Dispute: John McAllister - Arcade - Paperboy - Points [Grand Slam Score] - Player: Phil Britt - Score: 1,136,435

Arcade - Paperboy - Points [Grand Slam Score]
Score Track	https://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=26
Rules	Settings of 8-Toggle Switch on Paperboy CPU PCB (at 6/7A) 1-8 = OFF Settings of 8-Toggle Switch on Paperboy CPU PCB (at 5/6A) 1-2 = OFF/UNUSED 3 = ON 4-8 = OFF Note: The above Dip Switches, when properly designated, will give the following Twin Galaxies Tournament Settings, used for this title; Starting Lives: 3 Bonus Life Given At: 15,000 Points Difficulty: Medium Hard Special Rules: A "Grand Slam" is the sum of a single player's three (3) difficulty scores combined (Easy, Middle, Hard). The scores must be achieved on the same machine, by the same player, using the same initials. After discussion with former TG senior referee Ron Corcoran back in 2002, it was determined that the "Grand Slam" performance itself must be accomplished within the same game-day. Without this proviso, a player could indefinitely add to their "Grand Slam" score over a lengthy period of time. Further, the possibility of another player using the same initials in the interrim period exists. In all other respects, the rules governing the individual difficulty records will apply. The "Obstacle Course Trick", the "Grandstand Trick", and the "Lawnmower Trick" are all banned tactics. Usage of any will disqualify the score.
Player Name	Phil Britt
Original Adjudication	N/A
Verification Method	Referee
Verification Date	1986-06-29
Disputed Score	1,136,435 (Rank 1)
Disputed By	redelf
Dispute Evidence / Rationale	Score has been brought up and discussed many times over the years. I'll open this dispute for those that don't have enough credibility to do it.

Interesting track set-up and rule set. Didnt know it existed.

John, is there any documentation, TG/CAG threads, or proof, that supports the dispute?
Whether this score is impossible to achieve, or rules were broken, one cannot determine without evidence here attached to it.

I don't have all the details, but from what I've heard from other players over the years, message boards, and now seeing gameplay at a high level I thought it was time to open the dispute and let the knowledgeable people provide there info. There are post about the score throughout time and on different forums, I just don't have the links. But if you search the topic you will find that info.

John, I have lots to contribute here. Weigh it as you see fit.

For starters, no VHS tape of this performance exists.

Walter and I spoke with Phil Britt between 2001-2003 and discussed his score although that was not the purpose of the call...I happened to call Walter at the same time that he was already talking to Phil who was on hold, so Walter asked if I would like to talk to Phil to which I said sure and Walter then did something to have all three of us on conference.

During the call I asked Phil about Paperboy as I had always been curious about this game which I regard as one of my three personal all-time favourites.

Phil told me that he did not know the exact breakdown of the "Grand Slam" but he told me ballpark what the three scores were. I know for a fact that I detailed this recollection at least a few times within the TG forum so for sake of accuracy I ask that you search for my older posts as my recollection might be less than accurate since that call was now 14+ years ago. However, I do remember the following...

Easy - Phil said he recalled mid-100K range
Medium - Phil said he recalled 300K-range, but in the here and now I cannot remember clearly if he said at the time low, mid of high range
Hard - Phil said he was sure that this one was 600+K...I also do not clearly remember whether he said low, mid or high range

I've never achieved more than 70-75K on "Easy" ever, and only completed the other two a small handful of times over the years, always with pretty low scores,so I had no way to know how he did it. So I asked and also discussed what little I knew from my fellow refs..."Lawnmower Trick", "Bee Trick" and of course the "Grandstand Trick".

It was a given that he did not do the "Grandstand Trick" but while I knew of the others I never understood how they worked. So I asked.

Phil swore he used neither. He said he pressed points at every opportunity, strategically lost lives (which I did not fully understand at the time), and made a LOT of points in the bonus round with knocking down the drop targets. I cannot remember if he said he safely protected all houses in every round.

That was the conversation from years back. As far as I knew, what he said was both true and accurate, plus I had nothing even close to compare his anecdotes and recollections to.

Now, within the past year someone posted a very good "Paperboy" arcade or MAME score, and I wrote to them offering congrats and we discussed in-depth his performance as well as Phil's based on what little I knew.

This gamer mentioned that he was going to keep trying the level that he played...medium or hard...but he had his doubts over Phil's "Grand Slam" score as he could not fathom how Phil scored so high. Now that I think about it this was likely the hard way we were discussing.

This gamer if I recall correctly was going to invest some time into getting even better at the game and documenting his findings and observations at some point. My takeaway was that it sounded like he was going to see how high he could get per stage in comparison to Phil, and the logical next step in my opinion would be to take the dispute path if he chose...that would be the natural/logical next step.

Back to Phil's score...I do not even remember if it was mentioned as to WHO saw him do it...was it Walter or someone else, and did the same person witness all three paths played leading to that score ? That's a Walter question as only he would know.

So, John...I've encountered some questioning over Phil's score in the past. I never knew what was do-able myself, but it does seem that this score, which I have personally held in the highest regard as one of the five most significant and unbeatable arcade gaming achievements of all time, might need to be discussed publicly. I'm hoping that other experts at the title can chime in as I've only met one over the years, and only just recently via the TG personal message forum.

I have been playing Paperboy continuously for 10 years now. I am getting to a point where a very high percentage of papers hit and every flower is run. I have not put time into a Middle Road yet but I would have to score a ridiculous 530K just to meet his Grand Slam score. For reference, Ed Owen is a super skilled player and we are both maxing at the same point shy of the 180K score on Easy Street (185K is the MAME score). In my opinion and for the reasons cited above, this is a valid dispute.

If Walter or someone else credible saw it, back before recording it was a requirement, what is the problem?

I would be very interested who saw the score. It seems that even if there was not a single missed paper or flower through the entire run the score does not appear to be mathematically feasible. This was addressed in one of the MAME threads a bit more in depth. If time permits I will go through and try to calculate exactly how many missed papers I had on my 430K Hard Way, theorize if every paper was saved to hit individual house windows in order (which is highest scoring) and only zap points to see what that would compute to. It seems 600K would be quite a stretch. Missing houses to save them for damage points the next day does not work either, the game repopulates houses if you leave less than 3.
Off topic, there is a similar sentiment with Ron Perelman's 720 degrees 527,100 "score" that Jeff C has gone through in depth and found to be a likely impossibility as well. These are both doubtful legacy "scores" in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thefeckcampaign

If Walter or someone else credible saw it, back before recording it was a requirement, what is the problem?

---

RTM REPLY - it was never mentioned to me while I was working under Walter as chief referee from Aug/01-Aug/05 whether this performance was watched in-person by Walter or any other specific TG staffer, for that matter.

Unfortunately, only Walter can verify this, but with no other viable documentation it will come down to whatever Walter says whether his recollection is solid or not...and this is the core problem of most of the 1980's records.

For example...my own marathon record on "Star Wars" from January 1984. I know what documentation I sent to Walter, and I know that in Jul-Aug of that year both he and Steve Harris were on the phone with more for more than an hour grilling me about the score, and that conversation ended to their satisfaction. But whether Walter (or Steve for that matter) will remember specifics of a 34 year old phone call, or if Walter bothered to retain the documentation that I sent to him (which consisted of several Polaroids and signed affidavits of each 100M roll-over with my own signature and the arcade floor shift manager on each.

So if my score were to be challenged, and I am open to that in the spirit of full transparency, my own "story" is above, but it would all come down to Walter's memory and capacity to retain paperwork and documents from 34 years prior...and this is the danger of all scores from that era.

Walter's own recollection of the "Missile Command" TGTS performance by Roy was shaky during the Feb/07 All-Games Radio interview with Walter, myself and Roy. An hour before that call, he contacted both Todd Rogers and Tony Temple to ask them two questions...to one he asked whether the game made any sound when extra cities were awarded, and how he forgot that God only knows, and to the other he asked a truly dumb question which was "what were the odds" that he could watch a game for that long and NOT realize that extra cities were awarded. No one could possible answer that question. And during the interview itself, Walter basically recanted everything he had said and shared with his core group of TG insiders over the years about Roy and that performance and did not confirm the tough points that we had raised about Roy's score over the years, instead choosing to challenge Roy on his comic book.

So I caution everyone with respect to Phil's score...if the viability of the score is in question because of clear-cut point-related issues, that's perfectly reasonable, but I seriously doubt for Phil's score that "settings" is something that can be determined after so many years never mind the validation method (who saw it) and details other then where and when.

In the spirit of full transparency, since I am on my podium now about challenging Phil's score, which for the past 15+ years I have held in the highest regard as many of your know from my forum comments, if this score is up for dispute then I may as well put my money where my mouth is and share full disclosure of the documentation submitted and subsequent phone grilling for my own score from that era. It's my sole score from pre-1996, but it's a score nonetheless.

I

Just thought of something...

The rules for the game include a clause that read "The scores must be achieved on the same machine, by the same player, using the same initials. After discussion with former TG senior referee Ron Corcoran back in 2002, it was determined that the "Grand Slam" performance itself must be accomplished within the same game-day. Without this proviso, a player could indefinitely add to their "Grand Slam" score over a lengthy period of time. Further, the possibility of another player using the same initials in the interrim period exists."

I cannot remember clearly what precipitated this decision between Ron and myself but I did have that discussion with Walter and Phil in the 2001-2003 range and Ron was not part of that call. It is possible that some of what I learned from that discussion with Phil was part of my discussion with Ron.

I wish I could remember more, but in all likelihood this is probably what happened...

-> Phil himself supplied the fact that he accomplished his scores same-day
-> Phil himself supplied the fact that the initials would have to be the same for each
-> Whether Phil suggested the possibility of a player continually adding to their slam score over time or if Ron and I came up with that caveat I cannot remember...same for different players using the same initials over time

This would settle it:
Go through each level, calculate how many papers are given (x) times highest point target (+) flower scores for Mon Wed Fri Sun (+) papers for the 3 to 5 lives that can be scrubbed to end with 5 lives (+) bonus lives score.
That would be the absolutely highest amount of points possible on the game, might be close but I don't think this would even get to 1.1 million.