Ok I think I got everything updated, let me know if I missed anything

Based on the definitions agreed to there are no skips in 1 lap even possible I think; none that surpass 50% anyways

I believe going off course is faster in Toyko towards the finish

Yeah that's what Meauxdal theorized, I'm not convinced on it yet, mostly I think its because I want to get 1:00 the way I've been doing it

Highlights from discussion for anyone jumping in from my perspective

Where we started after I figured out how to do the lap skips ''all the true "Skips" from my definition utilize the out of bounds warp to advance track segment out of order''

"A definition that limits and addresses the Reset mechanic without making accidentally going off the track invalidate a run would be ideal and the reason for me avoiding out of bounds or off track in my proposition."

Great post by meauxdal highlighting the problem with limiting off course movement or small exploits of the reset mechanics that don't skip laps entirely "I really think it is unwise to group shortcuts which do not require any glitches or anything other than passing through the checkpoints, alongside runs which, by use of a specific glitch, trick the game into thinking an extra lap or laps were completed.

This game is exploding with potential for strategy and innovation, and I see a chilling effect occurring where viable strategies that the game allows are being shunted to the "Skips" category despite there being a clear and universally applicable definition that stands out starkly when analyzing what is happening in each run.

The problematic mechanic here is the "getting credit for laps not completed" - this is what needs to be separated out to protect leaderboard integrity. Separating other things out actually harms leaderboard integrity and has a chilling effect on strategy development, in my opinion."

Quote from the oldest champion we are in contact with andou "After reading your posts i'd prefer to see the community allow "minor skips" that involve jumping over a corner, first lap gravel pit etc. in the main categories and only limit the use of glitches that allow incomplete laps to count, skip sections of the track, etc. to be forced into the skips categories. Also, as Meauxdal brought up, please don't feel inclined to make a decision/rule based upon protecting historical runs at the expense of new strategies. I understand mine were set years ago with the available strategies at the time."

My example video intended to highlight the subjective nature of banning either off course reset or going off the course to skip over a corner: it together with this post for context "First example uses the off course area to skip part of the course without landing off the course at all

Second uses the Reset mechanic to skip driving on part of the track; this is one of the mistakes you can make on this course and it works exactly like the end of my houston laps

I think everyone agrees the first video is a skip; the other 2 are things we are looking at potentially calling a skip but in contexts where they actually lose time over current records without skips."

Reminder from pancakes "When we first made the skips category, it was to allow people to still play the tracks while not having to try and perform the necessary techniques to perform a skip."

Post wrapping up discussion from meauxdal that brings us to current day "Seems like discussion has settled down with the consensus being something along these lines:

A skip is defined as a shortcut which, by use of glitched checkpoint abuse and track reset mechanic exploitation, gains credit for a lap or laps which are not completed."

With a comment addressing the kyoto corner cut on the third lap "If finishing a lap on Kyoto is faster when cutting the corner out of bounds than taking the last turn, then doing so but not actually getting credit for a skipped lap should also be legal; i.e. running laps 1 and 2 normally, but finishing lap 3 by jumping toward the finish line as in the Skips run, and doing a buffered wheelie to pass through the final checkpoint and finish the race. No one has done this in a run yet, but its legality is an implication of the above."

Could someone please point me to the current definition of a Skip?

Go to Best Race Times (Skips) on any track

Click Rules

Change the top to 'Category Rules'

Second line

A skip allows you to skip a lap of driving; it's just about that simple in our current rules. Everything else is fair game(other than cheats).

This is mostly due to the checkpoint system already being successful at preventing anything that saves a lot of time. The biggest reset mechanic/off course exploits only save a couple seconds on a lap(madrid being the most extreme at the moment). You can't skip lap segments whether you are off the course or on it.

It is my opinion that the current definition of a skip needs to be revised. I believe there are a number of skips which are being accepted as regular laps, races, and runs. The definition of a skip is simple. A skip is avoiding any portion of track, running outside of the intended course, or exploiting any glitch that artificially improves times.

A regular (non-skip) is when the player runs the course as intended within the spirit of the game.

• There should be no landing off course anywhere including near the finish line.
• There should be no crashing on or off course including at the start countdown and near the finish line.
• There should be no respawns, corner cuts, cross over jumps, or other glitches - irrespective of checkpoints.

For instance, falling down at the start of Las Vegas, jumping three straights across the end of Houston, and crashing into the side of the last jump of Detroit and Kyoto are all obvious skips to name a few.

When fighting for my 58.88 second Kyoto race, I discovered and refined a number of techniques to improve my lap and race times. There is a lot more to that race than meets the eye, so in no way am I discouraging new strategies.

I am glad a community exists for us to compete, but we should provide a fair playing field for everyone to truly go fast rather than exploit errors in this great game.

It's a practical issue. There are two kinds of "shortcuts" in Excitebike 64.

Skips: A run in which one or more laps are counted as completed but without having passed through all required checkpoints.

Everything else: The off-course finish in Houston, cutting the big corner in Seattle, cutting the ending corner in Detroit - these shortcuts pass through every checkpoint on the map as intended. If you were to view the memory map of the game while playing, you'd see that each and every required checkpoint is triggered and acknowledged by the game.

This is the most sensible categorization. Your suggestion leaves lots of room for gray area and likely would require an additional segmentation on the leaderboards (there's almost no chance we ban or remove the existing non-skip runs) for "intended" runs.

Example: "running outside of the intended course": In the below example, you've crossed outside of the track boundary.

Similarly, in your Seattle run, you cut across a corner. I don't think you can argue that this isn't "avoiding any portion of track".

As a start for continuing, I'd suggest you define a ruleset that doesn't invalidate your own runs.

Should a run no longer count because a player accidentally landed off course?

In a long category like All Rounds or 100% it's quite easy to fall off the course especially for players that are just working on starting the game or improving

I have the same question about crashing; this rule would essentially ban most currently accepted runs outside of the individual levels you are talking about

Should we disqualify runs because someone isn't skilled enough to finish without crashing or accidentally land off course?

A new definition needs to account for all categories

Note: I do track various strategies on my spreadsheet. See the fourth sheet Other ILs here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1smQBE8lgMRj5ozIFz86JqXKJlPBXhyOj3PBg1g77w8s/edit?usp=sharing

Here's one of the biggest issues in terms of trying to maintain a third "intended" category.

It's not speculative with regards to gray areas - there are immediate and complicated considerations.

For example, let's say we establish a third IL category with the rules that no off-course landings and no resets can be used. Great, now you have to race Houston the "intended" way for that category, right? Well, no, not under those rules. Prior to the existing reset-warp strategy being discovered, the meta was landing on-course on the home straight and quickly turning around, skipping the last berm.

Or let's take Detroit. Currently, we optimally land off course and get bounced back onto the track, but let's again say we've established that 3rd category with no off-course landings. This still wouldn't rule the strategy out, though: the same racing line is possible without landing off-course at all.

Or maybe we end up going back to your initial idea about restricting off-track movement. Which would, as mentioned, invalidate your Kyoto run. Maybe that's OK to you, but it sounds utterly horrible to moderate. Are we going to go frame by frame through every run and try to verify whether they were on- or off-track?

Hopefully this helps elucidate the logistics of this situation.

My original post on the topic of skips was very carefully worded, but let’s try it again.

Crashing, respawns, running backwards and running off course should never be considered a regular way to run a course - especially in the pursuit of regular time records.

To clarify:

I am not recommending a new category.

I currently do not have any Seattle runs.

I believe the big corner cut in Seattle is a skip (because corner cuts are skips).

I believe jumping over the building and jagged fence line on the first straight of Gold Rush is clearly how the course is intended to be run.

And furthermore, I do not believe tail whips on or over the blocks are skips as shown in the Kyoto example cited above. If you watch my 58.88 second World Record Kyoto race in closer detail, you will notice the “Off Course” warning never flashes on screen. It is impossible to argue that a tail whip on or over the blocks is either off course or a time advantage since the motorcycle leaves from and returns to the same straight without landing on or touching anything outside of the course. This sort of maneuvering is commonly accepted in real life racing and stands in stark contrast to the corner cuts, bounce backs, reversals, and multiple straight cross-over jumps that I previously outlined.

It would be beneficial for everyone to review the current 2025 AMA Supercross Rulebook as it provides clear guidance on these matters. The following excerpts were taken directly from the full document linked here: https://americanmotorcyclist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2025-AMA-Supercross-Rulebook.pdf

1.6.16 GENERAL SAFETY AND ON-TRACK REGULATIONS

g. Unless directed to do so by Race Officials, no one at any time will be permitted to ride a motorcycle in the wrong direction on the track.

j. Intentionally causing or attempting to cause a red flag period by stopping, intentionally crashing or any other such action will result in a penalty.

1.6.20 TRACK CUTS/UNFAIR ADVANTAGE

a. A Rider leaving the course may only continue by properly re-entering the course, without gaining a time or position advantage, from the closest possible point to where that Rider left the course. While off course, the Rider must not accelerate in an unsafe manner.

b. Race Direction will make the determination as to whether a Rider gained any advantage by leaving the racecourse and re-entering. The Rider may be determined to have gained an advantage without gaining a position.

1.7.3 FINISH LINE DEFINED

a. The officially designated finish line is located at the site of the Timing and Scoring loop. The line will be clearly defined with trackside markings and will be located as close to the finish line flagger as possible.

b. Unless otherwise authorized by the Chief Scorer, the vertical plane at the leading edge of the finish line is the scoring point for the motorcycle. To be considered as having completed a lap, the Rider and his motorcycle must intersect the vertical plane at the leading edge of the finish line.

c. The Rider and his motorcycle must cross the officially designated finish line to be scored.

1.7.4 LAP DEFINED

a. Lap: A Lap is defined as the completion of a single circuit around the racecourse, as designated by AMA. A lap will only be considered full and complete when it starts and ends at the officially designated Start / Finish line. For the first lap of a race, the lap is defined as a full-course circuit completed from the Rider's start position to the officially designated Finish line. If the distance from the start positions to the Finish line is less than 50% of the track distance, the lap will not be considered complete until the second time each Rider crosses the Finish line. Official Race distance and positions are only updated for Riders at the completion of a Lap.

It would be beneficial for everyone to review the current 2025 AMA Supercross Rulebook as it provides clear guidance on these matters.

It would not be beneficial, since we are competing in a Nintendo 64 video game and not a 2025 AMA Supercross event.

You don't need to appeal to an authority here. It's a speedrun; the rules are arbitrary. There are certain traditional categories (Any%, 100%, etc.), and a long history of running individual levels and competing in the best achieved time. Otherwise, it's whatever the runners want to compete in.

The reason a third category is the natural focus of discussion is orphaning the existing runs in question or moving them to "Skips" is unlikely as an outcome. You'll face an uphill battle seeking that conclusion, because I doubt any other players will want that.

The most realistic compromise, then, is adding a new category catering specifically to the way you prefer to play the game.

In order for the speedrun.com Excitebike 64 community to work competitively, participants need to agree on the grounds of competition. We've extensively debated the ruleset and come to a consensus several years ago. I'm not being facetious when I say I'm sorry you don't appreciate the existing ruleset, and we do want to consider realistic ways of improving things. Whatever the case, major changes such as your proposals require community consensus. I suspect you will need some stronger arguments than what you've presented thus far.

Thanks for clarifying mosin, we have our own traditions and customs here that go back years now just like the AMA. Where our ruleset differs is mostly a result of looking for objective ways to verify video evidence of speedruns instead of live competition.

AMA Supercross Ruleset provides a good framework for how to navigate a real-life competition where people are at real danger of hurting each other; sportsmanship is integral to the basic function of the event. There are risks making a ruleset here as well; we want to encourage competition on a fair playing field.

Fundamentally we have the goal of growing Excitebike 64 as a game people play, learning new things about it, having a larger community, and driving the times down. We need to create a ruleset that's inviting for new players and also rewards veterans for their novel findings to keep them engaged in competition. Most of the players active and historically significant come from the speedrunning discipline where strategies like this are encouraged. It's not a stretch to say that the exploits make the game more interesting to watch, interesting to learn, and more attractive to new players within speedrunning.

Outside of the ruleset details there's a big part of this discussion that has to start with wanting to contribute to this community. Having detailed discussions about the game, talking about strategy, encouraging and helping others is vital to influence here just like the AMA; you need to rub a lot more elbows to have an effect on their ruleset. None of us are paid or gain much reputation for doing what we do here on these leaderboards are a passion project. The rules right now are fit to our community's culture. In the AMA or here you have to show some level of respect for those that came before you to earn influence on ruleset; if you show up at the AMA rules committee meeting you have to chum up with the other members regardless of your skill in riding if you want them to change things.

New discoveries allowing courses to be raced almost-entirely Off Course using wheelies (and a consistent setup) has sparked community discussion. Consensus has formed to split the default (non-Skips) Race and Lap categories into Standard and Shortcuts. Nearly all existing runs are now Standard. Non-Skips runs using reset warps, corner cuts, and other Off Course shenanigans are now relegated to the Shortcuts categories (full lap skips are still banned here, however). Skips runs are unchanged - all techniques from Shortcuts are allowed in addition to full lap skips.