One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations Question Thread

Is there a reason that E3 explicitly requires competitors to use the judge-supplied pens instead of allowing us to use our own?
 
Is there a reason that E3 explicitly requires competitors to use the judge-supplied pens instead of allowing us to use our own?
While the reason for the paper is obvious and is clarified by guideline E2c+, I'm not sure why you aren't allowed to use your own pens. I tried looking into when the wording "Paper and pens (both supplied by judge)" was added, but that wording was already there in the 2004 regulations (right at the end, second last sentence in the regulations).
 
If a center cap falls off during the memorisation phase of blindfolded events, am I allowed to not put the cap back, and use the missing center cap to my advantage during the solving phase?

Nothing in the regulations dictates that puzzle defects must be fixed immediately.
 
If a center cap falls off during the memorisation phase of blindfolded events, am I allowed to not put the cap back, and use the missing center cap to my advantage during the solving phase?

Nothing in the regulations dictates that puzzle defects must be fixed immediately.
Even if not explicit in the regs, I would have thought the answer to this is obvious. It would of course be unfair and against the spirit of WCA competition and I'm sure you would never actually think of doing that :)
 
Even if not explicit in the regs, I would have thought the answer to this is obvious. It would of course be unfair and against the spirit of WCA competition and I'm sure you would never actually think of doing that :)
Could I not simply defend myself by saying it would have wasted precious seconds by putting the cap back, thus I chose not to replace it? It is a valid reason (in my eyes at least) to not replace the cap.

Also, I've never really been a fan of the 'spirit of the regs' argument, as its quite subjective, but I would never do such a thing in comp too, just asking a theoretical question.
 
Could I not simply defend myself by saying it would have wasted precious seconds by putting the cap back, thus I chose not to replace it? It is a valid reason (in my eyes at least) to not replace the cap.
As you pointed out yourself, it would give a potential advantage that would be unfair and unacceptable just as an embossed logo would. Much like a pop in a sighted solve, it's bad luck, but you did not complete a valid solve, and bad luck happens sometimes.

Regarding "spirit of the regs": there's no such thing. The regs are a best attempt at formalizing the spirit of fair competition by defining rules and processes, but the spirit is more important and is the reason the regs exist in the first place. In case the regs don't fully cover everything that might happen, it's down to the delegate to decide what is the fairest way to proceed: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/regulations/#11d (I'm not sure if what you described is technically an "incident" but would expect it to be handled the same way.)

Just my opinion - I am not a delegate.
 
I’m going to my first comp! They have seven events. Is doing 4 (3 of which are back to back) too much for my first comp? Thanks
 
I’m going to my first comp! They have seven events. Is doing 4 (3 of which are back to back) too much for my first comp? Thanks

I think four is a pretty good amount for a first comp; it gives you enough time to relax and meet people, but it'll also keep you busy throughout the competition. Keep in mind that they may be back-to-back on the schedule, but since everyone else at the competition has to compete, you likely won't have any long stretches of competing. (Especially if they're short events, like 2x2, 3x3, Pyraminx, and Skewb; those would probably take about 10 minutes each for you to do all your solves.)
 
If at comp you don't make cutoff. Where will you go? Will they discuss that at the comp tutorial? Do you take your puzzle with you? Thanks.
 
Back
Top