# dnfing solves



## genericcuber666 (Nov 16, 2016)

so in the last two comps ive been to i've missed cut off for 4x4 and 5x5
4x4 i average 1:30
5x5 i average 3:00
am i not allowed to participate due to rule a1c
also does this mean i cant dnf a solve after cutoff on my second atempt?


----------



## biscuit (Nov 16, 2016)

genericcuber666 said:


> so in the last two comps ive been to i've missed cut off for 4x4 and 5x5
> 4x4 i average 1:30
> 5x5 i average 3:00
> am i not allowed to participate due to rule a1c
> also does this mean i cant dnf a solve after cutoff on my second atempt?



You can compete, but if you reach the timelimit (also called Hard cutoff) the judge should stop the solve and it's a DNF. If you get a solve under the cutoff (also known as soft cutoff) in the first two solves you get to finish your average, but you still must get your solved under teh Time limit or they'll be DNF'd


----------



## genericcuber666 (Nov 16, 2016)

I meant the soft cut off


----------



## biscuit (Nov 16, 2016)

genericcuber666 said:


> I meant the soft cut off



Yeah you can compete, but if niether of the first two solves are under the soft cutoff (the real term is cutoff) then you don't get you r3rd, 4th, and 5th solves.


----------



## AlphaSheep (Nov 16, 2016)

If I read your question right, you're basically asking if it's OK to deliberately DNF a solve if you think it will be a bad time.

From an organisational point of view, no one cares if you DNF your solve because it's a bad time. It frees up the timer earlier than if you stay and finish the solve.

From a regulation's perspective, it's also fine, as long as you started off the solve with the intention to do your best.
It seems a lot of people miss the fact that the regulations have guidelines which help explain how they should be interpreted.

A1c+) CLARIFICATION WCA Delegates should only use their discretion to prevent competitors from being a severe detriment to the competition (e.g. wasting time and/or competition resources). Competitors should not be disqualified for a "poor" result when they are competing to the best of their abilities.
So as long as you solve with the intention to do as well as you can, no delegate should disqualify you for having a bad solve (even a DNF) if it's not wasting time and you didn't start out with the intention of DNFing.


From a personal perspective, I've got strong opinions. I think deliberately DNFing just because you won't make the cutoff is stupid. Partly because I'm not a quitter, so I wouldn't give up. I'd rather have a bad time in the database than a permanent record that I quit half way through.

Rounds with cut-offs are called combined rounds. It's basically just a way of holding two rounds in one. Would you deliberately DNF a second round average if you realised you had no chance of getting a PB average or making the finals? To me it's kind of the same question.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Nov 16, 2016)

AlphaSheep said:


> A1c+) CLARIFICATION WCA Delegates should only use their discretion to prevent competitors from being a severe detriment to the competition (e.g. wasting time and/or competition resources). Competitors should not be disqualified for a "poor" result when they are competing to the best of their abilities.


Thanks for quoting this! The best answers always reference from the Regulations or Guidelines.

In any case, "soft cutoff" and "hard cutoff" are not official terms.
Per A1a, each solve has a _time limit_ ("hard cutoff"), and per 9g a combined round can require you to meet a cutoff in the first phase ("soft cutoff") to advance to the second phase.

But A1c+ should hopefully make it clear that you're welcome to compete in any events you'd like, as long as you're taking it seriously.
(Although if you know you're extremely unlikely to make the time limit, you might want to practice for another competition anyhow.


----------

