Stunts World Ranking and ISM 2007

[Mark L. Rivers]

Hi all,

I'm glad to announce the creation of a new Stunts World Ranking based on the results of all active competition:

ZAK
USC
Kalpen
WSC
SDR

I'm glad to announce too the International Stunts Master 2007 a special Stunts event, planned for January 2007, which will see engaged the first 10 drivers of Stunts World Ranking at the end of 2006.

For all the informations check digilander.libero.it\stunts.SDR

Good racing to all!

[JTK]

The link ain't working... 

[Krys TOFF]

The link ain't working... 

It works.
ISM page direct link : http://digilander.libero.it/stunts.SDR/ISM/ISM_index.htm
SDR direct link : http://digilander.libero.it/stunts.SDR/index_SDR.htm

[Krys TOFF]

the first 10 drivers of Stunts World Ranking at the end of 2006

Well, I'm surprised to see my name as current top 10 member.
Thanks to top drivers not racing all competitions.

One detail about establishment of this list : how to compare shortcuts-allowed and shortcuts-free races ? WSC is different from the other competitions due to this specific rule, like ISA/IRC and IMSA Cup were before too.

How will be your ISM tournament ? With or without shorctuts ?
I saw the word "checkpoint", so I think it will be shortcuts-allowed competition with specific checkpoints, like Alain and CTG did before on some tracks of their own competitions (and as I plan to do for special event Paris-Stunts-Dakar as part of forthcoming Stunts Career).

Anyway, that's a good idea, but I fear I won't be in top 10 at the end of the year : I race less these days as I prepare Stunts Career event, and with this competition planned, I'm sure (I hope) some top drivers will go to race other competitions than ZakStunts (which is a good effect of your idea, that's for sure) in order to get some additional points for the ranking. This would mean a lower result for me...

[BonzaiJoe]

It looks like a great idea, and very thought through, but I don't get the rules at all. It will be a nice list to see who races a lot and in every competition, but the list won't show anything about who is the best driver.

Example: if you race only in USC and Zakstunts, but you end up 4th on average, you will be ranked equally with someone who races all competitions, but generally finishes about 15th on average. Are these two pipsqueaks equally good?

Secondly, it will be a great idea to race small competitions if you want to be on top of this list. It's not easy to get into the top-10 in a competition like Zakstunts, while other competitions hardly have 10 pipsqueaks, so you can just send a 10-minute replay and get a lot of SWR points.

This is why in tennis, you get more points for winning the Wimbledon than a random Challenger tournament, and why in cycling, you get more points for winning the Tour de France than for winning "Danmark Rundt", our local bike race.

Anyway, the idea is great, and with some alterations to the rules, we can have a really good ranking list shortly thanks to you.

[JTK]

#26 for me?  Thanks! 

[Krys TOFF]

#26 for me?  Thanks! 

Number 26... Of 25 pipsqueaks. (just kidding)

Anyway, you can't be number 1 track designer AND number 1 Stunts driver.

[Mislav]

The universal ranklist, great!! But it's hard to make a ranklist, now it's like apples comparing with salami.. Maybe every race and every competition must have first it's own worth, depends on the number of the drivers. And yes, it shouldn't be the "who - is - driving - the - most - races" ranklist

P.S.

15. Mislav
16. Alain
?
There you go Alain haha

14. Cas
15. Mislav
?
There you go Mislav haha

[Mark L. Rivers]

One detail about establishment of this list : how to compare shortcuts-allowed and shortcuts-free races ? WSC is different from the other competitions due to this specific rule, like ISA/IRC and IMSA Cup were before too.

How will be your ISM tournament ? With or without shorctuts ?
I saw the word "checkpoint", so I think it will be shortcuts-allowed competition with specific checkpoints, like Alain and CTG did before on some tracks of their own competitions (and as I plan to do for special event Paris-Stunts-Dakar as part of forthcoming Stunts Career).

Well, I've carefully thought if WSC results should be included in Stunts World Ranking, and finally I choose to include it.
My thought is that almost all contests have some paricularities which diversify each from other. For example, in Kalpen Contest it's necessary to use Stunts 1.0 and this conditions guide style in some tracts of the tracks. In SDR, shortcuts are allowed, but drivers must pass through specific checkpoints (this rule has been introducted since 23th April 2006 as you can see in Old News to avoid that bugs could allow to finish a race without cover a large part of the track; in 2006 this was happened in "Choices", SDR, and in "Gyula", USC). Other competitions have sometimes special rules (I think to Goiania, USC, and its Knight Rider in December 2005). WSC rules say that almost one wheel must be over or on the track and tricks and shortcuts are not allowed. Sure these are very particular rules that have an higher impact on guide style than other contests, and sure driving with these rules necessitates more engagement. But these rules substantially don't alter the value of the single drivers, as current classification of WSC shows.
Anyway, in ISM 2007 there will be probably three races where shortcuts will be allowed. Three (short) races in 40 days maybe could be too many applying, even only to one of them, WSC rules. Moreover I never managed races with WSC rules and I'm not sure to manage very well. 

It looks like a great idea, and very thought through, but I don't get the rules at all. It will be a nice list to see who races a lot and in every competition, but the list won't show anything about who is the best driver.

Example: if you race only in USC and Zakstunts, but you end up 4th on average, you will be ranked equally with someone who races all competitions, but generally finishes about 15th on average. Are these two pipsqueaks equally good?

Secondly, it will be a great idea to race small competitions if you want to be on top of this list. It's not easy to get into the top-10 in a competition like Zakstunts, while other competitions hardly have 10 pipsqueaks, so you can just send a 10-minute replay and get a lot of SWR points.

This is why in tennis, you get more points for winning the Wimbledon than a random Challenger tournament, and why in cycling, you get more points for winning the Tour de France than for winning "Danmark Rundt", our local bike race.

Ideating Stunts World Ranking, I haven't wanted to create a classification that indicates who is the best driver in absolute. I don't think that it's possible to establish who really is the best driver in absolute. Stunts World Ranking only wants to rewards who, in current year, has glittered mostly for the good results and for the engagement showed in his participations to the official races. I think that summing 1) average race points (recalculated with a standard scoring) and 2) calculated coefficient (about rate of official races competed) we can obtain the right compromise to highlight this criteria.
Who participates to few races could get an high average race points, but he has dedicated all his time race to a restricted number of race (and this is valid for a top driver too). Who participates to many races could get more points, but dividing his time and energies for many competitions he could easily get an average race points more low. Anyway, I think that a driver with an average race points lightly inferior than other one, should be reward mostly if he has raced a more higher number of races, because it's reasonable to think that he has dedicated averagely less time than other driver for every single race.
And this concept makes difficult to compare Stunts Ranking with Tennis Ranking or Cycling Ranking. Because the tournaments or the races are not competed contemporaeausly.

I think that Stunts is a solar system where every planet, every contest, is populated and has a dignity not inferior than other ones, independently from the number of the habitants. Some contests are sure more prestigious and more frequented than other ones from historicity and other factors. But all the contests have specific rules, all the contests are administrated by these rule and all the contest are test-stand very hard for everyone try to win a single race. For example, WSC and SDR are the contests with lower number of participants. But if a top driver decides to compete in a single race of them, he know that it will be hard get the victory. Personally, I think that, independently from how a contest is prestigious, every single victory o placement in active contests, deserves the same appreciation.

Anyway, the idea is great, and with some alterations to the rules, we can have a really good ranking list shortly thanks to you.

I really will consider with great attention any thought about Stunts World Ranking Criteria. 

[JTK]

Anyway, you can't be number 1 track designer AND number 1 Stunts driver.

I'm HAPPY to be up that far! I thought, I was worse than that... 

[Krys TOFF]

I think that Stunts is a solar system where every planet, every contest, is populated and has a dignity not inferior than other ones, independently from the number of the habitants.

That's a very good image to describe Stunts competitions.

[BonzaiJoe]

Well, from the point of view that the ranking list is not meant to show who are the best pipsqueaks, I can't argue against you. I just think it's a pity, now that someone is making a ranking list, that it will not be that kind.
As it is now, if someone wants to be high on the list, all he will have to do is stop racing on Zakstunts, and start to spend his time getting high rankings on the small competitions, which will of course be easier, demand less skills and take less time. In Tennis or cycling, a player/rider who only races a few races will not be very high on the list either, because he will miss a lot of chances to earn points. I don't see what the difference is really... Tennis players and cyclists also have to think about form and energy. If someone races both Giro D'Italia, Tour de France and Vuelta D'Espana in one year, it will be impossible for him to make strong results in all three races. And I also still think a tennis player who only plays Wimbledon, and wins, is better than a tennis player who only plays one non grand-slam tournament, and wins. This will not be the case in SWR, but I guess the point is just that I don't agree with your idea that every competition is equal.

But it's up to you, I'm just replying because of one line you wrote, saying something about that you don't want the list to be seen as something arbitrary. I think that is just what will happen if you don't make some changes to make it reflect pipsqueak skills more. But it's up to you, and if the kind of list I am describing here is not the kind you want, by all means do make your own kind, and good luck with it!

[Mark L. Rivers]

I think to have understood what you say. Your argumentation is valid, I think so really. But I, at the moment, remain in a lightly different position. And, not to confute your reasoning, but only to argue again and to make more clear my thought, I try to explain it.

I think that what really makes a contest more difficult than other one, it's not the number of participants in absolute (in some contests, the number of participants is enlarged by some occasional driver which would occupy the same positions in every contest), and it's not the quality of the tracks (I really think that the level is high everywhere). This is the reason to lead me to say that a race is equal to other one, independently in which contest it's competed.

If to win in some contests is more difficult than other ones, the reason is only that top drivers mostly race in several contests than in others one. And this happens, as I say before, for historicity or other factors, but not for the difficult of the race (as it could be for Tour, Giro or Vuelta respecting single race or tours composed by a small number of stages) and not for other particularities of the contest (as it could be for Wimbledon, Roland Garros, Open U.S. and Open Australia, where players have to win 3 set to get the match, condition which highlights the athletic preparation).

I absolutely don't want to subvert the criterias wherewith every single driver considers more prestigious a contest than other one. The "pioneer contests", which have brought Stunts on the WEB, sure have a particular fascination, and sure nothing and no one can take away it to them! And I really hope that the things remain exactly as they are! 

Anyway, I think that it's not right to attribute more points to a victory in a single race of a specific contest, only because (for historicity or other factors) some occasional drivers mostly take part in it, or because (for the fascinating that some contests rightly have) an high number of top drivers takes part in it. And I think that there's not other technical factors (difficult of the tracks, lenght of the tracks or other ones) which can diversify the race of different contests so to justify a different scoring.

Finally, it's really difficult to choose or to establish which criteria should diversify the points to assign to a contest than to other one. I don't think, by aforesaid reasons, that the number of participants is the criteria. And I don't see, at the moment, other factors which could diversify the scoring of the contest in a rational way, not discriminatory or, anyway, arbitrary...

However, I will think about what you say and I try to refine current Stunts World Ranking criteria so to make it more precise and conformable to demands of Stunts World. 

[BonzaiJoe]

Alright, but you don't have to do it for me, I'll just see what happens.
I think the fundamental disagreement is that I think it's harder to get a good position in a competition with many pipsqueaks and strong winning times than in one with less pipsqueaks and not as good winning times. I don't think there are any other criteria for competition differentiation either.

[Mark L. Rivers]

Alright, but you don't have to do it for me

Sure, but I consider your thought, as any other thought that I'll know about SWR, important to evaluate if it's better to refine SWR criteria to make it more conformable to demands of Stunts World. And so... really thanks for your very clear and significative thoughts.