Week 73 Results

[Omero]

Omero, 👍

Replay as well as analyzer data.

You know, I went and looked at the lap in MKS.

Dude, I know it will seem odd, especially if you're already neck deep in week 74, but try down loading my replay, then take the settings down with MKS.

I promise you it will help
(well I hope).

Give it a try.

Well I'm not particularly fond of the car or the settings being suggested for 74, so I've held off for now. As for the setting I got it from week 28. It was CFM's setup from this post that I was using. It was alot better than anything I was running, so I just took it and ran it (kinda drifty; which allowed me to have some fun on the way out of bad laps).

 

[Kent]

Not to toot my own horn, but come on.

Think about it...
Notice anything about These Results.



CFM is great, a real top notch racer, but that week, I beat him by nearly a second.

Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to try my settings.

I've always been a fan of the skyline and this week it felt like I found an all new approach to tuning it.

Any way, just trying to help, but don't worry about it.
Later.

 

[Omero]

You do make a valid point; and I was waiting for your setup to be posted in the thread as you'd told someone you would do (oddly it never happened; so I resorted to looking in the vault). The setup I had was a pretty good one. It was smoothe, just the right amount of slip and grip for my comfort (for some reason I've always liked CFM's setups; they just agree with my style more). Well, off to bed, until tomorrow when I load myself with chores, summer reading, writing a story, and a shady Cobra on a hilly course *shudder*

 

[Eagle]

UB, Sphinx, Eagle

Thank you very much.

I am always worried about how I handle situations like this and your positive comments are more than enough to keep me on the right track. 👍

Thanks again,
-kent

You've got the right track picked quite comfortably I'd say, you got where you are because people felt you deserved to be there, this just underlines that. We'll be here to back you whatever happens.

I was hesitant to join the series initially because I thought you needed a Xport - I don't post my times at Racing Line for the same reason. But it's worth the few minutes it takes to copy out the analyser data and I'll even snap shots of my lap with a digital camera if I feel it'll help. The level of respect and honesty and pride here is certainly something to behold, and it warrants that effort in response.

 

[TS020]

Kents,I send all the times you asked me to you via PM.

 

[Mr P]

Good work Kent 👍

Personally the guy comes across as quite simply "full of $hit"

I ran an illegal car last week in week 72 but! ..
.... I will return to make amends on that silly yet! ... Honest Error! .
.. unlike TS020

" hit the road Jack! ... and dont you come back! ... no more! no more! ... no more. "

 

[NielsG]

Been out of town and just returned to this mess. I also would like to show my support to you, Kent. You have handled it great. 👍

At TS020: I think you're too late. With Omero posting his sectors it's just to easy for you continuing lying. You have already lost all credibility. 👎

 

[TS020]

I didn't copy them,I've send my real times to Kents and he will tell you they are not the same as those from Omero.

 

[Old Geezer]

I didn't copy them,I've send my real times to Kents and he will tell you they are not the same as those from Omero.

At this point: Do You THINK Anyone Actually CARES???...UB57 👎

 

[Sphinx]

At this point: Do You THINK Anyone Actually CARES???...UB57 👎

Actually I do

Negativity when questions have been asked for does not mean his is guilty of anything other than hot-headed stupidity.

 

[tuff240]

I would prefer to make him provide mandatory replays for a while even if he has to go buy a shark-port/x-port if he is allowed back in at all. That is soley MY opinion.

That being said, I stand behind any decision GoKents makes. 👍

 

[Oliver DePlace]

TS020:

If you're serious about competing in the WRS: ReplayTransferDevice
If not... nevermind.

It seems the Xport is extinct.


I've taken a Holiday so me and the boys can watch the R8 run Sears Point.
It'll be on CBS, Sunday.

@Kent: It's too bad the guy didn't keep this a back-channel affair. Clutters up the threads.
It should be simple. Comply or be gone.

 

[Kent]

Thanks Tuff240,

And ODP!

Ah, the elusive one.

Glad to see you didn't totally forget about us.

Regarding TS020,
I am discussing issues with moderators as well as taking time to think things through on my own.

All should be resolved within a day or so.

Until something has been decided please try not to speculate too much.

I will return once something has been decided.
Till then,
-

 

[GT3mich]

You handled this with class Kent. It was TS020 that let the cat out of the bag. It seems that we are getting more and more **eaters every few weeks! What is up with that? It may become necessary for random, spot replay verification. That would be too bad. I would be pissed off if I found out later that I had been beat by a fake time. Why would a person make up a time anyway Sad really. There is no better felling in OLR when you know you ran your best and won the race with a legit, replay supplied run.
Keep up the good work Kent.👍

 

[Omero]

I say that I should like to see the times he gave you, Kent. It seems rather convenient that he is only willing to share his Analyzer Data after I shared my own. My suggestion would be to not take his time this week, but make sure that he gives honest answers in the future by making him post his analyzer data first thing in the results thread. That way we can be almost certain that he isn't faking it.

@TS020 - You better not have been faking your times off mine; because if you did then I'd be forced to injure you so very severely...

 

[Eagle]

Like Kents said, save it until we know a more complete story.

 

[T13R]

It's quite a sad situation. Like many other people said, there is pride in knowing you did well and ranked well also. It's even better when people start to question your time or sector times. In week 28 I was still very new to the WRS, and was Div 2. But I ended up topping the standings. Of course being new, a few people were a little suspicious at the time. But the feeling I got when people kept asking for my replay was AWESOME. At that point I knew I did really good, I knew I was legit, and I just couldn't wait for everyone else to see this also. So why hesitate TS020?

@Kents: You did good, although I have to admit your quite a suspicious person! ( I remember from week 28 ) But you are fair nonetheless, and the way you treated this situation was in the most appropriate manner. No direct accusations along with a few chances for explanations. 👍

 

[The Missing Link]

Personally I think Kent went too soft on the guy, and is continuing to be too soft on the guy.... but I have little patience for people whom can't comply to standards that have been in existence for YEARS. Either way, the ruling should always resort to 'Put up or Shut up.'



Having said that, I don't think kent has done anything inappropriately... but fortuneately for TS020 he is as nice and leinient a guy as he is.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I think it went great until omero(Jspec) posted his analyzer times, and suddenly the weasel popped out of the hole and took the opportunity.

 

[TS020]

I kinda suspected it when he posted T times that rivalled the Pros; seeing as how he's in division 3 I honestly think he must've been faking it. Still, if the replay exists, I would really like to see those times and how in God's Name he managed to get so fast around the track.

@Darin; I am, as Omero, registered in Division 3 (unless I got promoted somehow without an announcement or my knowledge). As Jpec07, I am registered in Division2. I don't see where the mixup is, but I registered new under Omero because I haven't touched GT3 in a good long while, and I'm not sure where I stand with everyone else. Here's my analyzer data:

Sector 1:
Speed: 141
Sector Time: 02.295
Average Speed: 144

Sector 2:
Speed: 146
Sector Time: 04.285
Average Speed: 143


Sector 3:
Speed: 142
Sector Time: 04.827
Average Speed: 127

Sector 4:
Speed: 113
Sector Time: 04.589
Average Speed: 79

Sector 5:
Speed: 83
Sector Time: 02.300
Average Speed: 89

Sector 6:
Speed: 64
Sector Time: 03.489
Average Speed: 67

Sector 7:
Speed: 82
Sector Time: 03.144
Average Speed: 92

Sector 8:
Speed: 100
Sector Time: 04.361
Average Speed: 86

Sector 9:
Speed: 93
Sector Time: 05.629
Average Speed: 90


Sector 10:
Speed: 98
Sector Time: 10.429
Average Speed: 133

Sector 11:
Speed: 152
Sector Time: 06.183
Average Speed: 96

Sector 12:
Speed: 87
Sector Time: 05.183
Average Speed: 101

Sector 13:
Speed: 110
Sector Time: 06.729
Average Speed: 90

Sector 14:
Speed: 90
Sector Time: 02.946
Average Speed: 102


Sector 15:
Speed: 86
Sector Time: 04.771
Average Speed: 74

Sector 16:
Speed: 83
Sector Time: 05.839
Average Speed: 109

Sector 17:
Speed: 128
Sector Time: 03.842
Average Speed: 128

Sector 18:
Speed: 130
Sector Time: 02.069
Average Speed: 133

All that adds up to a lap with a time of 1'22.912
Average Speed: 104.6
Starting Speed: 141
Speed at end of 1st straight: 148
Speed at end of back straight: 154

Here's my replay attached (I forgot; do we go by the time listed on the replay filename when you first open it, or the time the replay displays at the end; I just took the shorter one; only .008 seconds if I messed up).

So you all think i copied them?Here's my sector times:

sector 1 :0.02.410
sector 2 :0.05.018
sector 3 :0.05.109
sector 4 :0.04.682
sector 5 :0.02.740
sector 6 :0.03.309
sector 7 :0.03.109
sector 8 :0.04.423
sector 9 :0.05.713
sector 10:0.10.477
sector 11:0.06.147
sector 12:0.05.360
sector 13:0.06.980
sector 14:0.03.033
sector 15:0.04.953
sector 16:0.05.631
sector 17:0.04.137
sector 18:0.02.181


See for yourself how different they are.And then you are telling that I was copy them.

 

[Eagle]

So you all think i copied them?Here's my sector times:

sector 1 :0.02.410
sector 2 :0.05.018
sector 3 :0.05.109
sector 4 :0.04.682
sector 5 :0.02.740
sector 6 :0.03.309
sector 7 :0.03.109
sector 8 :0.04.423
sector 9 :0.05.713
sector 10:0.10.477
sector 11:0.06.147
sector 12:0.05.360
sector 13:0.06.980
sector 14:0.03.033
sector 15:0.04.953
sector 16:0.05.631
sector 17:0.04.137
sector 18:0.02.181


See for yourself how different they are.And then you are telling that I was copy them.

Those sectors add to 85.412, or 1'25.412. Not exactly the lap you submitted.

 

[tuff240]

What was the time submitted?
Sorry, got here after it was already erased.

 

[Mr P]

Submitted time = TS020 Div.3 1:22.406

posted sectors total - 1.25.412

Maybe missing a sector of 3.006 ..... maybe!

Have you ever heard of putting the nails in your own coffin TS020?

A few more replies from you, and it should be one very secure coffin

 

[TS020]

Confused now However,this is the evidence I didn't copy my time from Omero.

 

[Eagle]

You provided us with 18 individual sector times, apparently the ones for your 1'22.406 lap correct? However if you actually add up those 18 individual sector times, they form a lap that's 1'25.412 long - that's quite a discrepancy. So whilst it's evidence you didn't copy Omero's stats, it's also proof you were over 3 seconds slower than you claimed to be.

 

[GT3mich]

Unbelievable

 

[Omero]

So you all think i copied them?Here's my sector times:

sector 1 :0.02.410
sector 2 :0.05.018
sector 3 :0.05.109
sector 4 :0.04.682
sector 5 :0.02.740
sector 6 :0.03.309
sector 7 :0.03.109
sector 8 :0.04.423
sector 9 :0.05.713
sector 10:0.10.477
sector 11:0.06.147
sector 12:0.05.360
sector 13:0.06.980
sector 14:0.03.033
sector 15:0.04.953
sector 16:0.05.631
sector 17:0.04.137
sector 18:0.02.181


See for yourself how different they are.And then you are telling that I was copy them.

*opens analyzer*
Let's just see if they're feasible in getting a really fast time (in spite of the 3 second discrepancy...).

It doesn't exactly match up...

 

[Darin]

I'm afraid i'm confused here. Did TS020 but in a fake time? And thats why I won by Default?

 

[Sphinx]

Submitted time = TS020 Div.3 1:22.406

posted sectors total - 1.25.412

Maybe missing a sector of 3.006 ..... maybe!

Have you ever heard of putting the nails in your own coffin TS020?

A few more replies from you, and it should be one very secure coffin

Up **** creek without a paddle comes to mind

 

[Famine]

These two sectors are key:

Sector 15:
Speed: 86
Sector Time: 04.771
Average Speed: 74

Sector 16:
Speed: 83
Sector Time: 05.839
Average Speed: 109

(from Jspec).

Compare mine:
Sector 15:
Speed: 109
Sector Time: 04.650
Average Speed: 77

Sector 16:
Speed: 85
Sector Time: 05.835
Average Speed: 109

I clearly got a better run through the corner which allowed me to get down to the next split marginally ahead of Jspec's car, despite the fact he was running 80hp more than me. Shall we compare TS020's times?

15: 4.953
16: 5.631

(no speed data given). But, despite the fact I get through the corner a FULL 0.3s quicker than TS020 and manage to beat Jspec's R-Tune down to the next split by virtue of my superior exit speed, TS020 blitzes both of us by a clear 0.2, even though he's running the same car as Jspec and got a poorer drive through the corner. Slow-in, fast-out usually means a decent that you lose time on entry and gain it on exit, not haemhorrage time throughout the corner and then activiate the flux capacitor.

And then of course there's the fact that these splits are for a lap 3 seconds slower than the submitted, questioned one.

At the moment, it's not only GoKents who thinks you can't be trusted.