tubechallenge.com

i think im going to nominate goodge street just becuase i have a killer route from there as well starkey

palkanetoijala31 wrote:i think im going to nominate goodge street just becuase i have a killer route from there as well starkey

That's good, that's one less awkward station for my list to cut to the ones I'm nominating. Cheers

Goodge Street is not an awkward starting station! It's an awkward middle station, I reckon, making it quite a good starting station. Maybe.

Do we HAVE to get a train out of the start station, or can we run to another if we knlow we would pass through the start station later in the challenge.

For example if Paddington (District, Circle, Bakerloo) is chosen, can we run to Paddington (H&C) without boarding a Train on the other lines? If so how would this be timed?

mullardo wrote:Do we HAVE to get a train out of the start station, or can we run to another if we knlow we would pass through the start station later in the challenge.

For example if Paddington (District, Circle, Bakerloo) is chosen, can we run to Paddington (H&C) without boarding a Train on the other lines? If so how would this be timed?

You must depart from the drawn station by tube train......

A query about rule 5: (tie breaking for podium places will be the split times)

What split times?

Did you intend to add a rule whereby teams must say how many stations they had visited after an arbitrary time interval, eg. 1 or 2 hours, Hakan?

CrunchySaviour wrote:Did you intend to add a rule whereby teams must say how many stations they had visited after an arbitrary time interval, eg. 1 or 2 hours, Hakan?

No, only at the end of the 4 hour time limit (and preferrably then remember the time of the last visited station before that).

Obviously, in case of a major shutdown, the entire competition collapses, but that's life...

I interpret that as, for example:

Team A visits 61 stations by the 4 hour cut-off, arriving at their 61st station after 3hrs 57mins

Team B visits 61 stations by the 4 hour cut-off, arriving at their 61st station after 3hrs 59mins

=> Team A is placed ahead of Team B on the basis of a better split time for the last station visited.

Is that correct?

Spot on! We were contemplating (maybe still are) that only use this tie breaker principle for podium places, but that'd be unnecessarily complex... A tie for the win did not seem like a good solution if there was a way to separate them!

Definitely not. If two teams finish joint first, but one team has visited more stations after two hours, it only means that their routes are different and perhaps the other team tackled "harder" stations first.

I don't see any reason to separate tied teams, actually.

(edited by Starkey7 for spelling)

I guess we, the organisers, again have to use our prerogative to dictate the rules!

However, I can see your point, but bringing that thought further, we simply can't appoint a winner at all if part of the system shuts down. It's all down to the detailed order of visiting stations or, frankly speaking, luck! A good route may turn terrible and vice versa, because of a shut down.

Without depriving the winners of Z1C 2006 any of their honour, I think it's fair to say, that the overall placings could have been quite different if Victoria line hadn't closed down that day.

So you expect every team to keep logs in order to be able to split them in case of a tie?

I wasn't planning to log, personally.

Not really, an estimate would be trusted in this case... Hopefully, we won't have to worry about this at all...

Surely if the whole system goes down, it's up to each team individually to plough on until 4 hours have passed, doing as best they can. It could be that some teams are able to continue around the problem areas.