Cheep cheep island, just watched the strat which is completely different to mine..

The one here.. http://www.loops.jp/~neka/

Is this legal? I suppose it is.. ?!

I was just driving till the large shroom cut..

Magi Koopa wrote on 05/15/06 at 04:54:35:


Tom is referring to a Non-Lakitu video further down the page, not the finish line SC video.
This strategy should be legal, yes. Pierre used it for his Non-SC record. (As I'm sure a good few others did before him.)

Andreas

May I speak for all of us who didn't know about that hole in the wall when I say "waaaaaa!!".

I might have a try at that later on, see if I can come up with a decent 1-lap at least.

edit : Following the same route as that guy did, I have got 16"35 for the 1-lap. My only concerns would be using a shroom to get through that gap. Bouncing through the gap couldn't be distinguished from bouncing over the wall next to the gap...

I'm not sure if there is a better place, but with my 1lap I shroomed through that gap, then over the water, then on the last straight. The last one could have been somewhere better I suppose, perhaps at the start, but I felt like shrooming through the gap was a good choice...

Are you indicating that you dont even attempt to angle towards the gap in the wall? I'd be more inclined to think that would be allowed than just bouncing over any wall where there maybe a gap further along..

Yes, I aimed for the water to take me over wall. It's either allowed or it's not, so I wasn't going for something I thought would be "somewhat more allowed". (You can't really judge whether someone attempts to get there or not. A clear rule needs to be set for it to be of any use. It's not to incorporate the fashion of driving. It should establish what's allowed and what's not only.) I specifically asked for it, and was given a go-ahead, so I'll refuse to take any sort of blame for it.  

The zipper is used to start tricking off the lefthand barrier, but if you want to use it (regardless of how), you need to jump over the water that follows it, otherwise it'll kill your boost.

Andreas

I'm not as defensive as I sound to be, but your post in response to mine isn't reflective of what I wrote before.
Don't knock defensive, Tom. I've been so in your favour more than once.  

I do not have the means to make a vid, but it's definitely banned if jumping over that wall even the slightest is considered SC. No worries, I'll just set a new F-lap. Glad to see this sorted out.

Andreas

I think it's too difficult to consider this way SC with a shroom... We can't say "no, you didn't go 100% through the gap with this shroom, only 87,63% in my eyes, so it's SC"...

We can forbid the shroom here, it'll be easier !

does do my points stand.. if you can make it without a shroom (and no lakitu) then its ok through the gap but if you shroom here its sc?

Here's what I wrote in response to Tom's suggestion of at least angling my kart towards the gap.

You can't really judge whether someone attempts to get there or not. A clear rule needs to be set for it to be of any use. It's not to incorporate the fashion of driving. It should establish what's allowed and what's not only.

As in the KB1 situation before it, I object to a pixel-approximation sort of rule, because there is no clear distinction to be made. An entire method must be allowed or not for arbitrary situations. We can't keep judging whether the driver was so and so much to the left, etc.

My above sentiment is, and will always be that something is allowed entirely, or it isn't. Your points illustrate this, but since I said it before, however differently - you don't need to question whether I "understand" it, Tom. (You could have chosen a better word, and one that appears less insulting to my intelligence.)
The reason I phrased it the way I did was for it to come off as an open decision to Tom, while still stating that I understood it would be illegal if such a rule was implemented.
(I've considered Tom the most authorative in verbalising here on the board what is considered legal.)

More often that not I give a detailed enough account of what's relevant to the situation, and it sort of bothers me that many never read into it enough, and that it happens so often that I have to explain things again. (I'd look to myself first, but I honestly don't see how they could be all that difficult to understand and follow.) I'm seriously starting to wonder whether people read my posts at all, since I have to repeat what I say because I devide answers (appropriately) between different topics. There aren't that many on this board.

Maybe I need a flashy icon or something to be remembered by..  

Andreas

I never really reflect over the language barrier as much as you think I would, given that English isn't my native language. It's because I'm fluent. I can see how some of my posts would be thick to go through.
I try not to get things in a mess when I write, use proper punctuation and structure, but on the terms and general wording, I suppose I could use something simpler from time to time.

Oh, and Tom, I never hold grudges like that, so I'm not going to hate you the least. Just read my posts again from time to time, make yours twice as long and that'll be the end of it.  

Andreas

Can you shroom and jump over the wall? That'd be a bit of a problem... This route was obviously intended otherwise they wouldn't have removed the wall there..... just allow it I say. Then again what do I know about mksc

Don't ruin mksc like mkds with too complicated rules

the rule is clear - you cannot shroom over the wall/gap. If you manage to hop from the edge of the water like the first two laps in the video then you can continue legally.