PSP ramp allowed at Maxs Masters

[Nick Brockdorff]

Well....

...if they got a free board for their gun for those € 60... the price would make sense.

Boards retail anywhere from € 30 to 100 anyway!

If the MS made this happen during 05, before teams signed sponsorships for 06, contractual obligations would be absolutely no problem.... especially if manufacturers wanted their guns used at major events!

It is NO different than the MS limiting the number of paint manufacturers that can have their products used at MS events... same principle applies.

As for speeding on the roads, that will pretty soon be a non-existing problem also, once research is completed on GPS guided chips, that can limit the cars speed to whatever is applicable where you are driving.... actually Britain is leading the way in that research, so it shouldn't be all that unfamiliar to you

EVERY problem has a solution dude

Nick

 

[Steve Morris]

I don't think it has to be all that complicated. I believe that the manufacturers are more willing to cooperate also. Simply ask them to comply with semi-only and lock it with the major league tamper seal. We will be able to hear if a cheater starts going at some of the ramping speeds we saw and heard last year. We monitor the BPS with our boxes and we hang those that intentionally cheat no matter who.

 

[Magued]

Nice

Originally posted by Steve Morris
Since peepz are rightfully disgruntled because of how late the gun rules got clarified then we should start working on Season 2006 right now. Who knows? We may find a better solution by mid-season this year.

I would like to see semi again without a cap, if we could find a way to make it work. One possible way would be that manufacturers and board producers agreed to a industry-recognized tamper seal ensuring that the gun is locked from the factory in the approved mode. Since many of us refs can already recognize around 15bps then we would hear and scrutinize any players that shoot significantly faster (because shooting much faster than that in semi is physically impossible). We would continue to use ball-counting devices to guide us to cheaters. Very severe penalties would apply and (I hope) manufacturers would not dare conspire to create cheating modes. We would still have to make sure the guns weren't too bouncy.

Thinkable?

Good Idea Morris

Magued

 

[Chicago]

Steve, didn't you say about this time last year that we shoud start working on the rules for 2005? A lot of good that did.

 

[Chicago]

Originally posted by sjt19
There is outrage at the moment that players have to pay 30 Euros for a plastic card they may only use once or twice. Can you imagine the outcry if players had to pay 60 Euros for a one off event? I doubt the MS would get the teams playing one off events anymore if they did that

And some teams have contracts with their sponsors that state they are not allowed to use any boards other than their boards in their guns.

Why would it be a one-off event? If millenium required a certain board, other leagues in Europe would probably quickly follow suit if that board got rid of the gun cheats problem. Millenium just has to suck it up and be first.

As for sponsor contracts, those contracts would quickly change. Sponsors are not stupid - they're not going to hold a team to a term in a contract that would prevent them from playing the one series the sponsor probably really wants them to play anyway.

 

[Steve Morris]

Originally posted by Chicago
Steve, didn't you say about this time last year that we shoud start working on the rules for 2005? A lot of good that did.

The current 15bps cap allows us to get used to the test devices and the sound of that ROF. That has given me renewed confidence in the ability of a decent referee organization to monitor and control semiauto only. The fact that there are laws against enhanced modes in some European countries also makes me more inclined to look at ways to make semi-only work. I can also combine that with some of the experiences we had at Maxs. For one thing there were the back corner players who were getting their "ramping" started before coming out which resulted in those of us standing on the tape line playing ducking and moving games because the balls would, of course, bounce right off into whoever or whatever was against the netting. Then there were the lower division players who became possessed by their ramping...a little scary. Plus reports of extra shots after trigger release that some say knocked out some people, including refs.

If we could get manufacturers to pledge with an agreed-upon hologram tamper seal that their guns are semi-only then maybe we could have semi and keep it under control. That combined with continuous monitoring of the ROF, thorough testing of suspicious guns and very severe penalties for those caught cheating.

By the way, I just read a statement that NXL has developed a very directional ROF testing device that can pick out and monitor players' ROF from the tower.

I believe that with determination by the leagues and reffing organizations we could have uncapped semi back again. I know this is a reversal from what I suggested before but I simply want what is best, fairest and still workable...and I think striving for semi-only may now be workable.

Again, solely my opinion.

 

[Baca Loco]

Mr. Morris sir, could you please explain how any of the current controlling devices, including the NXL's new directional mic, serves any viable function with regards to policing uncapped semi only? Other than the tamper proof, cross our hearts and hope to die it's true semi only boards, of course. And isn't that the same merry go round we've been spinning to all this time anyway?

 

[Steve Morris]

Originally posted by Baca Loco
Mr. Morris sir, could you please explain how any of the current controlling devices, including the NXL's new directional mic, serves any viable function with regards to policing uncapped semi only?

Yessir, Mr Loco. My theory is that if someone goes to the trouble to break or fake their tamper seal for the purpose of cheating then they will want the full monty, that is a really high ROF. Since it seems that very few peepz can shoot faster than 15bps unassisted (which needs to be proven or disproven using proper devices) then a high reading (say 18bps or more) would put up a flag for a gun that needs to be checked further, perhaps with a robot. Rates of fire that exceed 20 would be what I would expect from cheaters and after a few more tournaments with the 15bps cap I would expect such a shooter to stick out like a sore thumb. I believe that a solid commitment from the manufacturers, active, visible monitoring, spot-checks and checking suspicious guns along with really severe penalties could help achieve our goals.

Am I totally out to lunch here?

 

[Steve Morris]

If I may expand a little more...

If I had some of the same guns shooting the same way as last season, at the maximum ROF the hopper would feed, I would be inclined to simply pull the player and apply the penalties for illegal gun. I now have confidence in my ability to call a grossly cheating gun. Now we have the ball-count devices and we can give players a chance to show us they can shoot 25-30bps without electronic help.

I think after a couple of more tournaments of 15bps and if the majority of the top manufacturers agree to the seal then there would be very few players who would risk shooting at feed-rate in such an environment. If a couple of players get busted initially it will only help to keep a lid on it.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Steve Morris
If I may expand a little more...

If I had some of the same guns shooting the same way as last season, at the maximum ROF the hopper would feed, I would be inclined to simply pull the player and apply the penalties for illegal gun. I now have confidence in my ability to call a grossly cheating gun. Now we have the ball-count devices and we can give players a chance to show us they can shoot 25-30bps without electronic help.

I think after a couple of more tournaments of 15bps and if the majority of the top manufacturers agree to the seal then there would be very few players who would risk shooting at feed-rate in such an environment. If a couple of players get busted initially it will only help to keep a lid on it.

So what you're suggesting is that any high rate of fire is defacto evidence of cheating? And that you, in your officiating wisdom, are prepared to pull players because you deem them likely to be cheating and the follow-up is for them to prove otherwise? After they've already been pulled from a game?

Somehow that doesn't inspire me with confidence despite my regard for your intentions and personal integrity. I don't see how that's better or even as good as a clearly defined, enforceable hard cap.