Possible 2011 WCA Regulations Changes

[DavidWoner]

I don't get why people are differentiating speedbld and "regular BLD" methods for 2x2. "speedbld" is just cycling more pieces at once. Think of it as 8OP

 

[camcuber]

Alright, I understand the stickerless cubes.
How would a different orientation give some sort of advantage? You wouldn't be able to predict what the scramble would give you regardless.

I don't know if this is a good idea because for example, if two cubers use white cross and one has the white scrambled on top and one has it scrambled with white on bottom one competitor could have an easier case than the other making it unfair. This is just my opinion though.

 

[Tim Major]

Alright, I understand the stickerless cubes.
How would a different orientation give some sort of advantage? You wouldn't be able to predict what the scramble would give you regardless.

I don't know if this is a good idea because for example, if two cubers use white cross and one has the white scrambled on top and one has it scrambled with white on bottom one competitor could have an easier case than the other making it unfair. This is just my opinion though.

:fp
There's no reason to change the rule, except to cheat. If someone sees a colour neutral cuber do say, green cross, a white cross user would want white to be at the front (instead of green) to have the best available cross. It's your own fault if you're not colour neutral.
Tyjet66: why would you want this rule to be changed? To cheat is the only way I'm seeing.

 

[AvGalen]

Was curious and did some calculations (hope they're right):
- One in 300 positions for 2x2x2 can be solved in five or fewer moves.
- One in 9095 averages of five has more than one such position.
- There have been 845 rounds of 2x2x2 in WCA competitions (819 were average of five).

About 1927 (1+6+24+96+384+1416) out of 3674160 so 1 in 1907 unless I misread http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/cube2.htm or forget something. But I don't care about the exact number. I just based my "rare" on all the random scrambles I have created for the weekly competitions (never seen a 5 move or shorter one). So if qqref wants to go to 50 or 400 competitions to continuously fail 222blind just to get a good single (it won't be WR because somebody else will have already got it with a "legitimate" speedsolve), often not making it through the (recommended by me) cut-off that you have to get 1 of the first 2 succesful.........then I am not going to stop him from making a complete fool of himself at all those competitions. And I certainly won't deny hundreds of others a nice new event because of this.
(and just to be clear, I do agree with qqref that the single won't have MUCH meaning at all)

and that is very likely the last I have to say about this. I highly recommend adding 222blind 3/5 for all the reasons I stated in my first post about it. Nothing I have read seemed to provide a good argument against it

 

[AvGalen]

Was curious and did some calculations (hope they're right):
- One in 300 positions for 2x2x2 can be solved in five or fewer moves.
- One in 9095 averages of five has more than one such position.
- There have been 845 rounds of 2x2x2 in WCA competitions (819 were average of five).

About 1927 (1+6+24+96+384+1416) out of 3674160 so 1 in 1907 unless I misread http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/cube2.htm or forget something. But I don't care about the exact number. I just based my "rare" on all the random scrambles I have created for the weekly competitions (never seen a 5 move or shorter one). So if qqref wants to go to 50 or 400 competitions to continuously fail 222blind just to get a good single (it won't be WR because somebody else will have already got it with a "legitimate" speedsolve), often not making it through the (recommended by me) cut-off that you have to get 1 of the first 2 succesful.........then I am not going to stop him from making a complete fool of himself at all those competitions. And I certainly won't deny hundreds of others a nice new event because of this.
(and just to be clear, I do agree with qqref that the single won't have MUCH meaning at all)

and that is very likely the last I have to say about this. I highly recommend adding 222blind 3/5 for all the reasons I stated in my first post about it. Nothing I have read seemed to provide a good argument against it

 

[Mike Hughey]

I don't get why people are differentiating speedbld and "regular BLD" methods for 2x2. "speedbld" is just cycling more pieces at once. Think of it as 8OP

I like that perspective!

 

[DavidWoner]

I like that perspective!

I'm not trying to be cute either. Once you start thinking of stuff like R U R' as a 4-cycle rather than a one-piece insert, prediction becomes a lot easier. Maybe if I wrote it as [R: (U)]?

 

[hr.mohr]

I don't know why the table/mat is allowed to be used, but we should either allow it or prohibit it.

It's allowed for consistency because most people solve the master magic on the table. Some people also uses the table when doing LL on the Megaminx.

One of the charms of feet solving for me is that you also inspect with feet. For me it's mostly a novelty event, so I would like to keep the current way of inspecting.

 

[David Zemdegs]

Am I totally out of my depth when I think there should be a blind feet solving master magic?

 

[Stefan]

About 1927 (1+6+24+96+384+1416) out of 3674160 so 1 in 1907 unless I misread http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/cube2.htm

You did misread.

 

[endofdaworld]

OH Events...

I reckon we should add 4x4 and 5x5 OH events to competitions...What is everyone's opinion?

 

[darkerarceus]

Hm... While that would be cool seeing Faz just go crazy with one hand I really don't think it would really be a good event especially with inner slice turns with one hand.

 

[Zane_C]

No.

 

[RCTACameron]

You might want to suggest it here: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?26549-Possible-2011-WCA-Regulations-Changes.

 

[endofdaworld]

Should add Rubik's Snake (Twist) into competitions and OH 2x2

 

[Zane_C]

No.

 

[Billbowser]

Maybe a regulation for Laser,flashlight,or flash camera.

 

[Henrik]

Maybe a regulation for Laser,flashlight,or flash camera.

All of us who know how distracting it can be to have a camera flash go off, try to tell the audience not to use flash and such.
But spectators are not familiar to the regulations, so writing it in the regulations would not help much, I think.

 

[TiLiMayor]

Should add Rubik's Snake (Twist) into competitions and OH 2x2

Why? I mean we already have magic and mmagic, but I support 2OH and 2BLD, they are fairly short and the rules are already written down.

For 3OH I would like to propose one hand inspection, and the hand you inspect with, would be the one of the solve.

 

[a small kitten]

No.