Hi everyone,

I was reading once again the CI1 thread on the French MB and I'm more and more convinced the reasons why this strategy is banned from the Players' Site are completely obscure, out of date and make absolutely no sense at all. We eventually had IB banned from the site after weeks of talk and I'm pretty sure the rules, about which strats can be allowed and which cannot, may be able to evolve.

Here is a video of the strat I'm talking about. It requires jumping above the wall before the last part of the track thanks to the earliest bumpers you can meet. It's harder than the allowed strat and the time you can win is minimal since it makes the final big boost into the dirt completely impossible to release (even with a flatboost). You have to perform another boost just after to perform a f-lap or even inside of a 5-lap effort. This is how it works (thanks to Neo for the video) :



Here is the regular and allowed path. You have to use one of the last bumpers to jump above the same wall but much after, so that you cross the wall and land on the right of the Piranha Plant. This strat helps to prepare a boost (FB or not) in order to cross the big dirt part for a f-lap or an ending lap, and inside of a 5-laps it helps to prepare a boost that makes you cut a biggest amount of dirt than with the "SC" strat. Here is the f-lap WR with this strat (thanks to KVD for the video) :



Basically, there was some kind of joke at CDM inside of the SMK quizz through a question like "Why is the CI1 wall-jumping strat banned?", the answering being a slightly bored "Ask Sami >_>". Actually, I'm not even sure Sami has a decent answer to give about that situation. Moreover, I found a post-CDM 2009 message by Neo, who wrote he had talked to Sami about this during the previous championship, and the Godfather wasn't completely against allowing it after all those years, judging by the increasing amount of players giving it a try.

Since the detailed explanations making this strat "SC" sound total bullshit to my ears, I ask thee Sami, to consider this strategy again and eventually legalize it (only if people vote massively for it of course...), and see how people can handle with it. I'm not even able to perform it since I never gave it any try in Time Trial so I don't do this for myself, but just for the good and the integrity of the Players' Site rules, since regarding this strategy as "SC" is complete nonsense in my opinion.

Many thanks to everyone who gives his detailed opinion.

I find it difficult to believe that this isn't allowed but that on VL2 you are allowed to break loads of blocks in order to take a route on the flap that just isn't there on the 5 lap (lot's of the arguements against MC2 was that IB was not useful in a 5 lap attempt). My thoughts are that CI1 wall hop should be allowed and that MC2 IB and VL2 little island jumps should either be both allowed or both banned rather than 1 ok and 1 not as we currently have.

In fact, never mind if it's forbidden for good or bad reasons, so I won't even try to explain once again, why I consider this strat as SC, and so why it should stay bannes.

I say 'no' just because a decision was already taken about this strat in January 2003, and this decision was : NO ! You just have to accept that, and stop making revolutions as it was already done for MC2 IB.

I don't say that because CI1 flap is one of my strongest PRs, and I'm afraid to lose a French record here... If someone finds a new strat to go faster, and if the strat is allowed, no problem ; it's part of the game.

But this strat was banned. We said NO for this strat, almost 10 years ago ! Is it too hard to accept that ?

What will it be next ? Forbid CPU ghosts for Vanilla Lakes ? Allow breaking blocks for Ghost Valleys ?

The problem is not to accept it has been banned in the past but why it is banned. Seriously, the reasons are just stupid. As long as BIJ will be allowed on VL2, that CI1 strat should be allowed too, no matter if a wrong decision has been taken years ago when NBT was just rising and when it was a matter of inexperience of NBT strats that made it forbidden.

I guess another point is the main WR is still faster anyway for now, so why waste time worrying about it. Yes there have been some tracks which have had things included then disallowed. But this isnt an MC2 IB situation. So just let it go... smile and be happy  

Antistar wrote on 09/01/12 at 12:12:31:


In this case, why would we continue to forbid breaking blocks on Ghost Valleys ?

And on the other hand, if I answer you : "a wall isn't an ice block", you'll certainly answer : "so what about MC2 last corner ?".

Sometimes it's just not possible to clarify rules who'll work for every track. So you need adjustments.

About MC2, it's impossible to define something clear with the LB (it'd be easier if the LB was banned too ). About CI1 it's easy : you have to pass to the right of the piranha plant, otherwise it's considered you cut the wall too much, and it's SC.

I think it was ok to ban the shortcut, BUT then players started jumping over the edge of the wall and it was allowed for some reason. I agree with Mario that the rules don't really make sense anymore. I think jumping over that wall should either be totally banned or totally allowed. And since it can't be banned because of the WR strat, I think the shortcut should be allowed. The course charts won't have to be changed and if the WR strat is faster then it won't matter anyway.

My wall hop time is faster than my non wall hop time on CI1 flap so I'm all for including it

Crispy wrote on 09/01/12 at 19:24:19:


Quoted for the sole reason of being a Chris' post! lol


I don't think it should be allowed, since you hop almost the whole wall with it. And at some point I even had the "WR" here using that strat. Once people explained me why it was banned, it made a lot of sense.

Zarkov wrote on 09/02/12 at 03:30:34:

Yeah, it's like the people arguing against the SC lack any kind of common sense. This rule is MKSC level of dumb.

@ Moll, Absolutely.

The MKSC rules are a joke. Seriously.

It was really hard for me to accept them since I can't understand any logic behind them. But I wanted so bad to join and send PRs that I felt the need to force myself to accept those rules even if I strongly disagree (I even thought about sending a regular path RR time asking to remove my 45"76, which just SHOULD be regarded as a SC strat). But that's not the good place to argue on this issue.

Antistar wrote on 09/02/12 at 12:20:09:



There is a very simple logic behind the original mksc rules. Non shortcut paths are exceptable. If you want to play sc just play sc Seems you want to play smk with sc. If you want to play fastest route then just do the gv1 sc etc.