JustinTimeCuber
Member
Sure, but it would help a lot if organizers clarified such things to judges.Isn't it your responsibility to tell the judge?
Sure, but it would help a lot if organizers clarified such things to judges.Isn't it your responsibility to tell the judge?
What difference would it make? As a judge you're not supposed to time the attempt with a stopwatch unless told otherwise.Sure, but it would help a lot if organizers clarified such things to judges.
Did they add that as a regulation or guideline, because I didn't see something like that.What difference would it make? As a judge you're not supposed to time the attempt with a stopwatch unless told otherwise.
Didn't something happen to Chris when he got the 2x2 WR avg a long time ago?I got told "DNF" as my first callout... (I must say, I felt REAL in the zone because I hadn't gotten my 8s call yet, and I'd planned things pretty well.) "Uh... Delegate!"
The problem there was that the judge gave no call outs at all and Chris ended up getting almost 18 seconds of inspection time with no penalty. I remember the WCA made a very specific ruling on that case.Didn't something happen to Chris when he got the 2x2 WR avg a long time ago?
The other thing to mention is that the judge was the delegate for the competition. Iirc, the ruling was that the solve remain since it was not Chris' fault that he over-inspected.The problem there was that the judge gave no call outs at all and Chris ended up getting almost 18 seconds of inspection time with no penalty. I remember the WCA made a very specific ruling on that case.
I think this just goes to show that it doesn't matter how experienced the judge is, everyone is liable to make a mistake every so often. I think the most important thing to take away from this thread is to just know your rights as a competitor, be aware of the situation when you compete, and know when you are eligible to ask for extra solves.The other thing to mention is that the judge was the delegate for the competition. Iirc, the ruling was that the solve remain since it was not Chris' fault that he over-inspected.
One was an uncleared stackmat, that I just cleared, but the judge distracted me about it, and tried to get me to stop... so I did, and called for the delegate. (I am not sure what the right ruling is, given that I was within my inspection still.)
The other... I solve using ZZ. I will use ALL my time, so I wait for the 12s mark to put the cube down and start. I got told "DNF" as my first callout... (I must say, I felt REAL in the zone because I hadn't gotten my 8s call yet, and I'd planned things pretty well.) "Uh... Delegate!"
Maybe I was unlucky. But I will say, I was annoyed, and I think with good reason. If you're going to judge... please get the procedures right. We can call over a delegate on the finer points... But really, the issues I hit were just fundamental issues.
The big thing I'd say... "Please have them PRACTICE judging solves." They need to get the basic drill right. If you have to call a delegate over on an edgey rules call... that's fine with me! But the types of errors I saw, were not the type I'd expect. Keep in mind this is my initial impression of the WCA.
My first comp a judge gave me a +2 on a solve for not starting the timer with my fingertips, even though I did. I did the math, and if he hadn't given me that +2, i would have made the second round of 3x3.
Then don't sign until it's fixed... half the problems with judges are competitors I swear...My first comp a judge gave me a +2 on a solve for not starting the timer with my fingertips, even though I did. I did the math, and if he hadn't given me that +2, i would have made the second round of 3x3.
This was the right resolution to this case. The judge should have let you be after you reset the timer, but it is indeed the judge's responsibility to reset that timer, so I can see even a new, well-trained judge potentially thinking that they screwed up and that the attempt needs to start over. However, the regulations are quite clear that the competitor may reset the timer and continue as normal.
That second case you describe is wholly unacceptable, however. At all competitions I do, I try to have a general judge training session at the beginning of the competition where new judges watch the whole process on a practice solve. Any judges I train later, I do my best to watch them judge their first solve and properly resolve any issues that come up. I agree that learning through experience is obviously the best way to learn how to judge, and maybe in the future, I will have new judges in my early day tutorial pair up and judge practice solves on each other.
Yeah I think a rule sheet could help! One in going to has a practice comp/meeting the day before. <--- I think that's a really good ideaI did my first comp today, stayed 4 hours, had an awesome time. It wouldn't have been half as fun if I hadn't run for the first 3x3 heat (I competed in second) and judged for the remaining heats and most of 6x6. I had the time of my life and can't wait to do it again, witnessed a 6.12, gave a +2 and a couple of DNFs. I admit I made a couple of mistakes (called 8 at 9 once and misnotated that +2, but they said it was cool) but it was really fun (and the 10 year old across from me was equally good at it and had a good time). We're all human and rely on others when we make mistakes. I agree that maybe a rule sheet next to each station could have helped, maybe making that mandatory for comps that rely heavily on volunteer judges?
Yeah I think a rule sheet could help! One in going to has a practice comp/meeting the day before. <--- I think that's a really good idea