Submission Rating System

We take a different approach with our leaderboards. Scores may be submitted to us, or may be found of our own accord. We are not ‘official’ or an ‘authority’ as an explicit goal. At the end of the day, nobody is. What the community, and individuals, see as respectable scores are what matters, and it’s not always so binary as “valid” and “invalid.” Strict rules alienate new players and unintentionally (possibly even intentionally) reject runs most people see as likely valid, just with a technical error. Loose rules allow exceptions that attract and allow fake claims and weak evidence.

Our system is simple: we suggest you always give as much evidence as possible, especially if you are submitting for a Top 10 run. We will take any score with some kind of level of evidence that is not fully rejected by the community. We will then assign 1 to 4 Stars to that submission, based on the guidelines below. The leaderboards can then be viewed by whichever criteria the user sees fit for a given track.


Excellent evidence, streamed live, verified, and/or unanimous community support. Would almost certainly pass any adjudication standards. For arcade, includes things like showing PCB with unbroken footage, for MAME, a WolfMAME INP is provided, and similar high confidence indicators are present with no issues. 4-star evidence is most important to consider for an actual World Record claim.


Great evidence, though not necessarily exhaustive or flawless. Non-live video only, but from established players, etc. Still near unanimous community support. May or may not pass strict adjudication requirements. Examples include a full, clear video, but no hand cams or PCB/INP. “Three Star or better” is our suggested parameter for top 10 scores.


Flawed evidence, but still likely legitimate. i.e. picture only of a very probable score, partial but still compelling video. May be subject to the individual and individual case as to whether they recognize it, as it would likely not pass a strict adjudication. Two-star ratings are much more common and acceptable for non-top 10 score claims, as opposed to a score near the World Record, which often demands more scrutiny.

Lacking or dubious evidence. Lesser than above. Partial video not compelling by itself or not befitting the claim. Claim is disproportionate to skill/reputation, or from someone who has never posted more substantial evidence of a run. Likely needs more evidence to be taken seriously, should be considered provisional. Might still be okay for very casual score claims, but should definitely be given extra scrutiny the higher up the leaderboard it is. All old reported scores that do not have corroborated evidence are default 1-star.

Discretion and Discussion

The same pack of evidence may result in a different star rating. I.e., a Personal Best of 100,000 with only a pic with a timestamp would be a 2-star. It’s likely legitimate, but there’s not a whole lot of evidence. But the same evidence to claim a 5,000,000 from a player who has never played at that level will be a 1-star. World Record claims are expected to meet high standards, and therefore are most likely to lose stars or be scrutinized for lack of stars. a 2-star casual score is fine. A 2-star Top 10 score should at least be viewed with its weaknesses considered.

Discussions of moving ratings can always be done on Discord. The default setting will be 3+ Star submissions, setting a high, but not overly critical, bar.

%d bloggers like this: