Round 3 Replay Verification - all runs verified!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duke
  • 79 comments
  • 2,460 views
What´s the point to submit both replays before the deadline?
Submitting both times should be sufficient enough as i do know no one that is able to match the given time in the short period between the race deadline and the submission of the replays.

In addition i´d like to point out that that is one rule i don´t support at all.
Sent in a valid run or be DQ´ed, that´s it.
Plain and simple.
Maybe there´s a chance to remove this option for the next BC.;)
 
Flinx
What´s the point to submit both replays before the deadline?
Submitting both times should be sufficient enough as i do know no one that is able to match the given time in the short period between the race deadline and the submission of the replays.
Click to expand...
Agreed, that's what I'm on about.
Flinx
In addition i´d like to point out that that is one rule i don´t support at all.
Sent in a valid run or be DQ´ed, that´s it.
Plain and simple.
Maybe there´s a chance to remove this option for the next BC.;)
Click to expand...
I would agree with that IF it were as "plain and simple" to determine that a run is valid. Certainly for contact we're pretty close to that, but for offs, the game just doesn't quite give you a good enough ability to be 100% sure what's on or off. So two different people may come to different conclusions, that's why a backup run is a good idea in my opinion. It proves that the time was not a fluke, enabled only by the marginal off, that a similar time could be achieved without a marginal off.
 
bobkart
I would agree with that IF it were as "plain and simple" to determine that a run is valid. Certainly for contact we're pretty close to that, but for offs, the game just doesn't quite give you a good enough ability to be 100% sure what's on or off. So two different people may come to different conclusions, that's why a backup run is a good idea in my opinion. It proves that the time was not a fluke, enabled only by the marginal off, that a similar time could be achieved without a marginal off.
Click to expand...
You know the rule:
If in doubt, don´t submit.;)
 
I thought the rule was:
When in doubt, whip it out. ;)
 
CORRECT! The backup replay is not required to be submitted before the dealine.

x3...
 
Thanks Duke!

Flinx
You know the rule:
If in doubt, don´t submit.;)
Click to expand...
Yes I do, great rule, it has the benefit of ensuring valid runs. But at a cost of potentially eliminating a faster valid run, that because of the doubt, wasn't submitted.

Anyway, the backup run provision takes care of that problem. I would be happy to see such a provision go away, but only if there were 100% accurate (or at least close) ways of telling if a run is legal.
 
still waiting for the replay from ofronk (gtrp)
 
Scooby Roo's replay checked and clean ... verified 👍
 
waiting for sangoku's replay to come, so I can check it...
 
Sangoku as to sent is memory card to one of us, so it's coming.

a +
 
Managers: please give me your take on this situation.

The team accidentally deleted their faster replay. They'd like to fall back on a slower run (the replay they actually submitted, which has been reviewed as clean) but they did not submit the slower time here before the deadline. However, they have documentation of the slower time in a post on their own message board, timestamped before the deadline.

I'm of a mind to allow that, because I hate DQing things on technicalities. However, I also don't want to upset all the teams who got it right and on time. So please tell me your thoughts.
 
This an unusual situation. ofronk was confronted by r/l issues, which from what I read, led to the inadvertant deletion of his primary run. However, he was able to prove (Mistral's screenshot) that the backup run was completed before the deadline. I believe that, despite his technical error, that ofronk is responding honorably, including a willingness to accept a DQ.

Maybe this is a good opportunity to apply some common sense to an uncommon situation. That's not to say that anyone who wishes to adhere to the strict letter of the rules is excercising a lack of common sense, but merely an opportunity to apply what most of us strive for in OLR competition; honor among competitors.

This is just MHO; the backup run should be accepted.
 
for me there's no real problem, I don't like to lose drivers in the way we lost jimeez at bc3...
 
Ricolamb
for me there's no really problem, I don't like to lose drivers in the way we lost jimeez at bc3...
Click to expand...
There is a big difference in hitting a wall and having someone else deleting your replay files.

No problem for me to enter the time.
 
an invisible wall Jim...
rolleyes.gif

I still don't believe we give penalties for games glitches
wacko.gif
 
I'm not here to argue the validity of the replay itself, which has been verified clean. We're discussing a procedural technicality, not a track issue. GT3mich seems to be taking a stand against it for whatever reason.
 
Duke
GT3mich seems to be taking a stand against it for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Here are his reasons:

- ofronk submitted a slower replay than the race time he submitted and the faster time was deleted. Now he wants the slower time allowed. I say no way. This is BC not some run of the mil OLR comp. Be more carefull.

Even in an ordinary OLR event that should not be tolerated. There is more at stake than just the outcome of some spot race. It's about a racer's credibility and that can extend to the board that he is running for. Hope you're getting this cleared up.

- What are the rules there for? This is why I'm not the captain. If rules aren't followed then whats the point in running the comp?

- If this guys replay is accepted then we should accept replays from racers that got DQ's that have slower times saved on their cards.
 
eggmann
Here are his reasons:

- ofronk submitted a slower replay than the race time he submitted and the faster time was deleted. Now he wants the slower time allowed. I say no way. This is BC not some run of the mil OLR comp. Be more carefull.

Even in an ordinary OLR event that should not be tolerated. There is more at stake than just the outcome of some spot race. It's about a racer's credibility and that can extend to the board that he is running for. Hope you're getting this cleared up.

- What are the rules there for? This is why I'm not the captain. If rules aren't followed then whats the point in running the comp?

- If this guys replay is accepted then we should accept replays from racers that got DQ's that have slower times saved on their cards.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you say here, EXCEPT: we have clear evidence that the replay submitted was run well before the deadline, in the form of a post with the time mentioned in it that is date-stamped 14 September 2005. This is proof that the lap was run on time, and cannot be spoofed by adjusting the PS2 clock. That's the only thing that's making me want to approve the time.
 
Duke
we have clear evidence that the replay submitted was run well before the deadline, in the form of a post with the time mentioned in it that is date-stamped 14 September 2005.
Click to expand...

So I see no reason for a DQ. IMO the time should be accepted.
 
Duke
...cannot be spoofed by adjusting the PS2 clock. That's the only thing that's making me want to approve the time.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt the time was ran before the deadline, but screenshots of forum posts have never been an acceptable standard of proof that a time was achieved on a given date. Most forum software (GTBN not included) allows moderators to edit posts without any visual evidence of editing.

I don't have any reason to distrust anyone involved in this competition. I can only trust that as a collective GT community each team trusts at least one other team, so we rely on others for that.

My team's stance on this issue is that the rules should be more strictly adhered to. There are steps ofronk could have taken to protect the replay that matched his submitted time, such as copy it to a second memory card or only give it to someone he knows will not delete it. If his time is accepted, then no lesson has been learned by anyone other than that all rules can be bent.


However, after saying all of that, if Team Numbers is the only team to have this stance, then we'll gladly concede to the popular opinion.
 
So far the decision is split. There are teams on both sides of the issue. However, in my original post, I said that I would only accept it if there was not serious disagreement.

Since there is serious disagreement, I'm keeping that strongly in mind, and I'll go by the idea of "beyond reasonable doubt".
 
I don't mind (me and GTweb) to see GTRP's time to be acceptedé
 
Duke
GTWeb >reviews> Team Numbers
Click to expand...
I've watched the GT3mich lap - 1'01.499. It's clean.
 
Im going to withdraw my earlier statement of support for the simple reason that eggmann makes some very good points.While i understand that he did the run before and trust that the arent cheating i dont believe in the whole idea of 2nd chance times in a series.

The simple fact is that the time sent has no replay therefore the time is invalid.
 
Team GTRP here.;)

Have a look here.
 
I think they have shown enough proof and the time should be allowed!

I have messed up with replays before and submitted the wrong replay to the gt.de database one time! Its so easy to do with maxdrive 👎 I even lost a replay from my card that I dont have a clue where it went?

..... The fact that they have shown proof that the actual replay recieved was run before the actual deadline
( the screenshot ) then I think they should get that time accepted!

Although an easier solution would be to just look at the actual replay submittal as just a typing error with the replay time on that teams part .... as long as the run is clean ;)

The fact that they had submitted a run before the deadline is the major decider in my opinion.

Good luck with this one 👍
 
I've make a screenshot from my outlook folder ....

next day ofronk ... get a update and i sent the new time with PM to Duke
 

Attachments

  • of_bc3.gif
    of_bc3.gif
    37.9 KB · Views: 19
Looks like a time submisson to me. 👍 👍
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back