Post by dakohosu on Aug 31, 2024 13:43:59 GMT -5
Inspired by vaderlim's post I figured I'd do a Stage 3 difficulty ranking. I'm going by x/10 rather than ranking hardest to easiest as that would take a lot longer, as well as grouping identical stages (in terms of exact same course down to a modification level) together.
Bear in mind I'm going with a ranking of perceived difficulty by today's standards, not based on failure rates or relative difficulty at the time, and not considering e.g. the fact that 28's Crazy Cliffhanger was a new concept, as otherwise we'd be here for days.
Also anything above 10/10 is what I would consider to be impossible, at least within a span of 4-5 tournaments, because as we all know we have seen some ridiculous Stage 3 courses in the past.
1: 1.5/10
2: 2/10
3: 1/10
4: 3/10
5-8: 4.5/10
9-11: 5.5/10
12: 5/10*
13: 5/10
14-15: 7/10
16-17: 6/10
18: 6/10
19-20: 11/10**
21-23: 6.5/10***
24: 6.5/10
25: 10/10
26: 9/10
27: 7.5/10
28-29: 7.5/10
30: 7.5/10
31: 8.5/10
32: 11/10
33: 15/10
34: 12/10
35-36: 9/10
37: 8/10
38: 9.5/10
39-40: 9.8/10
41: 10/10 (the next tournament has technically already been aired so figured why not)
*12's Stage 3 was technically identical to 9-11 but dropped it half a point due to the Cliffhanger landing platform being directly under the third ledge, given that it saved Takeda from failing it.
**Sending Climber was deemed to be physically impossible due to the placement of footholds where handholds should've been, meaning the obstacle was unfeasible to complete.
***Not factoring in the glitch that happened to Nagano on the Gliding Ring in 21, because I'm a firm believer that this was a malfunction and not an intended part of the obstacle. If the ring was meant to get stuck, why does it have a stopper, why is it on a downward track, and why is it called "Gliding Ring"? He was also allegedly offered a re-run, which wouldn't have been the case if his fail was considered fair.
Bear in mind I'm going with a ranking of perceived difficulty by today's standards, not based on failure rates or relative difficulty at the time, and not considering e.g. the fact that 28's Crazy Cliffhanger was a new concept, as otherwise we'd be here for days.
Also anything above 10/10 is what I would consider to be impossible, at least within a span of 4-5 tournaments, because as we all know we have seen some ridiculous Stage 3 courses in the past.
1: 1.5/10
2: 2/10
3: 1/10
4: 3/10
5-8: 4.5/10
9-11: 5.5/10
12: 5/10*
13: 5/10
14-15: 7/10
16-17: 6/10
18: 6/10
19-20: 11/10**
21-23: 6.5/10***
24: 6.5/10
25: 10/10
26: 9/10
27: 7.5/10
28-29: 7.5/10
30: 7.5/10
31: 8.5/10
32: 11/10
33: 15/10
34: 12/10
35-36: 9/10
37: 8/10
38: 9.5/10
39-40: 9.8/10
41: 10/10 (the next tournament has technically already been aired so figured why not)
*12's Stage 3 was technically identical to 9-11 but dropped it half a point due to the Cliffhanger landing platform being directly under the third ledge, given that it saved Takeda from failing it.
**Sending Climber was deemed to be physically impossible due to the placement of footholds where handholds should've been, meaning the obstacle was unfeasible to complete.
***Not factoring in the glitch that happened to Nagano on the Gliding Ring in 21, because I'm a firm believer that this was a malfunction and not an intended part of the obstacle. If the ring was meant to get stuck, why does it have a stopper, why is it on a downward track, and why is it called "Gliding Ring"? He was also allegedly offered a re-run, which wouldn't have been the case if his fail was considered fair.