Altred functionallity?

Kenneth Gustavsson (2007-03-20 19:27:22 +0000)
Hi WCA board. I have a question about regulations (not the one I posted yesterday in the Y-group). I understand "some people" restring their Master Magics so it is "up-side-down". If you do that it is not longer possible to apply the usal solution on it, it wont get solved. Instead you have to use a diffrent solution to archive the goal and that diffrent solution is fast, a good bit faster than the usual one. Is this compatible with the rule about that you are not allowed to alter the functionallity of the puzzle?
StefanPochmann (2007-03-20 19:52:20 +0000)
You don't have to restring one yourself. Buy either an old one or a new one from Rubik's Studio, they're stringed oppositely.
Ron (2007-03-20 22:30:13 +0000)
Hi guys, I am not an expert on this subject. But when I saw the video of the Hungarian Master Magic solvers, I noticed that they use a very different solution. It looks much less work to solve it. So if the solution is different, then we are talking about a different puzzle. Even if a puzzle with a different solution is mass manufactured, then it is still a different puzzle. Please Master Magic experts: give me some advice on how to handle this. We have to standardise on one puzzle of the 'Master Magic category'. Which is the standard Master Magic? Thanks, Ron
StefanPochmann (2007-03-21 09:12:08 +0000)
Jaap and Alexander are the experts and I don't think they're in this forum, you might want to email them. I believe the Hungarians use Alexander's solution, just upside-down, so it's [b:1n4fadx5]not[/b:1n4fadx5] less work (at least not in number of flips).
Kenneth Gustavsson (2007-03-21 09:41:25 +0000)
I'm not an expert but as far as I understand the original master was backstringed an so is the Studio version (as Stefan points out above). But these are not wery common and not very easy to get. Most people are using the version Rubik's are selling today. So as I see it, the newer ones are the "correct" version,
StefanPochmann (2007-03-21 11:17:28 +0000)
[quote="Kenneth Gustavsson":2ow6l64u]I'm not an expert but as far as I understand the original master was backstringed an so is the Studio version (as Stefan points out above).[/quote:2ow6l64u] Actually I said those two versions are stringed oppositely.
Kenneth Gustavsson (2007-03-21 11:27:13 +0000)
Yep, you did :D I did not actually read yuor sentence when i "citated" it. I think the words choosen is not that important really, but the sentence of them are and I think I did hit the same meaning as you did :P
StefanPochmann (2007-03-21 13:06:09 +0000)
Ok, I see my wording is ambiguous. To state it clearly: I think new rubiks.com and new Rubik's Studio versions are stringed the same, and both differ upside-down from the old originals.
Kenneth Gustavsson (2007-03-21 16:07:46 +0000)
Ok, my misstake, now it's clear what you ment. I myself is using a home made "studio". I took two Homers and one "red rings" and made two masters of them (one for my brother). The innings for the tiles I got from Rubiks.com, secton "free downloads" where you can find a PDF that is made for printing your own innings. And it's stringed as the ones you can by today. My method is something I found myself and I think it's really good because I'm getting wery nice results after ony a month of mastering. Good also because it is kind to the puzzle, I'm using single strings and only seldomly break it apart. As sonn as I find a way to make a video of the method I will publish it :)
jaap (2007-03-22 19:10:22 +0000)
As Stefan said, both types of stringing have been available commercially. Therefore both types of master magic should be allowed in the competitions. I see no reason to then disallow restringing one the opposite of what it was. The normal magic has only been available in one version as far as I know. If you are given a magic which is strung different to what you are used to, you can still use essentially the same solution as before but in mirror image, as follows: 1. Put the magic down the way you normally would. 2. Flip it over left to right (i.e. what was the left side is now on the right). 3. Use the same solution you normally do in left-right mirror image. Note that in competitions you are allowed to start and/or finish with the magic face down. If you are not ambidextrous you may not like doing this since the amount of work done by the hands is reversed. Therefore you might prefer to do the following instead: 1. Put the magic down the way you normally would. 2. Flip it over top to bottom (i.e. what was at the top is now at the bottom). 3. Use the same solution you normally do in top-bottom mirror image. Now the hands do just as much work as before, except moving in the opposite direction (away from you instead of towards you and vice versa). Jaap
Ron (2007-03-23 07:59:40 +0000)
Thank you all for the feedback. My conclusion is that no changes in the regulations are needed, and that both variations of Master Magic must be allowed. Thanks, Ron
StefanPochmann (2007-03-23 11:28:00 +0000)
[quote="jaap":5ske3knn]As Stefan said, both types of stringing have been available commercially. [b:5ske3knn]Therefore[/b:5ske3knn] both types of master magic should be allowed in the competitions. I see no reason to then disallow restringing one the opposite of what it was.[/quote:5ske3knn] I disagree, there's not enough justification in the first sentence. Just being available commercially should not be an automatic permission. Otherwise someone could get the modification he's not allowed to do himself done by a manufacturer and sold commercially, and boom... all of a sudden the modification is allowed. Thus the first sentence should've included the equivalence of both versions. I'm maybe pedantic, but I didn't want to let it stand like that.