Abstract: The costs associated with initial conflicts could be reduced if animals can assess the fighting ability of possible future opponents by watching their contest success against other individuals. We tested this hypothesis by conducting repeated dyadic dominance trials on size-matched juvenile rainbow trout,Oncorhynchus mykiss. In the first trial a dyadic contest was `observed' by a single fish separated by a transparent divider. In the second trial, the observer was paired against either the `familiar' dominant fish or an unfamiliar dominant fish from the first trial. We predicted that observers should settle conflicts with previewed opponents faster and with less aggression than those with unfamiliar fish. This prediction was supported for observers that lost against a previewed competitor, since these fish reduced their aggression more rapidly than did unfamiliar observers. Familiar observers that won, however, showed a more rapid increase in aggression compared with unfamiliar winning observers. This suggests that, regardless of whether an observer challenges the initial dominant, this `decision' is taken more rapidly in conflicts with preassessed contestants, because of the a priori information about their fighting ability. Since preassessment could save energy and allow effort to be concentrated on contests with a high payoff/probability of winning, selection may favour preview strategies when contest competition over resources is important for fitness.