UnskilledStunts League 2021

[Cas]

About the length of the tracks: shall we use a normalized time scale (or percentages) in each duel as  "goal difference", to give more freedom to track designers?

I like that idea. Yes, I think that'd be best

[Duplode]

Yup, normalising the differences makes sense.

[Daniel3D]

About the length of the tracks: shall we use a normalized time scale (or percentages) in each duel as  "goal difference", to give more freedom to track designers?

That would be fair I think. But please keep tracks under 2 minutes (like if skid would race, not by CTG standards...) My concentration span is about 2.5 minutes so I should be able to reasonably be able to drive it...

[Duplode]

Also, very long tracks probably won't mix too well with one-week deadlines.

[CTG]

USL 2007:
Nobody missed a round.

USL 2008:
Krys Toff missed Round 6 due to private issues, but came back in the last round.

USL 2010:
Chulk missed Round 3 and 7, but he was not disqualified despite of the rules.
Zak missed Round 4.
Akoss Poo missed Round 7 (luckily, it was a Chulk vs Poo duel).

USL 2021:
Alan Rotoi and Daniel3D left out Round 5. Hopefully this list won't get any longer in the last two races.


Although the rules say the pipsqueaks leaving out more than one race will be disqualified and their previous duels will be removed from the overall results, I don't really like this option. It would be highly unfair to punish other pipsqueaks by taking away their previous victories.

In the next season, the rules might be the following (subject of discussion):
- If your opponent does not appear on the track, your time will be compared to the average of the round. If you are faster than that, you won that duel. If not, you lost.
- If somebody leaves out more than one round, his previous results will not be removed. Instead of DQF, I suggest -1 pt penalty from the second missed round.
- If you have foreseeable difficulties in a certain week, do not hesitate to warn us - anything can be postponted. Real life is more important, and I guess everybody will understand if you don't have time for Stunts because of private issues.

[afullo]

Although the rules say the pipsqueaks leaving out more than one race will be disqualified and their previous duels will be removed from the overall results, I don't really like this option. It would be highly unfair to punish other pipsqueaks by taking away their previous victories.

I don't really like it too.

In the next season, the rules might be the following (subject of discussion):
- If your opponent does not appear on the track, your time will be compared to the average of the round. If you are faster than that, you won that duel. If not, you lost.

It has some limitations, though. If your match is against an opponent which is generally weaker than you, and you are in the overall strength lower half, you would probably lose, while you would have likely won if your opponent would have shown.

- If somebody leaves out more than one round, his previous results will not be removed. Instead of DQF, I suggest -1 pt penalty from the second missed round.

I agree with this.

- If you have foreseeable difficulties in a certain week, do not hesitate to warn us - anything can be postponted. Real life is more important, and I guess everybody will understand if you don't have time for Stunts because of private issues.

Of course, I agree here too.

[Cas]

I like the new rules proposed. On my first read, I thought they were perfect, but after reading Afullo's comment, I have to agree with his point as well. However, I don't see a better way to do it under those circumstances than what CTG suggested. Any way of trying to guess what the result would've been had the pipsqueak not missed the duel will invariably be based on spurious extrapolations.

Only other option I can think of, but too complicated and probably not a good idea is this:
- First, the duel result is left pending till the end of the tournament
- Once it's finished, for each race, the average lap time is calculated from the pipsqueaks that did participate. The pipsqueaks that did not, get their laps estimated by averaging their own raced laps on other tracks relative to the average for all tracks. These laps are used to determining the winning or losing of his/her opponents, although not for their own winning/losing, of course.
However fair, this sounds really cumbersome to do, in my opinion, but I think ideas should always be given

[afullo]

- Once it's finished, for each race, the average lap time is calculated from the pipsqueaks that did participate. The pipsqueaks that did not, get their laps estimated by averaging their own raced laps on other tracks relative to the average for all tracks. These laps are used to determining the winning or losing of his/her opponents, although not for their own winning/losing, of course.
However fair, this sounds really cumbersome to do, in my opinion, but I think ideas should always be given

In my opinion is fairer: if the general average is 1:00 and the specific average is 1:15, the rac3r would have more likely finished his best lap, in the track in which he did not participate, with a time which is near the 125% of the mean, than near the mean itself. Computations are not so complicated to perform...

[Cas]

I already have a track for round 7 :-)  It's called Knots. When I started making it, it felt too easy and probably a little short, so I made sure to adapt it. Now it's more interesting. I think fast pipsqueaks can do it in some 45 seconds. With some effort, I probably can get near a minute. Do you guys think I should make it yet a little longer?

[Daniel3D]

I would like some quick racing with a familiar car after this one. 

[CTG]

I would like some quick racing with a familiar car after this one. 

#metoo

[Cas]

You'll have it!