Best player without a world record

MagnusB · Post by **MagnusB** » 23 Apr 2003, 21:56

What makes you think that you can? :]

KickZ · Post by **KickZ** » 24 Apr 2003, 13:59

J-sim wrote:Robeloto must be the player with the best tt without a wr. But looking at his stats.txt it also doesnt look like he has tried making wrs. 1 finish in jaws in 57.xx i think it was. DAME

Because of this, HaraldH asked abuot robeloto`s stats

MagnusB · Post by **MagnusB** » 24 Apr 2003, 18:05

Ah. Missed that part about "looking at his stats.txt".
I have no idea where.

Post by **SveinR** » 24 Apr 2003, 18:38

It was put on on #across once. Don't remember the link, might have just been at vk.mine.nu

Jeppe · Post by **Jeppe** » 29 Jun 2003, 13:02

Worst player that had a internal wr=Bofaiq <---ok maybe i wrote wrong the name =/ dont remember he had the wr 2-3years ago

zworqy · Post by **zworqy** » 29 Jun 2003, 22:59

Best player without WR must now undoubtedly be Know-How, with a total of 40:05(!) I just noticed him on the total times list today, did he get in there from out of nowhere or has he advanced over a number of weeks?

Bokhylle · Post by **Bokhylle** » 29 Jun 2003, 23:01

Know-How has the enigma WR...
I think he just got there from nowhere. didn't see the nick before he got the WR

John · Post by **John** » 30 Jun 2003, 01:34

I havent got any wr yet and my tt is 40.08..

Kopaka · Post by **Kopaka** » 1 Jul 2003, 19:43

MP wrote: ...but I think it's wrong to tell the best players by their tt time, everybody can copy moporecs and it's just a matter of hÃ¶yling

But the more you have played, the better you get.

MP · Post by MP » 2 Jul 2003, 10:10

That is true of course, but some can also play one lev very muchmuch and then be good in it. After that they try some other lev they haven't ever seen before and suck ...until the crazy hÃ¶yling starts.
There is differents kinds of "good" players, others have to practice the tracks over and over again and after that gets great results, some get nice times real quick but can't switch to the last gear ....and the very best players get superb times really quick
I don't mean that every player can be good just with hÃ¶yling, you need skill also.. some are just born to suck (in elma..and that doesn't really matter does it?)

Juish · Post by **Juish** » 3 Jul 2003, 04:30

gaurenteed john is best without wrs for internal playing

but laazy owns externals and i dont think he has wrs.

MagnusB · Post by **MagnusB** » 3 Jul 2003, 12:48

Juish wrote:gaurenteed john is best without wrs for internal playing

but laazy owns externals and i dont think he has wrs.

He has one OLP wr, if that counts. By the way, his nick is LazY, LaazY is just his irc nick.

MP · Post by MP » 4 Jul 2003, 08:53

Yeh I've seen his nick often writte with two a, damn wannabe lazy fans

ZeiZei · Post by **ZeiZei** » 4 Jul 2003, 12:08

Best player without a wr is LimpaN of course. His TT was 39:50 last time i saw him and that's a long time ago

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 4 Jul 2003, 13:38

ZeiZei wrote:Best player without a wr is LimpaN of course. His TT was 39:50 last time i saw him and that's a long time ago

i think ppl refer to best player who has never had a wr...

8-ball · Post by **8-ball** » 15 Jul 2003, 23:17

John wrote:I havent got any wr yet and my tt is 40.08..

Yea, u own...
now u have tt under 40mins and no wrs...
u must be best player without wrs!
but soon u will get some

Juble · Post by **Juble** » 16 Jul 2003, 08:53

the best player without WR is MP, god dame it.
Juish is pretty good to but he has got some good times like Tag for
example

TT is not a really good indication of a person who can invent styles...Deadnite has WRs but has an Alright TT.

A person who has a 45.xx.xx TT and has WR(s) is better in my opinion than someone who has 40.xx.xx TT without WR(s).

bob · Post by **bob** » 16 Jul 2003, 09:02

you have point there. but a kuski with good TT and no WRs ,for example, John, means he is skilled in more stages thean the other player, for example, deadnite. John is able to do more kinds of skills. And it seems the deadnite, on the other hand, has shown that he has alot of patients and can hoyla a lev over and over.

Now who do you think is the better player?

I think anyone with a TT under 44 is able to drive a WR.....its just a matter of patients and time.

sorry if i offend anyone

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 16 Jul 2003, 11:51

i think every one with elma installed is able to take a wr... it just takes luck, like Buci in freefall....

MagnusB · Post by **MagnusB** » 16 Jul 2003, 14:18

petsen wrote:i think every one with elma installed is able to take a wr... it just takes luck, like Buci in freefall....

That was an exception from the rule. Normally, to get a wr, you will have to play and play and play and play, and if you have an ounce of skills you will get the wr in the end. Not everyone has that kind of patience of course, and thus we can conclude with that patience is a skill. When people talk about "skilled players" I think they're usually referring to players who are good at e.g battles; people who can drive good times on a level in a short time. That's a useful ability to have, sure, but it won't get you anywhere if you can't hÃ¶yl.

Karlis · Post by **Karlis** » 16 Jul 2003, 20:11

good speech magnus, i felt like you were talking about me

very true that FF was exception of the rule, but not many has even hÃ¶yled FF with that 12.xx style so its not so great miracle actually, the old wr 12,24 was only my 9th finish with 12.xx style, so it couldnt be perfect

nowadays many WRs are more based on hÃ¶yling than skill, many recs(like moporecs) may look like perfect on average player's eyes, but its only because they cant see the possible places to improve. not even better player can see it always, but if you start hÃ¶yling the lev, first you think you drove just like in the moporec but you got much worse time, some ppl stop playing there cos they think they cant improve more. hÃ¶yl more and suddenly you seem to get as good times as that perfect rec of yours with much worse runs. at least that's the way it goes when I hÃ¶yl some lev, you start to "understand" things on that lev, you start to see where you do slower than in that good moporec and if you just continue you'll usually find(or you think you found something, but that was only kind of that understanding) something new, faster style and so on..

if we take John in a closer look and check his times, he doesnt actually have many very very good times, only few top-10 times actually, but still, he doesnt have bad times there at all, he has done almost all tricks and he has good time in every lev. he is 11. in World Total Times list, which is VERY good position imo!

we can draw a conclusion that john doesnt hÃ¶yl one level like hell, he chooses level, plays it and maybe improves little and moves to next lev, or might even play little more and improve little again, but what he doesnt do is play one lev for days even weeks to get very very good time, most likely he thinks its boring to play same lev for very long time

opposite to John we have players which can and usually do play one lev for days, weeks or even months(secret fm style) and are that way able to get wr to a certain lev

and then we have players like dmd, zweq etc. that can somehow be both of those at the same time and I think that's fucking unbelievable and sick

bob · Post by **bob** » 17 Jul 2003, 10:11

i tottally agree with magnus and karl
patients can be a skill to have, but i think that it would only make one's elma career fairly dull and boring.
Yes, kuskis such as Zweq are the perfect elma breed.

John · Post by **John** » 19 Jul 2003, 11:13

Karlis wrote: play one lev for days, weeks or even months(secret fm style)

Are there ppl that plays some lev for months?

As u said I dont play same lev for long just beat my best time and then start playing new lev, but if I drove bad run and still got best time then I probably try some more.

Karlis · Post by **Karlis** » 20 Jul 2003, 21:18

John wrote: Are there ppl that plays some lev for months?

Karlis, mr....

MagnusB · Post by **MagnusB** » 20 Jul 2003, 23:13

Karlis wrote:
John wrote: Are there ppl that plays some lev for months?
Karlis, mr....

I guess we can add psy.
And let's not forget zyntifox.

Ramone · Post by **Ramone** » 21 Feb 2006, 16:35

many ppl suggested here drove wrs by now. MP didnt
so: MP

The_BoneLESS · Post by **The_BoneLESS** » 21 Feb 2006, 17:06

MP
and BarTeK is quite good too ( don't know if he ever had a WR in his early years )

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 21 Feb 2006, 17:15

so funny that jsim never gets mentioned...only very known kuskis..

Luther · Post by **Luther** » 21 Feb 2006, 17:52

John wrote:I havent got any wr yet and my tt is 40.08..

NOOB =)))

A.K.B. · Post by **A.K.B.** » 21 Feb 2006, 22:10

Irection that The OooO is awesomely skilled playa!

Raven · Post by **Raven** » 22 Feb 2006, 09:02

A.K.B. wrote:Irection that The OooO is awesomely skilled playa!

He doesn't play internals.

A.K.B. · Post by **A.K.B.** » 22 Feb 2006, 12:11

I know that, it's just I think is the best player without a world record (internal)

jaytea · Post by **jaytea** » 22 Feb 2006, 22:08

best player who currently has no internal wr? or has never had? if the first, definitely Jeppe or Markku

Quinn · Post by **Quinn** » 24 Feb 2006, 18:01

jaytea wrote:best player who currently has no internal wr? or has never had? if the first, definitely Jeppe or Markku

or DaemoN....

jaytea · Post by **jaytea** » 24 Feb 2006, 18:26

hes ok, i just think the other 2 are noticably better :s

then again i have more of a battle/external mindset, im sure if you sat Daemon down next to Jeppe or Markku and gave each an internal to hoyl youd probably be more impressed by daemon's performance

Totti · Post by **Totti** » 27 Feb 2006, 16:11

A.K.B. · Post by **A.K.B.** » 7 Apr 2006, 15:05

Only since Stini beat your ass in Haircut, which now has a new style.

Honza · Post by **Honza** » 7 Apr 2006, 18:12

Luke or OtorK

OtorK · Post by **OtorK** » 8 Apr 2006, 10:46

Honza wrote:Luke or OtorK

hahaha

MP is best

Best player without a world record

Re: .

.

.