The History of One Handed World Record Singles.

Discussion in 'Other Cubing-Related Videos' started by Allen Fei, Oct 9, 2017.

Welcome to the Speedsolving.com. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community of over 30,000 people, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us and we'll help you get started. We look forward to seeing you on the forums!

Already a member? Login to stop seeing this message.
  1. Allen Fei

    Allen Fei Member

    7
    1
    Aug 28, 2017
  2. 1973486

    1973486 Member

    409
    162
    Jun 21, 2015
    That's not Thibaut's 15.81, that's his 15.84 from the following year
     
  3. p[
    pretty sure he couldn't find it so he accidentally put it in
     
  4. mDiPalma

    mDiPalma Member

    1,498
    280
    Jul 12, 2011
    I can't imagine being the members of the WCA Board that decided the misscramble on the WR single should be accepted.

    Every day that the WR stands, the guilt must constrict them tighter and tighter...
    Every time they boot up a browser to the OH single records page, it must make them feel a bit nauseous...
    Every time they navigate to Faz's WCA profile and see the result, it must fill them with regret...
    Every time the youtube video comes up as a recommended video, it must make them feel extremely uneasy...

    Perhaps that's why so many people have resigned recently. Maybe they couldn't handle their own little Tell-Tale Heart...

    That such a blatant disregard for WCA regulations is not only permitted, but displayed proudly at the top of the World Rankings...
    That they've prematurely stolen the WR from Haixin Yang, in such dishonest circumstances...
    That their horrible precedent jeopardizes the legitimacy of their entire association...
    That their decision violates Mott's Codes of Ethics for REAL non-profit organizations...
    And that Feliks would have gotten the WR single even without this horribly illegal, biased and unfair ruling.

    It's OK to admit you were wrong.
    You can always turn back your decision.
    You have nothing to lose and the world to gain.

    How does a clean conscience sound?
     
    pinser likes this.
  5. buddy you ok there
     
  6. lol
     
  7. turtwig

    turtwig Member

    467
    191
    Apr 2, 2015
    Canada
    WCA:
    2015JIAN04
    Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I don't see why you would think it was some kind of disaster even if you disagree with the decision. The misscramble was out of the competitor's (Feliks's) control, and as far as I can see it wasn't intentional. Given this, the misscramble obviously didn't give Feliks any kind of advantage, so the only reason to oppose it would be a strict application of the regulations (which I can definitely understand, but I think that ultimately the regulations are in place to make competitions fair, and I don't see how such a misscramble is unfair).
     
  8. mDiPalma

    mDiPalma Member

    1,498
    280
    Jul 12, 2011
    it was brute-force proven that the misscramble that was applied was literally the easiest possible misscramble for the competitor's method (for misscrambles of move omission and direction). i.e. out of all possible misscrambles, it gave the easiest cross... it also ended up breaking the WR by over a second... so it was clearly advantageous....
     
    Sajwo likes this.
  9. turtwig

    turtwig Member

    467
    191
    Apr 2, 2015
    Canada
    WCA:
    2015JIAN04
    But if it wasn't someone intentionally misscrambling, then I don't think it's an advantage. An accidental misscramble is still random so he would've had the same chance as anyone else to get an easy scramble, it's just that he got lucky.
     
    JTcuber likes this.
  10. mDiPalma

    mDiPalma Member

    1,498
    280
    Jul 12, 2011
    The only evidence that you have that it was not intentional is the scrambler's testimony. If we always blindly trusted the testimony of the accused, our society could not exist.
     
    turtwig and Sajwo like this.
  11. turtwig

    turtwig Member

    467
    191
    Apr 2, 2015
    Canada
    WCA:
    2015JIAN04
    Ok, that's the first time I've heard that. Changes the situation a lot.

    Just read that there's a program that generates easy misscrambles, and the scrambler seems very suspicious too (though Feliks says that he trusts him). Given this information, I would probably agree with you that it should've been a DNF or extra attempt (I don't know why the delegate didn't give him an extra attempt when Feliks couldn't reconstruct the solve), just to be safe.

    EDIT: I think we can agree that an intentional misscramble should be discarded, and an accidental misscramble that is still legit should be kept (especially in Feliks's case where they found out after the comp). The real question is when there is a misscramble (the scrambler will obviously say that it was an accident, since almost no one admits to cheating), how lucky the solve has to be for it to be suspicious enough to likely be intentional to the point that we agree to discard it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
  12. I'd agree
     

Share This Page