Just simple is not always good.
Two players 1 frame apart have practically the same skill. That's why the 2nd player should get just as mutch points.
MidiMightyMoe wrote:even if it's normalized/whatever it favors too much cuts or different routes
good!
If you find a short and are 1 second faster you deserve that second.
MidiMightyMoe wrote:the fact you can score more based on other player performance may just give too much importance too a particular map.
I don't see a "fact" here. Actually, that's simply not the case.
Every evaluation system needs two points of reference, so you can see what's considered good and what's bad.
In all systems I know the first reference is the fastest time(including the simple Discrete Point system you suggested).
You could put that 1st reference on 0:00:000. That means all players get negative points. The one with the least wins. That is the same as putting the reference to the best time on a map. All you get is an offset. So no point doing that.
You could also simply make up a time. Same thing. Just an offset.
You might be right in the end though. Maybe we are tying to be fair too hard. Maybe it's not worth it. I could settle for the simple time adding system without any normalisation; that's easy enough. One should adapt the maps though.
It's not entirely my decision to make in the end.
It's funny how the very same flaws you dislike so much are in the system you suggested.