Re: The +2, here's my analysis:
At the time of the penalty assessment:
If there's no penalty:*
Mats Valk: 8.81, (9.52), 7.61, (7.31), 7.76 Avg: 8.06
Feliks Zemdegs: 8.39, 7.95, 8.21, 7.36
Feliks would need an 8.02 on his final solve to tie.
(Edit: He'd need an 8.01 to win, since ties are broken by fastest solve.)
If there is a penalty, then 9.76 is worse than 8.1, and so:
Mats Valk: 8.81, 9.52, 7.61, (7.31), (9.76+) Avg: 8.65
Feliks Zemdegs: 8.39, 7.95, 8.21, (7.36), (x) Avg: 8.18
Feliks would win no matter what he does on his last solve. (And it so happens he ends up getting his worst solve, and it doesn't matter.)
*Of course, it's also important to keep in mind that "Mats would've won if he didn't get the +2" makes two key mistaken assumptions about variables that are not independent:
1) If there were no penalty, it likely would've been due to him spending slightly more time turning the piece, which means the time would've been slightly higher, though not by much
2) If Mats's solve 5 time were around 8 seconds, Feliks might've tried a bit harder on solve 5. As it was, you could see him visibly relax (in Lucas's table cam footage).
It remains the case that if Mats spent slightly more time turning that last bit, Feliks would have been on the spot to deliver something close to an 8 or faster, and there would've been no guarantee that he would've succeeded, but that's all we could say about that; the exact details of his solve would've turned out differently.
where do you found mats valk table cam? can you upload that?
Stay tuned to
Lucas Garron's channel.
