Exceptions with logos on certain puzzles.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 19792
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 19792

Guest
I recently purchased a Calvin's Square -1. It has two logos. A "Square-1" and a "Calvins Puzzle"

Does this make the puzzle competition illegal or is it an exception..

Do any of you have other thoughts with other puzzles?
 
Sa967St said:
It's not competition legal if it has more than one logo. Sometimes people can get away with it if the scramblers don't notice, but you're not allowed to use a puzzle with two or more logos.
Click to expand...

So this makes the Calvin's square-1 illegal? (I noticed it from your video review)
 
strakerak said:
So this makes the Calvin's square-1 illegal? (I noticed it from your video review)
Click to expand...
No, it just means you can't use it when it has two logos. You can peel them off, although they leave a sticky residue behind that isn't easy to clean off of the equatorial stickers, or you can just entirely resticker one of the R/L faces.
 
Last edited:
It's a stupid regulation but yes, competition illegal.

Logos should be banned on corner/edge pieces, but unless there is a textural change, they should be allowed on centres as much as you want. They give you an advantage on edges/corners (there is a regulation banning them for 3x3+, but it technically helps of 2x2 and Pyra.)

It offers 0 advantage having multiple (on centre pieces) but rules are rules I guess
 
I have 2 logos on pretty much all my square-1s, and have never had anyone give me any problems about them. This is definitely a violation of regulation 3l, though:

3l) A cube puzzle may have a logo, but it must have at most one logo. For the Rubik's Cube or bigger cube puzzles the logo must be placed on one of the centre pieces.
3l1) Colourless engravings (max. 1 per face) are not considered logos.
Click to expand...

With Calvin's Square-1, just peel off one of the clear logo stickers to make the puzzle legit. The colored sticker is separate so you don't need to resticker anything, just clean off the residue like Sarah said.
 
Yep, this is the perfect example of an useless rule that should definitely be changed. Logos on L/R equatorial stickers are of absolutely no help during the solve, you don't even have to look at them at any moment since the F side already tells you in which orientation the middle layer pieces are. And as a matter of fact, I've never seen anybody caring about these lgos during comps.

Yes, it's always possible to replace one single sticker to make your square-1 comp legal. But I would really prefer that the rule become more intelligent.
 
TMOY said:
Yep, this is the perfect example of an useless rule that should definitely be changed.
Click to expand...

No. It's not useless. It for example prevents recognition advantages caused by logos on corners.

TMOY said:
But I would really prefer that the rule become more intelligent.
Click to expand...

More "intelligent" would likely also mean more complicated. Maybe you can somehow cover all possible scenarios, but I think the regulations are long and complicated enough. I welcome a reasonable short simple rule like this.

Btw, it's unclear to me whether/how this rule applies to Square-1. It's only for "cube puzzles", and 4d1-4d3 make it look like Square-1 isn't considered a cube puzzle. If that's the case, neither the "may have a logo" nor the "must have at most one logo" apply. I'd say the explicit permission for cube puzzles implies that such explicit permission is necessary (otherwise that part of the rule would be superfluous) and thus non-cube puzzles are not allowed to have any logos at all.
 
Stefan said:
No. It's not useless. It for example prevents recognition advantages caused by logos on corners.
Click to expand...
I was talking about the "only one logo" part, not about the "only on centers" part.


Stefan said:
More "intelligent" would likely also mean more complicated.
Click to expand...

So what ? sI have already sais(in another thread) that I was against oversimplification. Simpler is always likely to mean more arbitrary.

Stefan said:
Maybe you can somehow cover all possible scenarios, but I think the regulations are long and complicated enough. I welcome a reasonable short simple rule like this.

Btw, it's unclear to me whether/how this rule applies to Square-1.
Click to expand...
The short simple rule you are welcoming is unclear to you ? Well, let's replace it by a long complicated one, it will probably suit you better :p
 
What does it mean by "may have a logo or must have at most one logo" ? Does it mean puzzles without logo are competition illegal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

averageyjfan
Tutorial on everything... except it's completely wrong
Replies
0
Views
459
averageyjfan
averageyjfan
Swagrid
3x3 Subsets Competition except we actually compete
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
9,431
Jorian Meeuse
J
CubesOfTheWorld
CubeCast podcast (circa 2010), first 19 episodes (excepting #5)
Replies
0
Views
449
CubesOfTheWorld
CubesOfTheWorld
J
OLS Subset where all pieces on top layer are oriented correctly (except the f2l pair of course)?
Replies
2
Views
1,007
Brayden_Speedcuber
B
Da Werido
The 3x3 "Example Solve" Game except 1 move per user(Roux Version)
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
8,238
Renslay
Renslay
Back
Top