[WR] Chris Olson 1.71 2x2 avg5

[amostay2004]

This reminds me of Cameron coming 3rd at WC2011, uploading a video where a +2 was in it, then getting awards stripped and a new 3rd place :s

Woah this is the first time I'm hearing about this. Sorry to deviate from the topic a little bit, but can someone summarize (with more details than this) on what happened? Was the prize money returned?

 

[yoinneroid]

Woah this is the first time I'm hearing about this. Sorry to deviate from the topic a little bit, but can someone summarize (with more details than this) on what happened? Was the prize money returned?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWhvAElHy6E
I'm not exactly sure what's the resolve, but that's the video in question

 

[ThomasJE]

Woah this is the first time I'm hearing about this. Sorry to deviate from the topic a little bit, but can someone summarize (with more details than this) on what happened? Was the prize money returned?

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...=9&t=959&sid=90fd3c963c431e1f4333a152f5436b27

Official post on WCA Forum from Tyson.

 

[Rubiks560]

I would just like to point point out to the people who are saying "he wouldn't have one looked it" I had it one looked fairly early in the inspection and the rest of the time was spent double checking. So had I heard "go" I would have started when told. But I was never told so I thought I had time.

I personally don't feel like I can be blamed for something I didn't do. I can't be keeping track of my inspection time when I'm A) under a crap load of pressure, 2) trying to track pieces and 3) already stressed out from trying to run a competition.
With that being said though, I also understand I went over 15 seconds of inspection which isn't fair to Sameer...

 

[Carrot]

I would just like to point point out to the people who are saying "he wouldn't have one looked it" I had it one looked fairly early in the inspection and the rest of the time was spent double checking. So had I heard "go" I would have started when told. But I was never told so I thought I had time.

I personally don't feel like I can be blamed for something I didn't do. I can't be keeping track of my inspection time when I'm A) under a crap load of pressure, 2) trying to track pieces and 3) already stressed out from trying to run a competition.
With that being said though, I also understand I went over 15 seconds of inspection which isn't fair to Sameer...

you should do a rock, paper,scissors game with Sameer, whoever wins a best of 5 match gets the WR for 2x2x2

 

[Noahaha]

I feel like most people are only saying it should count because they like Chris and are glad to see him set a WR.

I find this extremely offensive. I'm sure subsequent posts have made it clear to you why it would be unfair either to leave it as is or to penalize Chris, but blatantly saying that most people arguing against you are not arguing objectively is very rude regardless.

My opinion is that it is more unfair to penalize Chris than to leave the solve with 16 second inspection, but it is in the hands of the WCA board now.

I wonder if there's some way he could have an extra attempt at a future comp. that would be entirely unprecedented though.

 

[RicardoRix]

Rules are made to ensure that no competitor gains an unfair advantage over another. I think it's fairly safe to say that both, the competitor actually trying to gain an advantage by purposely going over the inspection time (it wasn't chris but the judge), and also actually gaining an advantage by going over the inspection time did not occur (double checking thinking).
Therefore, the record should stand, if you trust common sense.

 

[Sebastien]

Awesome scrambles, especially the last one.

Nice alternative for the 4th one:

Inspection: z y
Layer: U2 R U R'
CLL: R U R' U R U R' F R' F' R

with cancelations: z y U2 R U2 R' U R U R' F R' F' R

 

[Kirjava]

I personally don't feel like I can be blamed for something I didn't do

No one is blaming you.

Unfortunately people other than the competitor can be at fault for solves to be disqualified.

8f) If WCA Regulations are not correctly observed during a competition, the WCA Board may disqualify affected attempts.

I know that this whole thing really really sucks and wish this was the new WR, but I cannot personally consider it as so.

 

[Noahaha]

No one is blaming you.

Unfortunately people other than the competitor can be at fault for solves to be disqualified.

8f) If WCA Regulations are not correctly observed during a competition, the WCA Board may disqualify affected attempts.

I know that this whole thing really really sucks and wish this was the new WR, but I cannot personally consider it as so.

I agree that according to the regulations the attempt could definitely be given a +2 or DNF, but there is one that might be hopeful for Chris:

11d) If the WCA Regulations are not fully clear or if the incident is not covered by the WCA Regulations, then the WCA Delegate must make his decision based on fair sportsmanship.


I think that the regulations are not clear about what happens if an incident (and this is certainly an incident by 11a1) occurs but goes unnoticed. There seems to be some sort of wiggle room in the realm of fair sportsmanship. It's possible that a new procedure could be followed for the solve, such as giving him another attempt at a future competition.

It's a very slim hope though.

 

[Kirjava]

I think that the regulations are not clear about what happens if an incident (and this is certainly an incident by 11a1) occurs but goes unnoticed.

Of course they are clear, there is even precedent (mentioned in this very thread).

 

[conn9]

If he went over 15 seconds inspection, regardless of if it wasn't his fault, he should be given a +2/DNF. It's an unfair advantage, even though he probably would have got roughly the same time with <15s inspection. I think we need to hear from the judge/delegate about the exact timing. I'm not the WCA though. Their opinion should be more informed and thought out than mine.

 

[Noahaha]

Of course they are clear, there is even precedent (mentioned in this very thread).

Ok yeah... the regulations are more clear than I thought, but they still don't say the solve must be penalized.

And I don't think Cameron's solve counts as precedent for this situation, since that was a situation where the solve would have been DNFed had it been caught at the competition. In this case Chris would have been given another attempt.


Just to be clear, I think it would be a perfectly reasonable decision to give that solve a +2 or DNF, but I don't think that that's fair to the competitor, and so I am trying to make a case based on the regulations that are there, even if they don't fully back up such a course of action. I am probably letting my idea of what's fair get in the way of a completely objective interpretation of the regulations.

 

[amostay2004]

Ok yeah... the regulations are more clear than I thought, but they still don't say the solve must be penalized.

And I don't think Cameron's solve counts as precedent for this situation, since that was a situation where the solve would have been DNFed had it been caught at the competition. In this case Chris would have been given another attempt.


Just to be clear, I think it would be a perfectly reasonable decision to give that solve a +2 or DNF, but I don't think that that's fair to the competitor, and so I am trying to make a case based on the regulations that are there, even if they don't fully back up such a course of action. I am probably letting my idea of what's fair get in the way of a completely objective interpretation of the regulations.

Unfortunately in this case, what's fair for the competitor is not fair for the rest of the world.

 

[Stefan]

18 seconds = DNF not +2

It wasn't even close to 18 seconds. Stop saying that.

Maximum claimable time is about 16.48 seconds (from cube fully covered to hands clearly off the timer).

Minimum claimable time is about 15.86 seconds (from touching the cube to slightly bending hands upwards from the timer).

(using proper frame-by-frame video analysis)

it seems ridiculous to punish Chris when he did nothing wrong.

Runners running with strong tailwind also do nothing wrong. And yet when it's too strong, their record doesn't count.

Rules are made to ensure that no competitor gains an unfair advantage over another. I think it's fairly safe to say that both, the competitor actually trying to gain an advantage by purposely going over the inspection time (it wasn't chris but the judge), and also actually gaining an advantage by going over the inspection time did not occur (double checking thinking).
Therefore, the record should stand, if you trust common sense.

You're a newbie here, you're not supposed to write such good posts.

 

[Mr Cubism]

This would have passed without any notice if it wasn´t recorded.....special case this.

 

[Bunyanderman]

This would be unfair to Chris because, if there was not video evidence there would not be a question about inspection time. If you saw a world record holder inspect for 20+ second you would easily know that he should be penalized. Video evidence is not needed for a world record, therefore the video should not be used as evidence against him. The only evidence against him should be the delegates stop watch, and the stop watch says he was okay. The World Record should stand!

 

[qqwref]

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.

Maybe, maybe not. I know sometimes I will take more inspection than I "need" to make sure what I planned out is correct - I have the extra time, so why not use it? So I don't think we can be sure that if Chris stopped inspection earlier the solve would have been any different.

 

[AustinReed]

This would be unfair to Chris because, if there was not video evidence there would not be a question about inspection time. If you saw a world record holder inspect for 20+ second you would easily know that he should be penalized. Video evidence is not needed for a world record, therefore the video should not be used as evidence against him. The only evidence against him should be the delegates stop watch, and the stop watch says he was okay. The World Record should stand!

If that's the case, give Cameron his WC2011 solve back.

 

[aceofspades98]

I find this extremely offensive. I'm sure subsequent posts have made it clear to you why it would be unfair either to leave it as is or to penalize Chris, but blatantly saying that most people arguing against you are not arguing objectively is very rude regardless.

My opinion is that it is more unfair to penalize Chris than to leave the solve with 16 second inspection, but it is in the hands of the WCA board now.

I wonder if there's some way he could have an extra attempt at a future comp. that would be entirely unprecedented though.

No, I am just saying that there is a natural bias that people can't help. Not that everyone is not looking at this objectively.


Chris stated earlier that he didn't need that extra time and he had already planned out the whole solve.