One-Answer WCA Competition and Regulations Question Thread

[Cale S]

Would it be comp legal if a competitor bought a stickerless cube, scrambled it, and then stickered it into a solve position?
The solved position would be clear, the stickers, and the stickerless part wouldn't give an advantage to a competitor because it couldn't accurately tell which piece is which.
I did look at the regs and I couldn't exactly tell if it would be legal. I'm leaning more toward illegal, but I want to know for sure.

You can't have stickers and colored plastic

3d) Puzzles must have coloured parts, which define the colour scheme of the puzzle and must be one and only one of the following: coloured stickers, coloured tiles, coloured plastic, or painted/printed colours. All coloured parts of a puzzle must be made of a similar material.

and the solved state is very unclear in this case

 

[guysensei1]

What happens if during a blindfolded event, the competitor holds the cube too closely to his head for the paper to be placed in between? Does he get a DNF for that?

 

[BenBergen]

Another 3bld related question:
How strictly is regulation 3I2, The logo may be embossed, engraved, or consist of an overlay sticker. Exception: The logo must not be distinguishable by feel for blindfolded events (i.e. no embossings, engravings, or overlay stickers), typically enforced in competitions? I have a stickerless YeuXiao that I would like to use for blind at competition next weekend, however it has an overlay sticker of the GuoGuan logo on the white centre piece. While it's not easy to distinguish the piece by the feel of the sticker, it is possible. Do you think this will be allowed, or am I better off just removing the sticker?

 

[DGCubes]

Another 3bld related question:
How strictly is regulation 3I2, The logo may be embossed, engraved, or consist of an overlay sticker. Exception: The logo must not be distinguishable by feel for blindfolded events (i.e. no embossings, engravings, or overlay stickers), typically enforced in competitions? I have a stickerless YeuXiao that I would like to use for blind at competition next weekend, however it has an overlay sticker of the GuoGuan logo on the white centre piece. While it's not easy to distinguish the piece by the feel of the sticker, it is possible. Do you think this will be allowed, or am I better off just removing the sticker?

Oftentimes that regulation goes overlooked, although I've been to a competition where the regulation was enacted after a few people had already done multiblind attempts with logos, and their solves were DNFed. I'd recommend taking off the logo just to be safe.

 

[guysensei1]

Which regulation says that I'm not allowed to twist corners as and when I want? I've tried to look for it under 'puzzle defects' and 'solving' but couldn't find any such regulation.

 

[turtwig]

Which regulation says that I'm not allowed to twist corners as and when I want? I've tried to look for it under 'puzzle defects' and 'solving' but couldn't find any such regulation.

• 5b3c) If the puzzle is unsolvable, and can be made solvable by rotating a single corner piece, the competitor may correct the corner piece by twisting it in place without disassembling the puzzle.

 

[guysensei1]

• 5b3c) If the puzzle is unsolvable, and can be made solvable by rotating a single corner piece, the competitor may correct the corner piece by twisting it in place without disassembling the puzzle.

Says nothing about whether or not I'm allowed to twist corners if the puzzle is solvable.

 

[turtwig]

Says nothing about whether or not I'm allowed to twist corners if the puzzle is solvable.

I guess. And it technically doesn't say you can't flip edges either

 

[guysensei1]

I guess. And it technically doesn't say you can't flip edges either

Yup, but I asked about corner twisting since.. Well, there was that incident

 

[turtwig]

Yup, but I asked about corner twisting since.. Well, there was that incident

I know. I couldn't find anything either so I guess they could put in a rule for valid moves during a solve (basically only scrambling moves can be used for solving)

 

[AlphaSheep]

I thought Article 5 was quite clear. Corner twisting is a defect, so the competitor is deliberately introducing a defect then repairing it in such a way that he gets an advantage.

• 5a) Examples of puzzle defects include: popped parts, pieces twisted in place, and detached screws/caps/stickers.
• 5b) If a puzzle defect occurs during an attempt, the competitor may choose to either repair the defect and continue the attempt, or to stop the attempt.
  • 5b1) If a competitor chooses to repair the puzzle, they must repair only the defective parts. Tools and/or parts of other puzzles must not be used to repair the original puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
  • 5b2) Any repair to a puzzle must not give the competitor any advantage in solving the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).

Also, twisting one corner piece is the most ever needed to fix twisted corners so the regulation 5bc technically allows twisting a single corner.

 

[biscuit]

I thought Article 5 was quite clear. Corner twisting is a defect, so the competitor is deliberately introducing a defect then repairing it in such a way that he gets an advantage.

• 5a) Examples of puzzle defects include: popped parts, pieces twisted in place, and detached screws/caps/stickers.
• 5b) If a puzzle defect occurs during an attempt, the competitor may choose to either repair the defect and continue the attempt, or to stop the attempt.
  • 5b1) If a competitor chooses to repair the puzzle, they must repair only the defective parts. Tools and/or parts of other puzzles must not be used to repair the original puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
  • 5b2) Any repair to a puzzle must not give the competitor any advantage in solving the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).

Also, twisting one corner piece is the most ever needed to fix twisted corners so the regulation 5bc technically allows twisting a single corner.

Well what if I notice that there's a twisted corner, but accidentally twist it in the wrong direction, which ends up giving me a really easy solve, and I have to correct it again?

I think there should be a 5b3 that states something like "A competitor may not intentionally create/cause a defect of the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF)."

 

[Loiloiloi]

Well what if I notice that there's a twisted corner, but accidentally twist it in the wrong direction, which ends up giving me a really easy solve, and I have to correct it again?

I think there should be a 5b3 that states something like "A competitor may not intentionally create/cause a defect of the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF)."

That's what regulation 5b2 is for. You twisting that corner would be a repair that gives you an advantage, and you could be DNFed for it if caught.

 

[biscuit]

That's what regulation 5b2 is for. You twisting that corner would be a repair that gives you an advantage, and you could be DNFed for it if caught.

I'm saying if it was a legitimate mistake. Would I just not be able to fix it? Would it be a DNF because of that simple mistake? If it happened during scrambling, it's not my fault (I don't really have an opinion on the matter. That's super gray area whether that should be allowed or not in my opinion)

 

[guysensei1]

I thought Article 5 was quite clear. Corner twisting is a defect, so the competitor is deliberately introducing a defect then repairing it in such a way that he gets an advantage.

• 5a) Examples of puzzle defects include: popped parts, pieces twisted in place, and detached screws/caps/stickers.
• 5b) If a puzzle defect occurs during an attempt, the competitor may choose to either repair the defect and continue the attempt, or to stop the attempt.
  • 5b1) If a competitor chooses to repair the puzzle, they must repair only the defective parts. Tools and/or parts of other puzzles must not be used to repair the original puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
  • 5b2) Any repair to a puzzle must not give the competitor any advantage in solving the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).

Also, twisting one corner piece is the most ever needed to fix twisted corners so the regulation 5bc technically allows twisting a single corner.

The regs don't say that deliberately introducing a defect is disallowed. Also, what if I intentionally twist one corner, then later on twist another corner so the cube is solvable, without giving me an advantage?

 

[tseitsei]

OR then maybe we could all just use some common sense and stop this stupid debate...

Maybe just practise to get faster instead of trying to find loopholes from regs. Obviously this kind of "intentional corner twisting" is against the spirit of the regs if not directly against the letter of the regs, which is IMO much more important.

Just don't intentionally twist corners unless it's to make the puzzle solvable again...

Really guys. Common sense goes a long way...

 

[biscuit]

OR then maybe we could all just use some common sense and stop this stupid debate...

Maybe just practise to get faster instead of trying to find loopholes from regs. Obviously this kind of "intentional corner twisting" is against the spirit of the regs if not directly against the letter of the regs, which is IMO much more important.

Just don't intentionally twist corners unless it's to make the puzzle solvable again...

Really guys. Common sense goes a long way...

We're not trying to say that it should be allowed, or that we'll use it, but we're finding problems that should be fixed.

 

[Ranzha]

If you twist a corner intentionally, knowing the resulting state will be unsolvable, you deserve a DNF on that attempt at the very least.

During the solve, the competitor must not intentionally perform a repair to a puzzle that has no defect.

 

[JustinTimeCuber]

If you twist a corner intentionally, knowing the resulting state will be unsolvable, you deserve a DNF on that attempt at the very least.

During the solve, the competitor must not intentionally perform a repair to a puzzle that has no defect.

Of course, but they're asking for a specific regulation

 

[Kit Clement]

If any defect is intentionally caused by the competitor, then it seems like no matter what, fixing the corner would have to provide an advantage to the competitor since the defect was caused intentionally in the first place.