Goosly
Veteran
^ Seems like there's just a local difference in the way judging works. Maybe there's also a difference in the number of competitors.
Judging Discussion Thread [before: Judges' behavior at WCA competitions]
- Thread starter coinman
- Start date
Ranzha
Friendly, Neighbourhoodly
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,551
- Location
- Reno, Nevada, United States
- WCA ID
- 2009HARN01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
As far as the BLD same scramble thing goes, I've gotten a repeat scramble once. I noticed it after a bit, and I told the judge (maybe Vincent?) I thought I'd gotten that scramble before. Leaving the timer running, to make sure that if I was wrong my attempt was still valid, the judge validated that the scramble was a repeat, and I got the legit second scramble on a new attempt.
I don't see what's all too difficult about this process =x
Also, @Eric Müller: In regard to punishing judges, it's not as if judges are WCA-appointed. Actually, the WCA Regulations clearly state that every competitor must be available for scrambling/judging. Have you ever done so?
I don't see what's all too difficult about this process =x
Also, @Eric Müller: In regard to punishing judges, it's not as if judges are WCA-appointed. Actually, the WCA Regulations clearly state that every competitor must be available for scrambling/judging. Have you ever done so?
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 11,924
- Location
- Indianapolis
- WCA ID
- 2007HUGH01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
I am sorry about what happened at Indiana 2012; I was not aware of the incident until Chris mentioned it here on the forum. We are currently going through our data from the competition trying to make sure we know all the facts about the situation, and we will report our findings to the WCA board.
I would like to point out that even this excellent judging tutorial says absolutely nothing about what to do if a competitor receives a duplicate scramble. The only applicable rules there would be #1 (be familiar with the WCA regulations, which kind of defeats the idea of a short list of instructions anyway), and #15 (when in doubt, ask the main judge or WCA delegate - again, here you have to know enough to know that you're in doubt). I think we who have competed in many competitions often forget how complicated judging actually is. It's not as simple as one might think - it only seems that way after you've had the experience of doing it for a while. I totally agree that we should do anything we can do in the future to improve judging, but I also think we should be somewhat understanding when people make mistakes.
The one thing I can think of that would have truly helped in this situation (and which I intend to do at all future competitions where I am involved in running the competition) is that before any judge begins judging at any competition, we should ALWAYS tell them that if they ever get in a situation where they are even the slightest bit unsure of what to do, or if they EVER have a situation where a competitor is asking them to do something that they think might not be correct, they MUST find a delegate or organizer and discuss it before making a decision. It would probably be best to have both a judge's tutorial (like the one above) and this rule clearly read to each judge. But the rule I give here is probably actually more important than even the judge's tutorial.
I would like to point out that even this excellent judging tutorial says absolutely nothing about what to do if a competitor receives a duplicate scramble. The only applicable rules there would be #1 (be familiar with the WCA regulations, which kind of defeats the idea of a short list of instructions anyway), and #15 (when in doubt, ask the main judge or WCA delegate - again, here you have to know enough to know that you're in doubt). I think we who have competed in many competitions often forget how complicated judging actually is. It's not as simple as one might think - it only seems that way after you've had the experience of doing it for a while. I totally agree that we should do anything we can do in the future to improve judging, but I also think we should be somewhat understanding when people make mistakes.
The one thing I can think of that would have truly helped in this situation (and which I intend to do at all future competitions where I am involved in running the competition) is that before any judge begins judging at any competition, we should ALWAYS tell them that if they ever get in a situation where they are even the slightest bit unsure of what to do, or if they EVER have a situation where a competitor is asking them to do something that they think might not be correct, they MUST find a delegate or organizer and discuss it before making a decision. It would probably be best to have both a judge's tutorial (like the one above) and this rule clearly read to each judge. But the rule I give here is probably actually more important than even the judge's tutorial.
nickvu2
Veteran
Maybe in addition to a judge's tutorial, each judging station should have a little job aid taped to the table. Just a checklist of what to do or look for during each solve.
That's just off the top of my head so I may have missed something...and I'm sure it could be worded better. The list would just serve as a reminder. Simply having the list doesn't mean you've been trained.
- don't let competitor see cube
- reset timer
- inspection time?
If yes, reveal cube when they say they are ready, time 15 sec (announce 8s and 12s).
If no, they may begin when you both are ready. - ensure cube is solved
- record time, DNF, or DNS
- give card and cube back to runner
- if there is EVER ANY confusion, you MUST ask the head judge.
That's just off the top of my head so I may have missed something...and I'm sure it could be worded better. The list would just serve as a reminder. Simply having the list doesn't mean you've been trained.
shelley
chang
You can distill judging procedures down all you want. You still run into the problem regarding the judge's assessment of what is considered "confusion".
At a recent competition, someone was judging a 4 year old competitor. When it was evident that the 4 year old didn't know the proper starting procedure, rather than try to explain it to her, the judge started the timer for her after she had picked up the cube.
At another competition, a judge tried to call a competitor up for his solve. When the competitor didn't show up, the judge wrote DNS for that solve and returned the (still scrambled and covered) cube to the scrambling table.
In neither of these incidents did the judge think to notify the delegate before or after taking action. The judge wasn't a non-cuber family member either, which goes to show that just being a cuber isn't enough to qualify you to be a good judge.
It's easy enough to say "oh, just enforce regulation 1e2", but many competitors are first timers or young children who barely know the competing procedures, much less how to judge, and the incidents outlined above go to show that competitions have gotten big enough that organizers can't just pull competitors indiscriminately and be able to trust their judgment. If you as a competitor consider yourself an experienced judge, actually go up to volunteer. Don't just wait for the organizer (who probably is already juggling too many tasks) to enlist you.
At a recent competition, someone was judging a 4 year old competitor. When it was evident that the 4 year old didn't know the proper starting procedure, rather than try to explain it to her, the judge started the timer for her after she had picked up the cube.
At another competition, a judge tried to call a competitor up for his solve. When the competitor didn't show up, the judge wrote DNS for that solve and returned the (still scrambled and covered) cube to the scrambling table.
In neither of these incidents did the judge think to notify the delegate before or after taking action. The judge wasn't a non-cuber family member either, which goes to show that just being a cuber isn't enough to qualify you to be a good judge.
It's easy enough to say "oh, just enforce regulation 1e2", but many competitors are first timers or young children who barely know the competing procedures, much less how to judge, and the incidents outlined above go to show that competitions have gotten big enough that organizers can't just pull competitors indiscriminately and be able to trust their judgment. If you as a competitor consider yourself an experienced judge, actually go up to volunteer. Don't just wait for the organizer (who probably is already juggling too many tasks) to enlist you.
Last edited:
Similar threads
