Is this really the way things are with the pro level markers?

[GoatBoy]

Not even bounce, I've seen folks shooting auto-response at pro level events that way with an NTSC camera. Anymore you'd need a high-speed rig though.

I can sort of understand hi-tech's idea.

The best (only?) way you can detect these cheats is to catch them in the act, in a recorded fashion. You must record behavior, and record results.

For velocity, it's on-gun or something that can trace and measure all shots.

For BPS, you'd literally have to monitor finger activity and motion (relative to trigger/frame) and link that to the shot recorder.



The implementation of something like this would prove... as I said so many pages ago, really invasive. How many posts ago was that? Yes, I know, I can come up with garbage sometimes, can't I? Maybe some of it could be done with cameras... but it would take LOTS of really high performance cameras... and lots, and lots, and lots of reviewing, although this could be helped by the assistance of the very low tech use of... people with good, trained ears.

[Brophog]

You do have to give Slarty some credit, even if he is technically out in left field. Atleast he's trying to solve the problem.

We can't really keep playing this semantic game, can we? It's not really full auto if you rub your belly, jump three times, and eat exactly 1.3 cups of sugar, but it is all other times. Isn't that about where we're at?

The real problem, is like Bill said here, and I and others have said for a long time, is everyone let it get this far. Early electros weren't a huge problem. But now, they've gotten so bad, that what can we do? I don't know. Let's just say it doesn't look pretty though.

[GT]

I'll throw in my 2 here and see if anyone reads my junk.

Cheating:
After class Tues. night I was chatting with a guy in my class. He said that the plan to run 2 planes in the the WTC was very simple. I told him he was very wrong.

You see the problem is cheating. What do we want to do? Stop cheating right? The logistics invovled are enormous and very complex.

Lets all begin to understand that cheating is a social problem. The inory here is you guys are attacking the problem as if there was something wrong with the equipment. I dont care if you think you have developed the best anticheating electro on the planet. Give it to any number of members on AO and they can find away around it. What needs to happen is to make cheating less bennifcial, i.e. start handing out lifetime bans.


Thoughts on the "industry":
Does it really matter that pros cheat? Honestly do you think it hurst the industry? Lets look at this wholistic and relize that there are much larger issues at hand, I will let you guys figure those out. My personal belief is that real soon here, next 5yrs, rec paintball is going to want to make a move to "tourney ball." I think this influx of players will overload traditional venues and new ones will be started. Futhermore, with more money in the industry, K2, SP, and tippmann, we are going to see these folks start thier own series. I think that is where we will begin to see the formation of new legues.


p.s. Stop arguing and begin to think. The new era doesnt need disention, it needs leadership, and AO only need chose one path.

jb

[Jeffy-CanCon]

You do have to give Slarty some credit, even if he is technically out in left field. Atleast he's trying to solve the problem.

...

The real problem, is like Bill said here, and I and others have said for a long time, is everyone let it get this far. Early electros weren't a huge problem. But now, they've gotten so bad, that what can we do? I don't know. Let's just say it doesn't look pretty though.

Agreed.

Sadly, I think the problem here is one of organization and authority. It IS possibly to turn back the technological clock, IF you have a strong governing authority to ensure compliance by all manufacturers. But paintball doesn't have that. Because the manufacturers own the leagues and tournaments, they have no interest in a level playing field. They will each pursue the arms race in a bid for a technical superiority with which to boost sales of their markers. We saw that in the late 90's when thay all "agreed" to the 14BPS cap, and then all ignored it.

I'll throw in my 2 here and see if anyone reads my junk.

Cheating:
After class Tues. night I was chatting with a guy in my class. He said that the plan to run 2 planes in the the WTC was very simple. I told him he was very wrong.

You see the problem is cheating. What do we want to do? Stop cheating right? The logistics invovled are enormous and very complex.

Lets all begin to understand that cheating is a social problem. .

...

jb

You are right in that cheating is a social issue, but this thread isn't about cheating in general. This thread, from post #1, is about technological cheating. In the abstract, technological cheating should be easier to monitor and control than active play-cheating. But we have let the tech side go for so long, that we can't see our way back to daylight.

[billmi]

I can sort of understand hi-tech's idea.

The best (only?) way you can detect these cheats is to catch them in the act, in a recorded fashion. You must record behavior, and record results.

For velocity, it's on-gun or something that can trace and measure all shots.

Yep, I've been saying that for the last 5 years. Al Dilz, the designer of the Paintball Radarchron says it is practical and possible with a clip-on device. You shoot hot, it registers an alarm and you are done - that easy.

For BPS, you'd literally have to monitor finger activity and motion (relative to trigger/frame) and link that to the shot recorder.

That's the sticky wicket, finding a practical way to record the trigger pulls on the field to correlate them to the shots fired.

The implementation of something like this would prove... as I said so many pages ago, really invasive. How many posts ago was that? Yes, I know, I can come up with garbage sometimes, can't I? Maybe some of it could be done with cameras... but it would take LOTS of really high performance cameras... and lots, and lots, and lots of reviewing,

Yes, and it would only catch a portion, and you would have a lot of contested decisions with players claiming that the camera wasn't catching enough detail of their finger movement to see clearly.

although this could be helped by the assistance of the very low tech use of... people with good, trained ears.

That has been the answer from assorted tourney judges for years "oh, we can hear if they are shooting full auto, turbo, etc." and it's simply not true. At an NPPL tournament in 99 I shot some nice clear, tightly framed video of a pro player shooting in auto-response mode (shooting on both the pull and the release - the finger movement was wide and clear, and the bolt movement was visible) on a field where the head ref confidently told me that they were well experienced and could hear guns that were cheating.

[SlartyBartFast]

You do have to give Slarty some credit, even if he is technically out in left field. At least he's trying to solve the problem.

[GT]

You are right in that cheating is a social issue, but this thread isn't about cheating in general. This thread, from post #1, is about technological cheating. In the abstract, technological cheating should be easier to monitor and control than active play-cheating. But we have let the tech side go for so long, that we can't see our way back to daylight.

True,
but its to late, we cant go back. Take a look at some of the hidous ideas to curb "E-cheating." Like I said its a social problem, whether its gun or player its still wrong and we need to asses both and determine the best course of action.

However, like I said before, there are bigger fish to fry than what "pros" do or dont do.

jb

[Stimulation]

I have one question:

Where is Big Tom?

[GT]

SBF,
I dont to be critical but please put some space on your paragraphs. Your correct it does affect rec play, the question is how much? I think what scares me the most is that ramping boards, grossly ramping not just alittle bounce, are making there way into the used market. I really wish these morons wouldnt sell this stuff to the rec players.

Keep in mind that insurance is a buisness, although heavly regulated. Also keep in mind that if fields cant afford insurence due to premiums then isnurence compaines are no longer recieving the additional revenue. Insurance companies make money of both sides of paintball, manfuacturer and field/store owner. Remember that most issurance is mostly Risk based. There would have to be a hella-lot of deaths to really cause concern. Heck the reason the stats are so low for pb related injures is the lack of reporting or a mechanism for reporting.

IN a law suit folks are looking for money, plain and simple. I am willing to bet there is more money in the company that makes the equipment than the field owner and if any of these companies have an ounce of sence they carry some sort of libility insurance. Shure there premiums may go up a few bucks but they will just slap you, the consumer, with an extra 100 dollars for your next super splat master 2k.

[ilikePB]

they will just slap you, the consumer, with an extra 100 dollars for your next super splat master 2k.

I can't wait to get a super splat master 2k, I hope it comes set at db1 and a ramping board that ramps it to 35bps after I hit 5bps.

[Miscue]

The battery itself might not even be necessary.

A coil in the palm of the glove would have a pulse inducted into it by the magnetic field of the solenoid coil - wire that to a cpoil in the mid-finger of the glover, and it will generate a corresponding magnetic pulse lined up with the HES. It would be a passive way to trigger the HES with the solenoid pulse - if it's strong enough.

This is a rough description of the self-reciprocating problem, and why 4.01 is not released.

[Miscue]

When you tap "shave and a haircut" on the trigger it then fires full auto until you release the trigger.

You know... when I first thought of that a while ago, I wondered to myself how many people have actually done it.

Well, with monitoring trigger pulls and stuff - what if they used 3 or more fingers? It becomes even more easy to contest the test. What about a glove with open finger tips used to disguise finger pulls? How about a warpfed loader that hides your hand on one side altogether? What if I leave a finger touching the trigger with the other as the primary finger, and say that my secondary finger movement is very short and you can't see it on the video? With 1mm trigger pulls, finger doesn't have to move much. With a parallax, you can't see if the trigger finger has left or not. What if I wrapped my finger around the trigger and used the inside of my knuckle to fire? You cannot see the point of contact. What if I turn my body to the camera? How about hiding my trigger hand with my other hand? What about arguing that a shot was buffered, and that explains why it shot w/o a finger touching?

These things might not even work, but I'd imagine there's probably something like this that would defeat a camera - and everyone would figure it out and copy each other.

[trains are bad]

What needs to happen is to make cheating less bennifcial

bingo.

[REDRT]

My take on the subject is:

1. some teams out there a using special boards in there electro-markers to run big rates of fire.

2. most if not all electros out of the box are fast and are easy to acheive it.

3. Tom's products are and will always be what I use no matter what, period! Because they are every bit as good (fast) (if you can do it)as an electro that isn't Hopped up (cheater boards) plus they are simple.

4. My younger brother that I talked into an RTP can empty his hopper just as fast as an Angle 4. He has the touch. I can't

5.Yes I'm doing everything posible to get my old Classic RT to shoot as fast as posible. I may never get there, but it is fun trying.

6. I wish the e-mag and x-mag had been kept in production because I feel they have a better chance in the tourney scene for exceptance among todays electro-crazed players.

7. With the hope of Hair trigger many mag users are hanging on, but and I hope I'm wrong, it won't change the fact mags are unpopular amongst the masses. I still need it TOM!!!

8. some more exposure to the public couldn't hurt?

9. I'm happy that AGD takes the time for R&D to produce quality, but it may be too much time laps to beifit to company. Look at some other markers on the market. They change something very small and market it as new marker. In a years time it seems like they have 20 new guns and it is the same thing over and over again! Fact is we the people are stupied! Falling into the marketing trap and buying it. I like to think us mag owners are different, but we are small. Do I want AGD to do that, NO. But the big boys are working overtime spitting it out faster and racking in the $$$$$$.

10. As a bussiness owner everything you do is a risk I very much know this fact. But sometimes in ones darkist hour one needs to take a leap of faith and do something different, new and go for broke.

this is my thoughts.

[GoatBoy]

I wasn't actually suggesting that the camera method would prove... plausible in any sense, I was just giving a general idea as to what we would be looking for... Obviously there are holes in it. In fact, let me make it clear: I don't believe it would work.


Yes, I've seen the cheating on DVD's and videos and stuff, and I think it's pathetic. Even worse, what do other players think when they see flagrant cheating, like say playing on after being hit? "OMG AWESOME! HE WAS RIPPIN ON HIS TIMMY SO FAST OMG LOLGZ!!! U GUYZ HAEV 2 CHECK THIS CLIP OUT!!!" If you want to talk about being 'resigned to accept cheating', that's the crowd you should go after, not most of the people in this thread.


As far as people with trained ears; I wasn't talking about relying on their ears: more like using their ears to help us cue which portions of the records we want to focus on and analyze. You know, sort of help us prioritize what to go after.



Remember, the rule is "1 shot, 1 pull [of the trigger]". Breaking it down...

1. count the shots (duh)
2. count the 'pulls'

The 'pull', the action that causes a shot, might be a little fuzzy.


Make sure for every trigger movement, only 1 shot comes out. Track the trigger movement.

For every finger movement, only 1 shot comes out. Track the finger movement relative to shots fired.

Trigger movement needs to be caused by the finger. Track finger movement relative to trigger. If the trigger takes off without a finger behind it, you know something's fishy.




I dunno, that's about as far as I have gotten as far as thinking these things through. How would these technical goals be realistically achieved? I have no idea. Defining parameters for a 'pull' might be a start. Not sure how happy our trigger fetished population would be about this.