Allowing the Ability to Set Records Outside of Competition

[Tim Reynolds]

This would put a lot of burden on delegates to respond to these requests. I don't have time to set these up every time someone wants to try to break a record.

It seems to me like this would just make the "advantage" aaronb mentioned bigger. I can't imagine someone in Kansas would get a delegate to fly out there just to judge a few solves. I also don't see what the point is in not counting this as a "competition". What are the differences between this and a competition, other than not competing against other competitors and making the requirements for holding it less stringent? If I decided to hold one of these for Rowe, could other cubers come and participate as well? If so, the size would probably just turn into a regular competition. If not, it's just giving fast people who are friends with delegates 1-on-1 solving time.

 

[Tim Major]

So what if my brother is a delegate. Can I do official solves every day?

Funny you should mention this, we had an unofficial comp last Friday which Dene and TimMc (both delegates) were at, and Feliks got an 8 OH, and a 12 average. In Melbourne we have meetups every 2/3 weeks, which usually have Tim/Dene, so the records would be smashed in no time.
However, if it is not at an official competition, it is more lax by nature, and cheating would be much easier.
We have often had non-cubers randomly pick up cubes or interrupt, which doesn't happen in competitions.
You mentioned people can't do a100, because it doesn't follow the rules, but if so, what is the difference between these and competitions?
There is no rule saying a delegate can't host a competition every day of the week, closing registration at 15 people if necessary.
In short I can't really understand what you're suggesting, removal of the more or less required announcement of a comp 1 month ahead? Please list the differences you have in mind, of a competition to a "meet".

 

[TMOY]

And there may not be a rule against how many competitions you can attend in a day, but isn't there a general rule against having 2 or more competitions too close to each other on or around the same date? I guess in this case we would have to find another word to use besides "competition".

I don't think there's any such rule explicitly written in the regulations. But every competition has to be approved by the WCA Board , and they will most probably reject a proposal of a bunch of competitions happening the same day at the same place.

 

[RCTACameron]

It seems like the main reason you are proposing this is to allow speedcubers who can't go to competitions to be able to have official results. If this did happen, I think the fairest way to do it is for these people to have to apply to get the privilege of competing outside competitions, and somehow prove that they lived too far away and couldn't afford to attend competitions. If they had already competed then the applications would be rejected. Also, to ensure they don't get and unfair advantage over competitors in WCA competitions, they would have to wait at least 3 months (or another limit) between these sessions.

 

[TimMc]

If Feliks wants to do a WR attempt under the supervision of Dene or some other WCA delegate

Dude ಠ_ಠ

EDIT: With regard to competitors not having much of a chance to come along and do an Ao5: I've helped organise and delegate at 7 competitions in Australia this year. That's roughly one competition every two months. We usually have 2-3 rounds of events with 25% fewer competitors per round so more competitors get a chance to improve their PB.

Instead of requesting that delegates have the ability to casually host a cubing session where results are recognised, why not organise more competitions instead?

Tim.

 

[Godmil]

It seems like the main reason you are proposing this is to allow speedcubers who can't go to competitions to be able to have official results.

No, his main reason for propossing it seems to be to allow fast cubers more chances to break records.

At best what he's saying is he wants more competitions... but that's being kind, cause it actually just come across as a grossly unfair way for people to break records.
I know you said no ad hominems but, seriously, you put lots of thought into this.... and *still* decided to post?

 

[Erik]

... No, just no. The whole proposal is against everything the WCA stands for.
"people from all over the world have fun together in a friendly atmosphere, help each other and behave sportsmanlike"

1 guy (or only a few) from 1 place of the world, without much fun (how can you have fun on your own?), in an empty atmosphere, being non-sportsmanlike, being non-fair.

 

[TMOY]

Another problem: what if the competitor is a delegate himself ? "Hey guys, I appointed myself to come to my place, and while I was there alone I smashed all the WRs on official solves. Yes, you must believe me, I'm a WCA delegate !" At comps at least there are some witnesses, that's one of the purposes of the "at least 12 competitors" rule.

 

[tim]

Do current regulations allow for you to do 100 solves? No. Then it wouldn't be following regulations, and therefore wouldn't count.

Which regulations are you talking about? You realize, that the entire WCA regulations are written with "competition" and "competitor" in mind?

 

[Micael]

That's asking a lot to WCA and delegates for just a self-interest. What about putting forward effort yourself and organise an official competition? Delegates will then be willing to put the effort too and you will have what you want as well as the cubing community.

 

[tozies24]

Here is what I think that the point the the original poster is trying to make:

For some records (unrelated to cubing), you call up the Guiness Book of World Records people and you say that you want to try and break the record for something. So basically, I guess he is trying to say that is it possible for there to be a system put in place so that not only would we have the WCA but then there would be something else (that was more than unofficial records) that would determine if you had a record or not. Of course, then there would be a discussion about fairness and WCA delegates, but I think that his idea is not too farfetched.

 

[Robocopter87]

Yeah people have cheated at competitions. I understand, like all arguments you have good points as do I. Otherwise we wouldn't be arguing, correct? However it is so much easier to cheat under this new idea.

Also, though the concept is ideal, the current proposition actually doesn't help the idea at all.

People still have to have somebody from the WCA with them. That doesn't really open much more space than being able to go to a competition. And Judges would then have a choice on whether or not to attend. The only people who get any gain from this are people who know people. So this idea which is made for the people who don't know people doesn't really help any of them. They still need to set up a place and time. They still need to get people places. Just going to a competition is easier.

Also, WRs would be broken on a daily basis, and there is no rule against the amount of competitions you can attend.

Pretty much, everybody has already said all this.

 

[uberCuber]

Anyway, as much as I would like to be able to get halfway decent 4x4 and 5x5 results on my WCA profile sometime soon, I disagree with this idea for a good majority of the reasons already mentioned in the thread. Unfairness is inherent in this proposal.