Official WR average has gone! (10.07)

[amostay2004]

If the 2 times were considered DNFs and the average a DNF, technically he would have gotten last place in the first round and would not have qualified even for the second round. Which means he could not be the winner of Polish Open (would that also mean his 2nd and 3rd round's average should be deleted off WCA's database?)

The WCA rules say "at least one competitor must not proceed to the newt round". They don't say it has to be the one who finished last. So there's no contradiction here, he's officially ranked last in the 1st round but wins the competition anyway.

But 33 people advanced to the second round (including Tomasz), and there were 48 people in the first round (not including Tomasz). So if he was "last" in the first round (he doesn't even appear in the results for the first round), then wouldn't it not make sense that he advanced to the second round?

http://www.worldcubeassociation.org...ults=All+Results&competitionId=PolishOpen2009

Exactly. What reason would he have to be given a free pass to the second round while others 'faster' than him couldn't? Obviously the competition wouldn't have a rule saying 'the fastest 32 and Tomasz will advance to the next round'

 

[TMOY]

Well, he finished first at the competition, not last, and that's why he advanced. The competition rankings and the official rankings don't necessarily match.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

Does no one remember this?

http://worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=PolishOpen2008&allResults=1#sq1

 

[Carrot]

Does no one remember this?

http://worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=PolishOpen2008&allResults=1#sq1

I was thinking about the same xD

but is it just a rule that they have to mess it up at Polish Open causing a WR that is not legit? O__o but enough to win a round :fp

 

[Shadet]

Exactly. What reason would he have to be given a free pass to the second round while others 'faster' than him couldn't? Obviously the competition wouldn't have a rule saying 'the fastest 32 and Tomasz will advance to the next round'

Sorry, but its not funny at all ...:confused:

Imagine Yourself at his place, How would You feel ?

 

[Matthew]

Does no one remember this?

http://worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=PolishOpen2008&allResults=1#sq1

Yes - i wrote about this about 2 hours ago but then I thought.. that this is different case - in G. Prusak case that was not his fault - he've got wrong scramble and he had nothing to say about it until he solve it... But in Tomasz's case.. he could accidentally stop the timer so it could be his fault...

 

[Lucas]

Yeah, in that thread I linked to you, people discuss about the "timer malfunction". Most people agree that .19 and .13 are not timer malfunctions, but the user accidentally stopped the timer like that. So if those times were really .19 and .13 (WCA regulations you can't count on video evidence), then those times would be considered as DNFs and the average wouldn't count.

If the 2 times were considered DNFs and the average a DNF, technically he would have gotten last place in the first round and would not have qualified even for the second round. Which means he could not be the winner of Polish Open (would that also mean his 2nd and 3rd round's average should be deleted off WCA's database?)

Wasn't his sixth attempt (of the seven) one of the timer malfunctions. If it was then with just one DNF in his first 5 results he would have had a legit average (higher than 10.07, of course).

Edit: oh, he lost his single PB, too, which I think was legit.

 

[qqwref]

Yes, MAHTI-ANSSI posted it before in this topic, the average would be 10.80, (DNF), 12.08, 9.77, (8.68) => 10.88. I think this should be the result posted; it is enough to win the first round and get to the second round, so the competition results would not be affected, just the world record itself.

 

[Piotr]

From WCA Regulations:

11b) In case of an incident during an event the main judge of the event must decide about the outcome.
11d) If the WCA regulations are not fully clear or if the incident is not covered by the WCA regulations, then the main judge must make his decision based on fair sportsmanship, after consulting the WCA delegate.
11e) In case of an incident the main judge may award a competitor another attempt, that replaces the attempt for which the incident happened.

According to these rules everything was correct. There were 2 incidents and Tomasz was given 2 extra attempts. It is WCA delegate's decision.
Timer malfunctions.. It was not intentional. Watch the video.
So, where is the problem?? Why Tomasz' avg is removed??

Now, 5 days before WC Tomasz is under pressure..
Nice fair play example :/

 

[amostay2004]

Wasn't his sixth attempt (of the seven) one of the timer malfunctions. If it was then with just one DNF in his first 5 results he would have had a legit average (higher than 10.07, of course).

Edit: oh, he lost his single PB, too, which I think was legit.

Oh yea..that's true. Didn't put much thought into that So he would've had a sub-11 average in the first round anyway...

@Shadet: I wasn't trying to be funny, just wanted to state my point.

 

[masterofthebass]

There were 2 incidents and Tomasz was given 2 extra attempts. It is WCA delegate's decision.
Timer malfunctions.. It was not intentional. Watch the video.
So, where is the problem?? Why Tomasz' avg is removed??

Just because something was an accident, doesn't mean it didn't happen. I don't think ANYONE can say it was intentional that he stopped the timer, but it happened, and the rules say that the solve should be disqualified.

 

[Piotr]

The rules say:" In case of an incident the main judge may award a competitor another attempt, that replaces the attempt for which the incident happened"

It was an incident, wasn't it?

Edit:According to rules, the final decision belongs to main judge. So, why WCA is questioning it?

 

[qqwref]

I think the WCA board has the power to overrule anything that happened at a competition if they think it is necessary.

I am not really sure what I think about this situation... on one hand the main judge thought it was appropriate to not count the timer malfunctions, but on the other hand at some competitions that would always count as a DNF so it might not be fair to let Tomasz slide.

 

[Piotr]

I think the WCA board has the power to overrule anything that happened at a competition if they think it is necessary.

I am not really sure what I think about this situation... on one hand the main judge thought it was appropriate to not count the timer malfunctions, but on the other hand at some competitions that would always count as a DNF so it might not be fair to let Tomasz slide.

That's what I mean. It is judge's and WCA delegate's decision. They decide if it is fair, or not. In this case, they decided it was fair to give him additional attempts. They were at place, near the situation. WCA's decision is based on a short video and people's comments..

 

[AvGalen]

Ron said this is still under investigation. I am almost certain that the WCA has contacted Tomasz about this and that he is involved in the discussion.

I hope this gets resolved quickly.

Some more things:
* Please don't compare this with the Square-1 WR. That was a mistake by the scrambler that was deemed a DNF afterwards on request of the solver.
* Nobody is saying Tomasz did this on purpose.
* I don't think there should be a discussion ïf Tomasz won the competition. He was given extra attempts by the judge, advanced and won. The discussion should be solely about the WR

I wish Tomasz and the WCA the best of luck and wisdom in this decission. I will see you all at Worlds

 

[Mr Cubism]

I hope he will keep the 10.07-record. All this talk about it will be an alarm bell for everybody now.......

 

[gpt_kibutz]

I think the WCA board has the power to overrule anything that happened at a competition if they think it is necessary.

I am not really sure what I think about this situation... on one hand the main judge thought it was appropriate to not count the timer malfunctions, but on the other hand at some competitions that would always count as a DNF so it might not be fair to let Tomasz slide.

That's what I mean. It is judge's and WCA delegate's decision. They decide if it is fair, or not. In this case, they decided it was fair to give him additional attempts. They were at place, near the situation. WCA's decision is based on a short video and people's comments..

I absolutely agree. If the main judge decided to give him an extra attempt,
then the main judge should be in some way sanctioned (in the case that there was no timer malfunction). I think that the whole problem of it was that Tomasz broke the WR. If his avg would have been sub 11 nobody would have argued.

 

[riffz]

I think another issue might be that if they let too many accidents slide, someone might get the idea to "accidentally" start the timer improperly on a scramble with a difficult cross, and receive a new scramble as a result.

 

[Tim Major]

I pointed this out an a few minutes before you posted this thread.

Congratulations!

Thanks, glad to get the recognition I desire.

 

[Faz]

I pointed this out an a few minutes before you posted this thread.

Congratulations!

Thanks, glad to get the recognition I desire.

lol.

Regarding the issue, I think that the WCA regulations are not clear enough, and will be more specific once this is all sorted.

It is a shame that this happened right before worlds, and puts alot of pressure on Tomasz.