# Rowe Hessler 52.27 BLD former WR disqualified



## MaeLSTRoM (Nov 28, 2012)

This from the WCA Forum: (Source)



Disqualification of 2008 3x3x3 BLD World Record said:


> Postby Tyson » Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:14 pm
> This message is to serve notice of the disqualification of the 3x3x3 BLD world record set on November 22, 2008 at the Westchester Fall 2008 competition. The solve, at the time recorded at 52.27 seconds by Rowe Hessler (2007HESS01) was reported to have been a duplicate scramble. After a DNF solve on the first attempt, the judge failed to record the DNF attempt on the score card, and thus the cube was scrambled for a second time with the first scramble in the series. The competitor had an unfair advantage of solving the same cube after having previously memorized it, which invalidates the world record.
> 
> The WCA board appreciates Mr. Hessler for stepping forward and notifying the board of this error. Despite the time that has passed, the WCA takes pride in the integrity of its records. The WCA reprimands Mr. Hessler for taking advantage of a judge's mistake, which the WCA considers as unsportsmanlike conduct. However, the WCA recognizes that no premeditated acts of malicious nature were performed, and the lapse in judgement occurred after the incident.
> ...


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 28, 2012)

4 years

jeez rowe


----------



## Owen (Nov 28, 2012)

Is this a guilty secret Rowe has been keeping all this time, or has there been some sort of revelation?


----------



## A Leman (Nov 28, 2012)

I am glad Rowe was so honest even if it is 4 years later. I still think Rowe is an amazing cuber who made the right choice and deserves my respect.


----------



## googlebleh (Nov 28, 2012)

> Despite the time that has passed, the WCA takes pride in the integrity of its records.



lol "Despite the time that has passed"

nice, Rowe.


----------



## bluecloe45 (Nov 28, 2012)

Gotta love it


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 28, 2012)

I am in pure shock. But i appreciate that Rowe in essence "turned himself in". That takes guts, after soooo long.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 28, 2012)

...what? Seriously?


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 28, 2012)

qqwref said:


> ...what? Seriously?



My exact reaction.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 28, 2012)

wwwwwwwwwwoooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww


----------



## ajayd (Nov 29, 2012)

Who cares? The WR now is 26.xx. It's great that he confessed, but this is just a lucky occurrence and probably won't happen again. It's not like someone repealed 5.66...


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 29, 2012)

ajayd said:


> Who cares? The WR now is 26.xx. It's great that he confessed, but this is just a lucky occurrence and probably won't happen again. It's not like someone repealed 5.66...



Who cares? Um... if you haven't noticed, some of us DO. If you don't that's fine by me. It is still something that in some way affects the cubing community (some).


----------



## maggot (Nov 29, 2012)

what would a punishment look like for an action like this? hopefully not a long term vacation? such action was the mistake on the judges part and he confessed.

does "no additional attempt" conclude that there is nothing restricting rowe from going to competitions? that would be nice.


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 29, 2012)

maggot said:


> what would a punishment look like for an action like this? hopefully not a long term vacation? such action was the mistake on the judges part and he confessed.



You make a good point. And i don't think there would really even be a made up punishment for this.... except maybe the community looking down on him, which i definitely wouldn't do...


----------



## StachuK1992 (Nov 29, 2012)

Wait wait, is there really no punishment?
I get that it's been over four years now so that might lessen things. I get that it takes some balls to announce this sort of thing after such a long time.

That's not the point. This is no reason to hold him high on a pedestal. I don't know why so many of you are. I get it; he's popular. That's irrelevant. If someone else did something like this I feel as though they would have been punished much more.

What is the punishment?

If I steal from someone today and turn myself in four years, I get punished equally for how I get punished if I got caught today. That's the way law works. You did what you did and now you have to deal with it.


----------



## JasonK (Nov 29, 2012)

Wait what?

So, not owning up to what you did until four years later means you face no consequences.

Makes perfect sense...


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Nov 29, 2012)

maggot said:


> does "no additional attempt" conclude that there is nothing restricting rowe from going to competitions? that would be nice.



It means that he doesn't get another attempt at the second solve at Pleasantville four years ago.


----------



## ducttapecuber (Nov 29, 2012)

It was the judges fault, however Rowe should have confessed immediately after his solve, or even during memo. He should have owned up to it earlier. But at least he came clean, even if it was four years later. What kind of punishment would you even give him? It was the judges mistake, even thought he should have told.
May I ask how long this record stood?


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 29, 2012)

JasonK said:


> Wait what?
> 
> So, not owning up to what you did until four years later means you face no consequences.
> 
> Makes perfect sense...



I understand what your trying to say, and as far as i know, there is no punishment. I don't really want to praise him, but just kinda acknowledge the fact he turned himself in. I mean he DID do something wrong... I just don't think there is anyway of punishing him...


----------



## Ollie (Nov 29, 2012)

I'd rather hear what he has to say before making a snap judgement, especially since it took balls to confess even after all these years. He's obviously matured enough to see that what he's done is wrong so he deserves at least an opportunity to explain himself.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 29, 2012)

StachuK1992 said:


> If someone else did something like this I feel as though they would have been punished much more.
> 
> What is the punishment?


I think the only punishment was to remove the time itself, because he worked with the WCA by notifying them himself and being open about it. This kind of thing has happened before (with a much, much shorter time gap) and since getting a scramble again isn't a deliberate attempt to cheat the typical punishment is not to ban the person or anything, but to just get rid of that solve and give them a new one, and of course in this case we can't give Rowe a replacement solve.

I can't explain why nobody said anything about this until now, including people who were at the competition. I have a theory but it is pretty silly.



ducttapecuber said:


> May I ask how long this record stood?


From November 22, 2008 until December 6, 2008, so about two weeks.


----------



## tim (Nov 29, 2012)

StachuK1992 said:


> This is no reason to hold him high on a pedestal.



Knowing Rowe a bit I'm more amused by this whole thing than pissed. I probably would be really angry if this cost me a world record, though. Did anyone not get to celebrate a world record because of that?



ducttapecuber said:


> What kind of punishment would you even give him? It was the judges mistake, even thought he should have told.
> May I ask how long this record stood?



Wether it's the judge's fault or not is irrelevant.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 29, 2012)

tim said:


> Did anyone not get to celebrate a world record because of that?


Nope, the only change this makes to the WR history is to remove Rowe's time from the list.


----------



## Escher (Nov 29, 2012)

Good for him for saying something about it, even now. 

Given the number of competitions held each weekend these days I imagine this happens all the time and many people won't say a word simply to lower their competition PBs. The relative level of dishonesty isn't affected by the fact it happened to be a world record time, even if those getting slower times think it does. Adulation and a newspaper article or two are irrelevant to the act.


----------



## Tyson (Nov 29, 2012)

StachuK1992 said:


> If I steal from someone today and turn myself in four years, I get punished equally for how I get punished if I got caught today. That's the way law works. You did what you did and now you have to deal with it.



But nothing was stolen here. It's more similar to you buying something, and I give you too much change by accident. Or let's say you go and eat at a restaurant, and I don't bill you for something.

Obviously, it's preferable, and I would even say expected that someone should speak up if they receive something they shouldn't have received. But I don't feel it's the same thing as actively cheating.


----------



## Noahaha (Nov 29, 2012)

Let's not forget that punishing Rowe for this would discourage other people in similar situations from coming forward. The attitude should be: "turn yourself in rather than getting caught."


----------



## tx789 (Nov 29, 2012)

In athletics there been people who game out(amiting drug use) years later and then get so much hate a records wiped and banned 



Still 4years is a long time in cubing


----------



## InfiniCuber (Nov 29, 2012)

His apology thread is up...(Rowe's)


----------



## MWilson (Nov 29, 2012)

tx789 said:


> In athletics there been people who game out(amiting drug use) years later and then get so much hate a records wiped and banned
> 
> 
> 
> Still 4years is a long time in cubing



That's not a very accurate analogy. What Rowe did is more like player A committing a foul against player B, and when the referee calls it wrong as a foul for player B, player A just lets it happen even though they know it's wrong. Incidentally, that happens all the time in "professional" sports, along with faking injuries for advantages and all kinds of other BS. Rowe did not enter the competition with an intent to break the rules, and then carry out some sort of evil plan. The rules were broken by another person, the judge, and it happened to be in his favor. Yes, he should have set it straight back then, but it's not even close to the same as doping in athletics.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

Noahaha said:


> Let's not forget that punishing Rowe for this would discourage other people in similar situations from coming forward. The attitude should be: "turn yourself in rather than getting caught."


I agree with this completely. If Rowe receives no further punishment, then people will be more apt to stay quiet if the same thing happens to them. Even if they don't get a WR, they could improve their PB, bumping down others in rankings.


----------



## rowehessler (Nov 29, 2012)

Dominate said:


> That's not a very accurate analogy. What Rowe did is more like player A committing a foul against player B, and when the referee calls it wrong as a foul for player B, player A just lets it happen even though they know it's wrong. Incidentally, that happens all the time in "professional" sports, along with faking injuries for advantages and all kinds of other BS. Rowe did not enter the competition with an intent to break the rules, and then carry out some sort of evil plan. The rules were broken by another person, the judge, and it happened to be in his favor. Yes, he should have set it straight back then, but it's not even close to the same as doping in athletics.



Its 100% my fault this happened this judge was inexperienced I should have said something.


----------



## Noahaha (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> I agree with this completely. If Rowe receives no further punishment, then people will be more apt to stay quiet if the same thing happens to them. Even if they don't get a WR, they could improve their PB, bumping down others in rankings.



It seems that you took what I said to mean the opposite of what I meant. I think that if Rowe IS punished, other people will NOT come forward for fear of punishment. But if he is NOT punished, people WILL feel comfortable coming forwards.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

Noahaha said:


> It seems that you took what I said to mean the opposite of what I meant. I think that if Rowe IS punished, other people will NOT come forward for fear of punishment. But if he is NOT punished, people WILL feel comfortable coming forwards.


Oh, I see what you're saying. i suppose it can go either way. I just think it's unjust that he can get off with being dishonest for all these years. 
Also, how/why should we trust him in the future?


----------



## MovingOnUp (Nov 29, 2012)

So surprised this wasn't a surprise challenge. But seriously, why now? why not like after the hype died that he got WR if at any time?


----------



## gasmus (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> Oh, I see what you're saying. i suppose it can go either way. I just think it's unjust that he can get off with being dishonest for all these years.
> Also, how/why should we trust him in the future?



Do I detect a hint of bias?

In my opinion this makes someone _more_ trustworthy than before. How/why should we trust anyone else?


----------



## jackdexter75 (Nov 29, 2012)

Well dang, that kinda sucks...


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

Oh, just a mere hint.
We just have to trust that people will come forward at the moment something like this happens, not 4 years after. We tried this with Rowe, and it clearly did not work. People need to be honest, without delay, and encourage others to do the same.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> Oh, just a mere hint.
> We just have to trust that people will come forward at the moment something like this happens, not 4 years after. We tried this with Rowe, and it clearly did not work. People need to be honest, without delay, and encourage others to do the same.



That is an unrealistic expectation. Whether or not that is what we _*should*_ do, to expect that that is what will actually happen is unrealistic.

Also, because I know you personally, I get it. You don't, and haven't liked Rowe. That doesn't justify you being a jerk right now. Every time you've given a complaint or a biting remark, Rowe has come forward and agreed with you and has been respectable and in general degraded himself. You've made your point, and Rowe hasn't tried to refute it. Move on.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> That is an unrealistic expectation. Whether or not that is what we _*should*_ do, to expect that that is what will actually happen is unrealistic.
> 
> Also, because I know you personally, I get it. You don't, and haven't liked Rowe. That doesn't justify you being a jerk right now. Every time you've given a complaint or a biting remark, Rowe has come forward and agreed with you and has been respectable and in general degraded himself. You've made your point, and Rowe hasn't tried to refute it. Move on.


Fair enough.


----------



## David Zemdegs (Nov 29, 2012)

A fine example to all. Well done Rowe.


----------



## rowehessler (Nov 29, 2012)

fazdad said:


> A fine example to all. Well done Rowe.


Thank you David.


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 29, 2012)

Owen said:


> Is this a guilty secret Rowe has been keeping all this time, or has there been some sort of revelation?


This. Why come out now, not a few years ago. If he came out a day after if happened I'd respect that, but I feel like Rowe is trying to prove something?


JasonK said:


> Wait what?So, not owning up to what you did until four years later means you face no consequences.Makes perfect sense...


Exactly. In my eyes this is far worse than coming out back then. I've been at 2 comps with Rowe and he seems like a good guy... but this has kinda changed how I think of Rowe. At this stage, all coming out does is make people lose some respect for him.Edit: After reading your post, I feel better about you, I guess you were scared of the implications back then, but what about a year later, two years later. I'm shocked that it took you so long, however, props for atleast eventually telling the truth :tu


----------



## JasonK (Nov 29, 2012)

Tim Major said:


> Exactly. In my eyes this is far worse than coming out back then. I've been at 2 comps with Rowe and he seems like a good guy... but this has kinda changed how I think of Rowe. At this stage, all coming out does is make people lose some respect for him.


 For the record, my concern wasn't with Rowe, I understand how hard it must have been for him to come out with this knowing that he could be banned. My concern was with the WCA for not setting any consequences for what happened. I'm not even sure what I think anymore though.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 29, 2012)

Tim Major said:


> I guess you were scared of the implications back then, but what about a year later, two years later.


Kind of arbitrary, no? If he'd waited two years you could just as easily ask why not six months or one year. Yes, four years is a long time, but the fact is, it's always tough to admit something like this after the fact, no matter how long it's been. I don't think it's fair to criticize someone for not adhering to an arbitrary standard that you can't even be sure you'd follow if your situation was exactly the same.

Gotta say, I respect Rowe for having the maturity to tell the truth about this.


----------



## blah (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> Also, how/why should we trust him in the future?


You moron. We don't have to and we won't have to if we don't want to, but we do. If _you_'ve got such a big problem with this, why don't you go to every competition he attends to make sure he doesn't get the same scramble twice?

If someone gave me too much change and I don't report it, that's my problem. If I return it four years later and she forgives me, how is it any of your business? And even if she doesn't forgive me, how is it any of your business? If you're so butthurt about it, then count your damn change before you give it to me. If you're so butthurt about it, then try giving me too much change for once and see if I return it: if I do, shut up; if I don't, go celebrate that your butt's no longer hurt, and if it still is, then clearly I'm not the source of it hurting. If everyone else trusts me in the future, who are you to say anything about it? In fact, who are you to say that no one is being extra careful with their change before they give it to me anyway? And what does it matter in any case? Man, your butt hurts.


----------



## TimMc (Nov 29, 2012)

I trust that there weren't any repeat offences leading up to the present in 3x3 BLD...


----------



## StephenC (Nov 29, 2012)

IMO, the purpose of punishment is to ensure that an occurrence does not repeat itself. There would be no good punishing him now since there would probably not be a repeat offense. 

Perhaps if the world record had stood for longer I would have stronger feelings about this, but the fact that it stood for only 2 weeks makes it insignificant.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

blah said:


> You moron. We don't have to and we won't have to if we don't want to, but we do. If _you_'ve got such a big problem with this, why don't you go to every competition he attends to make sure he doesn't get the same scramble twice?



It's not just my responsibility, it's everyone's. Rowe included.


----------



## blah (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> It's not just my responsibility, it's everyone's. Rowe included.


Yes. _I_ trust that Rowe will be responsible in the future. I believe most people share the same sentiments. So there, Rowe is responsible, just to get it out of the way. (Until he betrays our trust, if ever, what else is there to be said about his lack of responsibility? He's done the most responsible thing one could ask for. If it took four years, it took four years, are you gonna turn back time now and be less of a prick if he came clean earlier? We both know you aren't. If "this is far worse than coming out back then," why don't you propose something that isn't "far worse than coming out back then" that can actually be done right now? We both know you can't.) Everyone else is responsible and has always strove to be responsible to the best of her knowledge, since no one has been known to give him duplicate scrambles intentionally.

In your stupid head you're painting this cute little picture where people are "irresponsibly causing him to get undeserved times." WTF does that even mean? Now that this incident has come to light, people will be even more attentive when it comes to his scrambles if anything. You're insulting organizers, judges, scramblers, and pretty much the whole community by having to assert that "it's not just my responsibility, it's everyone's" -- are you insinuating that someone is being irresponsible here? Of course we know it's our responsibility, of course we strive to be as responsible as we can in the chaos of running a competition, your pompous remark adds nothing to what we already know, and is degrading by assuming we need to be told that. People like you insult what it means to be a community. Get out.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

blah said:


> Yes. _I_ trust that Rowe will be responsible in the future. I believe most people share the same sentiments. So there, Rowe is responsible, just to get it out of the way. (Until he betrays our trust, if ever, what else is there to be said about his lack of responsibility? He's done the most responsible thing one could ask for. If it took four years, it took four years, are you gonna turn back time now and be less of a prick if he came clean earlier? We both know you aren't. If "this is far worse than coming out back then," why don't you propose something that isn't "far worse than coming out back then" that can actually be done right now? We both know you can't.) Everyone else is responsible and has always strove to be responsible to the best of her knowledge, since no one has been known to give him duplicate scrambles intentionally.
> 
> In your stupid head you're painting this cute little picture where people are "irresponsibly causing him to get undeserved times." WTF does that even mean? Now that this incident has come to light, people will be even more attentive when it comes to his scrambles if anything. You're insulting organizers, judges, scramblers, and pretty much the whole community by having to assert that "it's not just my responsibility, it's everyone's" -- *are you insinuating that someone is being irresponsible here? Of course we know it's our responsibility, of course we strive to be as responsible as we can in the chaos of running a competition*, your pompous remark adds nothing to what we already know, and is degrading by assuming we need to be told that. People like you insult what it means to be a community. Get out.



No, I'm not, i'm saying that it's everyone's responsibilty to be fair, not just mine, as it sounded like you said earlier. It was a general reminder to be responsible. Obviously people know that they should be responsible, even Rowe does, just a little bit later than others.


----------



## Ollie (Nov 29, 2012)

fastcubesolver said:


> No, I'm not, i'm saying that it's everyone's responsibilty to be fair, not just mine, as it sounded like you said earlier. It was a general reminder to be responsible. Obviously people know that they should be responsible, even Rowe does, just a little bit later than others.



If people already know, why are you reminding them? Just drop it, try and show some empathy, regardless of what a younger version of yourself would've done in that situation.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Nov 29, 2012)

Ollie said:


> If people already know, why are you reminding them? Just drop it, try and show some empathy, regardless of what a younger version of yourself would've done in that situation.



g-e-n-e-r-a-l r-e-m-i-n-d-e-r


----------



## Tyson (Nov 29, 2012)

I'm glancing at these responses and passing judgement on ALL OF YOU.


----------

