I wonder if it makes that much difference? It seems a little unfair, but it also seems a little unfair that a lowly suburban mortgage payer like myself would be competing against a neuro surgeon, or ... whoever, that can afford to buy the 20" RC and STL-11000 for themselves, or a retired person who may have an average telescope but lots more time
... but ... I accept it as "that's life"
I have often thought about this in relation to terrestrial photography competitions. In those I don't think the equipment usually has any significant impact on the judging. But how to translate that to astronomy where it's so equipment focussed? I've never been sure how to fairly judge a astro photography competition because of that.
The person using the rent-a-scope does still have to chose a nice subject, frame it well, choose the right exposure and process the image well....