[WRC] How to Provide Feedback on the draft of the new Regulations

[bobthegiraffemonkey]

They should not have been allowed in the first place. They were accidentally allowed because somebody thought that they did not violate our regulations, but they do. The way the regs are written, those cubes have ALWAYS been a violation. This change is a long time coming.

What about the fact that Ron at some point said they were legal for BLD (possibly in hindsight of the rules being misinterpreted before, but the reason is irrelevant) surely that affects their previous status even if the regs hadn't been updated? It seems absurd to me that these cubes can be used to set WRs, then become banned. And what about people who buy a stickerless cube thinking that they can use it, only to later be told that they wasted their money, doesn't that seem unfair?

 

[Stefan]

The one that allows competitors to do 2 practice solves.

Uh... are you seriously complaining about "add a regulation that makes the event EVEN LONGER!" when it's a change from

"The competitor may do practice solves on the competition timer."
to
"The competitor may do at most two practise solves on the competition timer."?

That looks like making the event *shorter*, not longer. From unlimited practice to at most two times. No?

I have not been allowing more than one since like 2009.

Then you clearly violated the regulations. Unless I'm missing that it's specified elsewhere that you're allowed to overrule "The competitor may do practice solves".

 

[DrKorbin]

You'd violate

4a) A scrambler must apply the scramble sequences.

Then I will do
<some random moves> <the scramble provided> <some random moves>

 

[Stefan]

Then I will do
<some random moves> <the scramble provided> <some random moves>

You forget
4e) Competitors must solve the same scramble sequences or scrambled positions per group of competitors.

Could you do me a favor and just finally suggest that the regulations/guidelines should clarify the checking of the scrambles like I want you to?

 

[DrKorbin]

You forget
4e) Competitors must solve the same scramble sequences or scrambled positions per group of competitors.

I didn't forget that. Yes, if a scrambler scrambles wrong, competitors won't have the same scrambles, but whose fault is it?
(Oh no, regs say "competitors must", so it is their fault, lol).

Could you do me a favor and just finally suggest that the regulations/guidelines should clarify the checking of the scrambles like I want you to?

Suggestion: the regulations should clarify that the checking of the scrambles is scrambler's/judge's/some special man's duty.

 

[Stefan]

I didn't forget that. Yes, if a scrambler scrambles wrong, competitors won't have the same scrambles, but whose fault is it?
(Oh no, regs say "competitors must", so it is their fault, lol).

If you're intentionally causing it not to be the case (like with your intentional extra scrambling), you're clearly knowingly/actively violating the regulations. Completely different from a scrambler making an innocent mistake and not noticing.

 

[Sebastien]

So we can't use paper for BLD?

Did you know that not all paper on earth is used to procude score cards?

Then you clearly violated the regulations. Unless I'm missing that it's specified elsewhere that you're allowed to overrule "The competitor may do practice solves".

This. Furthermore a competitor has to be ready within a minute. So if a competitor refuses to start after a minute you can just DNF his next solve (A3b1).

 

[Stefan]

Furthermore a competitor has to be ready within a minute. So if a competitor refuses to start after a minute you can just DNF his next solve (A3b1).

With the planned new regulations, yes. Not with the current ones.

 

[Sebastien]

I know.

I was actually mainly refering to this:

If I go up for my 3x3 solve, can I tell the judge to wait so that I can do two practice solves first?

 

[jazzthief81]

Yes. Perhaps we clarify that we should only allow a +2 in the case where a clock fell over unintentionally. Anyone object to that?
Does anyone have any good examples of clocks falling over or competitors changing pins by accident?

I don't like it. It's making the rule more complicated for the sole purpose of allowing competitors to be sloppy when starting their solves.

The only time I've ever seen a clock fall over unintentionally was that time I judged Robert Yau at N8W8 Summer 2012 and it was clear he was rushing things. If he would have kept it steady, this would not have happened. It was just carelessness more than anything else.