# Proposed change: A6e) The competitor must not touch or move the puzzle until the...



## TimMc (Jul 16, 2012)

It's difficult to confirm A6c and A6d when a competitor slams his hands on a timer and retracts them immediately:



> A6c) The timer must be stopped using both hands, with both hands flat and palms down. Penalty: 2 seconds.





> A6d) The competitor must fully release the puzzle before stopping the timer. Penalty: 2 seconds.




I'd like to propose a change to make it easier to enforce A6c and A6d and to reduce confusion around A6e:



> A6e) The competitor *must hold his hands on the timer and* must not touch or move the puzzle until the judge has inspected the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the solve.



Further clarification about whether A7a, A7d and A7e are sufficient for a judge to indicate to the competitor that he has finished inspecting the puzzle may be required.

Thoughts?


----------



## HelpCube (Jul 16, 2012)

I disagree with this change simply because it hasn't been seen as a real problem yet. Even with events like Magic and Master Magic, it's fairly easy to tell whether or not they stopped the timer with their palms. I think this would also be fairly awkward for the competitor and it would take quite a while to get used to. It's not a terrible idea, but it's not worth the adjustment seeing as it isn't really a problem.


----------



## TimMc (Jul 16, 2012)

HelpCube said:


> It's not a terrible idea, but it's not worth the adjustment seeing as it isn't really a problem.



Your comment made me realise that I haven't addressed A6c at all. A competitor can still perfect a karate chop technique that merges into flat hands and palms down as he slides his hands toward his torso.

However, it does help make A6d clearer. This change would _make it much more difficult for a competitor to obscure the fact_ that he released the puzzle far too close to the timer and was touching the puzzle when the timer stopped. For example: It would be obvious that A6d is breached when you leave your fingers resting on the puzzle while your palms are touching the timer. Quickly retracting your hands makes it difficult for the judge to determine whether or not your hands were touching the puzzle when the timer was stopped.

It also helps reduce the existing A6e by giving the competitor something to do while waiting for the judge to inspect the puzzle. Instead of getting distracted...

Tim.


----------



## amostay2004 (Jul 16, 2012)

I disagree on the basis that it is very easy to_ forget_ to keep your hands on the timer. We're already very used to not having to keep our hands on the timer, plus competition nerves and excitement of the moment, etc, I can see that many people will fail this rule.

And what about BLD? Are we not allowed to take off our blindfold until the judge says so?


----------



## TimMc (Jul 16, 2012)

A DNF would quickly remind you to keep your hands on the timer...



amostay2004 said:


> And what about BLD? Are we not allowed to take off our blindfold until the judge says so?



Yes, you would wait until the judge calls "OK", "PENALTY" or "NO FINISH". Just as the judge patiently waited for you with a sheet of paper held up to your face... If "PENALTY" or "NO FINISH" occurs then you would remove your blindfold and look at the puzzle without touching it. Inspection shouldn't really take more than a few seconds so it wouldn't be much of an inconvenience to have a blindfold on for a second or two longer.

And keeping a blindfold on for a minute or two for multiple blindfolded isn't that much longer relatively speaking... then again it could be very anti climactic to not be able to "see" dozens of people "silently clap" as you set a new record.

It may also prevent situations where a competitor thinks that he has stopped the timer, and has started to walk away, while it's still going.

Tim.


----------



## insane569 (Jul 16, 2012)

amostay2004 said:


> And what about BLD? Are we not allowed to take off our blindfold until the judge says so?



I think its safe to say that most people rip off their blindfold after they finish. This would cause problems.


----------



## drewsopchak (Jul 16, 2012)

You're solving a problem that hardly exists with solution that's worse then problem. This is a like petroleum jelly in a dayan or cocaine for a toothache.


----------



## uberCuber (Jul 16, 2012)

TimMc said:


> A DNF would quickly remind you to keep your hands on the timer...



And the number of DNF's would skyrocket for quite awhile. With not being able to think calmly with nerves, excitement, etc., getting one stupid DNF is not going to make it any easier to remove a habit that has been in place for years (i.e. removing hands from timer immediately after stopping it).


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 16, 2012)

One possible way this could be implemented is that the competitor keeps his/her hands on the timer, the judge checks hands, proclaims "hands good" or "hands bad" and taps the competitor's shoulder, and then the puzzle is taken into account.


----------



## Schmidt (Jul 16, 2012)

No WR's will be broken anymore (or PB's) as most of those are followed by a quick fist pump "I'm sorry, I'll have to DQ that solve. You failed to keep your hands on the timer."


----------



## Erik (Jul 16, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> You're solving a problem that hardly exists with solution that's worse then problem. This is a like petroleum jelly in a dayan or cocaine for a toothache.



Totally agree with this. Besides magic (which is a horrible event to judge no matter what, we could start a whole new discussion about that) this is not a big issue, if any at all. I don't think it's a good idea to have pesty little regulations for everything, let's not forget speedcubing is a hobby, not a professional sport.


----------



## Endgame (Jul 16, 2012)

"If it ain't broke don't fix it"


----------



## TMOY (Jul 17, 2012)

At Saarland Open it took several minutes to my judge, Sébastien and Tim successively to judge one of my 3^3 solves. I definitely don't want to be forced to keep my hands on the timer during all that time.


----------



## qqwref (Jul 17, 2012)

Cubing is supposed to be fun. Not being allowed to react to your speedsolve or view the result of your blindsolve is not fun. What's next, having to fill out a long form for every attempt? Having to sign confidentiality agreements when scrambling or judging? Requiring all audience members to sit with their hands in their laps until their name is called? Please.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 17, 2012)

Magics won't be official next year. No need to put this in the official regulations for any other reason.
Also, an adapted karate chop technique is downright silly =P It's a lot easier to just comply.


----------



## TimMc (Jul 17, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> You're solving a problem that hardly exists with solution that's worse then problem. This is a like petroleum jelly in a dayan or cocaine for a toothache.



It hardly exists now that Magic is being dropped...



Endgame said:


> "If it ain't broke don't fix it"



It's currently broken for Magic until it's dropped... with the potential of reoccurring with 2x2.



Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Magics won't be official next year. No need to put this in the official regulations for any other reason.
> Also, an adapted karate chop technique is downright silly =P It's a lot easier to just comply.



Would the increase of sub2 2x2 solves make people wish that stronger restrictions were applied for stopping the timer? Hindsight is awesome.

Tim.


----------



## Sebastien (Jul 17, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2227ulrNcew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfLJG_L01Rw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzI14ST3Rn8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY0_wPNm6a8

All those are pretty clearly stopped well. These are as well all filmed sub1 2x2x2 solves.


----------



## TimMc (Jul 17, 2012)

Sebastien said:


> All those are pretty clearly stopped well. These are as well all filmed sub1 2x2x2 solves.



1. Left hand didn't touch the cube while stopping the timer.
2. Hands didn't knock the cube forward after stopping the timer.
3. Judge didn't cause the yellow face to move while rotating the cube on the mat.
4. Insufficient video evidence.

It'd probably be clearer to see with more frames per second in a video but judges have to rely on their own eyes. Some of the angles in which the puzzle drops, combined with needless hand movements after stopping the timer (or retracting the hands quickly) make it difficult to clearly see.

Tim.


----------



## qqwref (Jul 18, 2012)

TimMc said:


> 1. Left hand didn't touch the cube while stopping the timer.
> 2. Hands didn't knock the cube forward after stopping the timer.
> 3. Judge didn't cause the yellow face to move while rotating the cube on the mat.
> 4. Insufficient video evidence.


You're talking with no regard for real-life considerations. I think you should completely abandon solving or judging physical cubes - with computer cubes, you wouldn't have to worry about stupid, meaningless details like these.


----------



## Sebastien (Jul 18, 2012)

TimMc said:


> 1. Left hand didn't touch the cube while stopping the timer.
> 2. Hands didn't knock the cube forward after stopping the timer.
> 3. Judge didn't cause the yellow face to move while rotating the cube on the mat.



Yes. Additionally:

1. Wears no hat.
2. Has no mustache
3. Isn't naked.

To summarize: What do you intend to say?



TimMc said:


> 4. Insufficient video evidence.



Ok.


Btw, how would you handle if a puzzle touches a competitors hand after stopping only because he has to leave it on the timer? Has the judge to evaluate this? Sounds very complicated for me.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 18, 2012)

LOL i cant stop laughing at the responses on this thread.


----------



## drewsopchak (Jul 18, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> LOL i cant stop laughing at the responses on this thread.


Agreed.


----------



## TimMc (Jul 18, 2012)

Sebastien said:


> To summarize: What do you intend to say?



The first two are valid concerns that a judge may have. A competitor can touch or knock a cube while or soon after stopping the timer as long as he removes his hands quickly enough, perhaps performing a flourish to add to the distraction, so that the judge is unable to clearly see that puzzle was not fully released or was touched after the solve.

The third one looked like A6g was being broken by the judge. It's just silly to risk screwing up a solve by touching a puzzle that appears to be misaligned by 45 degrees. But I digress...



Sebastien said:


> Btw, how would you handle if a puzzle touches a competitors hand after stopping only because he has to leave it on the timer? Has the judge to evaluate this? Sounds very complicated for me.



It would be a violation of A6e regardless of how obviously solved the puzzle is because the competitor didn't give the judge time to confirm that they'd finished inspecting the puzzle. One tip would be to get the competitor to fully release the puzzle properly... and not touch it again.

Tim.


----------



## Sebastien (Jul 18, 2012)

TimMc said:


> The first two are valid concerns that a judge may have. A competitor can touch or knock a cube while or soon after stopping the timer as long as he removes his hands quickly enough, perhaps performing a flourish to add to the distraction, so that the judge is unable to clearly see that puzzle was not fully released or was touched after the solve.



How is this related with the time achieved? Still to me it is clear that nothing of this has happened on this solves.



TimMc said:


> It would be a violation of A6e regardless of how obviously solved the puzzle is because the competitor didn't give the judge time to confirm that they'd finished inspecting the puzzle. One tip would be to get the competitor to fully release the puzzle properly... and not touch it again.



I don't think you got what I meant. After releasing a puzzle it will still move to a certain direction. What if it comes to hit the competitor's hand after stopping, ONLY because he has to keep his hands on the timer?


----------



## Ton (Jul 18, 2012)

TimMc said:


> It's difficult to confirm A6c and A6d when a competitor slams his hands on a timer and retracts them immediately:
> I'd like to propose a change to make it easier to enforce A6c and A6d and to reduce confusion around A6e:
> Further clarification about whether A7a, A7d and A7e are sufficient for a judge to indicate to the competitor that he has finished inspecting the puzzle may be required.
> Thoughts?



Why , what is the problem with current rules?
Even is the competitor ends with his hands on the timer it does not mean the competitor stopped with flats and palms downs

So in your case if a competitor from excitement cheers or slip one hand of the timer you disqualify a solve? Why? 

A6c) was introduced when we noticed that some people stopped with the puzzle between theirs hands (Dan Knights 2003) kind of the "karate stop" with both hands vertical

A6d) was to prevent someone could do a turn while stopping

So what issue do you want to resolve?


----------



## TimMc (Jul 20, 2012)

Ton said:


> So what issue do you want to resolve?



I'd like to reduce the occurrence of A6d being broken and overlooked by judges because of the way some competitors stop the timer (i.e. slamming their hands down on the timer and then retracting them within a second).

A6e might not be the most appropriate regulation to modify. Strict enforcement of A6d would make my suggestion redundant.

Perhaps judges could just opt to apply a +2 second penalty when there's doubt around A6d. It would then be in the interest of the competitor to keep his hands still after stopping the timer so that he has something to support his side of the dispute.

Tim.


----------

