WCA Regulations 2012

[Kirjava]

I average about 20 with the table.

I average above 30 without it.

 

[Tim Major]

Well, to be fair, Piti doesn't use the surface from what I've seen.

Why are you using Piti as an example? Because the other fast solvers do use the table?
Other than exceptions such as roux users, I don't think banning the use of a table would add more than a second on average to solve times, but the problem doesn't lie with time, but with the rules. It would be too difficult to enforce, especially as many judges only know the basics (it's hard enough to find judges as you, as an organizer, would know). If we're making judging more difficult, where will we find judges to staff one of the most popular events.
You can't exactly say any issues is for a delegate's discretion, as we aren't filming all solves.

Edit: ^ no, very on-topic

 

[Dene]

Why are you using Piti as an example? Because the other fast solvers do use the table?
Other than exceptions such as roux users, I don't think banning the use of a table would add more than a second on average to solve times, but the problem doesn't lie with time, but with the rules. It would be too difficult to enforce, especially as many judges only know the basics (it's hard enough to find judges as you, as an organizer, would know). If we're making judging more difficult, where will we find judges to staff one of the most popular events.
You can't exactly say any issues is for a delegate's discretion, as we aren't filming all solves.

Edit: ^ no, very on-topic

I used Piti as an example because he was the previous average WR holder. I thought that would get my point across.

 

[irontwig]

Is there a possibility of a "Mean of 3" format for 333FMC?
There have been some "Best of 3" competitions for FMC, but I believe "Mean of 3" is better than "Best of 3".

I like that a person with short solutions on average win, not a person with just a single lucky solution.

EDIT: Of course I don't mean deletion of "Best of X" formats, but mean just addition of "Mean of 3". This provides an option for organizers. Is there a major hurdle for the addition?

I would prefer Median of 3 rather than mean; (34, 31, 40) beating (28, 27, DNF) doesn't seem right, especially if the DNF is because of something silly like a misplaced apostrophe. Most competition would of course have just one attempt, but having three for continental/world championships makes sense.

 

[Stefan]

For example, if a OH world record holder gets invited to a tv show or something and get to show his skills, it looks very "wrong" to me that the truth is for him to think/say: "oh, sorry, I know it's called just 'one-handed', but I can only show my best if you provide a table for me".

He's still using only one hand, not two. That's why it's called one-handed, the emphasis is on "one", not on "handed".

Do you think an actual one-handed person (who only has one hand) would never do things on a table?

 

[bamilan]

I would prefer Median of 3 rather than mean; (34, 31, 40) beating (28, 27, DNF) doesn't seem right, especially if the DNF is because of something silly like a misplaced apostrophe. Most competition would of course have just one attempt, but having three for continental/world championships makes sense.

Misplaced apostrophe is like doing a wrong PLL and stop the timer on 3x3.
Btw FMC could be mean of 3. You get all the 3 scrambles at the same time, and you have 1 hour for all of them.

 

[TimMc]

Btw FMC could be mean of 3. You get all the 3 scrambles at the same time, and you have 1 hour for all of them.

Is 20 minutes per cube enough to try to get each solve down to 20 moves or less?

At what point does Fewest Moves event start becoming an event where competitors are more concerned about speed and averages over determining the fewest moves?

Tim.

 

[irontwig]

Is 20 minutes per cube enough to try to get each solve down to 20 moves or less?

I assume you 30 moves, of course if you get less time your solutions will probably be longer. A good mean would probably be low-30s-ish. FMC is about speed too in the sense that time management is important.

 

[okayama]

Out of interest, do you know how many comps have had 3 round of FM? I agree that mean can be a much better measure but is it really practical to have so many rounds?

AFAIK:

• Clermont Open 2009
• PKU Fewest Moves 2010
• Java FMC Cube Day 2010 (Firstly 3 rounds were planned, but it ended up with 2 rounds.)
• Beijing Footsteps 2011
• Alania Open 2011
• Dolmen Open 2011
• China FM 2011 Beijing
• China FM 2011 Shanghai
• China FM 2011 Xi'an
• China FM 2011 Shenyang
• China FM 2011 Zhengzhou
• China FM 2011 Guangzhou
• Puy de Dome Open 2011

So many times in China.
Planned in Japan next year.
I've heard that Erik Akkersdijk will plan 6-round FMC in the future.

Again, this doesn't force organizers to hold 3-round (or more) FMC, but just provides an option for organizers.
`Not so practical for organization of a standard competition' should not be a reason for rejection of Mean of 3...

I would prefer Median of 3 rather than mean; (34, 31, 40) beating (28, 27, DNF) doesn't seem right, especially if the DNF is because of something silly like a misplaced apostrophe. Most competition would of course have just one attempt, but having three for continental/world championships makes sense.

Yeah, I agree. But there's no such a format currently in WCA...

9f3) All counted results and averages/means are measured in natural numbers, with averages/means rounded to the nearest tenth (x.04 becomes x.0, x.05 becomes x.1).

I found this statement in the WCA regulation. Is the latter statement probably intended for FMC with Mean of 3?

 

[Carlos]

He's still using only one hand, not two. That's why it's called one-handed, the emphasis is on "one", not on "handed".

Do you think an actual one-handed person (who only has one hand) would never do things on a table?

Following this logic you may accept that the cuber can be helped by another one during the solve (getting a piece that popped or whatever how), since an actual one-handed person may be helped by others to do their stuff.

 

[Sebastien]

Is there a possibility of a "Mean of 3" format for 333FMC?
There have been some "Best of 3" competitions for FMC, but I believe "Mean of 3" is better than "Best of 3".

I like that a person with short solutions on average win, not a person with just a single lucky solution.

EDIT: Of course I don't mean deletion of "Best of X" formats, but mean just addition of "Mean of 3". This provides an option for organizers. Is there a major hurdle for the addition?

The best format for most events is obviously Average of x with x --> infinity. But unfortunately Average of 5 for FMC is as infeasable during competitions as Average of 100 for 3x3x3.

Probably Mean of 2 or Mean od 3 should be allowed for FMC? I would definately love that!

 

[Lucas Garron]

I am going to close all of the threads that are about adding or removing events. Several people have suggested that the WRC should avoid controversial changes (like adding removing/events) in favor of correcting a lot of other important issues. It seems clear now that this is going to be the only productive course of action.

We will look at event changes soon enough, but I'd like to ask that we focus on other important changes first. Unless it relates to an important point about another change, please refrain from discussing the addition/removal of any official events, in any thread.

The threads about events can be reopened in early 2012 when we are at leisure to discuss them.

For reference, here are the threads I'm closing:

• Team BLD
• Magics
• Skewb

 

[Ranzha]

Does this imply that the events will not be added/removed for 2012?
EDIT: Rather, does this mean that these events will not be added/removed for 2012 as they are to be further discussed?

 

[Lucas Garron]

Does this imply that the events will not be added/removed for 2012?
EDIT: Rather, does this mean that these events will not be added/removed for 2012 as they are to be further discussed?

Depends what you mean with "for 2012". There is not necessarily going to be a single document that is the only "2012 Regulations". There will probably be a first version at the beginning of the year. After that, but still in early 2012, it should still be possibly to discuss events and add/remove them in an amended version.

See the WRC Proposal for how that might all work.

 

[okayama]

The best format for most events is obviously Average of x with x --> infinity. But unfortunately Average of 5 for FMC is as infeasable during competitions as Average of 100 for 3x3x3.

Probably Mean of 2 or Mean od 3 should be allowed for FMC? I would definately love that!

Oh, if possible Mean of 2 also sounds nice.

 

[Florian]

The best format for most events is obviously Average of x with x --> infinity. But unfortunately Average of 5 for FMC is as infeasable during competitions as Average of 100 for 3x3x3.

Probably Mean of 2 or Mean od 3 should be allowed for FMC? I would definately love that!

At many competitions there is a problem with time management, so every competition who wants to held it as mean of 2 would have need to "waste"(not really waste but FMC cost a lot of time seeing that it's only one solve) one hour more.

@Onehand solving
I don't see any reason to have the rule "don't use the table", there are basically only reason for "you can use the table"
Especially when you pick up the point that you sometimes accidently drop the cube.
In Feliks former average world record: 14.41 the third solve would be DNF and the fourth solve would be DNF.

@Skewb I never solved a Skewb, but i think it's pretty easy to add Skewb because there wouldn't be any regulation problems.

 

[Erik]

Just for the record, I formulated 2 proposals in this thread: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...at-in-feet-and-in-general&p=685074#post685074

- Creating fairness for the used surface in feetsolving
- Obliging the use of the stackmat-mat in general (not only the timer)

 

[okayama]

At many competitions there is a problem with time management, so every competition who wants to held it as mean of 2 would have need to "waste"(not really waste but FMC cost a lot of time seeing that it's only one solve) one hour more.

As I said before, time-management is not a point to be discussed.
There have been lots of FMC events with "Best of 2" and "Best of 3" so far,
and organizers cannot select "Mean of X" just because of the current regulation.
Not because of time-management.

If time-management is a problem, why is "Best of 3" legal, and "Mean of 3" illegal?

AGAIN, this doesn't force organizers to hold 2- or 3-round (or more) FMC,
but just provides an option for organizers.

 

[TimMc]

Proposal: Copy/paste A3d1 as A6a2

I'd like to propose that A6a become A6a1 and A3d1 be copy/pasted as A6a2.

The puzzle must rest on the mat, not on the timer part of the Stackmat.

Penalty: disqualification of the solve.

Why?

At the end of a solve it's inconvenient for the judge when the puzzle lands:

• On the ground and off the stage.
• Under another chair or table.
• In the crowd.
• On another table/mat.

It's also inconvenient when a competitor hits the table so hard that the puzzle bounces off it and onto the ground before the judge has confirmed that it's in a solved state. Perhaps A6e already covers this case.

Thoughts?

Tim.

 

[Zoé]

For pyraminx, we should clarify if tips are a functional piece or not.
I have seen people arguing that it was because it could turn and therefore it was functional on the other hand some other people say that when a tip falls off, it is only the "cap" that falls off, and that the functional part that allows it to turn is still attached to the puzzle.

If we consider that the whole tip is the functional part then it means a tip falling off is DNF.
If not, then it is only a +2
Whenever that happened to me, it was always judged as a +2, but I heard that some delegates have already DNFed people for it....
So I think we should make it clear which of the two it should be for more fairness in the future.