2009: officialise blind installation

rubik_fr (2008-11-11 21:24:05 +0000)
Hello, Having seen a lot of competitions in 2008, and living the bad story of cheating in BLIND events, I can see from last competitions that some organizers want to install new equipment so to stop the cheating possibilities. I know there are some discussions around , but I suggest something must be officially written on 2009 regulations. This is to avoid that some organisers build a new thing and make it mandatory to all competitors whithout having their opinion first. I'm sure the two last equipments were ok for competitors, I mean those from japan and hungarian competitions. So maybe an official agreement could be given to those stuff ? This suggestion is only to make rules fair to all of us. addon : is it possible to add the active noise reduction headphones as authorised electronics for bld events ? JLM
Erik (2008-11-11 23:21:57 +0000)
Yeah good point. I'd say make 1 or 2 well described equipments organisers or competitors may bring and if not then use the extra paper rule. Ideally it would be best to have one device for each timer on all competitions but I expect that not all competitions will have to posibility to get those, especially the smaller ones.
Pedro_S (2008-11-12 21:17:48 +0000)
[quote="rubik_fr":1xu3gnng](...) addon : is it possible to add the active noise reduction headphones as authorised electronics for bld events ? JLM[/quote:1xu3gnng] I believe they're allowed already you just can't use headphones connected to an ipod or similar
blade740 (2008-11-12 22:02:24 +0000)
Active noise reduction headphones are an electronic device, rather than a regular pair of sound-blocking headphones. Under the current regulations, electronic devices are not allowed.
RobinBloehm (2008-11-12 22:09:00 +0000)
I guess our Multi BLD record is valid, so such headphones are already allowed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsaqEecUneQ
rubik_fr (2008-11-12 22:33:45 +0000)
I was there in GCD 2008 to see that fabulous WR but I'm not sure Tim used active noise reduction headphones. It seems they are but they are not electronics noise reductors, only big headphones. Maybe someone else could give us the exact information ? Ron maybe , as the final judge ? That's why I'm asking to consider this equipment as authorised and not as music players. I know in many competitions they were not allowed. I've found the actual 2008 regulation: "2i) While competing, competitors must not use sound equipment, other electronic equipment (like walkmans, dictaphones or additional lighting)." therefore, active noise reduction, as an electronic device, can not be used. Moreover, it is a sound equipment since it transforms the real noise. I would consider that, it is not helping in any way the way to solve a cube blindfolded, I mean by giving codes or memorisation help, so why not authorize it ? I personnaly prefer so much to have some quies earplugs while memorising and solving a cube blindfolded. It helps so much not to be disturb by surround sounds, despite the efforts required by organisator to spectators, there are always some bad surprises, like loud speakers announces in hungarian open during big cubes blind event ! The good thing during that discussion phase would be to have opinions of persons who are against that proposal, ... anyone ?
Ron (2008-12-21 21:50:15 +0000)
I have seen some different devices for blocking the view of the puzzle. A sheet of paper is so simple and it works great. Other similar devices should be allowed, as long as the view of the puzzle is obstructed all the time. It is not allowed to use electronic equipment. [quote:3u1ofjlo]2i) While competing, competitors must not use sound equipment, other electronic equipment (like walkmans, dictaphones or additional lighting).[/quote:3u1ofjlo] An unconnected headphone should be OK. Ron
Gilles (2008-12-21 22:02:35 +0000)
I think electronic audio devices should be allowed, as long as they do not interfere in the communication between judges and competitors. What are we afraid of, exactly?
BryanLogan (2008-12-21 22:27:34 +0000)
[quote="Gilles":3m3g3ab7]I think electronic audio devices should be allowed, as long as they do not interfere in the communication between judges and competitors. What are we afraid of, exactly?[/quote:3m3g3ab7] Someone listening to solve instructions....for blind, perhaps I could tell if you cycled wrong. Perhaps you're able to somehow record the cycles and then play them back later.
Gilles (2008-12-22 00:45:34 +0000)
[quote="BryanLogan":38dyukiu]Someone listening to solve instructions....for blind, perhaps I could tell if you cycled wrong. Perhaps you're able to somehow record the cycles and then play them back later.[/quote:38dyukiu] I know, I know... But to me, it sounds like paranoïa. (there are easier ways to cheat efficiently...)
BryanLogan (2008-12-22 01:11:27 +0000)
Question on blindfolded.... B4a) After memorisation the competitor dons the blindfold (provided by judge). Should competitors take this to mean that the organizers are providing the blindfolds? I had a few people at Wisconsin that were suprised I didn't provide them for them (although they were able to borrow them). Seems like blindfolds should be like puzzles. You have to bring your own, and they have to be approved by the organizers. I've only had a handful of competitors do blind at my comps, so if other people have different experiences, please comment.
jbcm627 (2008-12-22 03:36:44 +0000)
[quote="BryanLogan":q1tvuykd]Question on blindfolded.... B4a) After memorisation the competitor dons the blindfold (provided by judge). Should competitors take this to mean that the organizers are providing the blindfolds? I had a few people at Wisconsin that were suprised I didn't provide them for them (although they were able to borrow them). Seems like blindfolds should be like puzzles. You have to bring your own, and they have to be approved by the organizers. I've only had a handful of competitors do blind at my comps, so if other people have different experiences, please comment.[/quote:q1tvuykd] I suppose this could even be open to 2 interpretations: the judge provides the blindfold (meaning, gives it to them so they don't need their own), or provides it for the competitor at that step (as in simply hands it to them, while they actually have brought their own). Perhaps "provided" should be changed to "handed to competitor" if the second one is what was intended. Either way, I have always made sure to have a couple extra blindfolds at competitions.
BryanLogan (2008-12-22 04:25:03 +0000)
[quote="jbcm627":1nmbncq4] I suppose this could even be open to 2 interpretations: the judge provides the blindfold (meaning, gives it to them so they don't need their own), or provides it for the competitor at that step (as in simply hands it to them, while they actually have brought their own). Perhaps "provided" should be changed to "handed to competitor" if the second one is what was intended. [/quote:1nmbncq4] But it can't be the second, because the competitor wears the blindfold, it's not really handed to them at any point.
timhabermaas (2008-12-25 18:30:57 +0000)
[quote="rubik_fr":2um9hjup]I was there in GCD 2008 to see that fabulous WR but I'm not sure Tim used active noise reduction headphones. It seems they are but they are not electronics noise reductors, only big headphones. Maybe someone else could give us the exact information ? Ron maybe , as the final judge ?[/quote:2um9hjup] Yes, they were just big headphones.
Ron (2009-01-03 15:18:58 +0000)
Although we are using paper or other object now, we should still have good blindfolds. That is why it is described as 'provided'. Provided in the sense of 'not provided by competitor unless checked by judge'. Of course anyone can lend their blindfold to the organisation team. But it is the responsibility of the organisation team. There is also a hygiene issue here, though.
Pitzu (2009-01-07 11:01:39 +0000)
I'm afraid there is one issue that nobody mentioned before: In 2008 there was a 'custom' starting, the competitor solved the cubes under the table. But in MBF if you leave all your other cubes at the top of the table, you can watch them. It doesn't matter if you don't see the cube what you are actually solving while you can see the next cube. (It can be more helpful. :twisted: ) And when you are moving the cube (from the top to under the table and back) it can be more easy to watch it under the blindfold. So I think undertable solving doesn't mean absolute safety for MBF. I think there are 3 correct ways: - box (Hungarian Open) - bevelled sheet (like I usually do, however for not too many cubes) - small table under big table (like we did at Nantes Open)
StefanPochmann (2009-01-07 12:49:49 +0000)
I think Tim himself pointed that loophole out after his 24 cubes (as a possiblity, not as "I did that"). Can you show pictures of those alternative suggestions?
Pitzu (2009-01-07 13:46:00 +0000)
1. Hungarian Open: http://picasaweb.google.com/rubikkocka/ ... nOpen2008# 2. Nantes Open: http://ben.goubin.free.fr/cube/cube_aff ... 1212952593 (This was a bit inconvenient. :-) ) 3. Bevelled sheet I have no pictures but this is the best for me. Similar to the one the japanese used in some comp. I used it on Czech Open 2008 and on Euro 2008. If somebody has a picture about me?! :)