For a long time, I have an opinion about this, but hesitate a little to post about it, coz, I`m afraid it will stir up the community a little... But, never mind, sometimes we need to address our feelings in order to change things..... When it comes to awards, it`s pretty much a joke to me... When it comes to track value, it is pretty much the reality of the real value of a track... Why? Coz in order to award a track, there is no rules, no requirements.. Just award it, if u know the author, and u think it might be good, just award it... How can we know or trust this system ? UNLESS, it it is a requirements that u in fact raced the track?????? How can we know that u did ? IMO, by submitting ur replays ! ! ! ! ! There is, imo, just to many tracks having a lot of award, but the replays submitted, do not reflect the actuality of actually racing the track ! What reflect the true value of a track ? The track value ! ! ! ! The track value is regulated by submitted replays, which in turn reflect the actual popularity of the track, how much racers actually race the track and submit they`re time....a.s.o...... The award does not, imo... Anyone, whit an account in MX can award a track, whether or not actually trying to race the track..... Is this fair ? IMO, no ! There is no guaranty the award is based on actually racing the track, what so ever...... Track value, however, is based on actually racing the track and submitting the time on the track-page... So...IMO, it should be a restriction on the possibility to award a track; To actually prove u have raced it, by submitting a replay ! To many tracks have plenty awards, but just a few replays submitted... This is, imo, wrong..... and should be prevented...... How? No replay submitted, no award.. Simple as that. In this way, we can trust that award is in fact based upon actually racing the track, and not because of other relations to the track builder....

How do a track goes classic? By the amount of award or the track value? Just see for ur self, and u will know...

How can we affect the value of a track? By actually compete on that track, and submitting our replays ! As I can see for my self, every time I race a track and beat my own time, and submit my new time, the track value goes up... I might have awarded this track already, but I can not award it again, to give it more "award value"... So, only submitted replays, gives the true popularity of a track.....

So, imo, the decision from the staff here in MX , to let the track value decide what track to go classic, was the right one....
So, also just imo, the best of the week should also be based upon the track value, not the awards... This might be a problem for track builders choosing to update they`re track due to shortcut found by racers a.s.o.... But there is a way around this, by not updating the track, but submit a new version of it, and then see if driver will race it again, or, just continue to compete on the old one.... Activity on a track tells the truth, not the amount of awards.....
Here is the best (or worst) example; http://tm.mania-exchange.com/tracks/53845/rpg-forum-hadriani WTF ! 85 award and just 2 submitted replays ! When a track like this; http://tm.mania-exchange.com/tracks/9809/mrdvd-mini-31 going classic already, but have only 20 awards..... So it is pretty much obvious to me that the awards do not really reflect the popularity of a track...

From what I understand, tracks goes classic when reaching track value of 1000 or more... Please correct me if I`m wrong. So from the list of 20 most awarded track, only 4 classic track shows up on. Those tracks going classic do so because they are popular, and drivers compete on those tracks because they like it ! At least that`s the way it is for me...... And that is what it is all about, is it not?

I personally never upload replays because I'm lazy whatsoever (), I award maps if I think they're good, but I can assure you that I've driven it (and I'm quite sure most people actually drive a map before awarding). Awarding without actually played is in fact prohibited, but we can't check it without forcing everybody to upload replays, which would complicate the process of giving an award too much in my opinion.

Actually there has been some suggestion to have a panel which shows the "highest valued" recent tracks (and its variations) on the frontpage too, which seemed like an interesting idea. Could be something to consider adding someday.

Track value however does for sure show the competitive value, which yields a different meaning from the actual "I like the map"-value. Liking and competitive racing aren't per see related in my opinion, I love the map Forum Hadriani, but I'd not upload a replay since I've set a non-leaderboard-worthy time .

I can understand your concern a little bit.
Regarding the proof for awards. This is one thing, which is complicated to prove. The current system is based on trust. If you see an award, you have to trust the player that he has driven the map. Obviously proof is better than trust, but in my opinion trusting worked really well so far. I haven't seen fraud with awards during my entire playtime of Trackmania yet.
Therefore I think "trust" is proof enough.
(Real life analogy: When you enter the Bus/Taxi, how do you know the driver will drive safely and to the expected destination? I guess you don't. You just trust him to do that and to be in time )

Awards vs. Track value
I cannot say one is better or one of them is more accurate. They are both indicator for the quality of a track but in a different way.
Track value shows the competitiveness of a track (as Yoshi already said). How huntable is it? Do people actually hunt it a lot and enjoy it? It works really well for race tracks, but does not work for platform tracks, RPG tracks, tracks with heavy use of MT and Tracks, which just want to show of cool and creative sections/transitions - basically everything that is not a huntable racetrack.
Awards are subjective opinions of the players. If they think a track is good, they'll award it. This works for every type of track. Awards show the general popularity of a track, regardless of it's build quality, it's length or it's randomness or whatever. Awards show popularity, not quality.
So TrackValue and Awards are two independent rating system. None of them is the best or the most reliable system. They both work, but in a different way and therefore show different things.

The idea of a "Most TrackValue of the Week"-Panel is really cool! I support this idea!!

Ok, tnx for responding ! I see it in a little different light now... We all race and enjoy this excellent game for different reasons. So I guess the system, as it is now serve the community well as it is, especially if the excellent idea of a "most track value of the week" will be implemented....

As u said Yoshi "Liking and competitive racing aren't per see related in my opinion," Never thought about it that way, but totally get ur point.... It happens to me sometimes also that I just open a track to see the magnificent building creativity of the track builder, but must admit I tend to award a track only if I like to race and compete on it. Maybe I should change that....

I agree also to u Haenry when u say; "Therefore I think "trust" is proof enough." Probably my lack of that was just lack of understanding of how and why in this game.....

The good about voicing ones opinion about stuff is the new light others can shed upon it, to broaden ones own understanding of how and why in life....

So thanks again guys !

With friends you can get more awards, and by building easy maps you can get more replays... There aren't such thing to compare which map is better and why, each one is great if it works just as the builder wanted to ^^ For example supertransitional map vs easy huntmap, the first one might be more genius buildingwise but pain in the ass drivingwise, while the second one is just completely different Well this was almost off-topic, but kthxbye.

I award tracks for all sorts of reasons, if they're fun to drive, if they took a ton of effort to be built, if they're solid competetive tracks, if they're unique. The difficulty I have is that I just don't have time to drive all the tracks i want to, or have the time to search for them and leave an award even if I have driven them in-game. There really are an absolute ton of amazing worthwhile, awardable tracks.

I try to submit as many replays as I can. It's actually quite nice to have backups, which I appreciate much more after having had hard drive failure last year. But this isn't always something I do immediately or every time and I probably wouldn't like to have to submit a replay in order to award a track. For example, I awarded a trial track that was an hour long that I wasn't able to even finish. But there was so much effort obviously put into it. When I was playing it my jaw just hit the ground at how much work went into it and it was actually very inspiring.

At the end of the day, I just try to focus on having a good time and don't really consider to heavily what track value and leaderboards are representing. Trackmania is just a badass game that deserves to be played and enjoyed.

I do not think [RPG]Forum Hadriani is good example, that track was updated when maniaplanet and rpg titlepack received last update.
All replays was deleted, those replays you see now are only the new ones .
I do agree with your opinion and i never liked that much award system.
But the more i tried to figure out better way of support for track author, i more realized that award system is good as it is.
I am afraid the more restricting awarding system becomes, all it will produce it is less awards, but not more replays.

haenry says:
Awards show popularity, not quality.

Why not both?

Because some people do enjoy bad tracks/poorly build tracks. Some don't.
e.g. crapmaps. They are horrible to drive and poorly designed. Yet it can be fun to drive them with friends on a server

Well if the map is fun to drive, it can't be poorly built.All I need in a track to keep it a good one is that it's fun, no caring if it has 100 new transitions or best flow ever if it's not fun.