• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations Question Thread

Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
2,985
Location
Webster Groves, MO
WCA
2013BARK01
oh and we all know how people can easily forge convincing video evidence of a solve in 2 hours, so we definitely shouldn't allow for competitors to use video evidence to prove their times to be a certain way during the competition...
 

mark49152

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
4,693
Location
UK
WCA
2015RIVE05
YouTube
mark49152
oh and we all know how people can easily forge convincing video evidence of a solve in 2 hours, so we definitely shouldn't allow for competitors to use video evidence to prove their times to be a certain way during the competition...
The regs say that incidents not covered by the regs should be resolved by the delegate using discretion and fair sportsmanship. Video evidence can be used. What exactly is it that you want to change in the regs? There's no need to have explicit clauses for every eventuality.

It's about practicality too. If you're asking a delegate to spend the time to watch a video two years later and satisfy themselves as to exactly which result that video corresponds to, then update the database etc., is that reasonable to correct a 0.05 second error? How many such requests would they get? Should they be obligated to do this for everyone who asks?
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
2,985
Location
Webster Groves, MO
WCA
2013BARK01
I was joking about correcting the 0.05 second error but if it's a 5 second error and like 2 days after the competition it seems way less unreasonable.
We can all just know that my 3.99 is wrong :3
 

Ranzha

Friendly, Neighbourhoodly
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
2,551
Location
Reno, Nevada, United States
WCA
2009HARN01
YouTube
RanzhaTheLoneVlogger
The competitor doesn't write, they read. If they can't read a 4 on the score card, how do they know it's a 4 they see on the timer? If they are genuinely unable to validate that their time has been recorded correctly, for example because of visual impairment, they could ask someone they trust to check it for them.
I was referring to the judge, since that's what I thought you were referring to. I misunderstood.
 

cubizh

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
602
Location
Portugal
WCA
2014GOME07
YouTube
cubizh
My suggested policy would just be that what's signed on the scorecard is the official result unless a) it is obviously off in the benefit of the competitor, e.g. my previous example about a 9.98 becoming a 4.98, or if a digit seems mostly like a better thing (i.e. a 2) but is slightly ambiguous, it must be initially changed to a 7 but then allow competitors to request for such times to be fixed.
If this happens during the competition, and the confusion made in the scorecard time is understandable (it's one thing to have doubts on if it's a 1 or a 7 vs. is it a 3 or a W - deliberate or blatant poorly written mistakes are dealt differently).
The most appropriate course of action is follow the proper regulation/guideline that pertains to this topic, and have the score taker identify the judge and ask him to clarify the caligraphy, as per guideline A7c+). Please note that this process is not supposed to be done by showing the scorecard and asking what's the time written there, to avoid bias. There are other ways to clarify the situation.
If the judge can't be immediately identified, you can treat it as an incident, by 11a1) and therefore should apply 11b). The video evidence can be used by 11f), but not as the single source of proof for the result, as just a video in itself is not conclusive, but as a complement to other information that can be gathered, like identifying the judge.
This process is not always black and white, and sometimes it's not possible to prove what happened, particularly when you can't identify the judge or they can't be found anymore. It's easy to see how important it is to properly sign the scorecard and make sure the time corresponds and they are readable numbers and signatures that are identifiable. Delegates always try to use fair judgement, common sense and most of all register what really happened, but unfortunately I'm sure there are situations where there's no way to do it in practice beyond any doubt. In these cases, or in cases where you can't obtain any evidence of the matter and sort it out, the default way to deal with the situation is the first part of A7c+).
If judges can't seem to write proper digits, there is a standard way to write the digits, widely accepted and verified:
DS-Digital0.jpg

On a related topic, I'd like to note that video evidence is not always acceptable to verify times, particularly the case where the competitor hits the reset button after solving. Since the olympics were not long ago, hitting the reset button before the judge writes down the time is like an athlete stepping out of the circle in discus throw. It doesn't matter where it landed and how far, if you step out it's DNF, regardless of video evidence or measurements taken.
 

cubizh

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
602
Location
Portugal
WCA
2014GOME07
YouTube
cubizh
I would like to thank you for reading my post in its entirety.
The bulk of the post was to address the course of action that is taken when a score taker finds an ambiguous value written by a judge on a scorecard, during the process of inputting the results.
I believe the only part of my post that pertains DNFs starts with "On a related topic", on a paragraph of its own, which should represent that I am addressing another topic, different in nature. In this case, with the goal to add some more information regarding the usage of video evidence in other common incidents that happen in competitions, for more new or inexperienced people reading this thread.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
A1c) A competitor participating in an event must be able to fulfil the event's requirements (e.g. know how to solve the puzzle). A competitor must not compete with expectation of a DNF result or an intentionally poor result. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF) or disqualification from the event (see Regulation 2j), at the discretion of the WCA Delegate.
I'm going to a competition this weekend where the time limit for megaminx is 3:00. I'm registered for megaminx, but my pb single is 5:57. I have virtually no chance of actually completing an attempt. Does this rule mean that I should withdraw from megaminx?
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
817
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
sqAree
I'm going to a competition this weekend where the time limit for megaminx is 3:00. I'm registered for megaminx, but my pb single is 5:57. I have virtually no chance of actually completing an attempt. Does this rule mean that I should withdraw from megaminx?
I was in the same situation for 5x5 a few times and I always competed nevertheless. The worst that could happen is that you get a DNF anyway after not meeting the time limit.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
2,985
Location
Webster Groves, MO
WCA
2013BARK01
I'm going to a competition this weekend where the time limit for megaminx is 3:00. I'm registered for megaminx, but my pb single is 5:57. I have virtually no chance of actually completing an attempt. Does this rule mean that I should withdraw from megaminx?
A1c+) CLARIFICATION WCA Delegates should only use their discretion to prevent competitors from being a severe detriment to the competition (e.g. wasting time and/or competition resources). Competitors should not be disqualified for a "poor" result when they are competing to the best of their abilities.
 
Top