Potential vs Competition

I've been thinking about this a bit more since the conversation and the implications that come up from the question of potential vs competition. For one, this question of is basically the entire reason that category separations happen. To even competition while also allowing for full potential. One question that is important in establishing the right choice is: How big is the potential, and how important is the potential?

To give an example, you know I run Shadow the Hedgehog. Chaos Control Glitch isn't possible to perform on XBox. So, as a result, we ended up separating categories so that CCG runs could still flourish but XBox runners could still compete. (Although the category started more because of some finding it more interesting, I still think that argument applies.)

Although, once No CCG runs started developing, a different issue was now popping up. XBox has faster loading times than GameCube. So XBox has more potential for a faster No CCG speedrun, but is that potential *important*? Because this had literally no connection to skill but purely just what console you were running on, we as a community deemed that it wasn't important potential, so we were able to even the playing field of competition by switching to IGT for No CCG categories, removing the variation caused by loading times between consoles.

Separately, when using Chaos Control (not the glitch) on GameCube, you sometimes hang in mid-air at the end, losing a small amount of time. This doesn't happen on Xbox. However, there was never any conversations happening about this discrepancy, no talk about separating to No CCG XBox and No CCG GameCube, because this lower potential was very *small*. It maybe added 3 seconds to the run on GameCube IGT over the entire run. I think everybody just realized how insignificant this was and just realized XBox runners would have that small advantage, and that was it. It wasn't worth evening the playing field for something so small. (Though, we did eventually figure out how to alleviate this, but there still was that period of time where we just accepted that GC had a 3 second disadvantage and it was fine.)

When you think about it, the entire BOTW amiibo category separation discussion (the part of the conversation that wasn't calling it cheating) was around this. Was that potential that Amiibo gave big enough to warrant separation of categories, or was it so insignificant that runners who don't want to use them should just put up with it?

So, in a way, that entire issue of whether to allow that strat in Canvas Curse kinda comes down to all of this. How much does pause buffering affect the potential of the game? Is it big enough that it could change the routes for many stages? Does it make previously difficult tricks so ridiculously easy that having Wii U is just a straight upgrade for a bad reason? Is the difference small enough that DS runners could easily just deal with being at a disadvantage? Is it big enough to potentially warrant new categories? Is the idea that top runners might need to switch to another console too expensive or troublesome? It seems like a silly question, but does the strategy make the run more *interesting*? RNG Manipulation is obviously cheating because it makes the run less interesting Kirby, you cheater. (Joking, but that's probably a big part of the reason why people think RNG Manipulation/Amiibos are straight up cheating, kinda like why some people think camping in fighting games in unfair.)

And, all of those questions lead back to the original question, does the way this strategy potentially change up the speedgame make it worth allowing if it causes a significant amount of potential runners to be at a straight disadvantage? I can't speak for the Canvas Curse community, but as I see it, this is what needs to be thought about with this whole situation.