[WR] Feliks Zemdegs 3x3 OH single 6.88

[Iggy]

Nice, congrats Feliks!

 

[tomatotrucks]

Gr8

Well said.

 

[BboyArchon]

Video pls! And congrats again

 

[arcio1]

It has to be some kind of joke...

I guess we are allowed to give good cubers misscrabled cubes from now on as the Board doesn't care about their own regulations.

 

[megaminxwin]

It has to be some kind of joke...

I guess we are allowed to give good cubers misscrabled cubes from now on as the Board doesn't care about their own regulations.

It was an accident and who's to say we're not giving new cubers misscrambled cubes as well

why am i trying to debate this

 

[moralsh]

It has to be some kind of joke...

I guess we are allowed to give good cubers misscrabled cubes from now on as the Board doesn't care about their own regulations.

If that's what you have got to after reading 7 pages, sure, go ahead and start misscrambling cubes on purpose for your favorite cuber.

Don't be surprised if this ends with some people banned, though.

 

[arcio1]

You're right, we shouldn't debate this, because it should have been DNFed during the competition by the delegate and Feliks should have got an extra scramble.
There have been some similar incidents at Polish comps, one I can think about atm is skewb WR single at SLS Chorzow(iirc) last year which hardly anyone found out about because the delegate asked the competitor about the scramble and when he realised it was wrong, he DNFed it.
I know that accidents happen and that is why we have regulations which in my opinion should be exactly the same for all competitors.

 

[mDiPalma]

congrats on the incredible solve! 6.88 OH is insane!

and congrats WCA on losing the last ounce of credibility and respect I had for you.

 

[David0794]

Nice to see it's official, congrats! Incredible Time!

 

[Noahaha]

and congrats WCA on losing the last ounce of credibility and respect I had for you.

Ok Matt, so we want to fix the situation, but we don't want to DNF Feliks's solve when it's not his fault.

If we had caught it somehow at the competition, we would give him an extra scramble. We couldn't give him the original scramble, since there's a nontrivial relationship between the original and the mistake scramble.

So what we want ideally is for him to be given a completely fresh scramble.

How is that more fair than him receiving the mistake scramble?

Isn't the mistake scramble (assuming it wasn't an act of cheating) just as fair as a new random extra scramble?

 

[BboyArchon]

If that's what you have got to after reading 7 pages, sure, go ahead and start misscrambling cubes on purpose for your favorite cuber.

Don't be surprised if this ends with some people banned, though.

This.

 

[mDiPalma]

Isn't the mistake scramble (assuming it wasn't an act of cheating) just as fair as a new random extra scramble?

it is just as fair, but it's illegal. Using a non random-state generated scramble violates 1c3a, 1c3b, 1c8, 4b (the most important one), 4f (also important) and 4g.

if the WCA is going to make decisions that violate the WCA regulations on a regular basis (like they do), how can we trust them with anything?


as Arcio said, this should have been DNFd at the competition, and Felik's awarded an extra attempt on a properly generated scramble (per 11e1 and 4f). because the delegate failed to do this, the solve should be DNFd by the board retroactively.

 

[Logiqx]

Isn't the mistake scramble (assuming it wasn't an act of cheating) just as fair as a new random extra scramble?

A good point, well made.

It's still a random state, just as if you were to hand the cube to a passer by mid-scramble and ask them to make a random turn.

 

[APdRF]

I don't see why a misscramble it's not a random state though

It is unfair that a competitor gets a DNF solve for a mistake he didn't make and he can't control, simply that

 

[arcio1]

How is that more fair than him receiving the mistake scramble?

It's more fair because it doesn't violate 4b)

It is unfair that a competitor gets a DNF solve for a mistake he didn't make and he can't control, simply that

It's not. The images of scrambled cubes next to scrambles are printed for a reason. It's not Feliks' fault but its fair for other competitors.

 

[mDiPalma]

It's still a random state, just as if you were to hand the cube to a passer by mid-scramble and ask them to make a random turn.

I don't see why a misscramble it's not a random state though

It is unfair that a competitor gets a DNF solve for a mistake he didn't make and he can't control, simply that

Look up what random state is. This scramble was not random state.


And if the regulations were applied correctly at the venue the competitor would not get a counting DNF on his average or WCA profile. The delegate should have awarded him another attempt.

 

[Faz]

You're right, we shouldn't debate this, because it should have been DNFed during the competition by the delegate and Feliks should have got an extra scramble.
There have been some similar incidents at Polish comps, one I can think about atm is skewb WR single at SLS Chorzow(iirc) last year which hardly anyone found out about because the delegate asked the competitor about the scramble and when he realised it was wrong, he DNFed it.

I think it's a slightly different situation here. Basically what happened is as follows.

Scramble
B L2 D' R L2 F2 B (R') D' F R F2 R L2 U2 D2 L' F2 L' B2
Misscramble
B L2 D' R L2 F2 B (R) D' F R F2 R L2 U2 D2 L' F2 L' B2

1. I do the solve
2. ~15 minutes elapses between the solve and the end of the round
3. I attempted to reconstruct the solve once (Keeping in mind it's a bit harder to reconstruct when colour neutral, I think I tried the easy white cross on the original scramble but that didn't go anywhere. I suggest that there's a chance it was scrambled incorrectly.
4. Not trying to blame the scrambler any more here, but he 100% assures me that mine was the first cube he scrambled in the whole round, and it was definitely correct. (Perhaps he only looked at the top face, which only had a blue and green sticker swapped, and a white and yellow sticker swapped as compared to the orginal. The lighting was dark-ish so perhaps he scanned the top layer as opposed to checking each individual sticker)
5. So given this assurance, I decide to reconstruct the solve at the end of the comp along with the video.
6. After the awards I get the video onto my computer and we find out it was misscrambled.

I'm actually unsure as to whether an extra attempt could have occurred at this stage, post-competition (I'm assuming not).

I suppose the solution to avoid anything like this in the future is to ensure that every sort of record is reconstructed before the next round starts? To what extent should this occur - national records, average world records?

Yes, there is a small asterisk next to this record, but that being said, I am completely comfortable with the solve. I'll get the video up shortly.

 

[Noahaha]

it is just as fair, but it's illegal

At this point I would say you have a problem with the regulations, not with the procedure carried out here.

I'll take fair over blindly following the regulations any day. It's not like the board is acting randomly. They make their decisions very carefully.

I agree, however, that there should be something in the regs about this, so that what is fair is also what is in the regs.

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

Yay vid!

 

[APdRF]

Look up what random state is. This scramble was not random state.


And if the regulations were applied correctly at the venue the competitor would not get a counting DNF on his average or WCA profile. The delegate should have awarded him another attempt.

Yes, it is a random state scramble, the only difference is that it isn't THE random state scramble. I don't know if you get wht I mean.

For me it's a perfectly valid record and the WCA had done a great job.

Congrats Feliks!