WCA Guidelines 2012

[Lucas Garron]

Hi all,

Rather than debating all these little details, let's do something about it!

As you may be aware, we are planning to publish the next version of the Regulations with accompanying Guidelines. They will be just as binding, but they should contain all the interpretations and clarifications that don't belong in the rules. This way, delegates have a clear reference for making decisions.

However, there are a lot of small rules, and we could use your help in making sure we have everything covered. If you know (or want to know) something about the regulations that should be clarified, please post it in the thread with either the word QUESTION or the word SUGGESTION.
Like this:

SUGGESTION (A2): Competitors are not allowed to request a specific orientation for a puzzle.

SUGGESTION (3c): "Stickerless" puzzles like stickerless GuHongs are not allowed for any event. (WCA thread)

QUESTION (5b): If a single corner twists in place, what is the competitor allowed to do?

Some things that would help:

• Please include a reference to a section of the regulations, if possible.
• If the topic has been previously discussed, please provide links.
• If you have any examples from real events that help illustrate the topic, please give us as much information as you can, so the WRC can make informed decisions when compiling and deciding the Guidelines. In particular, it helps to know about rulings from delegates at actual competitions around the world.

Thanks.

 

[Mike Hughey]

I'll work on this tomorrow. But for now, I'd like to mention that I hope both of your examples above are included - they need to be.

 

[DrKorbin]

QUESTION (H): In multi-bld, if a competitor reaches his time limit, and some of his cubes have misalignment, are they treated as +2 or not solved?
(It seems to me Ron has said they are not solved, but I can't provide a link).

SUGGESTION (4d): If there is black and no white, the cube is scrambled black on top, green (or darkest adjanced color) on front.
link

SUGGESTION (2e1): Nationality is exactly a citizenship (i.e. you have a passport of this country (but how must young people who have no passport be treated?)), not membership of a nation in the sense of ethnic group.
link

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

QUESTION (9F14): What is to happen if 2 competitors have the same average and the same best single?

Spoiler: Quote from IRC, talking about aachen open 2012 cutoffs for 3x3 final

(4:06:06 PM) AardappelsapBASc: the funny thing was there would be 12 people in the podium fnials
(4:06:14 PM) AardappelsapBASc: and number 12 and 13 had exactly the same avg..
(4:06:21 PM) AardappelsapBASc: so we looked at who had the best single
(4:06:31 PM) AardappelsapBASc: but they both also had the same best single xD
...
(4:06:48 PM) Rawrbert: so look at 2nd best solve instead? o_O
(4:07:03 PM) AardappelsapBASc: lol no, there is no solution for it in the regulations
(4:07:10 PM) AardappelsapBASc: so they could both be in the podium finals

 

[vcuber13]

QUESTION (3c): Should the use of stickerless cubes be only for blind events, and should it be at the delegates descretion?

SUGGESTION (3c): "Stickerless" puzzles like stickerless GuHongs are allowed ONLY for blind events.

SUGGESTION (5b): If a single corner twists in place, the competitor is allowed to twist it in place.

 

[ardi4nto]

QUESTION (9F14): What is to happen if 2 competitors have the same average and the same best single?

Spoiler: Quote from IRC, talking about aachen open 2012 cutoffs for 3x3 final

(4:06:06 PM) AardappelsapBASc: the funny thing was there would be 12 people in the podium fnials
(4:06:14 PM) AardappelsapBASc: and number 12 and 13 had exactly the same avg..
(4:06:21 PM) AardappelsapBASc: so we looked at who had the best single
(4:06:31 PM) AardappelsapBASc: but they both also had the same best single xD
...
(4:06:48 PM) Rawrbert: so look at 2nd best solve instead? o_O
(4:07:03 PM) AardappelsapBASc: lol no, there is no solution for it in the regulations
(4:07:10 PM) AardappelsapBASc: so they could both be in the podium finals

Both will be have same position.
Just like FMC with same move counts.

 

[Ickathu]

Suggestion 4g) [?]: Scrambling orientation for non-cubic puzzles (e.g., pyra, mega): Lightest color on bottom, darkest adjacent color on front

 

[Julian]

Both will be have same position.
Just like FMC with same move counts.

He's talking about a round before the finals.

Suggestion 4g) [?]: Scrambling orientation for non-cubic puzzles (e.g., pyra, mega): Lightest color on bottom, darkest adjacent color on front

This doesn't work with the way megaminx is scrambled (or did you mean lightest colour on top?)

 

[Ickathu]

This doesn't work with the way megaminx is scrambled (or did you mean lightest colour on top?)

Oh yeah, I might have meant that. I don't do mega, so I'm not sure. I just know that, being a noncubic puzzle, scrambling orientation is not defined.

 

[ZachyD543]

what's the point of not being able to use stickerless cubes in competition? They are just like any other cube just without stickers. I think the WCA should take this into consideration and let us use these cubes.

 

[tasguitar7]

what's the point of not being able to use stickerless cubes in competition? They are just like any other cube just without stickers. I think the WCA should take this into consideration and let us use these cubes.

The reasoning behind not allowing them is that if you turn a side of a stickerless cube 45 degrees you can see more colors of more pieces (due to the fact that the pieces are dyed the color instead of just having stickers) than you would if you used a stickered cube. It apparently allows an unfair advantage in look ahead.

Has anyone found any evidence that shows an actual advantage to using stickerless cubes?

 

[oranjules]

With stickerless cubes you can see pieces you can't with any other cube (at least for dayan ones : the stickerless diansheng (with paint) are allowed)
EDIT : an example of help is turning the U face during F2L, with the LL in front of you (well, it become a F move) : you can see if there are bad edges in F2L slots, which you can't see normally from that angle

 

[Bob]

what's the point of not being able to use stickerless cubes in competition? They are just like any other cube just without stickers. I think the WCA should take this into consideration and let us use these cubes.

http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...ickerless-cubes-be-allowed-in-WCA-competition

 

[Mike Hughey]

what's the point of not being able to use stickerless cubes in competition? They are just like any other cube just without stickers. I think the WCA should take this into consideration and let us use these cubes.

Suggestion (3c): The rules for stickerless cubes should be the same for speedsolving and blindsolving - there should be no difference. I think I'd prefer that they be allowed, but the rules should be consistent either way.

 

[cubernya]

Suggestion (3c): The rules for stickerless cubes should be the same for speedsolving and blindsolving - there should be no difference. I think I'd prefer that they be allowed, but the rules should be consistent either way.

I disagree. In speedsolving, there is a supposed advantage. In blindsolving, though, the only advantage is when you turn the puzzle, at which point you can't see a thing (well maybe a little light)

 

[Vincents]

This is a great start.

Message to everyone: Please provide sufficient justification for your suggestions. Saying "I feel this should happen" is not considered sufficient justification. Saying "I feel this should happen because X and Y have been allowed on these two instances in the past, and those rulings were reasonable because blahblahblah" is better.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

Both will be have same position.
Just like FMC with same move counts.

Sorry, I should have been clearer, The problem was that only one of them should have proceeded to the finals, how should this be decided if it comes up again.

 

[cubernya]

Sorry, I should have been clearer, The problem was that only one of them should have proceeded to the finals, how should this be decided if it comes up again.

If it stays within the 25% limit, then it was legal to send them both to finals. If it doesn't, neither can go. As it stands now, one can't go and one can, but they can both be held back

 

[@uguste]

SUGGESTION (9f14) : Take the sum of the counting times in count before the best time to resolve ties, because it is unfair that someone with a 10.101 average can get beaten by someone with a 10.104 average. There are several examples of such cases.

SUGGESTION (section A) : Clarifying the cumulation of penalty of different categories : if you get a +2 from "Starting the solve" and one for "Ending the solve", is it a +4 or a DNF ?

SUGGESTION (10e3) : Removing the +2 penalty for FMC (it's not clear in the regulations) and blind, because it doesn't make sense (and it solves the stupid multi-blind problem)

And about the stickerless cubes interdiction : if we decide to forbid the stickerless dayans, then we should forbid cube with tiles : with 1.5 mm tiles, you can see much more pieces and the advantage is way better than with a stickerless dayan cube.

 

[cubernya]

SUGGESTION (9f14) : Take the sum of the counting times in count before the best time to resolve ties, because it is unfair that someone with a 10.101 average can get beaten by someone with a 10.104 average. There are several examples of such cases.

SUGGESTION (section A) : Clarifying the cumulation of penalty of different categories : if you get a +2 from "Starting the solve" and one for "Ending the solve", is it a +4 or a DNF ?

SUGGESTION (10e3) : Removing the +2 penalty for FMC (it's not clear in the regulations) and blind, because it doesn't make sense (and it solves the stupid multi-blind problem)

And about the stickerless cubes interdiction : if we decide to forbid the stickerless dayans, then we should forbid cube with tiles : with 1.5 mm tiles, you can see much more pieces and the advantage is way better than with a stickerless dayan cube.

9f14: If the averages are the same, then the sum can only be up to 0.01 off.
10e3: There is no +2 for FMC. It's solved or not solved. Stupid MBLD problem? The only problem is the +2 to +(n*2), which really isn't a problem