[WCA Regulations 2014] DNF for 1/2 multi BLD

[Antonie faz fan]

Thank you! Been waiting for this for a long time. If you did not solve MULTIPLE cubes, it should not be possible for you to podium the event. Simples.

100% Agreed

I agree with this BUT let the competitor then atleast finish even if it is 1/2 and give them their solve but then just
No podium how about that?

 

[LVP]

I agree with this BUT let the competitor then atleast finish even if it is 1/2 and give them their solve but then just
No podium how about that?

The main point is that 1/2 means that you solved just one cube. One. The event is called multiblind, so the logical consequence would be to DNF the result.

 

[Antonie faz fan]

The main point is that 1/2 means that you solved just one cube. One. The event is called multiblind, so the logical consequence would be to DNF the result.

Like other people say someone atleast try's it is not like u are doing 1/1 just give them there solve and no podium that is the dam simple thing to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[uberCuber]

Like other people say someone atleast try's

You can try 3x3 blind, and if you don't solve a 3x3, you get a DNF.
You can try multiple blind, and if you don't solve multiple 3x3's, you get a DNF.

Just because someone "try's" does not mean they necessarily get a non-DNF result.

 

[Bhargav777]

Pochmann 's point is very valid. Unless 2 cubes are solved, that doesn't make it a multi attempt. I support this idea for sure.

 

[Antonie faz fan]

So this means al 1/2 solves already in wca are going to get DNF? again where is the facepalm smiley? can't seem to find it!

 

[TMOY]

Are there really so many people doing 2 cubes and deliberately not solving one of them? What about all the people who legitimately want to try 2 cubes and don't have the skill to get them both? They just can't do the event now unless they get both cubes?

So what ? Just practice. People who waht to do big blinds need to have the skill to solve a big cube blindfolded if they want to get a non-DNF result, you can't get a podium with only a half-solved big cube. And a 2/2 multi is definitely not harder than a 4BLD.

 

[EMI]

So this means al 1/2 solves already in wca are going to get DNF? again where is the facepalm smiley? can't seem to find it!

They aren't, just read the first post. And stop making stupid comments please.

 

[TDM]

So this means al 1/2 solves already in wca are going to get DNF? again where is the facepalm smiley? can't seem to find it!

Can't see why you would need to use it, but if you want to know it was removed a while ago.
Please actually read the OP before posting, and if you're going to reply to a comment, then don't reply with just "How do you do a facepalm smiley?"; at least try to say something constructive. Questions like that should go in the OAQT.

 

[Coolster01]

I was thinking about this about a week ago, but didn't post it because I thought I'd get hate

Totally agree. Its not MULTI blind if 1 cube is solved. If you want to do 2 cubes, thats too bad for you that 1 cube off is a DNF; it's not the WCA's fault that you can't do sup-2 cube MBLDs.

 

[Jaysammey777]

As someone who likes multi-bld, but considers himself awful, I would be discouraged to see this change. I constantly get 1/2 or 1/3s weekly. If the only logical reason for this change is to prevent people who have 0 points be podium placers(which can be fixed by saying you need a positive score to place podium), then personally I don't believe that this change should take place.
As well, Cubing is and should be considered a hobby. I believe it is not right to just signify these as DNFs even though they did complete more than 0/x Multi BLD

 

[Lucas Garron]

As someone who likes multi-bld, but considers himself awful, I would be discouraged to see this change. I constantly get 1/2 or 1/3s weekly. If the only logical reason for this change is to prevent people who have 0 points be podium placers(which can be fixed by saying you need a positive score to place podium), then personally I don't believe that this change should take place.

Although podium may be a motivation for a competitor to do this, the real concern is that they are taking time from the competition. As long as they can still get a valid result, there is some motivation.

In addition, adding a special rule to prevent certain results from being "podium" is not really justified. Organizers already have discretion about the awards. The WCA doesn't even recognize podiums, opting instead to list the top 3.

As well, Cubing is and should be considered a hobby. I believe it is not right to just signify these as DNFs even though they did complete more than 0/x Multi BLD

In the end, it comes down to an opinion of what "multi" really means. Most serious multi BLD cubers can solve way more than 2, and that regular BLD is available for anyone who wants a blind success. Given that Delegate consensus (based on competition experience) was significant, I think it is reasonable to assert that "if you want to do multi, do multi".
It isn't infringing on anyone's hobby.

 

[cubernya]

Although I agree with this, I would also like to bring up a point brought up earlier: why is a 2/4 10:00 ranked higher than a 3/6 11:00, when the 3/6 is definitely better. Also, same scenario with 3/6 10:00 and it is a tie? How does that make sense?

 

[Noahaha]

Although I agree with this, I would also like to bring up a point brought up earlier: why is a 2/4 10:00 ranked higher than a 3/6 11:00, when the 3/6 is definitely better. Also, same scenario with 3/6 10:00 and it is a tie? How does that make sense?

3/6 might require more BLD skill than 2/4, but it is a worse result because it is a worse attempt.

 

[cubizh]

Although I agree with this, I would also like to bring up a point brought up earlier: why is a 2/4 10:00 ranked higher than a 3/6 11:00, when the 3/6 is definitely better. Also, same scenario with 3/6 10:00 and it is a tie? How does that make sense?

9f12c) For Multiple Blindfolded Solving, rankings are assessed based on number of puzzles solved minus the number of puzzles not solved, where a greater difference is better. If the difference is less than 0, the attempt is considered unsolved (DNF). If competitors achieve the same result, rankings are assessed based on total time, where the shorter recorded time is better. If competitors achieve the same result and the same time, rankings are assessed based on the number of puzzles the competitors failed to solve, where fewer unsolved puzzles is better.

 

[cubernya]

9f12c) For Multiple Blindfolded Solving, rankings are assessed based on number of puzzles solved minus the number of puzzles not solved, where a greater difference is better. If the difference is less than 0, the attempt is considered unsolved (DNF). If competitors achieve the same result, rankings are assessed based on total time, where the shorter recorded time is better. If competitors achieve the same result and the same time, rankings are assessed based on the number of puzzles the competitors failed to solve, where fewer unsolved puzzles is better.

That would put a 2/4 10:00 over 3/6 10:00, which I still think is wrong. I think the number of puzzles solved should be first, then time (as tiebreakers)

 

[qqwref]

Although podium may be a motivation for a competitor to do this, the real concern is that they are taking time from the competition.

Sure, people who do a single 1/2 multi waste the competition's time... so do people who do an average of 5 in 3x3x3 and average 3+ minutes. Should we put a low cutoff in the regulations for the whole world, to prevent such people from taking time from the competition? My point is that in all speed events we currently let the organizer decide whether they want to let less skilled people take time from the competition, using combined finals and cutoffs. Let's instead do this for multi too - if organizers are really concerned about less-skilled people doing the event, they can require e.g. all competitors must try at least 5 cubes.

In the end, it comes down to an opinion of what "multi" really means.

In the end, it comes down to an opinion of what "speed" really means. Most serious cubers can solve a 3x3x3 way faster than 3 minutes - surely a 3 minute solve is not a speedsolve!

But really, I think as long as you try at least 2 cubes, you are doing multi. Allowing someone to DNF a cube is just a bit of leeway to let more people get non-DNF results. Why should the leeway only exist for the people with *more* skill?

 

[CyanSandwich]

The title slightly worried me considering I recently got an official 3/6 (the only official NZ mbld)

 

[uberCuber]

But really, I think as long as you try at least 2 cubes, you are doing multi.

Sure, and trying a 4x4 means you are doing 4BLD. Doesn't mean you'll succeed.

Why should the leeway only exist for the people with *more* skill?

Because those people actually solved multiple cubes in their MULTI BLD attempt.

 

[Tim Major]

Are there really so many people doing 2 cubes and deliberately not solving one of them? What about all the people who legitimately want to try 2 cubes and don't have the skill to get them both? They just can't do the event now unless they get both cubes?

I've seen it at Melbourne competitions a few times. I dislike it, but I generally attempt 2 cubes and I've had a few close ones. This regulation will probably make me go for 3/3 instead of 2/2. I always seem to make a couple of small mistakes so it would suck to get 1/2 -> DNF.

So personally, I dislike intentional 1/2s, but I dislike how this rule will affect unintentional 1/2s.

Let's instead do this for multi too - if organizers are really concerned about less-skilled people doing the event, they can require e.g. all competitors must try at least 5 cubes.

But really, I think as long as you try at least 2 cubes, you are doing multi. Allowing someone to DNF a cube is just a bit of leeway to let more people get non-DNF results. Why should the leeway only exist for the people with *more* skill?

This sums up my thoughts and I agree with this proposed solution.