iOS - Crossy Road - Fastest to 100 hops - 21.466 - Joshua Beesley

Is this Performance Claim Valid?

    You have no permission to view/vote this poll.
You may not vote on this poll
  1. 06-25-2020, 01:44 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by trivia212005 View Post
    Well, I double checked you time it is 21.3 seconds. However, I'm still voting no because you need to round off to the nearest second.
    Not all time scores have to be rounded, in fact the less we round the better.

    I haven't voted on this cause I don't have time to accurately time it myself, but rounding is not neccesary for a score to be accepted.
    Daniel Ocampo
    Tomena Sanner
    Champion and JJT lover (not in that way).
    Thanks trivia212005 thanked this post
    Likes trivia212005, RonnieWeston liked this post
  2. 06-25-2020, 01:46 AM
    Thank you for the info. Abstaining for now.
    Jared Oswald
    World record holders on "Guitar Hero", "Rock Band" and Sonic games.
    Thanks Pixe Sukola thanked this post
  3. 06-25-2020, 01:57 AM
    In my opinion rounding off a time to the next second (not just the nearest) is an option that the player has if they don't have a better way to time their score. When this happens, lets say Joshua's time is 21.100 if he wants he can only submit it as a 22, and not as a 21, even tho' the score is closer to 21.

    Now, if the player has a much more precise timer like TimeSplit or many others out there, he can submit up to milliseconds, specially on short scores like this one, where half a second is a LOT, the more precise the better. Besides, the TG format for time based submissions includes up to milliseconds, it is only fair to fill that camp as accurate as possible.
    Daniel Ocampo
    Tomena Sanner
    Champion and JJT lover (not in that way).
  4. 08-14-2020, 11:13 PM
    05-08-2020. Do we have other opinions?
  5. 09-22-2020, 07:33 PM
    i wont rubber stamp speedrun, but if a respected member here wants to grab the frames and time it, i'll rubber stamp that
    Lode Runner champ, also, Roy was right
  6. 10-17-2020, 09:13 AM
    This score seems nearly impossible to confirm to the thousandths of a second. Heck, my stopwatch doesn't even have a place for that. I took my phone stopwatch and timed it 10 times from start to finish to see what I came up with and not a single time was it longer than 21.46. My average was 21.38. Granted I am far from perfect, but to me the .466 time is actually slower than the recorded time so it does not bother me to accept a time that seems to be ever so slightly worse than what was performed.

    I am voting yes, knowing that it is a risk and it may end up swinging no/
  7. 10-18-2020, 10:59 AM
    Waiting until a TG member does a digital time to get the exact time to nearest millisecond before voting yes

    1a. Joshua Beesley next time can you get a video game digital timer to time this to the nearest millisecond when playing this game.
    All I can do is minutes and seconds not milliseconds,

    1. Can a Twin Galaxies member does a digital time to get the exact time to nearest millisecond?
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes 31 seconds
    - 0 days 0 hours 0 minutes 9 seconds
    = 0 days 0 hours 0 minutes 22 seconds
    JJTJohnnyLightning World #1 Racer on Arcade Game Fast & Furious Super Cars 1,872 Match Wins 52Cities
  8. 10-18-2020, 12:51 PM
    I’m not sure that’s possible. I think YouTube plays at 60fps and I would assume TG is about the same. To confirm with 100% certainty at a millisecond level wouldn’t we would need 1000 FPS?
  9. 10-19-2020, 08:28 AM
    Trying to get consensus on a sub-one second time at TG: the blind (voters) will lead the blind (unwilling adjudicators) & will put it through, probably.

    Note that both YouTube and TG players have frame-by-frame navigational controls using . and , for forward/rewind by one frame. As neither of them have a clock with less than a single second, someone will have to do some explicit counting to work out when inside a second the first frame begins & calculate the offset from that second, then perform the same for the end frame (presuming that there can actually be consensus about which frame constitutes start and which frame constitutes end), then calculate the difference.

    Personally, I don't vote on manually timed runs.
    Lots of 1sts to be surpassed: what are you waiting for? Play the game, submit the score...
    Thanks JJT_Defender, Garrett Holland thanked this post
    Likes JJT_Defender liked this post
  10. 10-19-2020, 08:43 AM
    I’m surprised that there isn’t a standard that determines how detailed a time can be. Anything smaller than 10ths is a second is nearly impossible to prove unless it is times by the game itself.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Join us