# Method to prevent cheating in BLD



## Kenneth (Mar 20, 2008)

This idéa is derived from the inverse BLD idéa.

Competitor inspects a scrambled cube. When he is done he covers the cube and pic up a solved cube + don the blindfold. Then the solution is executed on the solved cube as in normal BLD.

When the solve is ended the judge compares the now scrabled solution cube to a reference cube that is scrambled to the inverse of the solution scramble. If the solve is properly done the solution cube will look like the reference cube.

It does not matter how much you peek if the solve is done like that, you have no idéa how the inverse looks if you do not start to figure it out by inversing the memo in your head, it will take like forever, no way you break any records that way


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 20, 2008)

I think this was already suggested; the problem with it is that spectators won't appreciate it as easily.

Also, cheating could be beneficial with this approach; if you peek it won't give you an instant clue as to what to fix, but say you're orienting corners and you're not sure if you turned them backwards or not - if you peeked you could easily check that just to make sure you hadn't messed up, and if you did, you could correct them.

I had suggested having a black cube with fluorescent invisible ink on it of different shades for each side of the cube - you would solve the black cube after inspecting the regular one, and the judge could then hold the black cube under a black light to see if you successfully solved it. If we could get Cubesmith to start making fluorescent stickers, it might even be a practical and relatively inexpensive approach.


----------



## Inusagi (Mar 20, 2008)

It wouldn't be fun for the audience, but I like the idea..


----------



## shelley (Mar 20, 2008)

Not fun for the audience/media that show up to such events, AND much harder to check. Also, you have to make sure you have the right orientation for each solver. Altogether too much trouble, when you could just make people solve behind their back or something.


----------



## Inusagi (Mar 20, 2008)

You could lose very much consentration if you solve it behind your back, because of it's behind you.


----------



## shelley (Mar 20, 2008)

I solve behind my back whenever I do it informally for an audience. It definitely ensures you can't cheat. I guess the position can be a bit uncomfortable for some people (which is why this probably won't be implemented for official competitions), but aside from body position it's not much different from a regular solve. After all, your hand position relative to the cube is the same, and that's much more important than where the cube is relative to your face, right?


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Mar 20, 2008)

Very effective, but the competitor wouldn't know if he got it correct.


----------



## joey (Mar 20, 2008)

Um... they can look after they finished the solve...


----------



## shelley (Mar 20, 2008)

I think he meant for the "memorize one cube, solve a different cube" method. You wouldn't know if you got it correct until after it's been carefully verified against the "answer key" or until the judge shines a blacklight on it. Personally, I think the instant between hitting the timer and taking off my blindfold already gives me enough suspense!


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 20, 2008)

I think solving behind the back would typically be a distinct disadvantage for some older competitors (I'm pretty flexible for my age, but I think some might have a lot of trouble with it). You youngsters already have enough advantage that we don't need to be giving you more of one. 

But I guess I agree with the points about it being harder to check and having to worry about the orientation. You could solve the orientation problem by having a couple of normal center stickers, but then that allows cheating again (it would be an advantage to be able to peek at the cube and tell if it was properly oriented or not). So I guess my solution isn't really practical.

I think it's looking more and more like the stand-device that was posted on another thread is a pretty good solution.


----------



## alexc (Mar 20, 2008)

I don't get why people are still suggesting new ideas. I think some kind of goggles are the way to go because they are the closest to what we have now and there is no way to cheat with them.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 20, 2008)

Does anyone know somewhere to get blindfold goggles outside of the UK? I could get regular goggles and spray paint them black, but that sounds difficult and messy.


----------



## tim (Mar 20, 2008)

alexc said:


> I don't get why people are still suggesting new ideas. I think some kind of goggles are the way to go because they are the closest to what we have now and there is no way to cheat with them.



Yep, they're just perfect. And they let the competitor even look more geeky


----------



## DennisStrehlau (Mar 21, 2008)

well i do not like this idea...of course you cant cheat, but come on!!!
we could also stop bld-cubing, then NOBODY could ever cheat, wouldnt this be geat?!?!?! But seriously, bld-cubing has to stay bld cubing!
ths cube has to be solved in the end!!!
So just hold this DAMN pice of paper for this couple of minutes and THATS IT!!!
where is the problem?

Greetings...Dennis


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 21, 2008)

Dennis, I'd think you could understand why someone might not want to hold a piece of paper for your 16 cubes. It's a little more than a couple of minutes.


----------



## dChan (Mar 21, 2008)

Can't you just have it where the judge waves a piece of paper in front of the competitor at different points during the solve and if the competitor suddenly stops for a little bit have the judge keep the paper in front of the person to make sure he did nto stop because he can't see. This way you don't have to hold the papers the whole time the competitor is solving. 

Or we can just have all competitors solve in a pitch black room - YAY!


----------



## DennisStrehlau (Mar 22, 2008)

@Mike:
yes, do it like dChan said

@dChan:
thats what i am talking about man...

P.S.: better blindfolds=no problems


Greetings...Dennis


----------



## keyan (Mar 23, 2008)

alexc said:


> some kind of goggles



But don't you know? The goggles! They do nothing!


----------



## tpsolver (Mar 27, 2008)

Is cheating that much of a problem in competitions?


----------



## fanwuq (Mar 28, 2008)

I suggest to get rid of all real cubes and use ryanheise.com simulator for every event. That way, I don't have to waste money getting a 5x5.


----------



## joey (Mar 28, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> I suggest to get rid of all real cubes and use ryanheise.com simulator for every event. That way, I don't have to waste money getting a 5x5.



I realloy hope you meant to put <sarcasm></sarcasm> round that!


----------



## Rosetti (Mar 28, 2008)

Why not just use special blindfolds, i.e. completely blacked out goggles, provided by the competition holders. Then, they could be checked via a flinch test (make a punch gesture towards them, to see if they flinch - they shouldn't if they can't see)

Also, I recall someone posting a device that goes between the cuber and the cube, they put their arms around it, so even if they removed the blindfold, they couldn't see.


----------



## fanwuq (Mar 29, 2008)

joey said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > I suggest to get rid of all real cubes and use ryanheise.com simulator for every event. That way, I don't have to waste money getting a 5x5.
> ...



realloy?
<sarcasm>I suggest to get rid of all real cubes.</sarcasm>

I do want to have computer cubes be allowed in competitions though. That way, my rank would be much higher.


----------



## SkateTracker (Mar 29, 2008)

Mike Hughey said:


> Dennis, I'd think you could understand why someone might not want to hold a piece of paper for your 16 cubes. It's a little more than a couple of minutes.



Couldn't they use a paper holder? Like, some sort of clip/stand that holds the paper there? 

If that's the only problem with BLDs there's gotta be a way around it, I mean, having someone hold the paper is kinda cavemanish in my opinion.


----------

