Hi Peter,

It's something that's "up to the judge's discretion" and fortunately,  
we've never had to call people on it.

As for the cubing community at large, we definitely had a discussion  
about this awhile ago when we were proposing changes.  I don't remember  
when the discussion took place, but I'm sure someone can just search  
the archives.  It has been largely stated that in order for a pop to  
affect an average of 5, a 40% pop rate is necessary.  That's like, a D-  
minus if you're in public school.

And again, they should be punished, because popping is not just a  
result of a malicious attempt to get a better average an eliminate a  
bad solve, but it is also a result of the cuber's lack of ability to  
turn the cube accurately.  Accuracy is very much a part of the solving  
practice as lightning quick fingers.

You might want to look at some results and try calculating the  
placement if their pop was not allowed.  I think for the most part, the  
standings remain unchanged.

Tyson Mao
MSC #631
California Institute of Technology

On Dec 24, 2005, at 5:14 AM, Peter Douthwright wrote:

> Sure they should punished IF!!!!! they pop on purpose. but I do not  
> think you can ever prove that. I therefore think that not allowing  
> pops is completely wrong. Unless you can show me a VALID reason for  
> not allowing pops then you should allow them.
>
> You should allow one pop per ten solves. Or something like that. While  
> we are at it. When did you ever consult the cubing community at large  
> about this, or did the board of the WCA decide this on their own?
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Tyson Mao
>   To: [email protected]
>   Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 8:03 AM
>   Subject: Re: [Speed cubing group] Re: 2006 Regulation Revisions
>
>
>   Yes, they should be punished because they can cut more corners.
>
>   Please refer to Lars Petrus' argument.  In order for a POP to affect
>   your average, since the slowest solve is discarded, you have to pop
>   twice, or twice out of five solves.  40% pop rate in a competition is
>   unacceptable.
>
>   I'll be gone for a couple of days.
>
>   Tyson Mao
>   MSC #631
>   California Institute of Technology
>
>   On Dec 24, 2005, at 4:33 AM, Pedro wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I agree with Dan and Per. Why not allowing POPs? Some people
>> prefer flat centers, which gives more chance of poping...but...should
>> they be punished by a personal preference? and if pops are not
>> allowed, competitors will not push very hard on their solves, because
>> they will be afraid of poping and ruining an average...so, we'll have
>> slower times...
>>
>>   well, is just what I think...but, I think POPs should be allowed...
>>
>>   Pedro
>>
>> Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
>>   Hi Tyson,
>>
>> I really object to the idea of not allowing POP's. I'm not 100% sure
>> of the reasoning behind this rule, but I assume it's to prevent
>> people from abusing it (ie when you have a bad solve you
>> deliberately force a piece). But let's be honest, how many of the
>> top20 solvers in the world have ever needed to/wanted to commit this
>> offence? Maybe I'm being ridiculously too trusting, but it just
>> doesn't seem to be a problem as far as I can see. I really really
>> can't see any of the top guys who can already solve in <15 secs
>> average being selfish enough to force the cube. And also, not
>> allowing a POP could completely ruin a competitors chance of winning
>> a title. A genuine POP is not the fault of the competitor at all,
>> and yet the new rule would be punishing them, since it completely
>> changes the approach to solving the cube. You don't want to risk
>> anything, especially if your cube is not quite as stable as other
>> competitors cubes. SO it also means that if you have a poorer cube
>> you are less likely to have a chance of making 5 solves! AND of
>> course, after you have POPped once, it's very unlikely that you
>> could recover it and beat someone who hasn't POPped, if you didn't
>> get the extra solve. I'm sorry for not putting my case very
>> succinctly, but hopefully you can see I feel quite passionately
>> about this rule change. I think the reasons for not changing the POP
>> rule far outweigh the reason for changing it.
>>
>> As regards the other rules, especially making all averages out of 5,
>> I am fully in favour of :)
>>
>> Per, Tyson, I am also in favour of allowing stickers in Fewest Moves
>> Competitions. Just as speedcubers are allowed to use a variety of
>> techniques, (some might use a corners first method, others might use
>> Fridrich, and ChrisH might be using ZB), even though those who
>> aren't using a particular technique might know nothing about it and
>> not be able to use it in their solves. So not allowing stickers
>> because it gives people an advantage over those who don't know how
>> to use stickers to their advantage is not a valid reason I think (if
>> that is indeed the reason for not allowing stickers, again i
>> slightly assumed I think). If competitors would supply their own
>> equipment, then I can't see any reason for not allowing stickers or
>> sticker equivalents.
>>
>> Thanks for listening,
>>
>> DanH :) - www.cubestation.co.uk
>>
>> --- In [email protected], Tyson Mao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>> For all competitions in 2006, we will be making the following
>> changes
>>> in the regulations:
>>>
>>> 1.  No POPs will be allowed.  The competitor will not be awarded
>> an
>>> extra solve if there is a puzzle defect during the solve.
>>>
>>> 2.  Record standards for 3x3x3 OH, 4x4x4, and 5x5x5 will be
>> Average of
>>> 5.  The current world records set in the format of Mean of 3 will
>> stand
>>> for six months to allow time for the current world record holders
>> to
>>> retake their world records under the new format.
>>>
>>> Note:  In blindfold cubing, +2 penalties are awarded.
>>>
>>> Thank you!  Please let us know if there are any major objections.
>>>
>>> Tyson Mao
>>> World Cube Association
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>>
>>
>>     Visit your group "speedsolvingrubikscube" on the web.
>>
>>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>> Service.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>  Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>   SPONSORED LINKS Jigsaw puzzle game  Free puzzle inlay games   
> Educational game and puzzle
>         Word puzzle game  Kid puzzle game  Puzzle games
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     a..  Visit your group "speedsolvingrubikscube" on the web.
>
>     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>     c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of  
> Service.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> -------
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/MXMplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to