[WCA Regulations 2014] DNF for 1/2 multi BLD

[Lucas Garron]

According to Delegate consensus, the WRC is planning to change multi BLD score calculation such that 1/2 will be considered DNF.

Scores of 0 with at least two solved cubes will remain the same, and past results will remain valid. The exact planned change is here.

This is intended to discourage competitors from entering multi BLD if they do not actually intend (or expect) to solve *multiple* cubes.
For example, it prevents a competitor from attempting only 1 of 2 cubes in order to try to get podium for multi BLD (in the hopes that enough "serious" competitors DNF) -- which has the potential to waste valuable competition time.

This choice will probably not change, but I'm making this post in case anyone would like input before it is added to the changes for 2014.

 

[Goosly]

I don't see how it would waste competition time, since the limit when attempting 2 cubes is only 20 minutes (assuming all competitors start at the same time, which was always the case when I competed in multi).

Probably not a bad change though.

 

[cubizh]

If it has retroactive effects, I can understand and fully agree with this decision. If not, it's going to be and feel really weird.

 

[BillyRain]

Thank you! Been waiting for this for a long time. If you did not solve MULTIPLE cubes, it should not be possible for you to podium the event. Simples.

100% Agreed

 

[qqwref]

Are there really so many people doing 2 cubes and deliberately not solving one of them? What about all the people who legitimately want to try 2 cubes and don't have the skill to get them both? They just can't do the event now unless they get both cubes?

 

[bobthegiraffemonkey]

Are there really so many people doing 2 cubes and deliberately not solving one of them? What about all the people who legitimately want to try 2 cubes and don't have the skill to get them both? They just can't do the event now unless they get both cubes?

If they are capable of doing 2 cubes they can try 2 cubes, but like all BLD events they might get a DNF. I don't see how this is a problem.

I had never considered this issue before, but now that it's been brought to my attention it think the change makes sense.

 

[qqwref]

My point is just that it will have a bigger effect of pushing the least skillful people out of the event than of actually preventing "cheating" / saving time. It's kind of arbitrary anyway - I would prefer to simply choose that 0 points is always DNF.

 

[DrKorbin]

My point is just that it will have a bigger effect of pushing the least skillful people out of the event than of actually preventing "cheating" / saving time.

Example: I'm the least skillful person in 7x7, and 10 minutes limit pushes me away. But if an organizer will do 15 minutes limit, 7x7 event will consume much more time.

 

[EMI]

Good choice. Also, I hate having 1/2 as my official PB although I have already achieved 3/6 (still noob I know^^). Maybe there should be a rule that if the achieved points of two results are the same, the number of solved cubes decides which attempt is better, instead of time. This might have been suggested before, I don't know.

 

[Bunyanderman]

Are there really so many people doing 2 cubes and deliberately not solving one of them? What about all the people who legitimately want to try 2 cubes and don't have the skill to get them both? They just can't do the event now unless they get both cubes?

I agree with you, why don't you exclude 1/2 from any podium but still count as 0 points.?

 

[qqwref]

Example: I'm the least skillful person in 7x7, and 10 minutes limit pushes me away. But if an organizer will do 15 minutes limit, 7x7 event will consume much more time.

A lot of people get 1/2, though. This would be more like setting a 2 minute time limit on 3x3x3.

 

[porkynator]

I personally don't care about this, but I think there are many reasons against this decision:
-Will this really save time? It depends on the competition, but I don't think it's worth the change.
-I'd rather see a 1/2 getting 3rd in a comp than a 2 people podium. It happens quite often (judging by the few competitions I went to) to have a 0-points result getting 3rd.
-I've never seen people trying only one cube to get 1/2 multi as a problem; possible comparison: someone who knows he is very slow at, let's say, rubik's clock (or he doesn't even know how to solve it) but wants to have an official result in his wca profile, so he solves it once and DNS all other four solves. Should we prevent him from doing this? (I know the metaphor is not flawless).
-As qqwref already said, there are people 'honestly' getting 1/2, giving them DNF might seem unfair in some ways, since it has always been a valid result.

I know some if the reasons listed above (maybe all of them) are weak, but I think they should be considered. All in all, I don't see any really good reason in favour of modifying the rule either (but give some real data about how much time is wasted at competitions because of people trying to get 1/2 on purpose and I will change my mind).

 

[ryanj92]

I think we should just be done with it and say that 0 points in general is DNF. Just means you have to solve -at least- half your cubes correctly, which doesn't seem like too harsh a condition to get a result

If we're going to be 'harsh' on one group of people, I don't see why this can't be expanded out (2/4,3/6, etc. , results that not only get you 0 points already but generally are already ranked lower than 1/2 scores)

 

[Stefan]

getting 1/2, giving them DNF might seem unfair

Getting 1/2, you literally did not finish multiple cubes.

You're focusing too much on the "saving time" aspect. The main issue is that it's simply wrong to declare a single solved cube a multi success.

If we're going to be 'harsh' on one group of people, I don't see why this can't be expanded out (2/4,3/6, etc. , results that not only get you 0 points already but generally are already ranked lower than 1/2 scores)

These cases are entirely different, as multiple cubes were solved.

 

[ryanj92]

Getting 1/2, you literally did not finish multiple cubes.

You're focusing too much on the "saving time" aspect. The main issue is that it's simply wrong to declare a single solved cube a multi success.

These cases are entirely different, as multiple cubes were solved.

Yeah, obviously, and 1/2 'successes' have irked me for a long time, but the way multiBLD is scored at the moment pays no consideration to the absolute number of cubes that are solved...

As an aside, why can't we make 3 the minmum number of cube you can attempt? That way, no exceptions are required, as 2/3 is already a valid result.

 

[porkynator]

You're focusing too much on the "saving time" aspect. The main issue is that it's simply wrong to declare a single solved cube a multi success.

Probably I don't consider it "wrong" because, for me, the definition of "multiple blindfolded" comes directly from the WCA regulations. Changing the regulations isn't something I would do if not strictly necessary or if it weren't the easiest way to solve a problem; a real problem, not philosophical one.
One rule I apply to many things is "if it works, don't change it". (For example, I don't update my operating system if not for security patches/bugfixes).

 

[Stefan]

a real problem, not philosophical one.

People disliking it is a real problem.

 

[Renslay]

As an aside, why can't we make 3 the minmum number of cube you can attempt? That way, no exceptions are required, as 2/3 is already a valid result.

So, 2/2 is not a successed multiple bld then? That would be the real discouraging for begginners to try multi BLD!

 

[MatejMuzatko]

Finally! :-D

 

[ryanj92]

So, 2/2 is not a successed multiple bld then? That would be the real discouraging for begginners to try multi BLD!

I don't see this as particularly radical, when hard and soft cutoffs are regularly used in other events already? I don't see it as discouraging, as someone who does not practise mbld and have only done 2 cube attempts for the fun, I think it would encourage more people to -actually- practice an event that they want to compete in.