WCA Announcement on BLD

[pjk]

WCA Announcement: Important announcement about blindfolded solving

View it here.

Please keep discussion friendly and make no personal reference to the involved person anymore.

 

[Erik]

so that's why I asked to change the name of some threads... don't say the name of the competitor

 

[Arget]

Wow... that is harsh, but fair.

Stole my words.

 

[Joël]

Guys, I don't know how you feel about this, but personally, three years seems a bit too harsh.

I really wonder what this desicion is based on.

 

[MarcusStuhr]

Three years is appropriate, in my opinion, considering expected loss of cheating

 

[fw]

I agree with Joel. 3 years is almost as long as this whole community exists and we all know that this is hell of a long time in the speedcubing world (look at the records we had 3 years ago). This is too much. I would say ban him for all blindfold events for 2 years, and all other events for... say half a year or something like that..

 

[Siraj A.]

Poor Matyas, yet why would he cheat??

 

[Crzyazn]

all his other amazing talent will forever be tarnished....

I can still envy, but not respect

 

[Hadley4000]

Guys, I don't know how you feel about this, but personally, three years seems a bit too harsh.

I really wonder what this desicion is based on.

Didn't he just turn 15? Maybe it's got to do with a banning till he's 18?

 

[Joël]

Guys, I don't know how you feel about this, but personally, three years seems a bit too harsh.

I really wonder what this desicion is based on.

Didn't he just turn 15? Maybe it's got to do with a banning till he's 18?

From what I heard, reaching a particular age has nothing to do with it.

 

[MarcusStuhr]

You can actually approximate an appropriate ban length by looking at the costs of cheating. The ban length would simply, then, represent the timeframe sufficient in covering the costs of such, augmented most likely to further cover any unforeseen externalities and to, in a way, compensate for damage done to the community, as well as to further reflect the general growth rate of world-record achievement (i.e. if records were replaced even more quickly, we'd assume a downward pressure on the ban). Three years is a very fair length when you take these factors into account.

 

[Joël]

You can actually approximate an appropriate ban length by looking at the costs of cheating. The ban length would simply, then, represent the timeframe sufficient in covering the costs of such, augmented most likely to further cover any unforeseen externalities and to, in a way, compensate for damage done to the community, as well as to further reflect the general growth rate of world-record achievement (i.e. if records were replaced even more quickly, we'd assume a downward pressure on the ban). Three years is a very fair length when you take these factors into account.

I don't follow this line of reasoning at all. How did you calculate all this?

I think all of this is quite subjective, so I wonder how many people were involved in making the decision.

 

[pjk]

3 years seems like forever. I think it should be like 1 year, w/o being able to compete in BLD for 3 years. I mean, after all, he is one of the best speedsolvers in the world. It is sad to see one of the best not be able to compete pretty much ever again.

 

[MarcusStuhr]

It is subjective in nature but a reasonable length can be extrapolated by figuring out an appropriate length for covering cheating costs.

 

[Hadley4000]

3 years seems like forever. I think it should be like 1 year, w/o being able to compete in BLD for 3 years. I mean, after all, he is one of the best speedsolvers in the world. It is sad to see one of the best not be able to compete pretty much ever again.

Maybe 6 months overall ban, and 1 year ban on blindfold?

 

[AvGalen]

The WCA found him guilty
Lots of people helped to provide prove that he cheated on several occasions.
Quite a lot of money was involved
He didn't confess or show remorse!

 

[MarcusStuhr]

Perhaps I am just being an ass, but in most sports, if you cheat at one event, you get canned from the rest of them. Just because it is sad because he indeed has a real element of high skill does not excuse him from the fact that he gained unfair benefit over those who were honest. The rules should not be bent for any one particular participant.

I'd advise you all to look at how punishment for cheating works in other sports. If cubing ever hopes to maintain the same general form of consistency as other sports, it needs to operate on a field comparable in fairness of reward and punishment.

 

[Hadley4000]

The WCA found him guilty
Lots of people helped to provide prove that he cheated on several occasions.
Quite a lot of money was involved
He didn't confess or show remorse!

How much prize money has he won?

 

[Joël]

It is subjective in nature but a reasonable length can be extrapolated by figuring out an appropriate length for covering cheating costs.

You already stated a similar opinion before, but you did not demonstrate how this should be done.

What exactly do you mean by 'cheating costs', and how do you translate that to a certain period of time?

Btw, I completely disagree with different bans for All events vs. Bld events. That would be a really weird situation.

 

[ExoCorsair]

I wonder if he's gonna keep cubing. If he does, wow, in two years, we will get an ass kicking of a lifetime.

I'm actually undecided as whether this will actually happen or not. He may very well just do that, or he may quit cubing altogether. I'm guessing that this will all be speculation until then.

Return the prize money? That is interested. If he already spent that, paying back could hurt the finance of his family.

It's a simple request, and the WCA cannot force him to do so.

You can actually approximate an appropriate ban length by looking at the costs of cheating. The ban length would simply, then, represent the timeframe sufficient in covering the costs of such, augmented most likely to further cover any unforeseen externalities and to, in a way, compensate for damage done to the community, as well as to further reflect the general growth rate of world-record achievement (i.e. if records were replaced even more quickly, we'd assume a downward pressure on the ban). Three years is a very fair length when you take these factors into account.

Spoken like a true economist.