[WR] Rami Sbahi - 0.58 2x2 Single and 1.55 Average

[Antonie faz fan]

sucks that wca actually disallowed it

 

[Kit Clement]

Seriously? The solution wasn't obvious? Or are you just talking about the best execution wasn't that obvious?

You could say that the 5 move solution was incredibly obvious, but seeing the cancellation into a 4 move solution isn't so obvious. I did a 5 move solution myself

 

[AlexMaass]

Nobody gets a permanent ban with the WCA, child or adult. I mean even someone who tried to fraud the 3x3 Single WR didn't get a perm ban.

Still this kid should definitely be made an example by the WCA. Couple years ban at most, 6 months ban at least.

People have been permanently banned, but with an option to make the ban only temporary if the person makes an apology, and in cases with money involved, return of the money.

sucks that wca actually disallowed it

They didn't make a decision yet I believe. I really strongly think they should allow it though.

 

[Antonie faz fan]

You could say that the 5 move solution was incredibly obvious, but seeing the cancellation into a 4 move solution isn't so obvious. I did a 5 move solution myself

yeah but its Rami, Rami can see that easily

 

[antoineccantin]

Seriously? The solution wasn't obvious? Or are you just talking about the best execution wasn't that obvious?

As in most random 2x2 noobs would see it. The simple fact that only 4 people got a sub-1 single on it (out of about 50 who tried it) shows that even if it was a 4 move solution, it's not something everyone would think of in <10 seconds.

yeah but its Rami, Rami can see that easily

The solution still wasn't THAT obvious. That Rami could is beside the point. He can 1-look almost any solution.

 

[AlexMaass]

As in most random 2x2 noobs would see it. The simple fact that only 4 people got a sub-1 single on it (out of about 50 who tried it) shows that even if it was a 4 move solution, it's not something everyone would think of in <10 seconds.



The solution still wasn't THAT obvious. That Rami could is beside the point. He can 1-look almost any solution.

It was just a bit awkward to do fast.

 

[JustinTimeCuber]

You could say that the 5 move solution was incredibly obvious, but seeing the cancellation into a 4 move solution isn't so obvious. I did a 5 move solution myself

I would have probably seen the 4-move solution because I incorporate R2 B2 R2 into my first layer very often. Rami said he sort of knew what the solution was after seeing it for a split second, so of course he could see it in 15.

 

[Neilggghhh123]

He probably didn't even know the rule that he can't talk about scrambles. You want to ban this kid for doing something he didn't even know what was wrong?

 

[Sessinator]

He probably didn't even know the rule that he can't talk about scrambles. You want to ban this kid for doing something he didn't even know what was wrong?

All WCA competitors are expected to abide by and familiarize themselves with WCA regulations. Not doing so has been proven to, in certain cases, lead to disciplinary action.

As has been repeated several times in this thread, an announcement was made that specifically stated not to discuss scrambles.

Anyway, this goes beyond merely discussing scrambles. This was recreating what we believe was the official scramble, and sharing it with at least one competitor who had not yet competed.

I would be hesitant to say the competitor didn't know what he was doing was wrong. Though perhaps he didn't foresee the magnitude of negative consequences that would result from his actions.

 

[cashis]

He probably didn't even know the rule that he can't talk about scrambles. You want to ban this kid for doing something he didn't even know what was wrong?

In order to compete, you must know the regulations

Plus, it was specifically reminded at the comp that scrambles shouldn't be discussed

 

[Bindedsa]

You could say that the 5 move solution was incredibly obvious, but seeing the cancellation into a 4 move solution isn't so obvious. I did a 5 move solution myself

I still honestly can't see how you missed it, other than the pressure.

 

[AustinReed]

I still honestly can't see how you missed it, other than the pressure.

Well, that just may be you then

 

[Laura O]

yeah but its Rami, Rami can see that easily

I don't like to reply to such one-liners without any proper argumentation, but: so what?

Reasoning that Rami should get the WR because he is *capable* to see the solution is stupid. It's unlikely that this situation happened to a newcomer, but if so: would you say that this newcomer shouldn't get the record?
The goal of the WCA is to have competitions "under fair and equal conditions" and that would definitely not be fair.

 

[DeeDubb]

I don't like to reply to such one-liners without any proper argumentation, but: so what?

Reasoning that Rami should get the WR because he is *capable* to see the solution is stupid. It's unlikely that this situation happened to a newcomer, but if so: would you say that this newcomer shouldn't get the record?
The goal of the WCA is to have competitions "under fair and equal conditions" and that would definitely not be fair.

It would be something to take into consideration to see how much of an advantage was gained by the competitor. If a newby got the WR in the same situation, one would be much more capable of arguing that he received an unfair advantage than the situation with Rami. Rami's track record shows that the advantage he gained by getting a small peek at a cube is much less significant.

Again, things should be handled on a case-by-case basis.

2g3) Competitors in the Competitors Area must not communicate with each other about the scrambled states of the puzzles of the round in progress. Penalty: disqualification of the competitor from the event, at the discretion of the WCA Delegate.

In this case, the delegate may have made a decision on the spot (to give Rami a retry), but this is something that should be open for further discussion, especially because Rami was smart enough to still execute the scramble and confess that someone showed him the scramble ahead of time against his will, leaving multiple resolutions available.

As a side note, was Rami in the competitor's area when the scramble was shown to him? If not, he technically did not violate this rule.

 

[MTGjumper]

As a side note, was Rami in the competitor's area when the scramble was shown to him? If not, he technically did not violate this rule.

If there's any reason for this to be accepted, it's not because of this technicality.

 

[Dene]

As a side note, was Rami in the competitor's area when the scramble was shown to him? If not, he technically did not violate this rule.

Perhaps not, but he would be violating:

A2a) When called for a round, the competitor submits his puzzle, in its solved state, to the scrambler and waits in the Competitors Area until he is called to compete.

I think in this case it would mean disqualification from the entire event.

Interestingly, this somewhat contradicts:

7h1) The organisation team may require that a competitor who has been called to compete must remain within the Competitors Area until he has finished all of his attempts for the round. [italics added]

I should let the WRC know about that one.

 

[DeeDubb]

Perhaps not, but he would be violating:

A2a) When called for a round, the competitor submits his puzzle, in its solved state, to the scrambler and waits in the Competitors Area until he is called to compete.

I think in this case it would mean disqualification from the entire event.

Interestingly, this somewhat contradicts:

7h1) The organisation team may require that a competitor who has been called to compete must remain within the Competitors Area until he has finished all of his attempts for the round. [italics added]

I should let the WRC know about that one.

What if he were part of heat 3 and he was told by someone in heat 1 so neither of them are required to be in the competitor's area? That was my assumption.

 

[Dene]

What if he were part of heat 3 and he was told by someone in heat 1 so neither of them are required to be in the competitor's area? That was my assumption.

Hmm yes... more problems with heats.

 

[Username]

What if he were part of heat 3 and he was told by someone in heat 1 so neither of them are required to be in the competitor's area? That was my assumption.

wait you guys use the same scramble for different heats?

 

[DeeDubb]

wait you guys use the same scramble for different heats?

I think we do here in Korea. I'm not 100% sure though.