GTPlanet Tandem H2H Drift Tournament #2 </Ivan vs Uberlight replay uploaded\>
- Thread starter Hayden
- 858 comments
- 45,153 views
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
Hey dino can you PM your email please?
xDriftzzinc
(Banned)
- 1,120
- United States
- DriFtZz
Brendan
LR-L2L-xDriFtZz
LR-L2L
USA
LR-L2L-xDriFtZz
LR-L2L
USA
- 1,615
- jimmy281090 GTP_Alex_Nicol
how many applicants are you going for 
- 1,615
- jimmy281090 GTP_Alex_Nicol
Well you never know we might not even make it to the last 16 haha.. hopefully with a better car choice i wont suck as bad lol
- 3,694
- South Australia
Suck? You did better then 12 other people, I'd be proud of that lol. I lost the first battle of my own tournament and seriously doubt that I'll even qualify for the next one... I know many of the new applicants are very skilled and may go far in this tournament and I can't wait to see how they go against the veterans 
(If the veterens qualify that is)
(If the veterens qualify that is
)
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
Woop! can't wait to get killed by Sai again XD
I also have a new car for this battle, it'll be one of two, depending on which is better for the track.
Chris.
I also have a new car for this battle, it'll be one of two, depending on which is better for the track.
Chris.
- 889
- TwinTurboCH
I just read the updated first post. I agree with everything apart from this:
In real drift comps the rule is that the following driver is ALWAYS 100% responsible for not making contact with the lead driver unless the lead driver spins and the accident is unavoidable. Whether the contact is accidental or deliberate, contact which causes the lead car to deviate is considered a loss to the following car. There is no discussion on the subject
Obviously this is online and it's your comp, so your rules, but that's how it is in real world
In real drift comps the rule is that the following driver is ALWAYS 100% responsible for not making contact with the lead driver unless the lead driver spins and the accident is unavoidable. Whether the contact is accidental or deliberate, contact which causes the lead car to deviate is considered a loss to the following car. There is no discussion on the subject
Obviously this is online and it's your comp, so your rules, but that's how it is in real world
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
+1
- 3,694
- South Australia
Good to see that everyone is so keen for this tournament. it's really a great testing stick...
and i can't wait to see the ride you pick Chris, that RX7 was nice.
SAi is a really talented drifter I must say. It will be good to see how different people go against each other (kaizar vs SAi anyone) and who steps up from the new flock. Good luck to everyone 👍
EDIT: I just saw your post TTCH, and I agree 100%, to be honest that was just a stand in rule until i could think of something better...
Your rule, while harsh is required. Thanks 👍
and i can't wait to see the ride you pick Chris, that RX7 was nice.
SAi is a really talented drifter I must say. It will be good to see how different people go against each other (kaizar vs SAi anyone) and who steps up from the new flock. Good luck to everyone 👍
EDIT: I just saw your post TTCH, and I agree 100%, to be honest that was just a stand in rule until i could think of something better...
Your rule, while harsh is required. Thanks 👍
Last edited:
- 3,039
- Krautland
- LukeCannotSkate
This battle will be the best i ever did on GT5 
and someone has to beat Sai
but this will be tricky 👍
and someone has to beat Sai
but this will be tricky 👍
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
Just thinking...
for qualifying to be fair, all runs would have to be judged by the same person, as one judge may see a certain style as better than another judge might.
Maybe if we went with the replay idea, but judges would be there to make sure they only did one attempt and then to upload the videos, for then Dino or someone like TT to rate them all.
Chris.
for qualifying to be fair, all runs would have to be judged by the same person, as one judge may see a certain style as better than another judge might.
Maybe if we went with the replay idea, but judges would be there to make sure they only did one attempt and then to upload the videos, for then Dino or someone like TT to rate them all.
Chris.
- 555
- Derby, England
- SaftyJoe
I think it's about time I bit the bullet and pushed myself to compete. So:
Brad
GTP_Bradders3535
N/A
UK
In response to the above post, that'd take epic amounts of time and commitment from one person. What I'd propose happen is the judge of each session give each person in that session a score and then ranks them. Then, using some clever statistics and maths, they choose 2 or 3 runs which are then submitted to the head judge who moderates them. This should then level all the different judges score. I'll explain it better later if you like, I'm on my phone right now.
Brad
GTP_Bradders3535
N/A
UK
In response to the above post, that'd take epic amounts of time and commitment from one person. What I'd propose happen is the judge of each session give each person in that session a score and then ranks them. Then, using some clever statistics and maths, they choose 2 or 3 runs which are then submitted to the head judge who moderates them. This should then level all the different judges score. I'll explain it better later if you like, I'm on my phone right now.
- 555
- Derby, England
- SaftyJoe
Double post.
Last edited:
- 3,694
- South Australia
I'll add you rufus and your idea makes good sense... I agree that watching 40+ qualifiers would drive one judge to insanity. I think that if we had 2 judges at each qualifier with ten points each it would work out a lot fairer, while rufus' idea would work well, I feel that its going to take some complicated maths which TBH, I suck at.
- 41
- On Internet
- UB3RL1GHT_
Alex
LR-L2L-Uberlight
LR-L2L
USA
LR-L2L-Uberlight
LR-L2L
USA
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
I could work it out but I'll need the final number of participants and judges, when are we closing aplications?
- 555
- Derby, England
- SaftyJoe
Haha, well you probably could use some really complicated maths to get it bang on, but I have no idea how to do any that.
I think it'd be fair if for each session the average score of all the drifters' best run is made. Then the single run closest to this average score as well as the upper and lower quartiles (halfway between the middle and highest/lowest run) are then judged by the head judge. The percentage difference between the runs would then be used to either bump all the scores in that group up or down.
For example the best scores of one session are as follows.
Drifter 1: 19.00
Drifter 2: 17.00
Drifter 3: 15.00
Drifter 4: 13.00
Drifter 5: 11.00
Drifter 6: 9.00
Drifter 7: 7.00
Drifter 8: 3.00
The average score of the session was 11.75, so Drifter 5's run will be moderated. Then Drifter 3 and Drifter 7 will too, as the Upper and Lower Quartiles are 15.375 and 7.375 respectively. Then, if the Head Judge judges that the runs are in fact worth 6.00, 10.00 and 14.00, all the scores in the group will then be lowered by whatever 10%, as that is the average percentage between the two judges.
Obviously this is a very basic example and in real life the scores probably won't be anythin like this. However, I do believe it's a fair way of doing things without you having to sit through hours of replays!
I've probably made it out to be more complicated that it actually is, but I'd be happy to crunch some numbers for you. In fact, an Excell spreadsheet could probably be made to do everything for you.
I think it'd be fair if for each session the average score of all the drifters' best run is made. Then the single run closest to this average score as well as the upper and lower quartiles (halfway between the middle and highest/lowest run) are then judged by the head judge. The percentage difference between the runs would then be used to either bump all the scores in that group up or down.
For example the best scores of one session are as follows.
Drifter 1: 19.00
Drifter 2: 17.00
Drifter 3: 15.00
Drifter 4: 13.00
Drifter 5: 11.00
Drifter 6: 9.00
Drifter 7: 7.00
Drifter 8: 3.00
The average score of the session was 11.75, so Drifter 5's run will be moderated. Then Drifter 3 and Drifter 7 will too, as the Upper and Lower Quartiles are 15.375 and 7.375 respectively. Then, if the Head Judge judges that the runs are in fact worth 6.00, 10.00 and 14.00, all the scores in the group will then be lowered by whatever 10%, as that is the average percentage between the two judges.
Obviously this is a very basic example and in real life the scores probably won't be anythin like this. However, I do believe it's a fair way of doing things without you having to sit through hours of replays!
I've probably made it out to be more complicated that it actually is, but I'd be happy to crunch some numbers for you. In fact, an Excell spreadsheet could probably be made to do everything for you.
Last edited:
- 183
- Apple Valley/CA/USA
- reddawn_77
I'm sorry did you guys pick a track?
- 55
- Philippines
- pinoy_boii_408
- pinoy boii 408
i vote for suzuka east =)
- 3,694
- South Australia
Wow, i actually understand all of what you said there! if miss Mott could see me now... lolHaha, well you probably could use some really complicated maths to get it bang on, but I have no idea how to do any that.
I think it'd be fair if for each session the average score of all the drifters' best run is made. Then the single run closest to this average score as well as the upper and lower quartiles (halfway between the middle and highest/lowest run) are then judged by the head judge. The percentage difference between the runs would then be used to either bump all the scores in that group up or down.
For example the best scores of one session are as follows.
Drifter 1: 19.00
Drifter 2: 17.00
Drifter 3: 15.00
Drifter 4: 13.00
Drifter 5: 11.00
Drifter 6: 9.00
Drifter 7: 7.00
Drifter 8: 3.00
The average score of the session was 11.75, so Drifter 5's run will be moderated. Then Drifter 3 and Drifter 7 will too, as the Upper and Lower Quartiles are 15.375 and 7.375 respectively. Then, if the Head Judge judges that the runs are in fact worth 6.00, 10.00 and 14.00, all the scores in the group will then be lowered by whatever 10%, as that is the average percentage between the two judges.
Obviously this is a very basic example and in real life the scores probably won't be anythin like this. However, I do believe it's a fair way of doing things without you having to sit through hours of replays!
I've probably made it out to be more complicated that it actually is, but I'd be happy to crunch some numbers for you. In fact, an Excell spreadsheet could probably be made to do everything for you.
I think this is a really good way to do it, but i fear people feeling they have been screwed over by maths they don't understand. You did a great job explaining it too 👍 you should be really proud of yourself mate.
Track has been decided (i think it's in the OP???) and we are running Indy 2. As for the Suzuka east comment... I'd rather not run it on that layout again (especially so soon) but if enough people vote for it for next tournament i have no choice
- 3,266
- FRAG-ME-CG
The main worry is, if a better class of drifters turn up to one session, then say the top 5 of them get through. There could be one judging session of very low level drifters, where the top 5 of those would go through, who could possibly be much worse than the people worse than the top 5 in the other judging session.
Chris.
Chris.
- 598
- the_kingb_ & Drift_artist
I think that,to choose the best runs from all ,scores should only be given after all the entrants have done their qualifying runs. That is the only way that the score will actually describe the goodness of the run. I suggest that all the runs should be saved by the live judge present then all saved replay(replay data or video if data is from diff version ) should be sent to one judge (who I think should be Mr. Hayden) for final scoring.
In D1 the judges watch all runs each judge takes notes and then after all runs are done they discuss it for the final list of the winners to the next round.
Bahaa.
In D1 the judges watch all runs each judge takes notes and then after all runs are done they discuss it for the final list of the winners to the next round.
Bahaa.
