- Can we use cubes of different sizes ? - Do we have to sum the +2 ? - If someone did 2/2 in 19:59 and one cube has a +2, does it give 2/2 in 19:59 or 2/2 in 20:01 or 1/2 in 20:00 ?

[quote:25csx2rm]- Can we use cubes of different sizes ?[/quote:25csx2rm] No, that would violate: [quote:25csx2rm]3j) Puzzles must be clean and must not have any textures, markings, elevated pieces, damages, or other differences that distinguish one piece from a similar piece.[/quote:25csx2rm] [quote:25csx2rm]- Do we have to sum the +2 ?[/quote:25csx2rm] Yes. [quote:25csx2rm]- If someone did 2/2 in 19:59 and one cube has a +2, does it give 2/2 in 19:59 or 2/2 in 20:01 or 1/2 in 20:00 ?[/quote:25csx2rm] 1/2 in 20:00

[quote="Ron":1da47lch][quote:1da47lch]- If someone did 2/2 in 19:59 and one cube has a +2, does it give 2/2 in 19:59 or 2/2 in 20:01 or 1/2 in 20:00 ?[/quote:1da47lch] 1/2 in 20:00[/quote:1da47lch] I don't like this ruling for two reasons: - It is supposed to be a two-second penalty, which is a very minor thing, not a one-cube penalty (two points), which is a very important thing and can change someone's rank by a very large amount (2/2 in 20:00 and 1/2 in 20:00 would be ranks 25 and 59 out of 61). - We do not know that in the last second the second cube was solved - it is very much possible that the solver paused for a few seconds at the end to make sure they had done everything they had memorized. Saying that the result is 1/2 implies that after 19:58 of their solve (counting the +2 penalty) exactly one cube was solved. If both cubes were solved (or within a total penalty of +2 from solved) at 19:58, it makes no sense to say that 1/2 was solved, because they both were solved at 20:00 including penalty. It almost seems like you are unofficially suggesting a one-cube penalty for people who go slightly overtime. I think it would be much better (and more fair) to say that the result is 2/2 in 20:01. The understanding would be that, since a solver is stopped after 20 minutes exactly, this time can only have happened because of +2 penalties. This way, the result would be ranked worse than any other 2/2 result, but you would not be giving an unfairly large punishment to the competitor by pushing them down into 1/2.

[quote="Ron":2et1vqht][quote:2et1vqht]- Can we use cubes of different sizes ?[/quote:2et1vqht] No, that would violate: [quote:2et1vqht]3j) Puzzles must be clean and must not have any textures, markings, elevated pieces, damages, or other differences that distinguish one piece from a similar piece.[/quote:2et1vqht][/quote:2et1vqht] We allowed competitors to use cubes of different sizes at US Nationals. I don't agree that this rule is violated, since in multi you are using more than one puzzle, and the rule doesn't explicitly cover this - it is too ambiguous to apply to multi, since multiple puzzles are used. Additionally, different cubes will handle differently: competitors will easily be able to distinguish between puzzles just by picking them up and doing a turn. It isn't reasonable (nor enforceable) to require competitors to make each cube feel and look exactly the same.

[quote="qqwref":1xzpn00l][quote="Ron":1xzpn00l][quote:1xzpn00l]- If someone did 2/2 in 19:59 and one cube has a +2, does it give 2/2 in 19:59 or 2/2 in 20:01 or 1/2 in 20:00 ?[/quote:1xzpn00l] 1/2 in 20:00[/quote:1xzpn00l] I don't like this ruling for two reasons: - It is supposed to be a two-second penalty, which is a very minor thing, not a one-cube penalty (two points), which is a very important thing and can change someone's rank by a very large amount (2/2 in 20:00 and 1/2 in 20:00 would be ranks 25 and 59 out of 61). - We do not know that in the last second the second cube was solved - it is very much possible that the solver paused for a few seconds at the end to make sure they had done everything they had memorized. Saying that the result is 1/2 implies that after 19:58 of their solve (counting the +2 penalty) exactly one cube was solved. If both cubes were solved (or within a total penalty of +2 from solved) at 19:58, it makes no sense to say that 1/2 was solved, because they both were solved at 20:00 including penalty. It almost seems like you are unofficially suggesting a one-cube penalty for people who go slightly overtime. [/quote:1xzpn00l] Here's a third reason: assume that instead of being +2, the cube was DNF. Then your result would be 1/2 in 19:59. In other words, you get a strictly better result with an unsolved cube than with an almost solved one, which is just incousistent. I agree that the result should rather be 2/2 in 20:01.

About the cube size, type of stickers, etc. I think it should be more explicit on the regulations. Also, I would prefer adding the +2 penalties after validating a result, so in the previous example : 2/2 in 20:01.

The different cubes and stickers are in my experience very badly judged, plus the rules are unclear about this. At German open 2009 Ron refused to let me use a normal cube and a mini cube referring back to 3j. There are some problems if you want to enforce this rule so strickt. I saw Dennis Strehlau at EC 2009 using tiled and stickered cubes for his multi attempt, so this should've been prohibited? Also, some cubes just have a different structure (like A2 which has rails from the inside), you can also check which cube is in your hands by just taking out a piece or feeling between a corner and an edge without popping anything, or checking the 'roundness' of the cube (Type F cubes have more round pieces which is easy to feel). Where to draw the line? I noticed people were already getting flamed by using a rubiks.DIY which had the rubiks logo craved into one of the center caps, what's wrong with this world??

[quote="Erik":wzfhc81c]Where to draw the line? I noticed people were already getting flamed by using a rubiks.DIY which had the rubiks logo craved into one of the center caps, what's wrong with this world??[/quote:wzfhc81c] Once we require that tension on all sides of the cubes are perfectly equal and ensure that there are no scents (or equal scents) on every face.

[quote="Erik":397gug9n] Also, some cubes just have a different structure (like A2 which has rails from the inside), you can also check which cube is in your hands by just taking out a piece or feeling between a corner and an edge without popping anything, or checking the 'roundness' of the cube (Type F cubes have more round pieces which is easy to feel). [/quote:397gug9n] Or simply applying a few moves. Different cubes feel differently while solving, and I know my own cubes well enough to be able to tell which is whici that way. Is that cheating ? In this case, everybody's cheating at multi... Requiring cubers to have and maintain exactly identical cubes in an exactly identical state may perhaps still be feasible for 2 or 3 cubes, but with people attempting 16 or more it's simply ridiculous. Or should the organization provide the cubes for multi ? That goes against the idea that competitiors have to bring their own puzzles, and I don't see why we should make a special case for multi. I'm in favor of just allowing different cubes, because forbidding them is simply impossible to enforce. Of course each cube taken individually must still comply to t3j.

[quote="TMOY":1rzxj3t2]I'm in favor of just allowing different cubes, because forbidding them is simply impossible to enforce. Of course each cube taken individually must still comply to t3j.[/quote:1rzxj3t2] Exactly. 3j) Puzzles must be clean and must not have any textures, markings, elevated pieces, damages, or other differences that [b:1rzxj3t2]distinguish one piece from a similar piece[/b:1rzxj3t2]. That applies only to pieces, not one cube compared to the other. As said before, I can tell the difference between my cubes just by making a few moves, and they are basically all the same size and have the same stickers.

Yes, there is no need for pieces from one cube to be indistinguishable to pieces from another cube, since pieces cannot move from one cube to another. I guess the rule needs to be rewritten to point out that each cube needs to be BLD-safe, not that all cubes together must be (since that is very difficult to maintain). I think the 2/2 in 20:01 thing should be brought back up. It should be set that a +2 penalty is just that, two seconds, and should not end up being a larger penalty such as disqualification of a solve. That is, time limits (in the sense of "your time must be less than X or it won't count", not in the sense of "your time must be less than X or you don't get to finish your average") should be counted before penalties are added, not after, since the point is to make sure the competition doesn't take too long. If someone has Y out of Z cubes solved when the time is stopped, it is simply wrong to not give them a Y/Z result.