[WR] Chris Olson 1.71 2x2 avg5

[hubingjushi]

No I don't believe it.....

 

[aceofspades98]

2.58 average with the plus two.
I will be blantaly honest.
It isn't really fair to Sameer Mahmood if this counts because it is technically a plus two and wouldn't be a WR if it had counted. I feel like most people are only saying it should count because they like Chris and are glad to see him set a WR.

 

[Tim Major]

2.58 average with the plus two.

18 seconds = DNF not +2, but it doesn't really matter.

 

[ottozing]

This isn't about being biased towards Chris. This is about the judge not doing his job correctly by not saying "go" or "12 seconds" at 12 seconds.

 

[JasonK]

2.58 average with the plus two.
I will be blantaly honest.
It isn't really fair to Sameer Mahmood if this counts because it is technically a plus two and wouldn't be a WR if it had counted. I feel like most people are only saying it should count because they like Chris and are glad to see him set a WR.

So it's fair to DNF Chris's solve because the judge couldn't follow the procedure? How exactly was he supposed to know that he was over-inspecting? He started solving when he was told to go.

 

[aceofspades98]

Yeah, but all I am saying is that Chris had a solve that should've been a DNF if the judge did his job properly, meaning Chris had an unfair advantage.

 

[JasonK]

Yeah, but all I am saying is that Chris had a solve that should've been a DNF if the judge did his job properly, meaning Chris had an unfair advantage.

Maybe so, but it seems ridiculous to punish Chris when he did nothing wrong.

 

[aceofspades98]

Maybe so, but it seems ridiculous to punish Chris when he did nothing wrong.

I don't see how it would be "punishment" if we simply changed his average. Maybe we should just make sure judges are more informed on the rules.

 

[ottozing]

The judge was a delegate though

 

[aceofspades98]

The judge was a delegate though

Thats even worse. Not some random judge, but a delegate?

 

[JasonK]

I don't see how it would be "punishment" if we simply changed his average. Maybe we should just make sure judges are more informed on the rules.

"Punish" may have been the wrong word, but I still stand by my point, which is that it's massively unfair to DNF a solve that was done (by the solver) completely according to the rules. The judge is the only one who didn't follow regulations, so DNFing the solve affects the wrong person.

 

[Kit Clement]

This is definitely a tricky situation. Had this been noticed at the time, a re-solve would have almost certainly have been issued. After the fact, I have to believe the WCA should accept this time. You really can't be fair with any decision here, as Chris taking a penalty and not being offered a resolve is unfair to him, and Chris having a solve with extra inspection is unfair to other 2x2 competitors.

With a few exceptions (Cameron in WC2011 as mentioned earlier), the WCA's precedent on revisionist history has been to change solves when there has been intent to go against regulation. Here, this was simply a judge's mistake and the competitor reacting based on that. This wasn't really due to incompetent judging (given that the judge is a delegate), and as a result I don't see any way it could have been prevented.

Regulations do allow for video evidence, but the regulations on incidents are mostly in reference to incidents that occur and are resolved during the competition. It is also unclear that a judge's decision on inspection time is something that can be overturned - especially given the large timing error between starting/stopping the stopwatch matching when the competitor actually begins inspection/starts the timer. The final inspection time should come from the stopwatch, and we have no photos or videos of the stopwatch. Unless we hear anything from Bryan, I see no reason to say that the inspection time was above 15 seconds as he ruled the solve free of any penalty.

 

[Carrot]

If he really went over 15 seconds inspection, then I would punish the delegate judging.

Ohhh coool, he broke a 2x2x2 WR! pretty fast :3

 

[rowehessler]

gj

 

[Edward_Lin]

gj

 

[Schmidt]

Perhaps the delegate was distracted by the ~6yo runner who brought him an unnecessary cube!

 

[Tim Major]

It is in no way Chris' fault.

However the fact that he took that long to inspect implies to me that he needed it. Perhaps with 12 seconds inspection like he's meant to have, he wouldn't have been able to one look it.

This really sucks. If it was noticed by an audience member, definitely would do a resolve. With this, it's... not fair to DNF him because he followed the procedure, but also isn't fair to the previous WR holder, or future competitors as he had a slight advantage.

At the end of the day, this average won't be removed by the WCA. It's just unfortunate.

 

[Edward_Lin]

I don't see how it would be "punishment" if we simply changed his average. Maybe we should just make sure judges are more informed on the rules.

how is taking away someone's WR not punishment?.....

 

[Kirjava]

this average won't be removed by the WCA

How could you possibly know.

This average wasn't set using WCA conditions.

He should have been given a resolve, but unfortunately this wasn't caught at the time. It is unfair on Chris, but this average should not be allowed.

 

[Andreaillest]

Nice job Chris! Whatever happens, this still was an insane performance.