[WCA Regulations 2012] Proposed New Event: Team BLD

[Vincents]

Hi everyone,

Before I get to my main point, I'm going to open by paraphrasing Lucas: This discussion is meant to be serious and useful. Posts construed as silly, inane, or similar will be moderated and dealt with harshly. Please post both constructively and respectfully.

One of the new events proposed for 2012 is Team BLD. Team BLD is an event of some popularity, run mostly unofficially at various competitions around the United States from my first-hand knowledge, and possibly in other places around the world.

What we'd like to do is codify a nice set of regulations that will allow us to induct it as an official WCA event.

I'll be taking a much deeper look at this soon. Currently, it is dead and Finals week for me, so I'm opening this discussion up to the general community for preliminary ideas and suggestions. I'll take another look at this thread in 1.5-2 weeks to see what kind of ideas have been thrown around.

Basically, what I'm hoping to accomplish by the end of the calendar year is a cohesive, bullet-proof set of regulations for Team BLD. I'm talking about something so tight even Stefan can't pick it apart. These regulations can, and will, then be field tested at the Berkeley Winter competition (and possibly others, if organizers are interested).

Some initial issues to consider (this list is not inclusive of all the issues that need to be addressed):
- How are "competitors" determined? Are they treated as a team?
- Are there defined roles on the team (e.g. a caller and an executor), at least in a capacity that the WCA would need information on?
- How will this be stored in the database? How will this show up on competitor pages?
- Actual event regulations. Who can touch the cube and when? Inspection?
- Event format.
- Penalties.
- Dispute resolution.

 

[Kirjava]

Search other threads on this topic and fix all the things wrong with holding Team BLD. Noone else has come up with a decent answer yet.

You should at least link to the threads that you're talking about. Coming up with a decent answer is what this thread is about, and your post was rather unconstructive.

One issue I have with this is that I get the impression that most people would like to have Skewb before Team BLD, Skewb will also be much easier to implement and I can't see WCA wanting to add two events this year.

 

[Sa967St]

Search other threads on this topic and fix all the things wrong with holding Team BLD.

Some stuff:
-the judge holding the paper
-the solver being able to point at pieces
-the solver being able to talk
-surrounding noise level


One big issue I see with having Team BLD officially is that since someone is calling out things about the cube, it can give hints to others who can listen, making it easy to cheat if you aren't the first to compete. However if many teams were to go at once in the same room then that would also be an issue (concentration, hearing (the caller, and other callers), etc.).

 

[Sa967St]

If Person1 goes and partners with multiple people and all are ranked fast, would that person1 also get the other top spots? Or would individual ranking be in effect? Such as Person1:1:00, Person2:1:00, and they would be ranked the same?

I suggest having separate ranks for the two roles. If it were separated into two lists of records, there wouldn't be any issues with competing with multiple partners, or switching roles in different competitions.
On your WCA profile under "Current Personal Records", it'd be nice if it displayed your best calling time on one line, and your best solving time on another line, (with your partner(s)'(s) name in brackets?), instead of having one line with your best Team BLD time.

 

[Tim Major]

The team BLD event would be a great team event to add. Completely different to all other events, and new skills are involved to become fast. Ny thoughts;

1. Solver wears face mask, tested by the judge. Anything completely obscuring vision.
2. Caller must be behind or beside the solver.
3. Judge opposite solver so as not to interfere.

Only problem I see is noise. Everyone calling "Right join" at different times could be problematic to other teams.

 

[Lucas Garron]

I suggest having separate ranks for the two roles. If it were separated into two lists of records, there wouldn't be any issues with competing with multiple partners, or switching roles in different competitions.
On your WCA profile under "Current Personal Records", it'd be nice if it displayed your best calling time on one line, and your best solving time on another line, (with your partner(s)'(s) name in brackets?), instead of having one line with your best Team BLD time.

So basically we would have two separate events in the database, except that each entry in one is paired with one from the other?

I'm actually in favor keeping a single PB for an event. The fastest team blind solve you've done is simply the fastest you've participated in. Not the most complete, but we already throw away some information like +2 data. Everybody gets a single entry like before, with two entries of the same time for each of two people. That also leaves the issue of how to encode the association (mostly from a technical aspect), though.

 

[Stefan]

I'm talking about something so tight even Stefan can't pick it apart.

Mmmhh, a challenge.

- How are "competitors" determined? Are they treated as a team?
- Are there defined roles on the team (e.g. a caller and an executor), at least in a capacity that the WCA would need information on?
- How will this be stored in the database? How will this show up on competitor pages?

I'd prefer to show who did what, but only show one line on the person pages. It's one event.

Some stuff:
-the judge holding the paper
-the solver being able to point at pieces
-the solver being able to talk

What's wrong with these?

 

[Kirjava]

Can the caller touch the solver?

 

[Sa967St]

Some stuff:
-the judge holding the paper
-the solver being able to point at pieces
-the solver being able to talk

What's wrong with these?

If the judge were to hold a paper in front of the solver, or if there were some sort of stand blocking his/her view, it may make it difficult the caller to see. Something like this has potential though.

For the other two points, it's just about whether Team BLD should be one-way communication or two-way communication. If it ideally *should* be one-way (just the caller telling the solver what to do) there isn't much preventing the solver by communicating by pointing at pieces or making hand signals. I imagine that the judge would have to be extra cautious to make sure they're following the regulations if the solver isn't allowed to talk and things..

 

[Erik]

To complete the introduction, there has been a discussion in 2010 about Team BLD becoming an official event on the WCA Forum here: http://worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=830&sid=928a902877991d90e182c27823996272

Many competitions have had team BLD as an unofficial event over the past 2 years (the discussion at the WCA forum started January 2010) without problems (I probably have done it about 10 times in competition already). It turned out that holding the sheet of paper is not hindering the callers view of the cube and thus is not a problem for the regulations. The event has proven itself to be fun, fast, easy to organize and not causing problems during execution.

The main idea is the following:
'a team consists of 2 people: a solver and a caller. The solver is not allowed to see anything and is thus wearing a blindfold. The caller is not allowed to touch the cube. By communication the team has to solve the cube.'

Other (easy) answers to all asked questions here:

- judge holding the paper: no problem, caller and judge stand on right and left side of the solver and thus don't hinder each other. In practice the caller can look under the sheet of paper without being troubled in any way.
- solver being able to point at pieces: no problem, the solver can communicate too. In my definition of team BLD the key is the 2 restrictions of not touching and not seeing.
- surrounding noise level: hardly a problem, the caller stands a few centimeters away from the solvers' ear so unless there is LOUD music...
- database idea: I have proposed this before, rankings are still individual which should also make the personal profile pages easy to maintain. http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...t-ideas-(Poll)&p=663449&viewfull=1#post663449
"I imagine the wca rankings as follows:

[person] [partner] [time]
1. Joel Arnaud 40.20
1. Arnaud Joel 40.20
..
..
5. Stefan Arnaud 45.87

This way rankings are still individual. Important you understand number 5. Stefans best time is with Arnaud although Arnauds best result is with Joel."

Regulations:
Summary of regulations:
- A team consists of 2 people, a solver and a caller
- The solver has to wear a blindfold and is not allowed to see the cube (penalty DNF)
- The caller is not allowed to touch the cube in any part of the solve (penalty DNF)
- The team can communicate in any way they like as long as other people are not disturbed
- There is a normal inspection time of 15 seconds where the solver can pick up the cube and the caller can inspect the cube
- Additionally to the blindfold, the judge holds a sheet of paper between the solver and the cube. Practically the judges stands on one side of the solver and the caller on the other side, to prevent hinder.
- The normal regulations apply for inspection, during the solve and stopping the solve.

 

[MostEd]

All is great, except inspection

itd be extra calling to call rotations during the inspection

how about caller inspects then places and the executioner than stackmats the cub etc...

 

[Erik]

MostEd what is the problem you see? During inspection the team can communicate so that the solver rotates the cube and the caller tells the solver how to solve the cross or sth.

 

[MostEd]

MostEd what is the problem you see? During inspection the team can communicate so that the solver rotates the cube and the caller tells the solver how to solve the cross or sth.

well its always easier to plan cross/block holding the cube in the callers hands, because i've had problems doing a teambld during inspection i had to take the cube and plan, thn i set it down and we solved(i called)

 

[SoulSeeker]

what about this way at 2:14 - 2:30 or is it to personal..

 

[RyanReese09]

Hmm I've thought about the ranking for a bit at work and I'm leaning towardsEriks idea. I had thought about there being two listings you can be ranked for (the total ti,e being the time in the rankings)...the two listings are for solver and caller. If you are caller and you get 40s...you get that time. And if you get 50 as solver you get that ranking. Just rambling the idea here and I'm not condoning it.

We have to make sure the regulations are clear about what the caller can and cannot touch. For example, touching the solvers hands would basically enable the caller to regularly solve it, with some infringement.

@mods, its not a good idea to delete posts here. It makes several valid points go away and gives confusion for the thread when people see deleted posts referenced. Just edit the posts to delete the off topic.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

I think the problem with the ranking system is that do people get the highest one possible, or the lowest?

 

[Erik]

Ryan: the caller touching the solver would generally not be a problem. Think about cool systems where a tap on the right shoulder would mean a RUR' trick and the left shoulder would be L'U'L! But ya I agree with you that touching the hands would be a bit too much, so, I guess that is a good boundary. Its easy to determine the different between hand and arm.

Maelstrom: I think its quite logical that you get the highest score? Like in my example, Arnaud would have a best time of 40 seconds while Stefan only has a best time of 45 seconds.

Soulseeker: that is very original! Personally I don't like it if this would be allowed, but I can't find a reason to not allow it.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

Ryan: the caller touching the solver would generally not be a problem. Think about cool systems where a tap on the right shoulder would mean a RUR' trick and the left shoulder would be L'U'L! But ya I agree with you that touching the hands would be a bit too much, so, I guess that is a good boundary. Its easy to determine the different between hand and arm.

Maelstrom: I think its quite logical that you get the highest score? Like in my example, Arnaud would have a best time of 40 seconds while Stefan only has a best time of 45 seconds.

Soulseeker: that is very original! Personally I don't like it if this would be allowed, but I can't find a reason to not allow it.

Yeah I agree, i was just trying to work out this bit that ryan posted:

If you are caller and you get 40s...you get that time. And if you get 50 as solver you get that ranking.

 

[collinbxyz]

Soulseeker: that is very original! Personally I don't like it if this would be allowed, but I can't find a reason to not allow it.

Should you be allowed to do this in any way you want? For example, you'd be able to do SoulSeeker's "method", or any other way you'd prefer. Or should we have a standard method that everyone must follow?

 

[Pedro]

(...)
- Additionally to the blindfold, the judge holds a sheet of paper between the solver and the cube. Practically the judges stands on one side of the solver and the caller on the other side, to prevent hinder.

What if I'm the caller and want/need to move to the other side of the solver, to see the cube better?
Judge would have to move too, which can make things complicated.