Battery

[Duplode]

Mark's replay at 53.20 from a different camera orientation:



From this point of view one sees there are a few pixels of the right front wheel barely on the road. When I specified "F3 overhead camera" as a means of verification, I did not specify zoom or horizontal angle settings, just the height of the camera (I only identified this oversight as a possible issue when checking replays for the first race). Therefore, if the car can be seen as being TWOOT from at least one position of F3 camera at maximum height I must consider it as valid.

(With Audi there is an additional difficulty in that a glitch sometimes makes the front wheel graphics to change position in relation to the rest of the car as the game is played. If you can't reproduce this screenshot after extensive rotation of F3 camera, restart Stunts and try again).

[Mingva]

C.2 During a lap, pipsqueaks must keep at least two wheels on or over the track proper.

But where's a wheel on track? I see it only touches the edge of asphalt on this zoomed and rotated image But if you're allowing such wheel position then I use it for next race.
I know, it's really annoying to argue and complain after the race. Well, at least I can brag about being the 1st until this key point

Verification of the C.2 rule will be performed using the F3 view directly overhead of the car.

I thought it's obvious about F3 view - on start line, arrows all to top and three to right, no zoom in or zoom out:

[Duplode]

C.2 During a lap, pipsqueaks must keep at least two wheels on or over the track proper.

But where's a wheel on track? I see it only touches the edge of asphalt on this zoomed and rotated image But if you're allowing such wheel position then I use it for next race.

The decision is based on the curvature of the road at that point. By the tip of the nose of the car, the track boundary has a straight segment about 70 pixels long; then it breaks and moves one pixel upwards (that is the break you can see on the zoomed part). Between the break and the first wheel pixel there are about 36 pixels (I'm using a screen ruler for convenience). Since we're moving towards the centre of the screen, the length of the straight segments of the road boundary must be increasing; and since 36px is significantly shorter a distance than 70px, at least a few pixels of the wheel must be on the road.

Verification of the C.2 rule will be performed using the F3 view directly overhead of the car.

I thought it's obvious about F3 view - on start line, arrows all to top and three to right, no zoom in or zoom out:

That would be the best way to standardize it, given the unreliability of camera angles in Stunts. Given the way I written it, however, I found it more likely that people would take the lenient reading rather than the restrictive one (as I don't mention explicitly the camera must be pointing forward); that's why I won't standardize it. Net result is that when you're in doubt about a close call of TWOOTness you can either spend some time rotating the camera trying to find a valid angle or spend about the same amount of time changing slightly your trajectory with RH so that there are no doubts.

[Mingva]

Oh gosh    OK, I won't argue with you anymore. It's your competition, you dictate the rules and bring decisions. It's up to you what allow and what not. But only by comparing replays (not results) you can say who keeps with rules. As I wrote earlier, only bridge tricks and that turn cut brought victory to Mark

[Duplode]

You're rightful in arguing whenever you feel the rules aren't being properly followed, Mingva, and I'm obliged to either present a consistent reasoning for the decisions based on the rules (which I hope to have done this time) or take the decisions back. I only do not quite understood what you meant with:

But only by comparing replays (not results) you can say who keeps with rules.

[Mingva]

Just watch Zak's or my replay. Is there any reason to think about legality of our rpls? We're trying to have ALL two wheels on/over track. And you wrote I always need to spend maybe double the usual amount of time reviewing his replays until I get convinced they are 100% legal

You think you're right, I think I'm right. But as I wrote you decide. I just feel frustrated about different interpretation of rules.

[Mark L. Rivers]

Hi Mingva. This is the first time I speak directly to you and I think it's polite to start this comment with a salute or something similar. Seeing the comment wherewith you spoke to me for the first time (topic: "Most winning cars for driver" in Stunts Chat) I know you have not the same idea, but evidently we are quite different.

Well, before Duplode wakes up, let me say some words about your considerations.

Sure I didn't expect congratulations from you after this race, since you didn't express any congratulations after the Round 1 (Force Ten track). But I didn't imagine you were so piqued after your second defeat.
Anyway, evidently, you didn't check neither my winning replay with the Indy, otherwise you would have relieved that I interpreted the rules exactly I did with the Lancia. More, I interpreted the rules of this contest in the same way I interpreted the rules of other OWOOT contests I took part, that is: there's no a standard F3 view that you can assume as absolute view in order to establish the real position of a car and so the validness of a replay. So, every OWOOT (or TWOOT) contest manager, usually checks the replay moving the F3 camera in order to determine if a replay is valid or not.
If you understood that the standard F3 view proposed by the program was the reference view, I'm sorry, but you went over what it's written in the Southern Cross Trophy rules.

Anyway, a less speculative analysis of the race shows that you're wrong when you say:

only bridge tricks and that turn cut brought victory to Mark

First of all, "bridge tricks" cannot be put beside the sizeable lot of words you spent about the validity of my replay. "Bridge tricks" are absolutely known features of Stunts and the expert drivers currently availed them. If you didn't use them (real strange thing you didn't since you took part in a lot of races in the past) as I did with Lancia in Round 2 and with Indy in Round 1 (but you didn't check that replay as I said before), that's your defect. Sure saying that "Bridge tricks" concurred, jointly to a supposed rules violation, to bring the victory to me, it's not so correct, because in this way it seems you suggest that you didn't win due to elements out of your control. Maybe it would be more correct saying that you lose even because you didn't avail (or exploit, as you wrote) a known Stunts feature as "bridge tricks" are.

Secondary, instead concentrating your attention on my wheels, that ARE "on or over" the track, even if only partially (no word in the rules says that the whole wheel must be on or over the track), you should pay attention to your race and your mistakes. And if you check your replay just in the same point you put your blow up lens on my replay, you'll see what you can see in the images below. The comparison shows that your path was quite far from the best path. You had 4 wheels on the track and your car is quite far from the edge. Your path didn't permit you to close enough the trajectory before to arrive on the ice, and this forced you to reduce your speed in order to keep your right and so approaching better the next left large curve.

So, finally, I think that instead to say "only bridge tricks and that turn cut brought victory to Mark", you made a better impression saying something similar to "Even if I'm not totally agree with the rules application, Mark won because, in this race, he drove better than me, availing the bridge tricks and choosing in the crucial part of the track a path that permitted him to conserve a higher speed for the rest of the race".

I wish more luck for you in the next rounds, and, I hope soon to tell you "Well done Mingva, you drove better than me deserving the victory".
Anyway, above all, I trust in a your more easy approach to the races. We are fellows in a special world, so act together to give life to sane challenges and not to inspire contentions.

[Mingva]

Oh, Mark, you misunderstood me. I'm not piqued, I'm not angry at you, I'm not rude on you or Duplode, I'm not... Well, it's better to say I love you all 

Please read my initial comment again:

I should learn to exploit those small bugs to win a race.

That's why I'm frustrated. Because I'm too weak, because I think differently. But we all are learning every time, so I will be more stronger next race. And yes, I'm not so good and unable to do bridge tricks. It's not bad you used it, it's 100% legal, and I think you know by yourself it added an advantage and was main factor for your deserved win. Well, you was too good on Battery, I had no chances to beat you. Congrats

[Duplode]

MIngva: the only thing that left me concerned about this discussion was that at some moments there appeared to be implications of double standards on rule application. Taken in context, your latest post makes it clear that wasn't your intention, though, so I feel we can carry on peacefully. After all, there is another race to be held already