# [WCA Regulations] Scrambling 4d)



## (X) (May 6, 2012)

This thread is to discuss WCA Regulation 4d):



WCA Regulations said:


> 4d) Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front.



Link to full WCA Regulations


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (May 6, 2012)

(X) said:


> 4d) :O


 
Its been agreed that if a cube has black instead of white stickers, then its scrambles Black U, green F


----------



## (X) (May 6, 2012)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> Its been agreed


 
...
It doesn't say so in the regulations. I think any agreements beyond the regulations must be considered unofficial.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (May 6, 2012)

(X) said:


> ...
> It doesn't say so in the regulations. I think any agreements beyond the regulations must be considered unofficial.


 
It was mentioned here: http://worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=941
Although no official stuff has been asid about it, it's so widely done that it is accepted as normal. For example, at the last competition I went to, cubes with normal colours but black replacing white were scrambled as if black was white.


----------



## (X) (May 6, 2012)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> It was mentioned here: http://worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=941
> Although no official stuff has been asid about it, it's so widely done that it is accepted as normal. For example, at the last competition I went to, cubes with normal colours but black replacing white were scrambled as if black was white.


 
I think the regulations should act as regulations, just an opinion.


----------



## Meep (May 6, 2012)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> It was mentioned here: http://worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=941
> Although no official stuff has been asid about it, it's so widely done that it is accepted as normal. For example, at the last competition I went to, cubes with normal colours but black replacing white were scrambled as if black was white.


 
Tyson told us he's okay with black U green F when we asked for a previous competition.


----------



## (X) (May 6, 2012)

Meep said:


> Tyson told us he's okay with black U green F when we asked for a previous competition.


 Doesn't really matter since a regulation should be universal, which it only is when it's in the official regulations. But I guess he said so because it isn't that important


----------



## Tim Reynolds (May 6, 2012)

(X) said:


> Doesn't really matter since a regulation should be universal, which it only is when it's in the official regulations. But I guess he said so because it isn't that important


 
There's also 4f:


4f (6x6) said:


> If scrambled position differs from executed scramble WCA delegate decides whether rescramble is necessary.



So, you can say that the scrambler screwed up by scrambling on the wrong sides, but the delegate said it was fine.


----------



## Kian (May 7, 2012)

As for scrambling, I really don't see how the regulations are unclear about this. White or the lightest color should be the U face. Black certainly isn't. We always default to yellow.


----------



## Bob (May 7, 2012)

I agree with Kian. Black should absolutely never be the top color when scrambling.


----------



## Julian (May 7, 2012)

Kian said:


> As for scrambling, I really don't see how the regulations are unclear about this. White or the lightest color should be the U face. Black certainly isn't. We always default to yellow.


^^
This is how I tell people to do it every Toronto comp


----------



## Dene (May 7, 2012)

I think it only makes sense to put black on top if it's a direct replacement for white. I think this is best done in the spirit of fairness. I dare someone to object with me on the point that it's the most fair way to do it.


----------



## Bob (May 7, 2012)

Dene said:


> I think it only makes sense to put black on top if it's a direct replacement for white. I think this is best done in the spirit of fairness. I dare someone to object with me on the point that it's the most fair way to do it.


 
I don't object in the spirit of fairness, I object in the spirit of the regulations. Do I think the regulations should require black top green front for such a cube? Yes. But I don't scramble that way right now because that's not what's written.


----------



## Rpotts (May 7, 2012)

Dene said:


> I think it only makes sense to put black on top if it's a direct replacement for white. I think this is best done in the spirit of fairness. I dare someone to object with me on the point that it's the most fair way to do it.



That's arbitrary, there's nothing special about white. If someone's cube had a dark color directly replacing green, say dark purple, then the cube would be scrambled with white on top and the lightest other color on front, like orange. 

It doesn't really matter though, imo.


----------



## Dene (May 7, 2012)

Rpotts said:


> That's arbitrary, there's nothing special about white. If someone's cube had a dark color directly replacing green, say dark purple, then the cube would be scrambled with white on top and the lightest other color on front, like orange.
> 
> It doesn't really matter though, imo.


 
If green was replaced with purple, and no other colour changed, I would also say put purple on the front.


----------



## DrKorbin (May 7, 2012)

Bob said:


> But I don't scramble that way right now because that's not what's written.


There are many things that are not written in regulations and yet must be followed. Like legality of transparent, pillowed and colored cubes for bld events.


----------



## aronpm (May 7, 2012)

Dene said:


> If green was replaced with purple, and no other colour changed, I would also say put purple on the front.


 
I would say this is a terrible decision as a delegate. Your job isn't to make your own rules, it is to make sure that the existing rules are followed.


----------



## (X) (May 7, 2012)

DrKorbin said:


> There are many things that are not written in regulations and yet must be followed. Like legality of transparent, pillowed and colored cubes for bld events.


I see your point, and I think it's important to implement the rules for pillowed cubes in the regulations. anyway, this does not mean that we should disregard the regulations when it states something very clearly, in this case the scrambling position.


----------



## Sebastien (May 7, 2012)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> It was mentioned here: http://worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=941
> Although no official stuff has been asid about it, it's so widely done that it is accepted as normal. For example, at the last competition I went to, cubes with normal colours but black replacing white were scrambled as if black was white.


 
This is nowhere accepted. 

Don't make wrong assumptions on people's bad regulation knowledge.


----------



## Thompson (May 7, 2012)

I've always thought that blue is a darker colour than green. 

Anybody else?


----------



## aronpm (May 7, 2012)

Thompson said:


> I've always thought that blue is a darker colour than green.
> 
> Anybody else?


The "darkest adjacent face" clause only comes into play when green is not adjacent to white (or the lightest colour).


----------



## MalusDB (May 7, 2012)

Theres a very simple reason black should be used as top. It maintains the orientation of most pieces in respect to each other between a cube with white and another with black (since they almost exclusively replace each other). Since black almost only features on larger cubes this is alot of pieces we are talking about inverting. It may be no problem to some people, but it boils down to the fact that it makes the racing aspect unfair. Its like saying that 2 people can run a 400 on a track but in opposite directions. Someone MAY be given an unfair advantage by alteration of their scramble solely based on some childish idea that the rules are sacred. Obviously this rule has not been edited since the advent of black stickering becoming so popular. The discussion here is practically obsolete, we should really discuss what the rule should be changed to, it's clearly outdated.


----------



## ardi4nto (May 7, 2012)

Based on article written on the regulation, black is not the lightest face.
I always ask the scrambler to do yellow on top if black replace white.

May be explicit article in the regulation should be placed in order to avoid things like this.
(also the definition of the darkest and lightest is not clear, for example "is cyan lighter than yellow?")


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (May 7, 2012)

I think the reg is currently fine, so long as people follow it correctly. Strangely, I don't recall ever being faced with this scenario when scrambling (except for megaminx where I checked that I knew the rule correctly, which isn't really the point of this topic). So what if black replaces white but the cube is scrambled with yellow on top? Sure it will be 'upside down' from other competitors and might affect people who e.g. start on black cross compared to those who always start on white cross, but it _is_ the same scramble, and like Kir always says, the regs should be method neutral.


----------



## (X) (May 7, 2012)

MalusDB said:


> Theres a very simple reason black should be used as top. It maintains the orientation of most pieces in respect to each other between a cube with white and another with black (since they almost exclusively replace each other). Since black almost only features on larger cubes this is alot of pieces we are talking about inverting. It may be no problem to some people, but it boils down to the fact that it makes the racing aspect unfair. Its like saying that 2 people can run a 400 on a track but in opposite directions. Someone MAY be given an unfair advantage by alteration of their scramble solely based on some childish idea that the rules are sacred. Obviously this rule has not been edited since the advent of black stickering becoming so popular. The discussion here is practically obsolete, we should really discuss what the rule should be changed to, it's clearly outdated.


 
People start their solve on different sides. If you use black stickers it's your own choice to have different starting conditions than the other competitors. This is about as unfair as to start solving on the green or orange side...


----------



## MalusDB (May 7, 2012)

(X) said:


> People start their solve on different sides. If you use black stickers it's your own choice to have different starting conditions than the other competitors. This is about as unfair as to start solving on the green or orange side...


 
Completely missed the point. Its not like starting on a different colour its like starting on a different scramble. If one cube is scrambled YG and the other WG with every colour in the same orientation (assuming white and black are analagous), then regardless of what colour you start with it will be effectively a different scramble.


----------



## megaminxwin (May 7, 2012)

Define 'lighter' and 'darker'.

People are obviously going to have a different opinion of what the lightest and darkest colours are. I bring this up mainly because of WCA Regulation 3c):

"Competitors must use any colour scheme for cube puzzles, as long as the puzzles show one colour per face in solved state. For other puzzles competitors must use any variation that has the same moves, positions and solutions as the original puzzle."

Alright then. So let's make a really weird colour scheme (go to cubesmith.com for pictures of the stickers): yellow opposite light purple, light blue opposite blue, and pink opposite middle grey, with pink, light blue and yellow going around a corner clockwise. Weird, but it could happen. Let's just run with it.

So the question is: which colour is the lightest, and which colour is the darkest?

Already they can be split into groups. Yellow, light blue and pink are the lightest, and light purple, blue and middle grey are the darkest. But then it gets very ambiguous. I mean, I can't tell the difference between what's lighter: yellow, light blue or pink? If I really had to discriminate, I'd have a choice between light blue and pink, but that's as best as I can do.

As for dark colours, the best I can do is blue and middle grey, but I can't do anything better.

Obviously other people are going to have different opinions, but that only adds to the problem. If people have different opinions, then who's supposed to tell if the cube's scrambled properly? The regulations have nothing on this; there are regulations for deciding whether a rescramble is necessary for the 6x6x6 and 7x7x7 cubes, but not anything else.

As a result, I reckon that the regulations need to be clarified. Again, a rare case, but it's hypothetical. So again, something needs to be cleared up. I'm not suggesting any ideas for new regulations, I'm just making a case for why they need to be changed.

Teal deer: the regulations aren't clear enough on the colour scheme for scrambling, and something needs to be changed.

*proceeds to be utterly smashed by kirjava*


----------



## MalusDB (May 7, 2012)

bobthegiraffemonkey said:


> and like Kir always says, the regs should be method neutral.


This is not an example of method neutral. The scramble is mirrored. It doesn't matter what method you use or whether you are CN or not, you STILL are doing a different scramble. It is not the fairest way to do it. It just makes sense to scramble black on top. You should think of White top, Green front as a quick way of saying the orientation of the entire cube. It makes perfect sense to do so. If the rules were written correctly there would be no difference between the states of the cubes relative to each other in each race for each scramble and there would be no ambiguity in the rules giving any cause for discussion. The rules clearly do not fulfil this, so they need changed.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (May 7, 2012)

MalusDB said:


> The scramble is mirrored.


 
Wrong: it is applied to a cube with a different colour scheme. Also, if you want to relate it to the standard colour scheme it is rotated by a z2, not reflected.


----------



## MalusDB (May 7, 2012)

bobthegiraffemonkey said:


> Wrong: it is applied to a cube with a different colour scheme. Also, if you want to relate it to the standard colour scheme it is rotated by a z2, not reflected.



Fair enough, but my point still stands, its still not the same scramble. If someone decides to use a colour scheme where the relative orientation cannot be preserved since it differs too much, then there may be a default manner to solve. Since this is a very small group of cubers it wont really cause many problems. Since quite alot of cubers do use black as an alternative to white then the rules should strive to maintain as much similarity between the states of the cubes being used by each competitor. This is best achieved by scrambling with black on top. Its not like its going to be rediculously confusing. Everyone already assocates white and black as "the same".


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (May 7, 2012)

MalusDB said:


> Fair enough, but my point still stands, its still not the same scramble.


 
But it is the same scramble. It is the same sequence of moves applied to the solved position. If you use a different colour scheme then you end up with a different arrangement of colours, that's inevitable, but as long as the same sequence of moves is performed from the orientation prescribed by the WCA, then it's fair. Why should the WCA change the rules to suit a certain group of people who use a certain non-standard colour scheme? It's too arbitrary.


----------



## (X) (May 7, 2012)

MalusDB said:


> Completely missed the point. Its not like starting on a different colour its like starting on a different scramble. If one cube is scrambled YG and the other WG with every colour in the same orientation (assuming white and black are analagous), then regardless of what colour you start with it will be effectively a different scramble.


Do you agree that you do the same move-sequence to the puzzles no matter what orientation? A move sequence done to a puzzle is the definition of a scramble. If I use ROGBWY and start on orange I would have the same starting point as someone who uses ROBGWB and starts on red. Do you understand? Some people choose themselves to have another colour scheme, that's their choice. This can mean they get another starting point just like someone who would start on another colour, or it could mean they get the same starting point as the majority of solvers. This depends on their choice of colour scheme and starting point.


----------



## aronpm (May 7, 2012)

The puzzle state is exactly the same regardless of scrambling orientation. For the purpose of the puzzle state, the actual colour of stickers doesn't matter, it's their relative positions to each other.


----------



## qqwref (May 7, 2012)

I think the regulation just needs to be rewritten. Black replacing white in a color scheme is very common now, and that common cosmetic change should really not affect the scramble that is given to the competitor. Maybe one solution is to have the top color be white, or black if there is no white, or the lightest color if there is neither black nor white.

aronpm: Except that most people aren't color neutral, so the starting orientation (e.g. where their cross color ends up before the scramble is applied) does matter.


----------



## (X) (May 7, 2012)

qqwref said:


> I think the regulation just needs to be rewritten. Black replacing white in a color scheme is very common now, and that common cosmetic change should really not affect the scramble that is given to the competitor. Maybe one solution is to have the top color be white, or black if there is no white, or the lightest color if there is neither black nor white.
> 
> aronpm: Except that most people aren't color neutral, so the starting orientation (e.g. where their cross color ends up before the scramble is applied) does matter.


 
It does matter, but it is the competitors choice to use another colour scheme. I can see that, if the function of this paragraph is to give the competitors the same starting conditions to the greatest extent, the paragraph should be changed to include black as a replacement for white.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (May 7, 2012)

The rules shouldn't have to take account of how colour neutral or not the average cuber is. If you only do one colour cross, then you are putting yourself at the risk of having a bad case for that cross, whatever colour it is. There is an equal probability of good/bad cases for all cross colours, so overall it will balance out anyway.


----------



## aronpm (May 7, 2012)

qqwref said:


> aronpm: Except that most people aren't color neutral, so the starting orientation (e.g. where their cross color ends up before the scramble is applied) does matter.


 
If the competitor chooses to deviate from the normal colour schemes they should not expect to have the same colours as everyone else

That being said, I don't mind the regulation being changed to reflect black on top, but as long the regulations do not say that, it shouldn't happen.


----------



## Ranzha (May 7, 2012)

Considering the fact that the vast majority of the time black is used as a substitute for white while the rest of the standard colour scheme is left unchanged. I agree with Dene on this, actually. In his examples, five of the faces followed standard colour scheme, and for consistency's sake for the competitors, the 'relative' W/G U/F should be followed.
However, the regulation will not change due to the fact that speedsolving is an assessment of how a competitor can solve the given puzzle from any scrambled position. But it's kind of unreasonable to ask everyone to maintain a similar colour scheme in competition if practice at home is done differently.


----------



## ben1996123 (May 7, 2012)

Thompson said:


> I've always thought that blue is a darker colour than green.
> 
> Anybody else?



Yes.


----------



## mariano.aquino (May 7, 2012)

Are we assuming that everybody uses Fridrich, everybody uses white-black crosses, nobody is not even opposite color neutral...? Rules may need some adjustments regarding weird colors (even though delegates final call works just fine) but anything else said about mirrored scrambles or unfairness does not make a point not to follow the current regulations


----------



## Rune (May 7, 2012)

Suppose that one sixth of the competitors begins with red, one sixth with blue etc. In that case should the regulation here have any meaning?
4d) Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

Bob said:


> I agree with Kian. Black should absolutely never be the top color when scrambling.



I think it's perfectly fine if you're scrambling and a WCA Board member tells you to do it like this.



Dene said:


> I dare someone to object with me on the point that it's the most fair way to do it.



The objection is that it's not what the rules state. If the rules are being applied differently across different competitions, then /this/ is unfair.



qqwref said:


> I think the regulation just needs to be rewritten. Black replacing white in a color scheme is very common now, and that common cosmetic change should really not affect the scramble that is given to the competitor. Maybe one solution is to have the top color be white, or black if there is no white, or the lightest color if there is neither black nor white.


 
Of course.

The impression I get is that the regulations are trying to say that the colour scheme should match the 'standard' one as much as posible.


----------



## Bob (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I think it's perfectly fine if you're scrambling and a WCA Board member tells you to do it like this.


 
Only if it is explicitly written somewhere and universally followed. Otherwise, we will have inconsistency depending on who the delegate and scrambler is, which should not happen. If a WCA Board member is telling people to scramble with black on top, the WCA Regulations should be altered to reflect this.


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

Bob said:


> Only if it is explicitly written somewhere and universally followed.


 
Nah, being told verbally by them at the time should be good enough. I wouldn't want to directly disobey a WCA board member for the sake of following some regulations that need to be changed.


----------



## hcfong (May 7, 2012)

No, a board member or WCA delegate has no authority to deviate from the regulations. They are there to make sure the regulations are followed, not to deviate from regulations where these are perfectly clear.


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

hcfong said:


> No, a board member or WCA delegate has no authority to deviate from the regulations.


 
The fact that board members can retroactively change results based on video evidence somewhat refutes this.


----------



## scotzbhoy (May 7, 2012)

I had always thought it was agreed that if white was replaced with black, the cube should be scrambled with black on top. Apparently I was wrong. I still think it should be done this way, because it's still the same orientation. If the colour scheme is exactly the same except with black instead of white, the cube should be scrambled with black top, green front, because with the standard BOY scheme this also means orange is left and red right. With yellow top instead, these are the other way round. In addition, looking at CFOP since most cubers tend to start with white or yellow cross, they will likely be more used to solving this way. Say someone starts with white cross then gets a cube with black instead, I would have thought they'd start with black cross because they'll be used to having yellow as their top colour. By the same token if they start with yellow, surely they'll continue solving with yellow cross because that's what they're used to. If their cube is then scrambled with yellow on top, they could be placed at a disadvantage compared to someone whose cube has white because the orientation is different.


----------



## Mike Hughey (May 7, 2012)

As things stand today, it seems that a board member does have authority to deviate from the regulations, but a non-board-member-delegate does not.


----------



## hcfong (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> The fact that board members can retroactively change results based on video evidence somewhat refutes this.


 
This is not against the regulations. The regulations only state that the WCA delegate and the main judge must not support their decisions based on video or photographic analysis. This does not include the WCA board. Also as far as I know, the WCA board is not the same as individual WCA board members. The WCA board can and have altered competition results based on video evidence when it was clear that the result submitted was wrong or because there were irregularities in the solve.


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

hcfong said:


> This is not against the regulations.



Of course not, but it shows that the board members can operate outside of standard procedure.



hcfong said:


> Also as far as I know, the WCA board is not the same as individual WCA board members.



Are you trying to say that WCA board members cannot perform actions on their own? Because they certainly can.


----------



## hcfong (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Of course not, but it shows that the board members can operate outside of standard procedure.



Yes, outside procedure; not outside regulations, unless you can give me a clear example of a board member making a decision that was clearly against the regulations.



> Are you trying to say that WCA board members cannot perform actions on their own? Because they certainly can.



Yes, of course they can perform actions on their own, but in line with the regulations. Also, when a WCA board member attends a competition as a delegate, he does so as a WCA delegate and during the competition, his authority is limited to that of a WCA delegate.


----------



## Bob (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Nah, being told verbally by them at the time should be good enough. I wouldn't want to directly disobey a WCA board member for the sake of following some regulations that need to be changed.


 
I think you missed my point. My point is not to disobey the WCA Board members. It's that if the Board is telling an organizer or delegate to deviate from the regulation, the regulation should be rewritten or all delegates should be informed of the deviation. If Kris de Asus is told to scramble black top, green front, then I should be told the same. Otherwise, we have inconsistencies.


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

Bob said:


> I think you missed my point. My point is not to disobey the WCA Board members. It's that if the Board is telling an organizer or delegate to deviate from the regulation, the regulation should be rewritten


 
I've already stated that the regs need to be rewritten in this case. I understand your point - I was explaining what should be done in the interim.



hcfong said:


> Yes, outside procedure; not outside regulations, unless you can give me a clear example of a board member making a decision that was clearly against the regulations.



Just because they haven't doesn't mean they can't.



hcfong said:


> Also, when a WCA board member attends a competition as a delegate, he does so as a WCA delegate and during the competition, his authority is limited to that of a WCA delegate.


 
Can you cite evidence for this?


----------



## ThomasJE (May 7, 2012)

I think we're going off-topic with the board/delegate stuff. Let's keep it basic - if one of either white or green (the scrambling orientation) is replaced by a different colour (e.g. black instead of white), then the alternative colour takes the place of the usual colour. If both white and green are replaced, then the lightest/darkest rule applies. That's what I think.


----------



## hcfong (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Can you cite evidence for this?


 
I have to admit that I can't, but it only seems logical to me. If a board member would use his authority to deviate from the regulations - assuming that he has the authority to do so - it would, in my opinion, undermine the regulations. I mean, if the very people who wrote the regulations can deviate from them in ad hoc cases, why would the rest of the cubing community even bother with the regulations?



ThomasJE said:


> I think we're going off-topic with the board/delegate stuff. Let's keep it basic - if one of either white or green (the scrambling orientation) is replaced by a different colour (e.g. black instead of white), then the alternative colour takes the place of the usual colour. If both white and green are replaced, then the lightest/darkest rule applies. That's what I think.



That's not what the regulations say. It ways white (or lightest colour by default) on top and green (or darkest adjacent colour) in front. It says nothing about when either white or green is replaced by another colour that colour should be on top or front respectively.


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2012)

hcfong said:


> I have to admit that I can't, but it only seems logical to me. If a board member would use his authority to deviate from the regulations - assuming that he has the authority to do so - it would, in my opinion, undermine the regulations.



Not really. The WCA Board are trusted people, I don't think they would lead us astray.

In a case where a WCA board member has requested a deviation from the regulations before, I have disagreed with the decision. However, I am happy for them to be able to do this in order to correct things the regulations do not cover.



hcfong said:


> I mean, if the very people who wrote the regulations can deviate from them in ad hoc cases, why would the rest of the cubing community even bother with the regulations?


 
The regulations are not infallable. Many recent threads have shown this.


----------



## hcfong (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Not really. The WCA Board are trusted people, I don't think they would lead us astray.
> 
> In a case where a WCA board member has requested a deviation from the regulations before, I have disagreed with the decision. However, I am happy for them to be able to do this in order to correct things the regulations do not cover.
> 
> ...



I agree. I'm also happy for them to be able to do things in order to correct things that aren't covered by the regulations. The issue of scrambling orientation however, is covered by the regulations. By the way, may I ask what the deviation of the regulation was that was requested?

True, the regulations are not infallible. That's why they need to be reviewed regularly and updated accordingly, but until that happens, the regulations are what they are and should be followed.


----------



## MalusDB (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> The regulations are not infallable.


 That is the biggest understatement in this entire thread. The fact is that black isn't replacing white as a choice, its coming as the default on many cubes. You could extrapolate the arguement to say that its the cubers choice to choose white cubes but thats just getting silly. Change the damn rule and be done with it, that would be the easiest thing in my mind.


----------



## megaminxwin (May 7, 2012)

Leading off what I said earlier:

Personally, I think that the regulations should be changed to white and green, if no white then black and green (or the darkest colour available if there is no green), and if there are neither of these shades, then it should be up to the decision of the delegate. Saves a lot of headaches.


----------



## Pedro (May 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> In a case where a WCA board member has requested a deviation from the regulations before, I have disagreed with the decision.


 
Can you tell what case was that?

I agree with Bob that if Board member(s) is(are) telling people to do something at a competition and not informing everyone else in the world, we have a problem.

And about the thread itself, I've always scrambled with yellow on top if there's no white on the cube, because that's what the regulations say.

Imagine there's a cube with brown instead of white, but everything else is the same. (cube A)
Imagine another cube, with black instead of white, everything else the same. (cube B)
Is it fair to scramble cube B with yellow on top but scramble cube A with black on top? 
Are we going to try to cover every possible which could replace white? Why should we give people who use black in place of white an advantage over those who use another color?

I think regulations are fine as they are now, keeping it simple.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Can you tell what case was that?


 
One that springs to mind is the removal of some scrambles seen as 'easy'.

I'm sure others can be noted.


----------



## Dene (May 8, 2012)

Just on the point that the regulations should remain "method neutral", I may as well make the suggestion then that there shouldn't be any defined orientation to scramble in, because what's the point? Whether you define an orientation or not, the scramble will be "method neutral". Simplicity should take priority, and not defining an orientation is surely simpler.


----------



## BlueDevil (May 8, 2012)

Dene said:


> Just on the point that the regulations should remain "method neutral", I may as well make the suggestion then that there shouldn't be any defined orientation to scramble in, because what's the point? Whether you define an orientation or not, the scramble will be "method neutral". Simplicity should take priority, and not defining an orientation is surely simpler.


 
But then people who use the same method, and work with the same color (not CN) could have very different solves due to a good cross/block being built on different colors (so only one of them would have good recognition and a good solve)
Is that really fair?

Why don't we just change the rule to yellow top, green front. Those two colors being on a cube are much more common than getting a white side. There could be some sort of built in exception for people with different color schemes on their cubes.


----------



## cubernya (May 8, 2012)

BlueDevil said:


> But then people who use the same method, and work with the same color (not CN) could have very different solves due to a good cross/block being built on different colors (so only one of them would have good recognition and a good solve)
> Is that really fair?
> 
> Why don't we just change the rule to yellow top, green front. Those two colors being on a cube are much more common than getting a white side. There could be some sort of built in exception for people with different color schemes on their cubes.


 
YG wouldn't work because of Japanese cubers. Just sayin'


----------



## BlueDevil (May 8, 2012)

theZcuber said:


> YG wouldn't work because of Japanese cubers. Just sayin'


 
ok, YB then. functions just the same, and works for japanese color scheme.


----------



## HelpCube (May 8, 2012)

How about if it's just green on front white on top, and if the cube doesn't allow for that the main judge decides what orientation on a case-by-case basis.


----------



## Ranzha (May 8, 2012)

BlueDevil said:


> ok, YB then. functions just the same, and works for japanese color scheme.


 
We could potentially arrive at the same problem.
The further this thread has developed, the further the idea goes from clarifying the existing regulation to perhaps taking it out entirely.




HelpCube said:


> How about if it's just green on front white on top, and if the cube doesn't allow for that the main judge decides what orientation on a case-by-case basis.


 
I thought about this, but a lot of people are butthurt about inconsistency.
It's solving a bloody Rubik's cube, guys. It's not going to hurt too much.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Dene said:


> Just on the point that the regulations should remain "method neutral", I may as well make the suggestion then that there shouldn't be any defined orientation to scramble in, because what's the point? Whether you define an orientation or not, the scramble will be "method neutral".


 
Being method neutral isn't the only stipulation that regulations require, you know?


----------



## Dene (May 8, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Being method neutral isn't the only stipulation that regulations require, you know?


 
Well of course. I'm going to assume you are on the negative side of that proposal; what exactly did you have in mind for a reason?


----------



## TimMc (May 8, 2012)

*Is 4d beneficial for the scrambler or the competitor?*

Why was 4d written?

Is it meant to ensure that a scrambler can consistently reproduce a scramble on any given cube?

Is it meant to accommodate competitors so that two people using Fridrich, one with W/Y and the other with W/G, who both start with white on the bottom have a _fair_ starting point?

Can we agree that white and black are both colours?

Tim.


----------



## hr.mohr (May 8, 2012)

http://uncletyson.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/wcas-scrambling-orientation/


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Dene said:


> I'm going to assume you are on the negative side of that proposal; what exactly did you have in mind for a reason?



Not really - I would like something else altogether. However, my idea is not feasable due to time/resources constraints, so I will not propose it.



Dene said:


> Just on the point that the regulations should remain "method neutral", I may as well make the suggestion then that there shouldn't be any defined orientation to scramble in, because what's the point? Whether you define an orientation or not, the scramble will be "method neutral". Simplicity should take priority, and not defining an orientation is surely simpler.


 
Simplicity should *certainly not* take priority, especially when the fairness of an event is compromised.


----------



## TimMc (May 8, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> http://uncletyson.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/wcas-scrambling-orientation/



^^must read

Cheers.

Tim.


----------



## kinch2002 (May 8, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> http://uncletyson.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/wcas-scrambling-orientation/


Going by Tyson's reasoning, black should indeed be a substitute for white. The regulations say otherwise, so I would urge the WRC to propose that black should be used as the top colour if white is not present and to get that written down properly. I suspect that Tyson at least would agree.


----------



## hr.mohr (May 8, 2012)

The current regulation is written to support all colour schemes. Just substituting black for white will not work if the cube does not have either white or black.

There is no reason to change the current regulation, but there is a very good reason in reading it...


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> The current regulation is written to support all colour schemes. Just substituting black for white will not work if the cube does not have either white or black.



No one is suggesting to change the regulations so they support less colour schemes.



hr.mohr said:


> There is no reason to change the current regulation


 
I think if people are interpreting the regulations differently, a clarification is certainly in order.


----------



## kinch2002 (May 8, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> The current regulation is written to support all colour schemes. Just substituting black for white will not work if the cube does not have either white or black.
> 
> There is no reason to change the current regulation, but there is a very good reason in reading it...


Of course just saying that black should be used when white isn't present won't cover every case, but I'm saying it should be there as the first fallback option.


----------



## hr.mohr (May 8, 2012)

But why? There is already an explicit fallback option?


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

People wanting to change the rule feel as though the current fallback option can be improved to be more suited to what they would like to aim for.


----------



## Sebastien (May 8, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I think if people are interpreting the regulations differently, [...]



LOL, no!

People are 

(a) violating this regulation on purpose

or 

(b) not knowing this regulation.

There is absolutely no way that someone is scrambling with black on top because he is misinterpreting this regulation.


Edit: The easiest way to cope with this is imo to change the regulation to 



> 4d)	Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the *darkest* colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Sebastien said:


> There is absolutely no way that someone is scrambling with black on top because he is misinterpreting this regulation.


 
I wrote a semantic based argument against your post, then I realised that it being an interpretation mishap or direct violation doesn't change the fact that it needs to be clarified.

LOL


----------



## Sebastien (May 8, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I wrote a semantic based argument against your post, then I realised that it being an interpretation mishap or direct violation doesn't change the fact that it needs to be clarified.


 
Something which is already totally clear surely doesn't need to be clarified.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

If this is a regulation that people feel they can ignore due to it's nature, surely it needs to be changed.

A WCA Board member has given instructions that conflict with regulations - the exact procedure to be followed needs to be clarified.


----------



## Sebastien (May 8, 2012)

I agree with you that it is probably the best solution to change this regulation towards what is supposed to be more intuitive, if people, who don't know it, do it wrong intuitively and if even people who do know it violate it on purpose.

I still disagree, that there is something that needs to be _clarified_ within that story. There is an exact procedure which should be followed right now.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Sebastien said:


> I still disagree, that there is something that needs to be _clarified_ within that story.


 
What the regulations /should/ say needs to be clarified.


----------



## Rune (May 8, 2012)

4d) Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face or black face on top.


----------



## Pedro (May 8, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> If this is a regulation that people feel they can ignore due to it's nature, surely it needs to be changed.
> 
> A WCA Board member has given instructions that conflict with regulations - the exact procedure to be followed needs to be clarified.


 
I don't know why people would feel that they can ignore this regulation, but if you're saying...

Also, you should contact that board member about this (in case you didn't do that yet) and ask him to do something.


----------



## Kirjava (May 8, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Also, you should contact that board member about this (in case you didn't do that yet) and ask him to do something.


 
Nah, no need to contact the board members with something like this.

Better to let the hivemind of speedsolving decide what the regulation should be and let the WRC take it from there.


----------



## hcfong (May 8, 2012)

I thought I'd write down my thoughts re the topic, instead of commenting on Board member's authority to deviate from regulations, as I have done until now.

I agree with Sebastien that the current wording of regulation 4d is perfectly clear and I can see no way that it could be interpreted as black being the top face colour if there's no white face. If you would give a cube where white is replaced by black, to a complete non-cuber to scramble and give him regulation 4d, there is absolutely no way he would scramble with black on top. 

The reason why people use black as the top colour could be because they do it deliberately, or because they are ignorant of the regulation. Although what I think is because they are misinformed. At a recent competition, there was this conversation at the start of an event at the scrambling table. There was a first time competitor who helped out with scrambling and a more experienced one. NC is new cuber, EC is experienced cuber. 

NC: Okay, how does this scrambling work?
EC: You scramble with the white face on top and green facing you.

NC grabs a cube and oh dear! there is no white face.

NC: Ehm.. there is no white face on this cube. What do I do now?

At this stage I try to explain that in that case, he should put the lightest colour on top, but EC, who has a more powerful voice than I interrupted and said

EC: Okay, then scramble with black on top. 

As the new cuber accepted his instructions, I held my peace.

So, I think the main reason that people scramble with black on top when there's no white, is because they were told to do so by more experienced cubers who are already in the habit to scramble that way. But regardless if the whole world does this, it is still not in line with the regulations.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: The regulation is crystal clear. "Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front." If you would give someone a cube where black replaces white and this regulation, without any additional comments or instructions, there is no way someone would scramble with black on top. The regulations are what they are and they should be followed. Whatever Tyson or any other WCA Board member might say during the competition is completely irrelevant. I absolutely do not intend to disrespect board members, but the fact is that not all of us have the benefit of having a board member at hand to tell us what to do when there's a non-standard situation, such as a cube without a white face. In fact, judging from the WCA database, unless you live in The Netherlands or are able to travel to there for competitions, the chances that you will meet a board member are pretty slim. It could of course be that I'm totally wrong and that the other 2 board members do regularly attend competitions, but do not compete, hence why there are no results for them. In that case, I stand corrected and apologise. anyway, what I'm trying to say is that while not everybody has the benefit of having board member nearby to consult, we all have the WCA regulations, which are available at all competitions to consult. And if the regulations are not available at the competition, that's a violation of regulation 1b2 

Having said all this, I do believe the current regulation 4d is flawed. It makes much more sense to scramble with whatever colour replaces white on top. The WRC needs to have a good look at this, especially with regards to the wording of it, to avoid misunderstandings. I've thought about it, but I have so far failed to come up with a clear regulations that leaves no doubt as to how a cube needs to be held when scrambled. Sebastien's suggestion of 'white (or darkest colour by default) on top, works with the current pre-stickered cubes, as they all have black replacing white. But it is possible in the future that white is being replaced by a different colour, which isn't the darkest colour. In that case, we have the same problem again. Another possibility would be "white (or its substitute colour) on top", but we cannot assume that everybody knows which colour would normally be white. Or we could say: "the face opposite yellow on top", but that only works when yellow is opposite white normally, which is the case now, but could change in the future. 

anyway, I think I've rambled enough now. Just a quick summary: The regulations are clear and should be followed. Even though they are counter intuitive and instructions by board members have been given contrary to the regulations, they are the current regulations which everyone at a competition should be familiar with and be able to consult during competitions, and as such should be followed. On the other hand, I believe regulation is flawed and should be adapted to make it more in line with common sense and intuition. However, I except that the correct wording of the updated regulation will be a challenge and I wish the WRC good luck with i.


----------



## TMOY (May 8, 2012)

IMHO the best way to solve the problem is to just consider black as dark white.


----------



## Pedro (May 9, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Nah, no need to contact the board members with something like this.
> 
> Better to let the hivemind of speedsolving decide what the regulation should be and let the WRC take it from there.



Then why do you keep bringing that up?


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

I mention it because it highlights how prevalent black top green front is. 

WRC was created so the board doesn't have to deal with this stuff


----------



## Dene (May 9, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Simplicity should *certainly not* take priority, especially when the fairness of an event is compromised.


 
Ok but I'm sure you agree that in the case that things are completely fair, simplicity should take priority? 

Now in the context of remaining method neutral, judgement of the fairness of the scrambling procedure cannot be influenced by the resulting scramble when related to particular methods. Taking the obvious example of people using CFOP with white cross, if we scramble the cubes using a random orientation to start with and one person has an amazing double x-cross on white, and another has a crappy 7 move cross on white, we cannot make a judgement on the fairness of that, as we are remaining method neutral.

The way I see it, fairness cannot be compromised by random orientation vs. fixed orientation, therefore it should play no role in our judgements, therefore we should revert to the simplicity factor.

I also want to mention the story by Tyson, which makes it clear that an orientation was chosen for every scramble in response to competitors being allowed to choose their orientation (to avoid getting an easy cross). This decision was made, according to Tyson's account, in the spirit of fairness, while taking into account method neutrality. But it seems that at the time Tyson did not consider the option of having no fixed orientation, and simply not allowing competitors to choose. If you think about it, he went from one extreme (forcing competitors to give a colour) to the other extreme (forcing the same orientation every time). This is a natural response, and occurs all the time in the world, but I believe a more reasoned response would have come to middle ground, i.e. random orientation each time.


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> judgement of the fairness of the scrambling procedure cannot be influenced by the resulting scramble when related to particular methods



That is not what method neutral means.

Method neutral means that no bias is given towards any particular method.

Random orientation compromises fairness because the cubestate generated by random state scramblers includes isomorphisms.


----------



## TimMc (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> I believe a more reasoned response would have come to middle ground, i.e. random orientation each time.


 
In terms of scrambling efficiency, it would be difficult to compare a picture of a cube on a scramble sheet with a specific orientation (white top, green front) and a standard colour scheme with a scrambled cube that has a different orientation and the same standard colour scheme.

In terms of fairness, the orientation doesn't really matter unless the scrambler knows that a particular competitor is not colour neutral and they deliberately change the orientation so that the applied scramble results in a difficult cross (_maybe it ends up being a LL skip anyway???_). It looks like 4d addresses this problem.

When the colour scheme of a cube changes slightly, e.g white has been substituted for black, it would make sense to simply retain the closest orientation (black top, green front) so that verifying scrambles is easier. However, the current 4d is useful when the colour scheme significantly changes to a point where any orientation wouldn't really help a scrambler verify the scramble. You'd essentially want competent colour neutral scramblers to verify the scrambles.

Tim.


----------



## TimMc (May 9, 2012)

Method and colour neutral approach:

Get colour neutral scramblers to verify that the correct scramble has been applied.
Apply a scramble using any random orientation (scrambler could be bias and choose particular colours). 
Encourage competitors to become colour neutral so that they avoid being targeted by scramblers who have no respect for competitors who simply solve with a White Cross using Fridrich...

Or simply swap black/white?

Tim.


----------



## qqwref (May 9, 2012)

A "color neutral scrambler"? Have you ever met such a person?

PS: It is possible that people who scramble black on top, and who understand the current regulations, may be attempting to follow the spirit of the law rather than the letter. That is, the regulation exists to ensure that people get the same orientation whenever possible, and if someone replaces the top color they should still get the same orientation as everyone else.


----------



## Meep (May 9, 2012)

A possible revision would be to acknowledge certain "standard" color schemes like BOY and BYO, then treat having 5 or more colors matching a defined color scheme to be that scheme with whatever color substituted. Then define the White/Green for U/F orientation afterwards, with the lightest/darkest adjacent faces for those that don't fall under the defined schemes.

From what I've seen, most scramblers just naturally see black as the replacement for white and start scrambling with black/green U/F. Due to this we end up with more inconsistencies in scrambling due to them simply forgetting that it's to be yellow under the regulations on some scrambles, and remembering that it is on other occasions. Every time I popped by the scrambling table I had to correct them at least once mid-scramble on the issue. This led to one of our organizers e-mailing Tyson about it (For some competition in 2011):



Tyson's Response said:


> I'm fine with black/green. It's a pretty fine point.
> 
> Our next priority with regulations is to set up a system so that these
> points can be addressed on a regular basis. Hopefully this gets done
> soon.


----------



## Ranzha (May 9, 2012)

Meep said:


> A possible revision would be to acknowledge certain "standard" color schemes like BOY and BYO, then treat having *5 or more colors* matching a defined color scheme to be that scheme with whatever color substituted. Then define the White/Green for U/F orientation afterwards, with the lightest/darkest adjacent faces for those that don't fall under the defined schemes.


 
LanLan 2x2s have black replacing white and purple replacing orange. I dunno of any other brand that does this.


----------



## Dene (May 9, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> That is not what method neutral means.
> 
> Method neutral means that no bias is given towards any particular method.



That wasn't an attempt to define method neutral, it is a statement that is an implication of the meaning of method neutral. I'll try to rephrase it, but I don't know if it's going to be any clearer what I mean:

Bearing in mind that we want to ensure that no bias is given towards any particular method (i.e. that we remain method neutral), we can't make a judgement on the fairness of the scrambling procedure (i.e. specific orientation vs. random orientation) by comparing the scrambled state to a particular method (for an example of comparing a scrambled state to a method see my above post). 



Kirjava said:


> Random orientation compromises fairness because the cubestate generated by random state scramblers includes isomorphisms.


 
I don't know what that is, or what difference it makes >.< . You'll have to explain to me why it matters or otherwise I simply cannot agree or disagree.


----------



## aronpm (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> I don't know what that is, or what difference it makes >.< . You'll have to explain to me why it matters or otherwise I simply cannot agree or disagree.


 
In other words



Dene said:


> I am not fit to be involved in this discussion


----------



## Dene (May 9, 2012)

Way to contribute bro. By using terms that few people understand and claiming that people must understand the term to contribute, you would only enormously limit the number of people that can contribute, thereby reducing any discussion on this matter to completely worthless. 

Basically what I'm saying is add something of value to the discussion or shut up and get out.


----------



## aronpm (May 9, 2012)

The ability to be able to look up the meaning of a new word is pretty important for discussing things.


----------



## Dene (May 9, 2012)

I did look it up. The only stuff I could find looked too complicated for me to be bothered to take the time to understand when I'm sure kirjava, or someone else, could dumb it down into simple enough terms for myself and the average person to understand without too much hassle.


----------



## Godmil (May 9, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Random orientation compromises fairness because the cubestate generated by random state scramblers includes isomorphisms.


 
I'd also like a simplified version of this sentence please. With a bit of research, some things are suggesting that this could mean that you're getting more than one end result from the same scramble, or that it includes the inverses of scrambles? :/


----------



## Erik (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> I did look it up. The only stuff I could find looked too complicated for me to be bothered to take the time to understand when I'm sure kirjava, or someone else, could dumb it down into simple enough terms for myself and the average person to understand without too much hassle.


 
You do realize that lots of beginners would get flamed if they say "I couldn't be bothered, it looks too complicated, please just explain to me" right?

FIY (I don't even know why I took the time to do this): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isomorphism "_if two objects are isomorphic, then any property that is preserved by an isomorphism and that is true of one of the objects, is also true of the other._" 

In other words: 2 scrambles with the same properties are isomorphic, it's not necessary that the colours are the same. If you put a 3 cycle on the U face in Cube Explorer and then a 3 cycle on the R face (both have all pieces oriented), Cube Explorer will say "cube is isomorphic to the one you just researched, do you want to continue?".


----------



## Godmil (May 9, 2012)

Thanks for helping to clear that up Erik. So if the random scrambler includes isomorphisms... that means that it's unfair to include random orientations because... it increases randomness/decresases randomness.. nope I'm still not sure what Kirjava meant. Any more help would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## (X) (May 9, 2012)

I think random orientation is a bad idea. I do not see why it is simpler than having a standard orientation. It just adds another thing to be aware of for the judges. I imagine the scramble must include and orientation like BRY or something. anyway the biggest concern is that I think the idea, or atleast some of it, of this regulation is to give as many competitors as possible the same starting conditions. I think the paragraph, as it is written today, does that job. But a change to include black as a substitute for white would be better. 

Even better, to increase fairness for all competitors, is Meep's proposal of treating it as a version of a standard colour scheme as long as theres just one colour that deviates from the standard.


----------



## qqwref (May 9, 2012)

Random orientation wouldn't fix this problem because you'd then be giving different people (with the same color scheme and method) different orientations. And since the vast majority of cubers are not fully color neutral, this means that given two people with the same method it is quite possible for one to get an easier scramble than the other. This defeats the purpose of using the same scramble for everyone.

Note that I did not specify which method I was talking about. As you can see, my argument is method-neutral.


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> That wasn't an attempt to define method neutral, it is a statement that is an implication of the meaning of method neutral.



Method centric analysis can be used to produce method neutral judgement.



qqwref said:


> Note that I did not specify which method I was talking about. As you can see, my argument is method-neutral.



In the context of regulation, CN and non CN are two different 'methods' of solving the cube. While these hypothetical people are using the same /speedsolving system/ to solve the cube, their actual approaches (due to different implementations) are different.

Not that your argument has to be method neutral in the first place, just the resulting proposal.



Dene said:


> I don't know what that is, or what difference it makes >.< . You'll have to explain to me why it matters or otherwise I simply cannot agree or disagree.



Competitors in the same group are assigned the same cube state. Scrambling programs produce a scramble to take the cube to the randomly generated state. The state is not defined by how the pieces are relative to each other, it is defined from a fixed orientation. Applying a random orientation of your choice before a scramble will lead to a different state than the one intended. 

Random state generators do not treat isomorphic states as the same, and neither should the regulations.

Aside from this, scramblers are able to influence the state given to the competitor when applying their "random" orientation.


----------



## Pedro (May 9, 2012)

Why not chage it to yellow (or brightest) on top and red (or darkest adjacent) on front?

Easy, no confusion, avoids black/white issue, etc...


----------



## Dene (May 9, 2012)

Erik said:


> You do realize that lots of beginners would get flamed if they say "I couldn't be bothered, it looks too complicated, please just explain to me" right?



And rightly so, if they are asking for help on something where the information is readily available and easily interpreted. I think you can agree it is fair enough that your average person would be put off by that wikipedia article, which I did indeed skim through before deciding it was too complicated, and a simpler option was to ask.



Erik said:


> In other words: 2 scrambles with the same properties are isomorphic, it's not necessary that the colours are the same. If you put a 3 cycle on the U face in Cube Explorer and then a 3 cycle on the R face (both have all pieces oriented), Cube Explorer will say "cube is isomorphic to the one you just researched, do you want to continue?".





Kirjava said:


> Competitors in the same group are assigned the same cube state. Scrambling programs produce a scramble to take the cube to the randomly generated state. The state is not defined by how the pieces are relative to each other, it is defined from a fixed orientation. Applying a random orientation of your choice before a scramble will lead to a different state than the one intended.
> 
> Random state generators do not treat isomorphic states as the same, and neither should the regulations.



Well, at least I think I understand what isomorphic means now  . While I see your point, I don't believe it ultimately impedes on the _fairness_ issue. Even if cubeexplorer (or any other program) scrambles based on a fixed orientation, once the sequence of moves has been defined, it is just as easy to view the pieces relative to each other rather than relative to the fixed orientation (even if this is not how the program is intended to be operated).



Kirjava said:


> Aside from this, scramblers are able to influence the state given to the competitor when applying their "random" orientation.


 
After Tim posted a response to something I said, we had a discussion and this issue was brought up. My response was something like:
1) For a scrambler to choose an "easy" or "hard" cross for their friend or enemy would be against the spirit of fairness etc., and would not only serve as grounds to stop them from scrambling, but to ban them from the competition altogether.
2) Having a specified orientation does not prevent a competitor from helping/sabotaging someone when no one is paying attention to them while they are scrambling. For example, if I was so inclined, I could have deliberately manipulated the orientation for probably more than a thousand cubes in competitions already, without being noticed.
3) While having a specified orientation in the regulations gives the delegate something specific to point to if someone were to be found out to be manipulating the orientation deliberately, the rule itself would be superfluous, as pointed out in point 1 above.


I have to say, to be honest I don't care if there is a random orientation or not, and I always scramble white top/green front when scrambling at home anyway. But allowing for random orientation does remove the issues being brought up in this thread (except for the ones related to random orientation  ). I just think it's worth looking at, and I'm happy to play devils advocate ^_^


----------



## Erik (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> And rightly so, if they are asking for help on something where the information is readily available and easily interpreted. I think you can agree it is fair enough that your average person would be put off by that wikipedia article, which I did indeed skim through before deciding it was too complicated, and a simpler option was to ask.



If I would insist on an explanation on all topics I don't understand of this forum I think ppl would call me a spammer. Just sayin


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

Dene said:


> once the sequence of moves has been defined, it is just as easy to view the pieces relative to each other rather than relative to the fixed orientation



No. Viewing the pieces relative to a fixed orientation is required because this is what gives us 43 quintillion states.


----------



## Bob (May 9, 2012)

I can't believe there are over 100 posts regarding what scramble orientation we should use.


----------



## Kirjava (May 9, 2012)

Bob said:


> I can't believe there are over 100 posts regarding what scramble orientation we should use.


 
welcome to speedsolving.com


----------



## MalusDB (May 9, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Why not chage it to yellow (or brightest) on top and red (or darkest adjacent) on front?
> 
> Easy, no confusion, avoids black/white issue, etc...


 
This is fair enough to be honest. It's unlikely that we would have many situations where this couldn't be adhered to. It would take a long time for this to cause the same problems (and the 100+ comments clearly highlights that there is a problem, since nobody seems to be able to agree on why its right/wrong) that we have with the current rule. I'd be happy enough for this to happen.


----------



## Sa967St (May 9, 2012)

Just in case people missed this post. Here's a simple and effective solution:


Sebastien said:


> The easiest way to cope with this is imo to change the regulation to
> 
> 
> 
> > 4d)	Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the *darkest* colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front.


----------



## Dene (May 10, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> No. Viewing the pieces relative to a fixed orientation is required because this is what gives us 43 quintillion states.


 
tbh, not really seeing that as a major issue >.<


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

It's not a major issue, it's a reason why we should used fixed orientation as opposed to random.

Quite a good one.


----------



## Dene (May 10, 2012)

Oh well, fair enough as long as that's how CE works, but if isomorphisms were taken into account I think it would be worth considering. What need have we for 43 quintillion cases anyway? Is 7(?) quintillion not enough?


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Dene said:


> Oh well, fair enough as long as that's how CE works



No. That's how any random state scrambler works, because _that is how cubing works_.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

Sa967St said:


> Just in case people missed this post. Here's a simple and effective solution:


 
What if I have gray instead of white? Or light blue? or pink, lavender, light green...


----------



## Sa967St (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> What if I have gray instead of white? Or light blue? or pink, lavender, light green...


Then changing "lightest" to "darkest" would make no difference (unless the grey is darker than blue, which probably won't be the case). Realistically, since few people would use such a colour scheme where there are two similar colours, it wouldn't matter.


----------



## TimMc (May 10, 2012)

So... is there a chance that Cube Explorer will generate isomorphic scrambles when using the "Generate WCA Scrambles" feature and not remove these cases?

I.e. Colour neutral solvers could essentially apply the same solution for 2/5 scrambles with some axis rotations requires as some setup moves for the second one?

Tim.


----------



## Vincents (May 10, 2012)

So, I must be missing something here, but
"Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front."

Seems pretty clear to me. If there is no white face, you go with the next lightest color on top, and the darkest adjacent face in front. It seems to me the issue is that the regulations are not followed, not that the regulation needs updating.

I'm not redefining this to yellow on top, red in front or whatever, because nonstandard color schemes will always provide problems (you don't change the fundamental problem).


----------



## Dene (May 10, 2012)

Vincents said:


> So, I must be missing something here, but
> "Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the white (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front."
> 
> Seems pretty clear to me. If there is no white face, you go with the next lightest color on top, and the darkest adjacent face in front. It seems to me the issue is that the regulations are not followed, not that the regulation needs updating.
> ...


 
The problem is that if, for a common example, white is switched for black, it's stupid to then completely re-orient the puzzle to yellow on top for scrambling.


----------



## TimMc (May 10, 2012)

Vincents said:


> So, I must be missing something here


 
The regulation is clear.

The discussion is about 4d and questions around whether or not it should be changed have been raised here.



Vincents said:


> nonstandard color schemes will always provide problems



Yes, and I'd like to see a better form of mitigation when there's a nonstandard color scheme that has Black instead of White. Simply orienting the cube with Black (top) and Green (front) would make it much easier for the scrambler to verify the scramble.

A simple change to 4d to accommodate this case won't address every other colour scheme but how many different color schemes to you come across in a competition?

I usually just see the standard or standard on a white cube with black stickers instead of white.

Japan?

Tim.


----------



## Rune (May 10, 2012)

In an event all cubes but one are scrambled after 4d. One cube is scrambled with red in front instead of green. The competitor with this cube is supposed to have a better or worse scramble than the rest. Can anyone explain, how this difference in scrambling may lead to different solves or different inspecting times?


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

Rune said:


> In an event all cubes but one are scrambled after 4d. One cube is scrambled with red in front instead of green. The competitor with this cube is supposed to have a better or worse scramble than the rest. Can anyone explain, how this difference in scrambling may lead to different solves or different inspecting times?


 
The point being discussed is not about which color goes on front, but rather "we should always scramble with the cross color on top, to keep things fair for CFOP users, because when you put yellow on top, instead of black, you're scrambling with cross color on bottom".

As I said, I prefer yellow-top red-front, because I think that's present in the vast majority of the cubes. Works for standard BOY scheme, works for black-in-place-of-white, works for japanese color scheme. Of course if you have this color scheme nothing is gonna work, but...


Oh, and here's a thing I just thought: what about the (big) japanese community, where most people do cross on blue? Are we treating them unfairly all these years?


----------



## Godmil (May 10, 2012)

Rune said:


> In an event all cubes but one are scrambled after 4d. One cube is scrambled with red in front instead of green. The competitor with this cube is supposed to have a better or worse scramble than the rest. Can anyone explain, how this difference in scrambling may lead to different solves or different inspecting times?



If the person is using Roux (which people tend to have a fixed L and R sides) then it could be an easier or harder scramble.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> "we should always scramble with the cross color on top, to keep things fair for CFOP users, because when you put yellow on top, instead of black, you're scrambling with cross color on bottom"


 
This is nothing to do with cross colour.


----------



## Rune (May 10, 2012)

Godmil said:


> If the person is using Roux (which people tend to have a fixed L and R sides) then it could be an easier or harder scramble.



Please, more concrete!


----------



## Ranzha (May 10, 2012)

The word "cross" really shouldn't appear in the discussion because the regulation mustn't be made to favour any method over another.
That said, I don't see how "The regulation is clear" solves the inherent issue that for some reason people think scrambling Y/G U/F is more intuitive than Bk/G U/F.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Rune said:


> Please, more concrete!


 
The same scramble applied to two cubes with different initial orientations leaves them in two different (but isomorphic) states.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> This is nothing to do with cross colour.


 
Then why does black or yellow matter?


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Then why does black or yellow matter?


 
Because the cube will be in a different state for two competitors who are supposed to have the same state.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

Well, as I said before, yellow on top and red on front shoud take care of almost all cases.

Also, what about


> Oh, and here's a thing I just thought: what about the (big) japanese community, where most people do cross on blue? Are we treating them unfairly all these years?


?


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Oh, and here's a thing I just thought: what about the (big) japanese community, where most people do cross on blue? Are we treating them unfairly all these years?


 
*We are not trying to ensure that people who use different colours have the same cross.*


----------



## hr.mohr (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Well, as I said before, yellow on top and red on front shoud take care of almost all cases.


 
But why change a regulation that handles all cases to a version that only handles most?

What if the regulation just said this:

"Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the lightest colour face on top and the darkest adjacent face colour on the front."

and perhaps follow up with the two most common examples white/green and yellow/green? It's the same regulation just with the "confusing" example moved to the end.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Rune said:


> So among different (but isomorphic) states some states are harder to solve than others?


 
There are methods that are given different difficulty by different but isomorphic states and methods that are not.


----------



## Rune (May 10, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> There are methods that are given different difficulty by different but isomorphic states and methods that are not.



You are very fast - I deleated my post two minutes after I have posted it, but in vain.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> But why change a regulation that handles all cases to a version that only handles most?
> 
> What if the regulation just said this:
> 
> ...


 
I'm proposing it because people feel that the rule MUST change. I know current regulations handle any case, but people feel it is unfair to scramble cubes-with-black-in-place-of-white using yellow on top (instead of black).



Kirjava said:


> Because the cube will be in a different state for two competitors who are supposed to have the same state.


 
So you're saying people with japanese color scheme aren't supposed to have the same state?

What if japanese becomes dominant? Will we change the rule again?


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Rune said:


> You are very fast - I deleated my post two minutes after I have posted it, but in vain.



Haha, sorry. We can delete all related posts if you like 



Pedro said:


> So you're saying people with japanese color scheme aren't supposed to have the same state?



No, you just don't understand it. 

They are given the same state if they are scrambled in the same orientation, which they are.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2012)

Ok. What is your proposal, then?

Japanese color scheme has yellow and red adjacent, like almost all color schemes. I think it would solve the current issues.

Do you have something against this?


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Ok. What is your proposal, then?



I don't have one.



Pedro said:


> Japanese color scheme has yellow and red adjacent, like almost all color schemes. I think it would solve the current issues.
> 
> Do you have something against this?


 
Yes. In the current system the western and japanese scheme share 4 colours. Your proposal would make them only share 3.


----------



## DrKorbin (May 10, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Because the cube will be in a different state for two competitors who are supposed *to have the same state*.



1) One cube has western color scheme and another one has japanese. What do you mean by "the same state"? What does this mean that these two cubes with different colors are in the same state?
2) One cube has western color scheme and another one has black instead of white. Same question.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

DrKorbin said:


> 1) One cube has western color scheme and another one has japanese. What do you mean by "the same state"? What does this mean that these two cubes with different colors are in the same state?
> 2) One cube has western color scheme and another one has black instead of white. Same question.


 
Based on the rule, all cubes have a default orientation. Two cubes have the same state when the same scramble is applied to the default orientation of each.


----------



## DrKorbin (May 10, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Based on the rule, all cubes have a default orientation. Two cubes have the same state when the same scramble is applied to the default orientation of each.


Yes, based on the rule. But an intuitive approach would be, in the first case - idunnolol, in the second case two cubes are in the same state if they are equal after replacing black with white. An intuitive approach contradicts the regulations - that's the whole content of this thread.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2012)

DrKorbin said:


> Yes, based on the rule. But an intuitive approach would be, in the first case - idunnolol, in the second case two cubes are in the same state if they are equal after replacing black with white. An intuitive approach contradicts the regulations - that's the whole content of this thread.


 
You contributed nothing.


----------



## Pedro (May 11, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Yes. In the current system the western and japanese scheme share 4 colours. Your proposal would make them only share 3.


 
Well, according to this, I'm changing my proposal to yellow on top and blue on front.
Since they're not swapped in japanese color scheme (and black-instead-of-white), western and japanese still share 4 colours and the white x black problem is solved.


----------



## Kirjava (May 11, 2012)

Pedro said:


> Well, according to this, I'm changing my proposal to yellow on top and blue on front.
> Since they're not swapped in japanese color scheme (and black-instead-of-white), western and japanese still share 4 colours and the white x black problem is solved.


 
With yellow/blue instead of yellow/red they will only share 2 colours.


----------



## Pedro (May 11, 2012)

Oh, you're right.

Orange top, green front
Green front, orange top
Red top, green front
Green front, red top

Any one gives 4 shared colors


----------



## Ranzha (May 11, 2012)

It seems we're now trying to offer a completely different orientation to avoid the issue of whether or not black is a suitable U-face colour when scrambling.
There are two viable solutions to the issue we're avoiding:
-Scramble with yellow-green in UF; It follows the regulations to a tee, and the regulations ultimately solve the issue of "What orientation should I scramble in?" for all colour schemes, no matter how esoteric. The problem is that when scrambled, two cubes with five colours matching can still be at different states although isomorphically consistent.
-Scramble with black-green in UF: Because the VAST majority of colour schemes that contain black are undoubtedly based on the western scheme, it seems logical to keep the colours in an orientation that is intuitively based and keeps both scramble state and isomorphic state consistent. The problem with this lies in that it goes against the current regulations, which can be changed.

The only other possibilities are avoiding the issue by changing orientation to some like what Pedro suggested (OG, GO, RG, GR in UF), or to not have any scramble orientation (which is stupid).


----------



## Pedro (May 11, 2012)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> -Scramble with yellow-green in UF; It follows the regulations to a tee, and the regulations ultimately solve the issue of "What orientation should I scramble in?" for all colour schemes, no matter how esoteric. The problem is that when scrambled, two cubes with five colours matching can still be at different states although isomorphically consistent.
> 
> The only other possibilities are avoiding the issue by changing orientation to some like what Pedro suggested (OG, GO, RG, GR in UF), or to not have any scramble orientation (which is stupid).


 
But yellow-green is not possible on japanese color scheme. Or do you mean "yellow-green if white-green not available"?

I still prefer something which is possible on the main color schemes and has the most colors matching, like I suggested above. Would clear the black-white issue and make regs simpler.

How about this:
_*4d)	Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the orange (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front.*_
?

Oh, I just noticed that nothing is said about non-cube puzzles! Even though common sense says to scramble megaminx or square-1 the same way, it would be nice to have it written, to avoid confusion and/or the need for interpretation. Also setting a scheme for pyraminx would be good.


----------



## Bob (May 11, 2012)

Many cubes replace orange with purple. You get the same issue.


----------



## Pedro (May 11, 2012)

Make it red, then.

I never saw a widely-used cube with no yellow and red.


----------



## Ranzha (May 12, 2012)

I think it's really up to the discretion of the main judge, delegate, and scramblers to follow the protocol as they see fit.
And I did mean "yellow-green if white-green not available". I keep forgetting Japscheme has no YG edge.

Does no one remember reading this?


http://uncletyson.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/wcas-scrambling-orientation/ said:


> So, it came time to decide how the WCA should scramble its cubes. White seemed like a logical choice for the top. White, after all, is not a color. And pretty much every cube has white, though some cubes substitute white for black. But almost every cube has white, and it’s a very neutral color, since it’s not a color. As is black, both white and black aren’t really colors. So it made sense to put something neutral on top.


----------



## qqwref (May 12, 2012)

Anyone who suggests totally changing the default orientation (e.g. to red-green) is being silly. That doesn't really solve the problem; it just avoids the issue by choosing a pair of colors that doesn't behave the same.



hr.mohr said:


> What if the regulation just said this:
> 
> "Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the lightest colour face on top and the darkest adjacent face colour on the front."


Then the relative hue of the green sticker would actually affect the scramble. If green was indeed the darkest color it would be white/green, but if it wasn't then the orientation would be something else, like maybe white/red. The problem is actually made worse.

I don't see why we can't simply change "white (or the lightest color by default)" to "white (or black, or the lightest color by default)". Problem solved, intuitively weird case fixed.


----------



## TimMc (May 12, 2012)

lol, all this talk of the Japanese colour scheme reminded me of how much frustration I caused to scramblers by having a Japanese colour scheme with red and orange swapped.

To continue from Pedro's line of thinking...

4d) Cube puzzles must be scrambled with the *red* (or the lightest colour by default) face on top and green (or the darkest adjacent face by default) on the front.

Colour schemes: BOY black, BOY white, Japanese black, Japanese white

Problem?


----------



## qqwref (May 12, 2012)

red/green -> someone uses pink or purple instead of red on an otherwise normal color scheme -> they get a different scramble (white/green)

Did you even read my post? ._.


----------



## Bob (May 12, 2012)

qqwref said:


> red/green -> someone uses pink or purple instead of red on an otherwise normal color scheme -> they get a different scramble (white/green)
> 
> Did you even read my post? ._.


 
My sister uses such a cube. Red and orange are replaced with pink and purple.


----------



## Sa967St (May 13, 2012)

qqwref said:


> I don't see why we can't simply change "white (or the lightest color by default)" to "white (or black, or the lightest color by default)". Problem solved, intuitively weird case fixed.


That's even better than just changing "lightest" to "darkest" (mentioned earlier by Sebastien). Although one can argue that there are some odd colour schemes that would result in an irregular orientation during scrambling, that still can't be helped at all. It does exactly what we want for all colour schemes with black swapped with any colour (based on BOY or BYO), and for the most common variants (e.g. purple/pink instead of red/orange). IMO it's definitely an improvement over the current regulation.


----------



## hr.mohr (May 13, 2012)

So both the black on top and the yellow on top would be valid orientations for cubes without white?


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (May 13, 2012)

hr.mohr said:


> So both the black on top and the yellow on top would be valid orientations for cubes without white?


 
That's a fair point, the wording just says 'or', so it doesn't actually seem to specify which is preferred. Should be easy to fix though, something like: "white on top, if present, if not then black, if present ... ".


----------

