GTP_WRS Week 56 : Official Results

[Chadwicksracing]

I used PAL.

GTP_CWR

 

[MarkWebber]

DOH!! I missed the deadline! I had a 58.813 in the bank but had too much beer last night and passed out and missed the deadline.. ..oh well, no one's perfect.

Exactly, people make mistakes. My initial post was of an informative nature, and I had no intentions to attempt to take anything away from Mad's brilliant victory, or to suggest that I am a superior driver to Mad and that I had a divine right to win this race, Mad already knew my time anyway. Also, something I didn't mention was the fact that I was slightly unsure if my lap was clean or not, another strong reason why I didn't submit.

I see little to no reason to attack my WRS forum etiquette as a result of my 1st page post. I was merely stating the facts, and explaining the reason for my non existent submission, while offering Mad congratulations ofcourse. I thought it was a good idea to reveal my time incase anyone wanted to know the time I managed, which correlated to the splits I posted.

I expressed myself in a positive fashion, showing respect to Mad firstly, and later criticized my laziness and poor time management. Thankyou. please come again

 

[Duke of Pendle]

Exactly, people make mistakes. My initial post was of an informative nature, and I had no intentions to attempt to take anything away from Mad's brilliant victory, or to suggest that I am a superior driver to Mad and that I had a divine right to win this race, Mad already knew my time anyway. Also, something I didn't mention was the fact that I was slightly unsure if my lap was clean or not, another strong reason why I didn't submit.

I see little to no reason to attack my WRS forum etiquette as a result of my 1st page post. I was merely stating the facts, and explaining the reason for my non existent submission, while offering Mad congratulations ofcourse. I thought it was a good idea to reveal my time incase anyone wanted to know the time I managed, which correlated to the splits I posted.

I expressed myself in a positive fashion, showing respect to Mad firstly, and later criticized my laziness and poor time management. Thankyou. please come again

Some time ago I made an error when submitting, which resulted in my submission not arriving at the correct destination. That particular week I had a time which would have won my division.
I was burning to let everyone know my time anyway, but I kept it to myself.
Why?
a) Because I didn't want to bring the thread down to school playground level by inferring I was the moral victor.
b) Technically I didn't submit, therefore I wasn't in the competition, and whatever laptime I achieved was irrellevant.
c) I don't have an ego to feed.

 

[Timppaq]

Exactly, people make mistakes. My initial post was of an informative nature, and I had no intentions to attempt to take anything away from Mad's brilliant victory, or to suggest that I am a superior driver to Mad and that I had a divine right to win this race, Mad already knew my time anyway. Also, something I didn't mention was the fact that I was slightly unsure if my lap was clean or not, another strong reason why I didn't submit.

I see little to no reason to attack my WRS forum etiquette as a result of my 1st page post. I was merely stating the facts, and explaining the reason for my non existent submission, while offering Mad congratulations ofcourse. I thought it was a good idea to reveal my time incase anyone wanted to know the time I managed, which correlated to the splits I posted.

I expressed myself in a positive fashion, showing respect to Mad firstly, and later criticized my laziness and poor time management. Thankyou. please come again

1. But you did take something away anyway, didn't you.

2. Why would anybody be interested in a time that a) is not in the comp b) might be dirty?

3. A congratulations to the winner would have been enough 👍 👍 As we should know by now, the "official" results don't often seem to mean that much to you. I bet you care more to know who is the "moral" winner - what you suggested in your post here to be you. ..at the same time hiding the fact that the time might even be dirty!! Is that a positive manner? Sorry, but that's just poor everything.

 

[MarkWebber]

Look who's talking, drunk man, or was your post in which you quoted my original post meant to be sarcastic? It's hard to tell.

Whatever the case, I am not attempting to show off my time, I see things in black and white, I had a time that was probably clean (96.7 percent probability clean) so I entered it in this thread as a piece of information that directly relates to this thread, or has relevance to the general topic covered in the thread, which in this case, is the results, or, final times driven by drivers who participated in Week 56 of the WRS, I participated, offering feedback, split times, and useful information during the race, I 'competed' in other words. So I had a right to deliver any information I wanted to share, which I did.

I chose to deliver factual data to this thread in my initial post, each piece of information I reported was truthful and accurate, and i had a right to deliver it seeing as how I competed in the race, I really see no reason to continue this discussion.

Also, thankyou for highlighting in bold, certain sections which epitomizes perfectly the nature of my original post, much appreciated.

 

[Duke of Pendle]

Never mind.
Teacher will come and sort out the playground soon, probably.

 

[MarkWebber]

I am unsure why you a referring to this discussion as one that would be found in a playground, it's a peculiar expression, or suggestion, as I am not of the age to be found in a playground, thanks again for your feedback, member of gtplanet. Yours sincerely, Daniel Holland

 

[Duke of Pendle]

I'm done with this. I've made my point, and that's enough for me 👍

 

[MarkWebber]

Thankyou, your point was delivered and acknowledged by myself, earlier. it was a valid argument no doubt, but flawed in every possible way imaginable

 

[Timppaq]

Look who's talking, drunk man, or was your post in which you quoted my original post meant to be sarcastic? It's hard to tell.

Whatever the case, I am not attempting to show off my time, I see things in black and white, I had a time that was probably clean (96.7 percent probability clean) so I entered it in this thread as a piece of information that directly relates to this thread, or has relevance to the general topic covered in the thread, which in this case, is the results, or, final times driven by drivers who participated in Week 56 of the WRS, I participated, offering feedback, split times, and useful information during the race, I 'competed' in other words. So I had a right to deliver any information I wanted to share, which I did.

I chose to deliver factual data to this thread in my initial post, each piece of information I reported was truthful and accurate, and i had a right to deliver it seeing as how I competed in the race, I really see no reason to continue this discussion.

Also, thankyou for highlighting in bold, certain sections which epitomizes perfectly the nature of my original post, much appreciated.

Well, as you don't know me personally it should have been easy to tell it was sarcastic.. But maybe not then.

I do appreciate much the help you give out here .And I'm sure it helps a lot of people, often me too.. 👍 👍 So thanks for that. (and no, not being sarcastic here)

One more thing, would make my WRS life much easier if you'd miss some of the apexes the way you're missing the whole point here.. But maybe you can't see the bubble if you're inside it?

 

[MarkWebber]

Thanks Timpaqq, wait, thanks Timppaq, a well thought out post, subtly delivering your argument at the end, but, I always try and view things as If I was an observer from a distant galaxy, far far away, or in your explanation, outside the bubble, whichever one comes first.

Anyways, thanks for all your feedback regarding this matter, I think I'll have to learn to miss a few apexes in order for my eyes to open up to reality

 

[spyrrari]

I took the time to have some fun and watch the PAL replays that have been posted so far.

Spyrrari - clean and green

tho sometimes a little on the edge
Sascha / Rudi - clean and very green

Phil / Eriba - clean and green

tho you obviously were struggling with the gears here and there ...

Well done all and a pleasure to watch

Cheers for checking my replay Steven



spyrrari.

 

[Crispy74]

Congrats to all podiums and well done to all participants 👍

Here's my replay,

 

[Synwraith]

I had a time that was probably clean (96.7 percent probability clean)

That is, categorically, NOT good enough! If you are not 100% sure it is clean then that means you are not certain, as the opening thread of every WRS event says "If you're not 100% sure that your lap is clean, then consider it dirty".

"Probably clean" is simply not up to the required standard of competition in this series.

so I entered it in this thread as a piece of information that directly relates to this thread, or has relevance to the general topic covered in the thread, which in this case, is the results, or, final times driven by drivers who participated in Week 56 of the WRS, I participated, offering feedback, split times, and useful information during the race, I 'competed' in other words.

Do you think 'competing' in WRS means running a lap and telling everyone what it was, while delivering some useful driving tips? After all these years you think this is sufficient?

Competing in WRS, and this is something you have failed to grasp on repeated occasions, involves not only posting splits and submitting a final laptime before the deadline, but submitting a lap that is 100% clean, with no doubts whatsoever AND respecting the sportsmanship of this competition and showing that respect at all times for your fellow competitors. This is not accomplished by stating "Oh I would have won if..." or "I had a faster lap that i should have submitted but I'm not sure it was clean...". A faster lap that is not 100% clean is utterly irrelevant. The people who competed on week 56 didn't need to know what was possible with splits that were 96% clean, they wanted to know what was achievable with 100% clean splits, and they got that from Madison.

I am unsure why you a referring to this discussion as one that would be found in a playground, it's a peculiar expression, or suggestion, as I am not of the age to be found in a playground, thanks again for your feedback, member of gtplanet. Yours sincerely, Daniel Holland

Thankyou, your point was delivered and acknowledged by myself, earlier. it was a valid argument no doubt, but flawed in every possible way imaginable

Thanks Timpaqq, wait, thanks Timppaq, a well thought out post, subtly delivering your argument at the end, but, I always try and view things as If I was an observer from a distant galaxy, far far away, or in your explanation, outside the bubble, whichever one comes first.

Anyways, thanks for all your feedback regarding this matter, I think I'll have to learn to miss a few apexes in order for my eyes to open up to reality

You are a continuing embarrassment and disgrace to GTPlanet, its competitors, yourself and every single competition you enter.

All the best
Maz

 

[Jack]

There's no need for this anymore, time to move on

Dan did the correct thing by not submitting his lap due to thinking it was only 96.7% clean and not the big 100. Maybe he should have kept his personal laptime comments to himself...

Move on and get on with the rest of the results.

Congrats to all winners and podiums this week

 

[MarkWebber]

Synraith, the main reason why I didn't submit the lap, was because I am on a last chance scenario in terms of submitting dirty laps, for all intensive purposes, the lap was clean, it's as simple as that, but because of the nature of the game, and its lack of analysis features, I wasn't prepared to even look at it closely (first corner, inside barrier, possibly grazed it, no speed drop, just the sound of the engine put me off submitting) Yeah

 

[EDK]

Congrats to mad for clinching the overall honours, I had been meaning to run a final session on the weekend before submitting, but that never occured unfortunately, I managed to accomplish a 58.839 lap time earlier in the week, which I should have submitted obviously! Cheers!

I had considered replying to this when I first posted here in the results thread, but thought I was better off not acknowledging it. Now I see where that got me.

I'm going to weigh in on this, briefly, but my comments are not a matter of opinion, they are direction for you, and all of the other participants in WRS.

When we DQ a laptime, we remove it from the results. There's a reason for that. We don't want to see times in the results thread that were not achieved within the rules of the series. I know you know better. Sphinx had to warn you on your old account on GT4 for posting times in the results thread when your submission was not honored, due to not having a maxdrive to provide a replay.

It's funny, because my first thought was, "I bet he thought that lap might be dirty, so he didn't submit". And you ended up validating that information with one of your posts in the thread here. So, I'm going to provide you and the other participants with clear direction here, and we will add a "rule" to future results threads stating the same.

"Drivers who do not have a submitted lap posted in the results are not to post any information related to a laptime they might have achieved in the results thread. Any such posts will have the times removed."

I would think the level of sportsmanship we have here would not require such a rule. But I guess I was wrong.

 

[MarkWebber]

That sounds like a good rule to me Thanks EDK

 

[crazytortise]

I had considered replying to this when I first posted here in the results thread, but thought I was better off not acknowledging it. Now I see where that got me.

I'm going to weigh in on this, briefly, but my comments are not a matter of opinion, they are direction for you, and all of the other participants in WRS.

When we DQ a laptime, we remove it from the results. There's a reason for that. We don't want to see times in the results thread that were not achieved within the rules of the series. I know you know better. Sphinx had to warn you on your old account on GT4 for posting times in the results thread when your submission was not honored, due to not having a maxdrive to provide a replay.

It's funny, because my first thought was, "I bet he thought that lap might be dirty, so he didn't submit". And you ended up validating that information with one of your posts in the thread here. So, I'm going to provide you and the other participants with clear direction here, and we will add a "rule" to future results threads stating the same.

"Drivers who do not have a submitted lap posted in the results are not to post any information related to a laptime they might have achieved in the results thread. Any such posts will have the times removed."

I would think the level of sportsmanship we have here would not require such a rule. But I guess I was wrong.

+1 Agree 100% with this 👍

 

[Anghammarad]

So anyway

GTP_CWR

Several close calls

GTP_Crispy74

The first turn was inches away from being dirty

 

[steven]

To Kevin and Jack - fully agree on your point of view 👍

To Dan - you continue to surprise me with your actions and communications. You know I think you're a good guy, but somehow you keep to dissident yourself in GTPlanet ...

 

[Crispy74]

GTP_Crispy74

The first turn was inches away from being dirty

I know I had to check the replay quite a few times to make sure before I submitted, but I had a couple of millimetres to spare Thanks for checking 👍

 

[crazytortise]

Here's my replay

 

[nuclearfire]

GTP_Seken's replay is clean and green 👍

 

[Seken]

GTP_Seken's replay is clean and green 👍

*Dances*

 

[Mad94d]

Replay: sorry it's late. Really close to the walls, but i'm certain it's clean.

 

[crazytortise]

Mad is clean and green 👍 nice lap

 

[MadMax]

1---0'58.910---GTP_mad94d

2---0'59.156---GTP_CRAZYTORTISE

16--0'59.981---GTP_grevling

21--1'00.688---GTP_DGiant2000

All clean , the most I was amazed by DGiant2000's T2-T3 👍 👍 well done.


Out of curiosity, I'd like to see GTP_Aderrrm's and GTP_clacksman's replays.
(So that I could learn from them )


MadMax

 

[crazytortise]

1---0'58.910---GTP_mad94d

2---0'59.156---GTP_CRAZYTORTISE

16--0'59.981---GTP_grevling

21--1'00.688---GTP_DGiant2000

All clean , the most I was amazed by DGiant2000's T2-T3 👍 👍 well done.


Out of curiosity, I'd like to see GTP_Aderrrm's and GTP_clacksman's replays.
(So that I could learn from them )


MadMax

Thanks for checking 👍

 

[clacksman]

Out of curiosity, I'd like to see GTP_Aderrrm's and GTP_clacksman's replays.
(So that I could learn from them )

If you have an NTSC disc to watch it with I'll find it again.