"If a side is misaligned by more than the above criteria, then that side is considered one turn away. If a cube is one turn from completion, 2 seconds will be added to the solve time. In all other cases, the solve is disqualified." QTM or HTM?
--- In [email protected], "Ron van Bruchem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi friends, > > I think everything has been said now about extra attempt for pops. Thank you > all for your input. > There is still a majority favoring no extra attempts for pops, even for the > bigger cubes. In return these cubers get 5 instead of 3 attempts. > Let us see what 2006 brings. > > Stefan, for WC2003 there were no clear regulations about the cubing itself. > Actually there were a few people (even finalists) getting extra attempts for > having the last face not correctly aligned. On one occasion there was > someone getting two extra attempts for the same cube. And each of the three > scrambles was the same! There was also no limit for pops, so there was > someone who had 3 pops, and received 3 extra attempts. Another thing was > that the regulations were very personal, one judge would react differently > than another judge. > We should be happy now that we have good regulations. :-) > > About the twisted center corner of Masayuki Akimoto. > It is my mistake that the twisted center corner for Masayuki for his 5x5x5 > attempt was not allowed. > The judge came to me together with Masayuki, and asked me whether it was > allowed or not. Even Masayuki said that he would not have a problem if it > were not allowed. > I was in doubt at that moment, so I should have checked the regulations. > The regulations 2005 say: > " > All pieces of the puzzle must be ATTACHED to the puzzle for it to be solved. > If a piece of the puzzle is EJECTED as the puzzle is placed down but it is > otherwise solved, then the puzzle is not considered to be in a solved state. > " > > The piece was attached, but ejected and not in solved position. Reading back > now I think it should have been allowed. > I am glad in the end it did not make much of a difference. Although I am not > sure whether it was Masayuki's fastest time of the competition and thus a > Japanese record. > > My mistake. Sorry. Lesson learnt. > > About the center corner of 5x5x5 being broken. > The regulations 2005 say: > "If a non functional part of a puzzle is defect/ejected and the puzzle is > still unambiguously in a solved state, then the puzzle is considered solved, > under discretion of the judge." > In this case you could consider the flat part of the center corner to be a > non functional part, because the inner part of the center is still in place. > If the puzzle is unambiguously in a solved state, so only one of the center > corners with this problem, then the puzzle should be considered solved. > > Looking forward to more competitions in 2006 in more countries, with even > more fun. > > Have fun, > > Ron > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Per Kristen Fredlund > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 6:36 PM > Subject: [Speed cubing group] Re: 2006 Regulation Revisions > > > Hi ! > > That's more evidence to keep the current rule, allowing ONE pop. It > really is no problem timewise to allow a few ppl one more solve due > to (accidental) pop. And ppl can cube faster more relaxed, not > having to worry too much about pops. Anyway, i feel this topic > is "out-debated". What happens will happen. Unless the WCA board > decides that we gonna have a vote or something over it :-) > > I have written lots here about popping, but still my main concerns > are that twisting centers should be allowed and also a single broken > center (or any single cubie) as long as there is no ambiguity the > cube/puzzle is solved. There is no way to benefit from those cube > defects :-) > > -Per > > > --- In [email protected], "Stefan Pochmann" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Lars Petrus > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > I was imagining some future competition with more attempts, > maybe 10 > > or > > > 20, and every solve counting. > > > > Ah, ok. Yeah, that would be nice :-). The more solves the better. > Uh, > > except that more solves require fewer or faster competitors or > fewer > > rounds... > > > > > If there were really no pops at all in the latest final, that > does > > show > > > it's not much to worry about, at least for people in that level. > > > > Yes, there really weren't any. And only 2 (declared) pops in the > semi > > final, i.e. 2 pops in 182 solves (36 competitors). Don't know > about > > round 1, there are no pops but dnfs and they could mean anything. > > > > Looking at the WC 2003 results, I don't see any pops at all. But I > > could imagine that the free-replacement-for-pops rule didn't exist > > back then, is that correct? > > > > http://www.speedcubing.com/events/wc2005.html > > http://www.speedcubing.com/events/wc2003/wc2003_results.html > > > > Cheers! > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > > 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! 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/
