Ideas for Slice Move +2, with a Fair Judging System for Awkward Slices!

[Kit Clement]

@Kit Clement this should help explain any questions
View attachment 11359
anyway I think it’s possible to implement this, but we shouldn’t because it would complicate everything and be unfair to all the results that came before the rule. Plus the “round to the nearest cube” method and this method can give completely different results further complicating it. As a side note wide moves are allowed because Rw2 is literally just L2.

This is the best application of slice misalignments I've seen in terms of consistency. I do agree with you that it's not worth the added complication.

 

[LNBFilms]

anyway, if we did implement slices into +2s instead of DNFs, it would need to have a really clear explanation of the change in the regulations, written into the guidelines. It seems like a lot of work for an issue that would affect a lot of previous competition results, of course, they won't be changed, but it would irritate people like me, like when the cube falls off the table and a slice moves when it hits the ground. (I wouldn't get irritated; it was just an example.


Co-Founder of WeCubeTeam, Lukas Batema

 

[OreKehStrah]

Even still, I think most people would agree that if nothing else, it would be reasonable to +2 a slice move if it was a completed move and the cube was fully cubic

 

[TipsterTrickster]

Even still, I think most people would agree that if nothing else, it would be reasonable to +2 a slice move if it was a completed move and the cube was fully cubic

Lol having it that way would make things even more complicated.

 

[OreKehStrah]

Lol having it that way would make things even more complicated.

Why? Is it ambiguity between it being a slice vs UD?

 

[Kit Clement]

Define what makes a cube "fully cubic." Is 1 degree off on the outer layers enough to be outside that definition?

 

[OreKehStrah]

Define what makes a cube "fully cubic." Is 1 degree off on the outer layers enough to be outside that definition?

I see your point. For this to work a fully comprehensive system would be needed. Maybe we could consider completely aligned up to maybe 5 degrees as a fully cubic?

 

[Cuberstache]

I see your point. For this to work a fully comprehensive system would be needed. Maybe we could consider completely aligned up to maybe 5 degrees as a fully cubic?

Can you tell the difference between 5° and 6° by just looking at the cube? Because I can't.

 

[OreKehStrah]

Can you tell the difference between 5° and 6° by just looking at the cube? Because I can't.

No but a protractor can. An while this might seem super extra, as cubing becomes more and more refined, I don’t think it would be unreasonable to use protractors or a similar tool to enable more consistent judging. Competitive sports simply become more and more precise over time

 

[Cuberstache]

No but a protractor can. An while this might seem super extra, as cubing becomes more and more refined, I don’t think it would be unreasonable to use protractors or a similar tool to enable more consistent judging. Competitive sports simply become more and more precise over time

I personally think that using a protractor would be unreasonable.

 

[Kit Clement]

Or we can just remove all misalignment +2 penalties.

 

[OreKehStrah]

I personally think that using a protractor would be unreasonable.

Maybe, but my point there is that there are better, more objective ways to judge the cubes besides human judgement

 

[brododragon]

What about this extremely simple idea that would not effect anything else: When judging for Solved/+2/DNF, only a few rules are needed for every case on 3x3, and one special case for bigger cubes:

1. Outer layers are considered solved if they are within 45 degrees of alignment of the middle layer. If it is not within 45 degrees, it is a +2.

2. Middle layers are considered solved if they are within 45 degrees of alignment of at least one of the outer layers. If both outer layers are not within 45 degrees, it is a +2.

2b. For cubes larger than 3x3, adjacent middle layers count as one. The middle layers in question also have to be adjacent to a outer layer to use it for any ruling.

3. If 2 outer turns are within 45 degrees of each other, apply Rule 2.

4. Multiple +2’s result in a DNF.

That’s it.



Note: This is pro slice moves should be +2.

Additional Note: I’m sure this could be shortened a lot.

 

[Kit Clement]

Or we could just make sure that people solve their cubes when they stop the timer rather than using multi-step procedures and flowcharts to determine penalties.

 

[cubeshepherd]

Or we could just make sure that people solve their cubes when they stop the timer rather than using multi-step procedures and flowcharts to determine penalties.

That's what this thread was meant to talk about: https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/should-2s-be-switched-to-dnfs-officially.74962/page-2

 

[LNBFilms]

And using protractors is unreliable still. As having said in the regs. That the judge may not touch/ move the cube in any way to officially judge the cube.


Co-Founder of WeCubeTeam, Lukas Batema