[WR] Yiheng Wang 0.93 2x2 average

[Discomantis]

If he appealed to a judge then the solve was not an attempt. He solved it for rescrambling and started the timer for fun.

Edit: I want to clarify that in my opinion the WR should not count. But we all saw the score sheet thus we have a contradiction and Yiheng did not appeal for an extra

Yiheng should know better and should not have started the timer. At the very least, he should have called over a delegate immediately to appeal, and should not have timed the solve. Doing so is a very easy way to cheat.

Also, on what you said about the score sheet, I would not consider that definite proof that he did not appeal. There is a possibility that the judge wrote down the time even though he appealed durign inspection. What it does show however is that he did time the solve on that scramble, which is something that he should not have done.

Regulation 11e says: "The competitor should appeal verbally or in writing to the judge and WCA Delegate at the time of the incident, before finishing the original attempt, to be eligible for an extra attempt."

He continued the attempt by starting the timer. That violates 11e.

However, you could also take the interpretation that, since he didn't sign for the attempt, he technically didn't finish the attempt, thus warrenting an extra attempt.

Regulation A7c says: "The competitor must check the recorded result, and sign (or initial) the score sheet to acknowledge that the result is correct, complete, properly formatted, and clearly readable. This finishes the attempt."

Regardless of which you think is correct, what Yiheng did was unfair and he should not have been given an extra attempt. This shows a flaw in the regulations at best.

 

[NigelTheCuber]

my opinion here might be a bit biased to zayn, but i think this should not count. by asking for an extra after doing his fifth solve, he was basically giving himself two chances at getting wr. besides, he had already appealed that he was not ready, which means that he should not go ahead and do the fifth solve anyway. basically what yiheng is doing here is milking the regulations by using it to gain a second attempt at wr, maybe after seeing that the first scramble was bad

 

[NigelTheCuber]

New name for this thread : ZAYN Khanani fans get ticked off that Yiheng got the first sub1 avg

youre not funny

 

[AhsanDaCuber125]

youre not funny

That’s like the biggest fact of all time.

 

[Waterfire]

Is there footage of the 5th solve? The orginal, not the extra.

 

[NebraskanSpeedsolver]

Is there footage of the 5th solve? The orginal, not the extra.

Iirc most of the videos that go over it show it.

 

[2x2MasterYT]

Iirc most of the videos that go over it show it.

Link plz

 

[AhsanDaCuber125]

Is there footage of the 5th solve? The orginal, not the extra.

It's more likely it's not shown to hide the shady fact...

 

[Waterfire]

It's more likely it's not shown to hide the shady fact...

I'm not trying to accuse anyone unnecessarily of anything shady. But honestly if we see that footage then we can all stop the back and forth

 

[Tabe]

Will the board or at least a committee review this?

This outcome is the result of the Board reviewing it.

 

[SkewbIsTheBestEvent]

If the regulations allow a competitor to get a second chance at getting a good solve, ultimately getting WR, then the regulations need to change. You should not be able to get free extras...

This is not even about the regulations anymore, it is about the integrity of the WCA and its mission statement.

 

[JDAW6]

I feel like in this situation a loophole has been found in the regs and has been exploited. The conpetitor has done every thing within the rules, if the rules have loopholes then it’s not the competitors job to fix it.

 

[SkewbIsTheBestEvent]

I feel like in this situation a loophole has been found in the regs and has been exploited. The conpetitor has done every thing within the rules, if the rules have loopholes then it’s not the competitors job to fix it.

Thats true, but competitor shouldve respected the rule and the loophole, and instead be honest and not take the extra, because that is basically cheating, even if the regs allow it.

 

[JDAW6]

Thats true, but competitor shouldve respected the rule and the loophole, and instead be honest and not take the extra, because that is basically cheating, even if the regs allow it.

We are the competitor we want the best time we have loopholes for that we shall get the good time. WR is WR.

 

[Discomantis]

We are the competitor we want the best time we have loopholes for that we shall get the good time. WR is WR.

Exploiting loopholes would not be fair to other competitors who compete under fair standards. Just because a loophole is there does NOT mean that it is under fair sportsmanship to exploit it.

Remember, the mission statement of the WCA is to make sure all competitions are held under fair standards. Regardless of if the WCA does that or not, it is our job as competitors to uphold that as well. That means playing fairly, and not exploiting loopholes in the regulations.

It is very clear that the WCA does not want competitors to get 2 attempts. They probably have a reason behind why they gave Yiheng an extra. Remember, they have the ability to conduct investigations to privately gather evidence.

The best thing to do now is to wait for the report to see why the WCA made the decision that they did. There is a high chance that they made their decision based on information that is not known by the public.

 

[JDAW6]

Exploiting loopholes would not be fair to other competitors who compete under fair standards. Just because a loophole is there does NOT mean that it is under fair sportsmanship to exploit it.

Remember, the mission statement of the WCA is to make sure all competitions are held under fair standards. Regardless of if the WCA does that or not, it is our job as competitors to uphold that as well. That means playing fairly, and not exploiting loopholes in the regulations.

It is very clear that the WCA does not want competitors to get 2 attempts. They probably have a reason behind why they gave Yiheng an extra. Remember, they have the ability to conduct investigations to privately gather evidence.

The best thing to do now is to wait for the report to see why the WCA made the decision that they did. There is a high chance that they made their decision based on information that is not known by the public.

Yeah you’re right but I am talking about the side of a competitor that just wants the best time without breaking the regs,.
Also let the mehs pour in

 

[Discomantis]

Yeah you’re right but I am talking about the side of a competitor that just wants the best time without breaking the regs,.
Also let the mehs pour in

No, that’s not what you were talking about earlier. What you were talking about earlier is a competitor exploiting loopholes in the regulations.

What really matters is the intention of the regulations. The regulations do not intend for a competitor to exploit loopholes to achieve a better time. A competitor that does such deserves to have their attempts DNFed or to have an extra not count anymore.

Yiheng is an experienced competitor and should know better before starting the timer after asking for an extra.

A WR should not be a WR if it is obtained by that method. Period.

 

[kake123]

No, that’s not what you were talking about earlier. What you were talking about earlier is a competitor exploiting loopholes in the regulations.

What really matters is the intention of the regulations. The regulations do not intend for a competitor to exploit loopholes to achieve a better time. A competitor that does such deserves to have their attempts DNFed or to have an extra not count anymore.

Yiheng is an experienced competitor and should know better before starting the timer after asking for an extra.

A WR should not be a WR if it is obtained by that method. Period.

I also agree that it shouldn't stay and I'm not sure why they decided to put it back up. But you should read a reply I made on a different thread.

Just to add to what you have said, the comps Nigel goes to are Singapore and Malaysian comps. Which means that Singaporean and Malaysian delegates have approved these extras before in the past.

And I believe the same thing also happens for China delegates, because I saw an extra being granted for Yiheng in a cuberoot video for Chongqing Open 2023 (reason for that one is the judge lifted the cover when Yiheng was not ready). There was a comment from Patrick Ponce saying that the extra should not be granted if the extra was asked for after completing the solve and he asked for the reason which he got from cuberoot. There was a follow-up comment by someone saying that an extra can be granted up until the paper is signed.

I attended a comp called Singapore Mini 2023 (around September 2023), which Nigel did not go. I judged a rather high ranking pyraminx solver from Malaysia in one of the rounds. In one of his solves, I misjudged his expression and lifted the cover too early and that distracted him a lot and gave him a really bad time. He requested for an extra after completing his solve and the attempt was not signed during the request. He was given an extra for that attempt by our local delegate. So at least for the one example I gave (even though its humiliating for me to bring this up), this type of extra had not just been given to Chinese cubers.

If you told me before that 2x2 incident if asking for that extra was ok, I would have said yes. And I'm willing to bet that Nigel did not think much of that extra until it was brought up. I agree with the reasoning now, but its really unfortunate that we had to wait until then to address it.

I don't know why there wasn't a consensus on this particular rule for requesting an extra before. I recall that Yiheng wasn't given an extra for his last solve in Worlds 2023 finals because he requested it after he signed the attempt.

Here's my overall assessment of this:
The delegates from the countries I have mentioned have overall done a great job enforcing the WCA rules. It is just unfortunate that there wasn't a consensus on this particular rule on requesting extras and it should have been addressed back then.

Thanks, I appreciate that a lot. Also read the above FYI.

Honestly, instead of reinstating the record, they should probably ensure delegates from all regions are in sync with every aspect of the regulations.

 

[bldcuber314]

We are the competitor we want the best time we have loopholes for that we shall get the good time. WR is WR.

If you think that a WR done by exploiting a loophole is a WR we should celebrate, I think we're on a different page and this is where we're disagreeing.

 

[OtaMota]

World Cube Association

The World Cube Association governs competitions for mechanical puzzles that are operated by twisting groups of pieces, commonly known as 'twisty puzzles'. The most famous of these puzzles is the Rubik's Cube, invented by professor Rubik from Hungary. A selection of these puzzles are chosen as...

forum.worldcubeassociation.org

Here is the report