Threshold for miliseconds accuracy
2 years ago
Brazil

Hello. Feel free to delete this thread if it looks cluttered in the midst of everything else, but there's this one thing I'm curious about.

With runs as precise as SMB1, I realize that the line must be drawn somewhere for the moderation team to validate runs based on player cam, input display, live streaming, community trust, and so on; but I'm wondering why the accuracy for miliseconds starts at 5:02.xxx and 19:12.xxx. It would be silly to not demand these accuracies for these lower bounds from now on, since it's been long established, but two questions: why those bounds to begin with (was there some proportional gap that was calculated for that purpose), and is there any interest to extend those bounds to a few seconds higher (say, 5:05.xxx and 19:15.xxx, for example)?

Thank you in advance.

Massachusetts, USA

Really it depends on if either the runner submits the miliseconds as part of the time, or to break a tie of multple 5:05s for example to see which is a lower milisecond. Hope this answers your question.

Edited by the author 2 years ago
England

I think it’s just you only get a little serious about smb when you put in a couple hours, and for a 502, you have to put in a good amount of time(aka, a couple of hours.) I think they just don’t want casual speed runners to go through the trouble.

Edited by the author 2 years ago
abrahamw999 and yeabruh like this
Brazil

Thank you Gorillax. But with the way ties work on leaderboards, it goes from oldest to most recent, top to bottom. Very minor thing on a list with hundreds of participants, I agree, but even if someone over 5:02 decides to submit a time with miliseconds, it would automatically go to the bottom, since all others default to a .000. I guess it just looks wrong to see a low 5:03, for example, staying at the bottom of all 5:03, for being the most recent one. And in a way, there is that drive too, like "if you want to be properly ranked, go that extra mile, and get at least a 5:02". Maybe it's fair that if a player doesn't have the stamina to reach a 5:02, then it shouldn't be worried about this issue in the first place. Once again, thank you. I'd appreciate more points of view, if you'd please.

Brazil

Thank you Lululover. Yea, exactly, I was just in the middle of posting something similar xD

Massachusetts, USA

I'm not sure, but a 5:03 would behave like a 5:03.99 if there is another 5:03 with miliseconds. So a 5:03.23 would go above a 5:03 because of the way src tracks times. But yes, if there were multiple 5:03s, then the one posted first would be on top.

Edited by the author 2 years ago
Philippines

are you asking why from the game optimization standpoint? if yes, it could be because it seems like 5:03 is the fastest casual time you can get in smb1 any%. no tight pipe jumps or any hard tricks (2 frame walljump being classified as an easy/hard trick is debatable). first run that comes to mind is miniland's 5:03 with safe strats. probably the same reason for warpless...

Edited by the author 2 years ago
Brazil

Hello yeabruh. Oh, I'll have to take a look at this 5:03, even though I had a different frame of reference, with the glitchless record (a low 5:03). It's that feeling of executing what's close to your best, and still not being in the 5:02 range, ya know?

yeabruh likes this
Game stats
Followers
7,784
Runs
8,790
Players
1,781
Latest news
Requirements for High-Level Any% Runs

Any% (NTSC) runs below 4:57.000 must now fulfill additional requirements in order to be verified.

  • The run's full session must be included in the submission description.
  • For emulator runs below 4:57.000, some form of input display must be visible for the duration of the run. A hand-cam or input
3 months ago