Dispute: Simon Leitch - M.A.M.E. - Double Dragon [Japan] - Points [1 Player Only] - Player: Martin Racine - Almighty Dreadlock

Is this a valid dispute?

    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
You may not vote on this poll
  1. Dispute: Simon Leitch - M.A.M.E. - Double Dragon [Japan] - Points [1 Player Only] - Player: Martin Racine - Almighty Dreadlock

    06-11-2018, 05:57 AM
    M.A.M.E. - Double Dragon [Japan] - Points [1 Player Only]
    Track
    https://www.twingalaxies.com/scores.php?scores=26119
    Rules
    ROMSet: DDragon
    Cabinet: Upright
    Flip Screen: Off
    Difficulty: Medium
    Unused: Off
    Bonus Life: 30k and every 60k
    Lives: 2
    Special Rules: This is a Single Player ONLY Variation! Continues are NOT allowed!
    Special Note: When you defeat a Boss, you may NOT continue beating on other enemies for points when the clock stops. As well, there exists a trick where you can time a jump when you possess a weapon, just as the stage ends and the weapon will materialize on the next stage in front of you. This is a banned tactic and use will disqualify your record.
    Player Name
    Martin Racine
    Original Adjudication
    N/A
    Verification Method
    INP
    Verification Date
    2011-01-07
    Disputed Score
    376,110 (Rank 2)
    Disputed By
    Almighty Dreadlock
    Dispute Evidence / Rationale
    In this game, the player exploits a bug, which allows him to leech an endless supply of points, without having to make any progress. In the end, the player opts to halt progress entirely, and uses the leeching method until all his lives have been exhausted. The method has several variations. The variation he uses is inferior, hence his failure to accumulate bonus men or attain the game's maximum score.

    I have noted that the player is not registered at TG, so reckon he probably does not care about this dispute. Should anyone know otherwise, and wish to inform him about it, he may be contacted via e'mail.

    of the game included, for scrutiny.
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes JJT_Defender liked this post
  2. 06-11-2018, 07:13 AM
    You're assuming that they don't care about the dispute because they're not registered at TG.com? Then you find an email address but don't bother notifying them that you're going to dispute it? What the heck, man?!

    If you have witnessed this performance, can you please provide an INP of it and tell us where you got it?
  3. 06-11-2018, 07:17 AM
    There's something that I think you're failing to understand:

    The POSSIBILITIES of a tactic that are being employed are not what's to be disputed, and are not what the score performance represent.

    The PERFORMANCE ITSELF is the only thing that should be judged. How the tactic was executed in the specific performance is the only worthwhile evidence to examine for the purposes of determining if it was leeching or point-pressing.
  4. 06-11-2018, 07:39 AM
    i clicked on the link thinking it was the inp and it didnt work. This is a pre-tgsap score not sure how we can be sure of what was performed. I will need the inp to verify, additionally we need someway to know the inp provided (if its provided) is the correct one for this game. Currently there is insufficient data to justify this dispute
    Lode Runner champ, also, Roy was right
    Likes Barthax, datagod liked this post
  5. 06-11-2018, 08:26 AM
    There is an account at MARP which utilises the name "Martin G Racine" which has the same score and has been confirmed at MARP (meaning only that someone with elevated privilages at MARP confirmed the INP plays back to that score - it does not convey any meaning towards actions within the game or play style).dub_ddragon_376110_wolf106.zip

    The game link to MARP is http://replay.marpirc.net/r/ddragon - this score is in 2nd place at the time of my posting this message.
    Lots of 1sts to be surpassed: what are you waiting for? Play the game, submit the score...
    Thanks bensweeneyonbass, HugDD thanked this post
  6. 06-11-2018, 08:29 AM
    Note: the attached INP is likely to be the same INP as was originally submitted but other than the obviously similarities of player name and score, it only remains a high likelihood (as anyone can create an account at MARP under any name as well as in previous incarnations of TG).

    I do not have a MAME setup currently in order to play back and have no wish to generate a video of a recording which isn't proven to be the one in question.

    With those thoughts in mind, there is no base evidence of the original submission here at TG and therefore the dispute remains unsubstantiated. Voting no.
    Lots of 1sts to be surpassed: what are you waiting for? Play the game, submit the score...
    Thanks datagod thanked this post
  7. 06-11-2018, 09:03 AM
    You neophytes are longtime members of this site, yet are pig ignorant of how it works. Don't you know that a site member has to be "verified", before being able to submit? Since this member has not been verified, that means he didn't submit this score. Therefore, the record was imported from MARP. So, although it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, on this occasion, I'll acknowledge that MARP was the source of the attached INP. Thus, anyone who denies that the INP is pertinent to the disputed record is just a liar.

    It's really pathetic how obsessed you all are with everything I do, here. And just utterly sad, how you grasp at straws, trying to derail my dispute train. But, like the Geto Boys, it can't be stopped. All you weaklings are doing is generating more interest in this controversy, increasing the likelihood that one or more expert players will use this ridiculous leeching method to make a mockery of the current scoreboard.
  8. 06-11-2018, 09:45 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Barthax View Post
    Waffle MARP waffle MARP waffle MARP
    Yeh, thanks for attaching the INP which I'd already attached, Mr Redundant. Since you obviously just ran yourself over to the scoreboard from whence this record came, it won't shock you to learn that I've downloaded your Double Dragon INP from the same place.

    When you, in my preceding dispute, dumped all your rubbish about this leeching method's being "point pressing", I knew that you were merely defending MARP's incompetency. I also know that you are one of the MARP decision makers. What I did not know, until now, is that your reason for fighting so hard is altogether more personal than just sticking up for your site & cronies.

    You are the one who first used this leeching method, to beat all the decent scores which used to be at the top of MARP's Double Dragon scoreboard. Did you invent the method? Wouldn't surprise me, as your TG forum signature proudly broadcasts your affinity for mediocrity.

    Well, would you look at "Ol' Honest Pete"? So forthright & forthcoming. [Snorts.] I don't know who you've been fooling, all this time, bubba, but rest assured that I was never amongst their number. My dispute train is gathering steam, and I think you know what the next stop will be.

    Name:  Cheesy.png
Views: 173
Size:  64.5 KB


    Note: this is what my #1 post ought to look like:-

    Dispute Evidence / Rationale
    In this game, the player exploits a bug, which allows him to leech an endless supply of points, without having to make any progress. In the end, the player opts to halt progress entirely, and uses the leeching method until all his lives have been exhausted. The method has several variations. The variation he uses is inferior, hence his failure to accumulate bonus men or attain the game's maximum score.

    I have noted that the player is not registered at TG, so reckon he probably does not care about this dispute. Should anyone know otherwise, and wish to inform him about it, he may be contacted via e'mail.

    INP of the game included, for scrutiny.
    Thanks JJT_Defender thanked this post
    Likes JJT_Defender liked this post
  9. 06-11-2018, 11:03 AM
    I'll be skipping over the insults and focus on the one incorrect assumption thats relevant to this dispute. The fact the submitting member is not currently verified does not automatically mean the score is imported, though I could see where newer members could make this mistake. All old accounts needed to be re-registered. Thats why some members have duplicate accounts that need merging and why some former members aren't currently registered even though at one point they were avid submitters. The only thing a pre-tgsap score belonging to an unregistered user means is that the member did renew their membership when Jace took over. So while anything is possible, this score might be imported, the lack of registration hardly proves that.

    In the future, instead of assuming that more experienced members are lying or ignorant a polite question would help get you the answers you need.
    Lode Runner champ, also, Roy was right
  10. 06-11-2018, 11:49 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
    So while anything is possible, this score might be imported, the lack of registration hardly proves that.
    In other words, I'm right.

    The INP was "confirmed" at MARP on the 27th October 2010, "verified" at TG on 27th January 2011.

    MARP is the source. There, another feeble attempt to sabotage this dispute, utterly demolished.
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 71
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Join us