# We need better judges.



## Mastermind2368 (May 15, 2017)

Just wanted to bring something up.

We need better judges. Maybe we don't need to do the test I was talking about, but down here in the south, we suck at judges. At Crossroads, I saw many Judges sign their name on the score card before I even did my solve! I could easily wright something down, and even if you guys call BS, he/she is still lying that the approve of a time that is non-existent. Another thing, He fixed it, but someone wrote 16.x .+2 =19.x . If I hadn't noticed it, I would have got a 19 instead of a 18. My friend, John Albright also caught a little girl judging fall asleep (Will try to get the footage.) Like c'mon guys, we need to get all that stuff fixed. This also ties into my post about not warming up with cubes. Any thoughts on this?

Edit: Someone said something that made me think of another thing that happened. Someone said 8 secs when it had been about two and 12 when It had been about four.


----------



## FastCubeMaster (May 15, 2017)

I Agree, but there's not a whole lot that can be done about it. Especially when volunteers take up ~80% of the judging positions in the average comp.

If you think something should be done about it, come up with an idea that could fix this e.g. Judging seminar before the comp.

I've concluded with these points cos I've seen this discussion many times before and there's no simple solution.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 15, 2017)

This is an actual problem unlike the thing about the warm-up cubes.


----------



## Jaysammey777 (May 15, 2017)

I don't seem to recall that you volunteered to judge even once, so it's not like you're actively helping to solve the problem. Considering we give a description of how to judge to each volunteer that does not know how to judge and there are sheets provided at every judging station, there is not a whole lot more we can do besides relying on competitors like yourself to step up and help at a competition.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 15, 2017)

Jaysammey777 said:


> I don't seem to recall that you volunteered to judge even once, so it's not like you're actively helping to solve the problem. Considering we give a description of how to judge to each volunteer that does not know how to judge and there are sheets provided at every judging station, there is not a whole lot more we can do besides relying on competitors like yourself to step up and help at a competition.


There's the problem right there, if competitors would rather complain about bad judges on the forum than actually volunteer at a comp.


----------



## CornerCutter (May 15, 2017)

^that aside:

I think the is a major problem as well. Like FCM was saying, the delegate or organizer should have a quick, but in-depth teaching period before the comp starts. Then during the competition the delegate and organizers should keep an eye on the judges. If there are some judges _not doing their job _then the delegate should have a talk with them and then watch them closely for the next few times.

I talk about this a little bit in my most recent podcast episode: https://www.spreaker.com/user/9520971/interview-best-2x2-and-world-records-tcc


----------



## asacuber (May 15, 2017)

3...2...meh



CornerCutter said:


> ^that aside:
> 
> I think the is a major problem as well. Like FCM was saying, *the delegate or organizer should have a quick, but in-depth teaching period before the comp starts.* Then during the competition the delegate and organizers should keep an eye on the judges. If there are some judges _not doing their job _then the delegate should have a talk with them and then watch them closely for the next few times.
> 
> I talk about this a little bit in my most recent podcast episode: http://thecornercutterpodcast.buzzsprout.com/



+1. I have been a judge quite a few times but i remember being a bjudge one/twice lol.

I think the delegate should converse with the volunteers beforehand


----------



## Kit Clement (May 15, 2017)

Some real solutions to this problem:


Fewer comps. Volunteers are the basis for having competitions, and even our best volunteers can't be judging non-stop unless we take more time into planning competitions better.
Higher registration fees. This will allow us to have better compensation for volunteering competitors or for outside volunteers that go through more than a 3 minute training session.
Every other solution posed here does not really address the problem. In-depth teaching periods are done at competitions before the start of the day, and you still get plenty of judges that make errors because you can't simply make everything from any quick teaching session stick during a competition. I sit down with every new judge for at least 3 minutes or so, and this still does not fix the issue. Judging quizzes have been proposed before, but passing any test never implies that a person has practical knowledge regarding that test.

I respect that there are plenty of people that want judging at WCA competitions to be at the professional level of a competition like Nationals at every event. But if we are to make that happen, the way the WCA operates will have to change drastically.


----------



## AlphaSheep (May 15, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Just wanted to bring something up.
> 
> We need better judges. Maybe we don't need to do the test I was talking about, but down here in the south, we suck at judges. At Crossroads, I saw many Judges sign their name on the score card before I even did my solve! I could easily wright something down, and even if you guys call BS, he/she is still lying that the approve of a time that is non-existent. Another thing, He fixed it, but someone wrote 16.x .+2 =19.x . If I hadn't noticed it, I would have got a 19 instead of a 18. My friend, John Albright also caught a little girl judging fall asleep (Will try to get the footage.) Like c'mon guys, we need to get all that stuff fixed. This also ties into my post about not warming up with cubes. Any thoughts on this?


When the competitors signed their name before the attempt, did you tell them not to do that and explain why they shouldn't?

Mistakes like the judge writing 16+2=19 shouldn't be a problem because the competitor is actually REQUIRED to check the time that the judge writes down, and sign to confirm that it is correct.

It's not that useful complaining. You actually have to be proactive about it.


----------



## Rcuber123 (May 15, 2017)

AlphaSheep said:


> When the competitors signed their name before the attempt, did you tell them not to do that and explain why they shouldn't?
> 
> Mistakes like the judge writing 16+2=19 shouldn't be a problem because the competitor is actually REQUIRED to check the time that the judge writes down, and sign to confirm that it is correct.
> 
> It's not that useful complaining. You actually have to be proactive about it.



Experiences with bad judges as a competitor:
1: on my last solve of my first and only NR average before lifting the cube cover he shouted (yes shouted) something that would translate to: "Israeli NR" which was probably very distracting to all the other competitors. As for me instead of thinking about my solve during inspection I was thinking about why he shouted that... I went on to DNF that solve.

2: in Pyraminx finals at a comp I was really nervous because I only get to compete once a year and I wanted to do well. I went up to solve with a warmup pyra (with was my main but I switched in the middle of the average because my main was too unstable. I don't remember if this was in inspection or while I was solving but the judge took my warmup pyra and started with it and then had a pop... I went on to DNF that solve.

3: in 3x3 finals multiple judges asked me what my main was while inspecting... really annoying.


----------



## AlphaSheep (May 15, 2017)

Rcuber123 said:


> Experiences with bad judges as a competitor:
> 1: on my last solve of my first and only NR average before lifting the cube cover he shouted (yes shouted) something that would translate to: "Israeli NR" which was probably very distracting to all the other competitors. As for me instead of thinking about my solve during inspection I was thinking about why he shouted that... I went on to DNF that solve.
> 
> 2: in Pyraminx finals at a comp I was really nervous because I only get to compete once a year and I wanted to do well. I went up to solve with a warmup pyra (with was my main but I switched in the middle of the average because my main was too unstable. I don't remember if this was in inspection or while I was solving but the judge took my warmup pyra and started with it and then had a pop... I went on to DNF that solve.
> ...


In all three situations you should have involved the delegate who would have reprimanded the judge and depending on circumstances, and would most probably have replaced your attempt with an extra in cases 2 and 3, and quite possibly in case 1 as well.

Delegates aren't psychic and need to be told about cases like this as soon as they happen so that they can actually do something about it.


----------



## Malkom (May 15, 2017)

Age restriction should solve most problems, most of the times my judge has been annoying, inattentive or lacking basic knowledge of the regs the judge has been <11 years old. Parents and other adults can also make mistakes but their higher age mean they understand social rules and don't annoy the solver as easily (like the 7 year old who sang Taylor swift during my solve) and are used to follow rules unlike smaller kids.


----------



## AlphaSheep (May 15, 2017)

Malkom said:


> Age restriction should solve most problems, most of the times my judge has been annoying, inattentive or lacking basic knowledge of the regs the judge has been <11 years old. Parents and other adults can also make mistakes but their higher age mean they understand social rules and don't annoy the solver as easily (like the 7 year old who sang Taylor swift during my solve) and are used to follow rules unlike smaller kids.


I disagree. I've had a 10 year old judge who took judging very seriously and knew the exact procedure and could even recite all 8 reasons for a +2. I've had a 20 something year old judge at one competition who was constantly playing with his own cube and practicing timed solves on his phone while judging, and responded with "why? It's not like anyone is going to cheat anyway" when told to stop. Also I find parents far more likely to make decisions they shouldn't, such as grant extras without involving the delegate or being lenient with penalties, etc.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 15, 2017)

Jaysamtmey777 said:


> I don't seem to recall that you volunteered to judge even once, so it's not like you're actively helping to solve the problem.


I did do mostly running, but I judged a few times.


Jaysammey777 said:


> there is not a whole lot more we can do besides relying on competitors like yourself to step up and help at a competition.


What if we did what FCM was saying,


FastCubeMaster said:


> Judging seminar before the comp.


 and hold it right before 2x2/3x3?

Ok here is an Idea.


AlphaSheep said:


> I disagree. I've had a 10 year old judge who took judging very seriously and knew the exact procedure and could even recite all 8 reasons for a +2.


. I only took time to say all the bad judges we have, not the good ones. What about you can start judging once you have been to three comps? It won't fix the problem, but will eliminate everyone who comes down to do one round of 3x3, get pizza, leaves and will never come back. Sure you might say," Their could be a good judge that is a first timer." and that is true, but chances are all they know about comps is SD cards running out. And if they and to be helpful to the community, then they will do three comps. It only took me being very picky, 5 months and I think anyone who we want judging should not have any less cubing experience then that.


Kit Clement said:


> Judging quizzes have been proposed before, but passing any test never implies that a person has practical knowledge regarding that test.


 As Kit was saying, the competitors could pass a test and not know jack.


----------



## Jaysammey777 (May 15, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> What about you can start judging once you have been to three comps? It won't fix the problem, but will eliminate everyone who comes down to do one round of 3x3, get pizza, leaves and will never come back. Sure you might say," Their could be a good judge that is a first timer." and that is true, but chances are all they know about comps is SD cards running out. And if they and to be helpful to the community, then they will do three comps. It only took me being very picky, 5 months and I think anyone who we want judging should not have any less cubing experience then that.



Usually non Cubers can make for great judges: interested parents, friends... they are qualified in many ways and can easily assess if someone who knows more about cubing needs to help them evaluate a situation. One of our newest staff in GA just went to his first comp, he was there to pretty much only help out. Same with some of the organizers in certain areas. As well competitions that have more than 50% newcomers must rely on newcomers to help judge.

Furthermore if we don't allow people to judge within their first 3 comps then they will not learn how to judge and simply not ever want to do it. Once you do judge you are accustomed to it and will want to help out.


----------



## asacuber (May 15, 2017)

lol i judged at my first comp


----------



## YouCubing (May 15, 2017)

Jaysammey777 said:


> and can easily asses



what


----------



## Jaysammey777 (May 15, 2017)

YouCubing said:


> what



Missed an S :/


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 15, 2017)

Jaysammey777 said:


> if we don't allow people to judge within their first 3 comps then they will not learn how to judge and simply not ever want to do it. Once you do judge you are accustomed to it and will want to help out.


I guess you have a point that if most people don't judge in their first three comps, they never will, but the first time I judged was at Discovery place, my 6th comp. Also if their first three comps had seminars about judging, they could get hyped up and ready.


----------



## ducttapecuber (May 15, 2017)

Hi organizer of Crossroads and Discovery Place here-
Judges have always been a problem. At Crossroads we had a lot of younger kids (siblings) who were bored and wanted to help out. Yes, that little girl fell asleep. I personally had to go wake her up. 
At Discovery Place we had Museum staff as judges. I trained all of them before the event. They could ask questions and whatnot. They were also very informed that if they had any problem, to call for help from my trusted group of comp staff. This is what I plan on doing again at Discovery Place this summer. 
I would like to continue to implement a "seminar" at the beginning. 
Another idea is to have newer judges shadow an experienced judge for a couple attempts. See how it's done and be walked through it first hand. I have found great success in this.


----------



## AlphaSheep (May 15, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> I only took time to say all the bad judges we have, not the good ones. What about you can start judging once you have been to three comps? It won't fix the problem, but will eliminate everyone who comes down to do one round of 3x3, get pizza, leaves and will never come back. Sure you might say," Their could be a good judge that is a first timer." and that is true, but chances are all they know about comps is SD cards running out. And if they and to be helpful to the community, then they will do three comps. It only took me being very picky, 5 months and I think anyone who we want judging should not have any less cubing experience then that.


There are parts of the world where they only have one comp a year, so those who have been to 3 comps are actually really experienced. Also, what about comps in areas that have never had comps where all but 2 or 3 competitors are first-timers?


----------



## lejitcuber (May 15, 2017)

In the UK, all of the judges are, give or take a couple of parents, cubers that I would say have been to 2 or 3 comps, and if they are a new competitor 1 of the 2 or 3 delegates attending the comp will run then through all of the procedure and penalties and so on. This sometimes does, admittedly, take the organiser or delegate calling for more judges/runners maybe 2 or 3 times during clock, or mega or something but I have only 1 real bad experience in 20 comps which were all 2 days long.
I honestly don't know how it compares to other comps, but they tend to have around 80-100 competitors with 16 solving stations, so that leaves 16 judges + 3-6 runners and 3 scramblers which is no more than 30 people for a very smooth and efficient system, and because only 30 people compete at a time maximum, only early on when only feet or clock is being done at 8:00 does this number become a problem, however you only need 10 to run these events so that just solves itself


----------



## AwesomeARC (May 17, 2017)

There can be no better 'training' than judging a delegate. In fact, I did that *twice *in my first competition.
The delegate had told me that I was a really good judge.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 17, 2017)

AwesomeARC said:


> There can be no better 'training' than judging a delegate. In fact, I did that *twice *in my first competition
> The delegate had told me that I was a really good judge.


I disagree. Some people are better then others. What about this. In order to have a comp, you need at least 1 timing table for 15 people. People online say then can judge for X amount of time. If the Delegate doesn't know them, the Delegate will ask for proof ( The person judging at another comp, skype ect...). The comp can not be put online untill you have the number of judges needed. The 1 out of 15 applies to comps with 150> competitors. For 150 to 300, the ratio should be something like 1 to 30 people. Anything above 300, you need to have 20 tables with someone always judging. Any thoughts?


----------



## AwesomeARC (May 19, 2017)

@Mastermind2368:

I think there's a misunderstanding somewhere... I meant to say that when you judge a delegate, they can will correct you immediately if you do anything wrong. It is a good way of learning the basic rules and regulations; if you get corrected once, you won't make the same mistake again.



Mastermind2368 said:


> Some people are better then others.



Unfortunately, I don't understand what exactly you mean by that. Do you mean to say that some people are better judges than others? If so, how is that a counter-argument to my post?



Mastermind2368 said:


> What about this. In order to have a comp, you need at least 1 timing table for 15 people. People online say then can judge for X amount of time. If the Delegate doesn't know them, the Delegate will ask for proof ( The person judging at another comp, skype ect...). The comp can not be put online untill you have the number of judges needed. The 1 out of 15 applies to comps with 150> competitors. For 150 to 300, the ratio should be something like 1 to 30 people. Anything above 300, you need to have 20 tables with someone always judging. Any thoughts?



Well, if implemented properly, it *might* be a good idea.

In an *ideal* world (or let's say comp), anything can be done in a controlled manner. In fact, we won't even need any special regulations for judges. Neither we'll need 'better judges', because in ideal conditions, everything is at its best. But... this is the *real* world. People differ, opinions differ and everything is possibly at its worst. Proper time management on a large scale is something that's almost impossible. If the delegate asks for proof from every person, it will take the delegate a lot of time to actually go through all the proofs. Now, let's say we can deal with that issue. But, we won't be able to say for certain whether the judges be present when they're required or not. There may be some kind of an emergency due to which a certain judge doesn't appear when needed. That will be enough to destroy the whole system.

Thus, this system might be successful for small comps, but not for big comps (unless there's some kind of professional establishment, of course).


----------



## Kit Clement (May 19, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> I disagree. Some people are better then others. What about this. In order to have a comp, you need at least 1 timing table for 15 people. People online say then can judge for X amount of time. If the Delegate doesn't know them, the Delegate will ask for proof ( The person judging at another comp, skype ect...). The comp can not be put online untill you have the number of judges needed. The 1 out of 15 applies to comps with 150> competitors. For 150 to 300, the ratio should be something like 1 to 30 people. Anything above 300, you need to have 20 tables with someone always judging. Any thoughts?



Or you can just train judges at the competition rather than spend your whole social life skyping competitors to meet incredibly arbitrary standards.


----------



## mDiPalma (May 19, 2017)

No random first-time judge is intentionally sabotaging your solves. If the judge makes a mistake, just politely tell them what it is. Then after your solves are done, offer to take their place so they can go back to watching their son, playing phone games, or pestering their parents to leave, etc.

*We don't need better judges. We need competitors that can communicate and solve these really simple problems.*


----------



## tx789 (May 19, 2017)

An experienced competitor could help the judge if the judge is willing. I'll help the judge if needed, sometimes they ask what they need to do. Usually they are unsure about +2s where they can ask the delegate and how to write them down.

A delegate should be able to help them. Demanding people to have been to x comps is unfair for less devoloped areas. If you think there is a judging promblem and don't judge your part of the problem.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 19, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> Or you can just train judges at the competition rather than spend your whole social life skyping competitors to meet incredibly arbitrary standards.


You have a lot more competition experience then I do, but don't you think it would be better to know who is gonna judge at what table for what time rather then just going into it asking random 10 year olds if they could help, when in reality they have no idea how to judge other then what the papers say to do. I know I didn't say this at first, but I know lots of people in the community including myself get annoyed when the judge does "3,2,1".



mDiPalma said:


> We don't need better judges. We need competitors that can communicate and solve these really simple problems.


I kida agree, mostly not. Sure they might not screw you up on purpose, but writing down their initials, cubing, asking what main you have, and other things like that are all out of laziness/ good intentions. If you are someone who has been to a few comps, you can tell if something that shouldn't happen does, but if it is your first and you have a noob as a judge, something could go wrong like +2 penalties ect...




AwesomeARC said:


> Unfortunately, I don't understand what exactly you mean by that. Do you mean to say that some people are better judges than others? If so, how is that a counter-argument to my post?


 I mean anyone who knows the WCA inside and out. You could come to your tenth comp and still be a nub, or you could be at your first and know all the +2 penalties.

Ok maybe the problem isn't the judges. What if its the runners putting the people at the tables. We should get some people at comps who know about everyone and their skill level. If they are a delegate/ someone with experience, put them with a nub. If they are new, put them with a good judge.


This brings up another thing. What if we changed the scrambling process. The scramblers know what their doing and if they are scrambling, I'd bet they know how to judge. What if had scramblers scramble at a judging table, they call the person who owns the cube. Do the solve ect... and the know all penalties. After the solve is done a runner runs it to another table. You might say, "Why not keep them their?" But then they could easily see the cube being scrambled. Or you know what? What if we got a shield so all we combined the judge and the scrambler and eliminate the runners. Any thoughts? I think a comp could go much faster.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 19, 2017)

Just for fun let me see if I can name all the +2s

Misalignment
Over inspection
Not starting timer with fingers and with hands facing down
Starting timer while touching cube
Starting timer with cube touching it
Stopping timer without palms facing down
Stopping timer without fully releasing puzzle
Touching cube after solve without applying moves

I only remember penalizing people for misalignments, although I had to DNF a kid at Overland Park for 18 second inspection


----------



## 1973486 (May 19, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Starting timer with cube touching it



The reg which specified this (A3d1) was removed in the latest version and now A3d penalises the puzzle being placed anywhere other than the mat.

So technically you're missing +2s for placing the puzzle outside the mat but not on the timer


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 19, 2017)

1973486 said:


> The reg which specified this (A3d1) was removed in the latest version and now A3d penalises the puzzle being placed anywhere other than the mat.
> 
> So technically you're missing +2s for placing the puzzle outside the mat but not on the timer


that's what I get for being a cuber before all you kids


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 20, 2017)

1973486 said:


> So technically you're missing +2s for placing the puzzle outside the mat but not on the timer


Lol TCS was saying how they thought they made that reg because someone threw a cube across the room when competing. Not sure if this is true though.


----------



## 1973486 (May 20, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Lol TCS was saying how they thought they made that reg because someone threw a cube across the room when competing. Not sure if this is true though.



I remember it being brought up after someone noticed this


----------



## Ranzha (May 20, 2017)

mDiPalma said:


> *We don't need better judges. We need competitors that can communicate and solve these really simple problems.*



False. We need both.
More communicative competitors can help organisers/delegates eliminate judging problems.

Protip: If you think something's wrong, say something. If you're a competitor and your judge is bad, for the love of god tell the organiser/delegate.

Related: I +8'd (iirc) a solve at Worlds 2013 at the end because the solve was bad, and the judge DNF'd me for touching the cube while stopping the timer. I made a fuss, and another staff member insisted it was a DNF.
Even with (two!) WC-tier judges, mistakes still happen. Cubing isn't perfect. We should aim to do the best we can, as hold each other to that standard in a positive, constructive manner.


----------



## Ronxu (May 20, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> You have a lot more competition experience then I do, but don't you think it would be better to know who is gonna judge at what table for what time rather then just going into it asking random 10 year olds if they could help, when in reality they have no idea how to judge other then what the papers say to do. I know I didn't say this at first, but I know lots of people in the community including myself get annoyed when the judge does "3,2,1".


You should probably start by helping out with judging before you start demanding others to spend hours upon hours scouting for people who will 100% be present at a specific table at a specific time over a month beforehand.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 20, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> You should probably start by helping out with judging before you start demanding others to spend hours upon hours scouting for people who will 100% be present at a specific table at a specific time over a month beforehand.


I try to help out at every comp I go to, whether by judging, scrambling, or running. People seem to be saying I shouldn't bring up a problem just because Judging is not my specialty. I didn't make this thread for me to just say, "Someone should volunteer to judge, but I won't." No! I made it so we have a better judging system helping competitions to be less chaotic and follow the regs better.


----------



## CornerCutter (May 20, 2017)

Ranzha said:


> False. We need both.
> More communicative competitors can help organisers/delegates eliminate judging problems.
> 
> Protip: If you think something's wrong, say something. If you're a competitor and your judge is bad, for the love of god tell the organiser/delegate.
> ...



I agree people need to point out bad judging more often. I've had problems with people starting the stopwatch and lifting the cube cover before I'm ready.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 20, 2017)

I wish organizers would tell BLD judges to use the stopwatch to time the solve so that some slow idiot like me could actually get like a 12 minute official solve.


----------



## Malkom (May 20, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I wish organizers would tell BLD judges to use the stopwatch to time the solve so that some slow idiot like me could actually get like a 12 minute official solve.


Isn't it your responsibility to tell the judge?


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 20, 2017)

Malkom said:


> Isn't it your responsibility to tell the judge?


Sure, but it would help a lot if organizers clarified such things to judges.


----------



## Ronxu (May 20, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Sure, but it would help a lot if organizers clarified such things to judges.


What difference would it make? As a judge you're not supposed to time the attempt with a stopwatch unless told otherwise.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (May 20, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> What difference would it make? As a judge you're not supposed to time the attempt with a stopwatch unless told otherwise.


Did they add that as a regulation or guideline, because I didn't see something like that.


----------



## mark49152 (May 20, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> What difference would it make? As a judge you're not supposed to time the attempt with a stopwatch unless told otherwise.


A1b) If the time limit for a solve is greater than 10 minutes, a stopwatch must be used for timekeeping.


----------



## Ronxu (May 21, 2017)

mark49152 said:


> A1b) If the time limit for a solve is greater than 10 minutes, a stopwatch must be used for timekeeping.


A1a1) The default time limit per solve is 10 minutes, though the organization team may announce a higher or lower time limit.


----------



## phreaker (May 21, 2017)

I'll agree with this basic premise.

In my 1st comp, I had *2* procedural issues, that fouled 2 solves of my 7 total at my first comp.

One was an uncleared stackmat, that I just cleared, but the judge distracted me about it, and tried to get me to stop... so I did, and called for the delegate. (I am not sure what the right ruling is, given that I was within my inspection still.)

The other... I solve using ZZ. I will use ALL my time, so I wait for the 12s mark to put the cube down and start. I got told "DNF" as my first callout... (I must say, I felt REAL in the zone because I hadn't gotten my 8s call yet, and I'd planned things pretty well.) "Uh... Delegate!"

Maybe I was unlucky. But I will say, I was annoyed, and I think with good reason. If you're going to judge... please get the procedures right. We can call over a delegate on the finer points... But really, the issues I hit were just fundamental issues.

The big thing I'd say... "Please have them PRACTICE judging solves." They need to get the basic drill right. If you have to call a delegate over on an edgey rules call... that's fine with me! But the types of errors I saw, were not the type I'd expect. Keep in mind this is my initial impression of the WCA.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (May 21, 2017)

phreaker said:


> I got told "DNF" as my first callout... (I must say, I felt REAL in the zone because I hadn't gotten my 8s call yet, and I'd planned things pretty well.) "Uh... Delegate!"


Didn't something happen to Chris when he got the 2x2 WR avg a long time ago?


----------



## Christopher Cabrera (May 21, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Didn't something happen to Chris when he got the 2x2 WR avg a long time ago?


The problem there was that the judge gave no call outs at all and Chris ended up getting almost 18 seconds of inspection time with no penalty. I remember the WCA made a very specific ruling on that case.


----------



## Ranzha (May 22, 2017)

Christopher Cabrera said:


> The problem there was that the judge gave no call outs at all and Chris ended up getting almost 18 seconds of inspection time with no penalty. I remember the WCA made a very specific ruling on that case.


The other thing to mention is that the judge was the delegate for the competition. Iirc, the ruling was that the solve remain since it was not Chris' fault that he over-inspected.


----------



## Christopher Cabrera (May 22, 2017)

Ranzha said:


> The other thing to mention is that the judge was the delegate for the competition. Iirc, the ruling was that the solve remain since it was not Chris' fault that he over-inspected.


I think this just goes to show that it doesn't matter how experienced the judge is, everyone is liable to make a mistake every so often. I think the most important thing to take away from this thread is to just know your rights as a competitor, be aware of the situation when you compete, and know when you are eligible to ask for extra solves.


----------



## Kit Clement (May 22, 2017)

phreaker said:


> One was an uncleared stackmat, that I just cleared, but the judge distracted me about it, and tried to get me to stop... so I did, and called for the delegate. (I am not sure what the right ruling is, given that I was within my inspection still.)



This was the right resolution to this case. The judge should have let you be after you reset the timer, but it is indeed the judge's responsibility to reset that timer, so I can see even a new, well-trained judge potentially thinking that they screwed up and that the attempt needs to start over. However, the regulations are quite clear that the competitor may reset the timer and continue as normal.



phreaker said:


> The other... I solve using ZZ. I will use ALL my time, so I wait for the 12s mark to put the cube down and start. I got told "DNF" as my first callout... (I must say, I felt REAL in the zone because I hadn't gotten my 8s call yet, and I'd planned things pretty well.) "Uh... Delegate!"
> 
> Maybe I was unlucky. But I will say, I was annoyed, and I think with good reason. If you're going to judge... please get the procedures right. We can call over a delegate on the finer points... But really, the issues I hit were just fundamental issues.
> 
> The big thing I'd say... "Please have them PRACTICE judging solves." They need to get the basic drill right. If you have to call a delegate over on an edgey rules call... that's fine with me! But the types of errors I saw, were not the type I'd expect. Keep in mind this is my initial impression of the WCA.



That second case you describe is wholly unacceptable, however. At all competitions I do, I try to have a general judge training session at the beginning of the competition where new judges watch the whole process on a practice solve. Any judges I train later, I do my best to watch them judge their first solve and properly resolve any issues that come up. I agree that learning through experience is obviously the best way to learn how to judge, and maybe in the future, I will have new judges in my early day tutorial pair up and judge practice solves on each other.


----------



## VenomCubing (May 23, 2017)

My first comp a judge gave me a +2 on a solve for not starting the timer with my fingertips, even though I did. I did the math, and if he hadn't given me that +2, i would have made the second round of 3x3.


----------



## Cale S (May 23, 2017)

VenomCubing said:


> My first comp a judge gave me a +2 on a solve for not starting the timer with my fingertips, even though I did. I did the math, and if he hadn't given me that +2, i would have made the second round of 3x3.



If you actually did start with your fingertips you could have disputed it


----------



## Underwatercuber (May 23, 2017)

VenomCubing said:


> My first comp a judge gave me a +2 on a solve for not starting the timer with my fingertips, even though I did. I did the math, and if he hadn't given me that +2, i would have made the second round of 3x3.


Then don't sign until it's fixed... half the problems with judges are competitors I swear...


----------



## phreaker (May 24, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> This was the right resolution to this case. The judge should have let you be after you reset the timer, but it is indeed the judge's responsibility to reset that timer, so I can see even a new, well-trained judge potentially thinking that they screwed up and that the attempt needs to start over. However, the regulations are quite clear that the competitor may reset the timer and continue as normal.



I agree it is correct... just annoying when you're trying to do your 1st competition solve ever... and that happens .



> That second case you describe is wholly unacceptable, however. At all competitions I do, I try to have a general judge training session at the beginning of the competition where new judges watch the whole process on a practice solve. Any judges I train later, I do my best to watch them judge their first solve and properly resolve any issues that come up. I agree that learning through experience is obviously the best way to learn how to judge, and maybe in the future, I will have new judges in my early day tutorial pair up and judge practice solves on each other.



I totally agree on this one, and I was displeased with the judge. If my experience can stop someone else from having the same things happen. I'm happy.

Thanks for listening to me.


----------



## CrystallineCuber (May 28, 2017)

I did my first comp today, stayed 4 hours, had an awesome time. It wouldn't have been half as fun if I hadn't run for the first 3x3 heat (I competed in second) and judged for the remaining heats and most of 6x6. I had the time of my life and can't wait to do it again, witnessed a 6.12, gave a +2 and a couple of DNFs. I admit I made a couple of mistakes (called 8 at 9 once and misnotated that +2, but they said it was cool) but it was really fun (and the 10 year old across from me was equally good at it and had a good time). We're all human and rely on others when we make mistakes. I agree that maybe a rule sheet next to each station could have helped, maybe making that mandatory for comps that rely heavily on volunteer judges?


----------



## Micah Walker (May 28, 2017)

The judges at most Ohio comps are actually pretty good, and if you tell them they made a mistake they are always nice about it and fix it!


----------



## aybuck37 (May 28, 2017)

CrystallineCuber said:


> I did my first comp today, stayed 4 hours, had an awesome time. It wouldn't have been half as fun if I hadn't run for the first 3x3 heat (I competed in second) and judged for the remaining heats and most of 6x6. I had the time of my life and can't wait to do it again, witnessed a 6.12, gave a +2 and a couple of DNFs. I admit I made a couple of mistakes (called 8 at 9 once and misnotated that +2, but they said it was cool) but it was really fun (and the 10 year old across from me was equally good at it and had a good time). We're all human and rely on others when we make mistakes. I agree that maybe a rule sheet next to each station could have helped, maybe making that mandatory for comps that rely heavily on volunteer judges?


Yeah I think a rule sheet could help! One in going to has a practice comp/meeting the day before. <--- I think that's a really good idea


----------



## uyneb2000 (May 28, 2017)

aybuck37 said:


> Yeah I think a rule sheet could help! One in going to has a practice comp/meeting the day before. <--- I think that's a really good idea



We have these in the PNW, I think that our judges are decent for first-timers


----------



## ronaldm (Jun 5, 2017)

Having read through all of the thread, there are some good points that have been made and some points that wouldn't make much difference in my opinion.

Do we need better judges? Hard to tell, as 99% of all my comps are in the UK, so I don't have much material to compare with. However, quality of judges is an important thing to make competitions fun for everyone, as well as having competitions that run smoother.

In the UK most judges are competitors that have been to a few competitions before, and are therefor more used to procedures, but we do have a group-wide introduction to competing for all competitors (though aimed at the new ones) before we start 3x3, to explain how everything works, which includes how to judge.
People that will be judging for the first time will generally shadow an experienced judge for a few solves first, before then judging themselves while being shadowed by their 'mentor' (so to say), to make sure they're doing a good job.
As an organiser, when I'm not judging myself, I try to keep an eye out and more or less check the judges to make sure nothing is going wrong. (Especially during blind, where sometimes judges lose focus and the cardboard is not correctly placed in the line of sight). Delegates at UK comps tend to do the same. That way there is always a possibility to intervene when needed, and use it as a moment to teach the judge.
Also, since we have a lot of experienced cubers in the UK, they correct judges as well when needed. Communication is key here. It's in the interest of all the competitors to have enough people that are willing to judge, and that can judge in a proper way. By taking the time as a competitor to judge in other groups, as well as teaching a judge when they make a mistake (as opposed to just moaning about it), you create an atmosphere where people are willing to judge, as well as making them better judges, creating a win-win situation.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Jun 6, 2017)

I thought this was dead. So according to *ronaldm *it seems like the judges in the Uk are good because their are less nubs. Right? Now here is an Idea that could help for all the 10 year olds. What if the Organizers had best judge of the day awards? It wouldn't be a reg, but if you are older, you will follow it better and if you are younger, motivation can help. Do you think this could help it at all? I think it could because it is mostly the young judges that screw up. 











Micah Walker said:


> The judges at most Ohio comps are actually pretty good, and if you tell them they made a mistake they are always nice about it and fix it!


What about the Nebraska judges?


----------



## cubeninjaIV (Jun 6, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> I thought this was dead. So according to *ronaldm *it seems like the judges in the Uk are good because their are less nubs. Right? Now here is an Idea that could help for all the 10 year olds. What if the Organizers had best judge of the day awards? It wouldn't be a reg, but if you are older, you will follow it better and if you are younger, motivation can help. Do you think this could help it at all? I think it could because it is mostly the young judges that screw up.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nebraska judges were A+

Source: was in Nebraska


----------



## ronaldm (Jun 6, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> I thought this was dead. So according to *ronaldm *it seems like the judges in the Uk are good because their are less nubs. Right? Now here is an Idea that could help for all the 10 year olds. What if the Organizers had best judge of the day awards? It wouldn't be a reg, but if you are older, you will follow it better and if you are younger, motivation can help. Do you think this could help it at all? I think it could because it is mostly the young judges that screw up.



This will never be a dead topic, as quality of judging is important to having a good comp.

We may indeed be lucky that we have a good amount of experienced cubers vs. new competitors. However, my main point was that we have a system in place (not even written down afaik, it just grew that way and is now the standard) of having new judges shadowing first before being shadowed, and having experienced people that are not afraid to correct judges. Having more experienced cubers does make that process easier, but even with just a few experienced cubers you can quickly get a number of new competitors up to speed in judging at at least a decent level. Also, judges here are not afraid to either ask an experienced competitor or even a delegate for help if they aren't 100% sure.
I'm not sure if a judge of the day award would do any good. First of all it's hard to figure out who the best judge is (unless you check all judges on every solve they judge, which imo is a waste of manpower), plus you'll get a lot of sad faces from judges that don't win the award. All in all that means it may even work counter-productive, and put people off of judging, and create animosity, as they'll start pointing fingers about mistakes someone who won an award may or may not have made. Also, it may stop judges from asking for help from experienced cubers/delegates when they aren't 100% sure, as that may mean they won't win the award. I feel having such an award moves the focus from good judging, to appearing to be a good judge just for the sake of winning an award.
When we are short for judges, there is a tactic I use that tends to work well: Instead of calling out in general (which doesn't work), or approaching people individually (which they don't like), I walk up to a table with a few cubers, and tell them all that one of them has to come help judge, and they can discuss among themselves who that should be. It keeps everything light-hearted, and gives them the responsibility to sort it. And we all know people (especially children) like to feel they have some decision-power and responsibility  Also, the more experienced judges will usually be the one that will then 'volunteer' to judge.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Jun 6, 2017)

ronaldm said:


> First of all it's hard to figure out who the best judge is (unless you check all judges on every solve they judge, which imo is a waste of manpower)


Well I don't know if you are religious or not, but here at churches they do things like that just so they know their is a prize on the line. I don't know about UK comps, but in the US at the end their is only about 20 people for comps that start with 100 people and half those people are staff. You also would generally give the younger cuber who is trying harder to be a good judge rather then the person who knows all the +2 penalties and has been to 20+ comps. Do you see what I am saying? I agree with what you are saying. Comps in the UK seem so much better because of the ratio of nubs to experienced cubers.


----------



## Fábio De'Rose (Jun 7, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> nubs



Could we please as a whole refrain from calling anyone this and similarly derogatory terms? This is not COD Multiplayer. 

Might sound silly, but IMO one of the best things about this community is how welcoming it is to anyone. I get that it is said tongue in cheek, but newcomers might not.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Jun 7, 2017)

Fábio De'Rose said:


> Could we please as a whole refrain from calling anyone this and similarly derogatory terms? This is not COD Multiplayer.
> 
> Might sound silly, but IMO one of the best things about this community is how welcoming it is to anyone. I get that it is said tongue in cheek, but newcomers might not.


AMEN!!!


----------



## JoshJumble (Jun 14, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> I thought this was dead. So according to *ronaldm *it seems like the judges in the Uk are good because their are less nubs. Right? Now here is an Idea that could help for all the 10 year olds. What if the Organizers had best judge of the day awards? It wouldn't be a reg, but if you are older, you will follow it better and if you are younger, motivation can help. Do you think this could help it at all? I think it could because it is mostly the young judges that screw up.



Judging awards is a good motivation for better judging, however a lot of people leave well before the awards, and if any of those people decide to volunteer to judge, they won't really have that same motivation as they won't be there to receive an award anyway.


----------



## Mingler_65071 (Jul 9, 2017)

I saw this and immediately remembered this vid




I don't know why, it just triggered me so much. maybe there could be a talk first thing on the agenda about voluntary judging, scrambling or running (though i dont think you need instructions on that).


----------



## cubing master (Jul 10, 2017)

I think another problem is judges during blind. I was at a competition doing blind and my judge didn't hold the paper in front of my eyes very well, so while doing the attempt the paper kept brushing my hands and got very distracting. Blind takes a lot of concentration and you don't want it wasted on focusing on other things like what your judge is doing.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jul 10, 2017)

I think some judges _over_enforce the timer start rule. I think this is because people always talk about "starting the timer with your _fingertips_", which I don't normally do, but there is no such requirement, only a requirement to start the timer with your _fingers_. I've only been penalized for that once (back then I wasn't sure about the regulation so I didn't try to correct the judge because it was at Nationals) but yesterday at Nationals I had the same judge for the last 3 solves of the second round, and on the first one, which was a legal timer start, he gave me a warning about starting the timer with my fingertips, so on the next solve I started the timer with my fingertips because I was scared about getting a +2 and then ended up with a 12 anyway. The final solve was similar to the third solve, with a legal timer start using my _fingers_ and not necessarily my fingertips, and he acted like he was going to give me a +2, but he decided not to.

Even though I wasn't directly penalized for it, the unwarranted warnings made me really nervous and although I can't say for sure it impacted my time it would be nice if organizers who explain judging don't say anything about fingertips specifically, because that gives a false idea of what the actual rule is.

For reference:
A4b) The competitor uses their fingers to touch the elevated sensor surfaces of the timer. The competitor's palms must be facing down, and located on the side of the timer that is closer to the competitor. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).


----------



## Bob (Jul 21, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I think some judges _over_enforce the timer start rule. I think this is because people always talk about "starting the timer with your _fingertips_", which I don't normally do, but there is no such requirement, only a requirement to start the timer with your _fingers_. I've only been penalized for that once (back then I wasn't sure about the regulation so I didn't try to correct the judge because it was at Nationals) but yesterday at Nationals I had the same judge for the last 3 solves of the second round, and on the first one, which was a legal timer start, he gave me a warning about starting the timer with my fingertips, so on the next solve I started the timer with my fingertips because I was scared about getting a +2 and then ended up with a 12 anyway. The final solve was similar to the third solve, with a legal timer start using my _fingers_ and not necessarily my fingertips, and he acted like he was going to give me a +2, but he decided not to.
> 
> Even though I wasn't directly penalized for it, the unwarranted warnings made me really nervous and although I can't say for sure it impacted my time it would be nice if organizers who explain judging don't say anything about fingertips specifically, because that gives a false idea of what the actual rule is.
> 
> ...



I wish you had brought that to our attention at the competition--we would have addressed the judge.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jul 21, 2017)

Bob said:


> I wish you had brought that to our attention at the competition--we would have addressed the judge.


I should have, but I was a bit excited about my first 9 average so I didn't think of it.


----------



## Jaysammey777 (Jul 22, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I should have, but I was a bit excited about my first 9 average so I didn't think of it.


After watching your video, I think a warning on the 3rd solve is perfectly acceptable. It was a half finger, half palm start. I always ask competitors to make it abundantly clear that they start with their fingers and indicate this by showing them the crease that their figures create and saying they need to start above that line.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jul 22, 2017)

Jaysammey777 said:


> After watching your video, I think a warning on the 3rd solve is perfectly acceptable. It was a half finger, half palm start. I always ask competitors to make it abundantly clear that they start with their fingers and indicate this by showing them the crease that their figures create and saying they need to start above that line.


The camera angle wasn't great for telling that, but I guess I can see how that's somewhat close. I could definitely try to have better timer starts but I also think that that rule shouldn't be overapplied.


----------



## weatherman223 (Aug 5, 2017)

Alright, I was judging at a Colorado comp, and the organizers said it was normal practice to sign my initials before, so i did that.

Well that might be a mistake.

I have disgraced everyone. Sorry for being a bad judge.

(Oh also another confession, I solved during mitch's 5x5 finals)

EDIT: This was my first comp. I plan to be a better judge at my next comp


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 5, 2017)

weatherman223 said:


> Alright, I was judging at a Colorado comp, and the organizers said it was normal practice to sign my initials before, so i did that.
> 
> Well that might be a mistake.
> 
> I have disgraced everyone. Sorry for being a bad judge.



Before what? If you mean before they complete their solve, then yes, you shouldn't sign for an empty box. Lots of things could happen (timer malfunction, duplicate scramble, etc.) that would result in you not actually being the judge for that attempt. 

If you mean before the competitor signs, that's actually the correct procedure.


----------



## weatherman223 (Aug 6, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> Before what? If you mean before they complete their solve, then yes, you shouldn't sign for an empty box. Lots of things could happen (timer malfunction, duplicate scramble, etc.) that would result in you not actually being the judge for that attempt.
> 
> If you mean before the competitor signs, that's actually the correct procedure.


I signed during inspection. I should have closely read the regs before i volunteered to judge.


----------



## I_<3_SCS (Aug 6, 2017)

weatherman223 said:


> I signed during inspection. I should have *closely read the regs* before i volunteered to judge.



Thank you for admitting this. (Bold) If every1 did this, we'd be fine...

Just random... how did "nub" even originate?

Beginner/ new person -> newbie -> noob -> nub? TBH that's p ******* re******* for an etymology.


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 6, 2017)

I_<3_SCS said:


> Thank you for admitting this. (Bold) If every1 did this, we'd be fine...
> 
> Just random... how did "nub" even originate?
> 
> Beginner/ new person -> newbie -> noob -> nub? TBH that's p ******* re******* for an etymology.



TBH so is the quality/quantity ratio of your posts.


----------



## Cubestien (Aug 6, 2017)

You know how in the beginning of a comp we have a new competitor tutorial...Just like that we should have a tutorial for people who want to volunteer as a judge

Who agrees?


----------



## Competition Cuber (Aug 6, 2017)

Cubestien said:


> You know how in the beginning of a comp we have a new competitor tutorial...Just like that we should have a tutorial for people who want to volunteer as a judge
> 
> Who agrees?


Me.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Aug 6, 2017)

Cubestien said:


> You know how in the beginning of a comp we have a new competitor tutorial...Just like that we should have a tutorial for people who want to volunteer as a judge


Its been suggested before and it seems to be all we can do other then having a paper telling the basics. I also think that as somebody hinted at this, once you have about 5-7 good judges who go to lots of the comps in the area, they can try finding someone to start training till we have 30+ people who would be of being staff at a big comp.


----------



## cuber314159 (Aug 6, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Its been suggested before and it seems to be all we can do other then having a paper telling the basics. I also think that as somebody hinted at this, once you have about 5-7 good judges who go to lots of the comps in the area, they can try finding someone to start training till we have 30+ people who would be of being staff at a big comp.


However if you have a group of people who are the judges for competitions then they feel abliged to judge, I like the fact that at comps I can judge when I don't feel like practising and not all the time, I think that it would be a good idea to have a sheet telling you how to judge a solve properly but not to discourage people from judging


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Aug 6, 2017)

> However if you have a group of people who are the judges for competitions then they feel abliged to judge, I like the fact that at comps I can judge when I don't feel like practising and not all the time, I think that it would be a good idea to have a sheet telling you how to judge a solve properly but not to discourage people from judging


Well it will would be more of a thing of wanting to help if they got to that level. You would get to a level where you love the community so much that you want to. There will always be the people like you and tbh sometimes me, who help out some, but don't devote them selves to it, and that's fine. The sheet I was talking about is a thing over hear where I live.


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 7, 2017)

Cubestien said:


> You know how in the beginning of a comp we have a new competitor tutorial...Just like that we should have a tutorial for people who want to volunteer as a judge?



This honestly fixes 90% of the issues with poor judging quality. I used to teach new judges on the spot, and there's always something you'll miss. If you just hold 3x3 first thing in the morning, nearly everyone will be there, and you can teach everyone in one go, and have much higher quality judging.



Mastermind2368 said:


> Well it will would be more of a thing of wanting to help if they got to that level. You would get to a level where you love the community so much that you want to. There will always be the people like you and tbh sometimes me, who help out some, but don't devote them selves to it, and that's fine. The sheet I was talking about is a thing over hear where I live.



Competitors don't have an option to not judge if they are asked to do so. If holding a judge training session doesn't create enough volunteer judges, which it almost always does, that doesn't mean you can't enlist more people to help.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Aug 7, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> ompetitors don't have an option to not judge if they are asked to do so. If holding a judge training session doesn't create enough volunteer judges, which it almost always does, that doesn't mean you can't enlist more people to help.


Sure you can make them help, but are they gonna be as good as if they volunteered. If it was just randomly asking them, they won't be, but if you do the thing where you judge for each round you compete, I think that most of them will be good enough.


----------



## ThisBoi (Aug 10, 2017)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Just wanted to bring something up.
> 
> We need better judges. Maybe we don't need to do the test I was talking about, but down here in the south, we suck at judges. At Crossroads, I saw many Judges sign their name on the score card before I even did my solve! I could easily wright something down, and even if you guys call BS, he/she is still lying that the approve of a time that is non-existent. Another thing, He fixed it, but someone wrote 16.x .+2 =19.x . If I hadn't noticed it, I would have got a 19 instead of a 18. My friend, John Albright also caught a little girl judging fall asleep (Will try to get the footage.) Like c'mon guys, we need to get all that stuff fixed. This also ties into my post about not warming up with cubes. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> Edit: Someone said something that made me think of another thing that happened. Someone said 8 secs when it had been about two and 12 when It had been about four.


I once had a judge who told me i dint reach cutoff and then i went back to my table and everyone was like WhY dId YouU LEaVE


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Aug 16, 2017)

Only so much can be done about it. Judges are often just volunteers. I agree that a seminar at the beginning of every comp would be good. 

Another option is to have "staff", who are trained. The type of thing that is at nats and worlds. I guess their compensation could be competing for free?


----------



## CubingRF (Feb 17, 2018)

Mastermind2368 said:


> Edit: Someone said something that made me think of another thing that happened. Someone said 8 secs when it had been about two and 12 when It had been about four.



Last year when I was at comp, they said ten seconds instead of eight and 12 seconds like normal. 10 seconds? Is that normal?


----------



## Mike Hughey (Feb 17, 2018)

CubingRF said:


> Last year when I was at comp, they said ten seconds instead of eight and 12 seconds like normal. 10 seconds? Is that normal?


No, it violates the regulations. Hopefully the delegate noticed and eventually corrected the judges.

A3d) At the end of the inspection, the competitor places the puzzle on the mat, in any orientation. Penalty for placing it outside the mat: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A3d2) When 8 seconds of inspection have elapsed, the judge calls "8 SECONDS".
A3d3) When 12 seconds of inspection have elapsed, the judge calls "12 SECONDS".

Edit: Actually, if you should happen to see something like this while competing, where you're sure it's not following the rules, it's always best to inform a delegate that it's happening right after your solve. That way the delegate can correct the mistake as soon as possible and minimize the negative impact on other competitors.


----------



## CarterK (Feb 17, 2018)

Mike Hughey said:


> where you're sure it's not following the rules


Or if you are unsure of the rules. Don't always take the judges word for it. Also, if you know the regulations, don't be afraid to say that somebody is wrong. At one comp, I stopped the timer on 5x5, and the judge wasn't sure what to do, so he got the delegate (good job on him) and the delegate said it was a plus 2. I argued that I knew that that wasn't a plus 2 and asked him to check. I didn't get a plus 2.


----------



## Bob (Feb 20, 2018)

CubingRF said:


> Last year when I was at comp, they said ten seconds instead of eight and 12 seconds like normal. 10 seconds? Is that normal?


 That hasn't been normal since 2008. However, before that, the judge used to call 10 seconds.

Please inform a delegate whenever you see the regulations not being followed.


----------



## Ollie (Feb 20, 2018)

Is it breaking the rules is 8, 10 and 12 seconds are called?


----------



## Bob (Feb 20, 2018)

Ollie said:


> Is it breaking the rules is 8, 10 and 12 seconds are called?


Yes.


----------



## D1zzy (Nov 25, 2018)

I agree, one judge was talking to me during my solve (distracting in the first place) and told me that I should DNF the solve because I messed up the cube accidentally because of my nerves. He also wrote my time down incorrectly for that solve. I just think that the judging training session needs to be more thorough and precise about the some of the more uncommon rules. I also think that they could have a few groups of judging tutorials at comps so they can ask and answer questions without being put on the spot like it is when there is one big group.


----------



## CornerCutter (Nov 26, 2018)

D1zzy said:


> I agree, one judge was talking to me during my solve (distracting in the first place) and told me that I should DNF the solve because I messed up the cube accidentally because of my nerves. He also wrote my time down incorrectly for that solve. I just think that the judging training session needs to be more thorough and precise about the some of the more uncommon rules. I also think that they could have a few groups of judging tutorials at comps so they can ask and answer questions without being put on the spot like it is when there is one big group.


That sounds like a pretty bad case. Did you alert the delegate? 
Most of the time the bad judge just needs a little instruction and then is fine.


----------



## Sajwo (Nov 26, 2018)

D1zzy said:


> I agree, one judge was talking to me during my solve (distracting in the first place) and told me that I should DNF the solve because I messed up the cube accidentally because of my nerves. He also wrote my time down incorrectly for that solve. I just think that the judging training session needs to be more thorough and precise about the some of the more uncommon rules. I also think that they could have a few groups of judging tutorials at comps so they can ask and answer questions without being put on the spot like it is when there is one big group.



Next time it happens remember to talk with delegate, he will give you an extra solve


----------



## LightFlame_ (Nov 26, 2018)

I_<3_SCS said:


> Just random... how did "nub" even originate?
> 
> Beginner/ new person -> newbie -> noob -> nub? TBH that's p ******* re******* for an etymology.



i'm pretty sure nub is someone that is fast but intentionally acts noobie (if that's even a word) in their ways. like an example is derpy cuber.


----------



## Mastermind2368 (Nov 30, 2018)

1.5 yrs of this lmoa thread and people are still commenting on it xd


----------



## CornerCutter (Nov 30, 2018)

Mastermind2368 said:


> 1.5 yrs of this lmoa thread and people are still commenting on it xd


Guess there might be an issue.


----------



## Twifty (May 14, 2019)

I remember volunteering to judge at my first comp after all my events. I tried really hard not to mess anything up, but I forgot to reset the time once. Led to me giving the next solver an E1.


----------



## ganuwoahh (Mar 10, 2020)

I'm sure this has happened to all of us.

You finish a solve and the cube will be like marginally unsolved, like 15 degrees off and clearly not a +2, but the judge calls the delegate over anyway. Or when the judge calls your solve a DNF even though it's a U2 away. Stuff like this. This needs to stop. I had a kid come up to me complaining that his judge marked his solve as a DNF because it was a 180 degree turn away and that it was 'two' moves away from being solved. 

Can't we have it such that only cubers who are old enough and/or have been to a certain number of competitions can judge; similar to how we assign scramblers?
I understand there may not be sufficient judges but I think it's worth it to have more accurate jurisdiction.


----------



## AbsoRuud (Mar 10, 2020)

ganuwoahh said:


> I'm sure this has happened to all of us.
> 
> You finish a solve and the cube will be like marginally unsolved, like 15 degrees off and clearly not a +2, but the judge calls the delegate over anyway. Or when the judge calls your solve a DNF even though it's a U2 away. Stuff like this. This needs to stop. I had a kid come up to me complaining that his judge marked his solve as a DNF because it was a 180 degree turn away and that it was 'two' moves away from being solved.
> 
> ...


In the Netherlands, there is a judging training at every competition. There is also a system in place where newcomers have a white/green ribbon, people with 1-2 comps get a yellow ribbon and experienced competitors get a blue ribbon. Runners know not to match newbies with newbies, so these problems almost never occur. In fact, I've had the opposite where I told the judge I was fine with the +2 she gave me, but she called the delegate because it was such a minute difference. All in all most competitors are also very honest and even if the judge misses something, which happens once in a while, the competitor will almost always call out the situation. Someone at the last comp even said he got a miss scramble and had to redo a solve, which cost him about half a second on his average in Skewb.


----------



## alexiscubing (Mar 10, 2020)

Same in Australia, we do a judging tutorial, but this doesn't stop kids from talking during solves, counting by seconds during inspection and this judge even knocked my friends $50 gopro stand off the table, breaking it and not even saying sorry. There is literally no way of stopping this unless they force people to be good


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Mar 10, 2020)

If judges got quickly tested for easy mistakes to make maybe this situation would be fixed.


----------



## Ronxu (Mar 11, 2020)

ITT people who think the whole world is just like their local community.


----------



## DerpBoiMoon (Apr 12, 2020)

There was a post a few months back talking about how in Norway or somewhere, they use a banding system. I agree with this 100% and would prob like it as a wca reg


@ProStar


----------



## brododragon (Apr 12, 2020)

DerpBoiMoon said:


> There was a post a few months back talking about how in Norway or somewhere, they use a banding system. I agree with this 100% and would prob like it as a wca reg
> 
> 
> @ProStar


Here's the post:


AbsoRuud said:


> In the Netherlands, there is a judging training at every competition. There is also a system in place where newcomers have a white/green ribbon, people with 1-2 comps get a yellow ribbon and experienced competitors get a blue ribbon. Runners know not to match newbies with newbies, so these problems almost never occur. In fact, I've had the opposite where I told the judge I was fine with the +2 she gave me, but she called the delegate because it was such a minute difference. All in all most competitors are also very honest and even if the judge misses something, which happens once in a while, the competitor will almost always call out the situation. Someone at the last comp even said he got a miss scramble and had to redo a solve, which cost him about half a second on his average in Skewb.


----------



## Sub1Hour (Apr 12, 2020)

At one of the competitions I went to we had experienced people staff for the first 3 groups of an event and then the experienced people would compete in the 4th and 5th with newcomers or inexperienced cubers as our staff (aside from scrambling). We did that for all of the events but if we only did it for the first round of 2-4 then it would have worked by giving the new/inexperienced guys a look at what a good judge is. I think that competitor tutorials help a lot and in my area whenever we do comps there is usually a delegate, organizer, or whoever is willing to help is designated to teach people how to judge. I staff a ton so I have done this before and it works well to have someone teach people how to judge when they are new. This is not perfect though. One time during 6x6, my judge was doing skewb U perms for the entirety of my centers, until one of our organizers told him to stop. If any of you guys are helping out with the competitor tutorials make sure that you point out that you should not be talking, solving, or just giving a general distraction during a solve while you judge.


----------

