Solved state for Square-1 under regulations 2009

Ron (2010-04-12 06:13:01 +0000)
Hi all, See attachment for a picture of a Square-1 at the Zaragoza Open 2010 last weekend. Given WCA Regulations 2009 what do you think should be the result for the competitor? 1) no penalty 2) +2 3) DNF In my opinion the regulations say the following: a) we count the number of moves away from solved b) in addition any misalignment larger than a boundary means an additional move away from solved c) if 1 move away: +2, if >1 move away: DNF My conclusion is that the result should be DNF. - The vertical move could be considered a misalignment or a full move, because the actual full move "/" is 180 degrees, not 90 degrees. - The horizontal move could be considered a misalignment or a full move, because you could see (x,y) as a full move, or every single part of it "x", "y" and "/". In this case I interpret every single part "x", "y" and "/" as a move. So this Square-1 is 2 moves away from solved: - a half "/" move, considered as a misalignment, but larger than 45 degrees, so 1 move away. - a "-1" move, not considered as a misalignment, so 1 move away. Total 2 moves away. What do you think? What should we change in Regulations 2010 to be able to make a clear decision in the future? Yes, we could use some pictures for solved state of Square-1, but I do not have time for that and we need to go final as soon as possible. Thanks, Ron
deadalnix (2010-04-12 09:24:13 +0000)
I would say DNF. But that's a pretty unclear case according to regulations :/
DanCohen (2010-04-12 11:43:17 +0000)
I don't see how this is a DNF. As you said, the "/" move is a full 180 degrees, so half of that turn (going by similarities in cube puzzles) would be 90 degrees. In this picture, the cube is turned exactly half of the full slice, which I feel should be an allowable misalignment. If you are seriously counting the (1,0) as a full move, then there is no point to having a misalignment rule. I definitely feel that the U/D layers should have the same standards as cubic puzzles, meaning 45 degrees is allowed. This is because from the solved state, the only possible 1 move sequences on the Ulayer are (1,0) and (-2,0). This allows inconsistencies, because depending on which direction the puzzle is over/underturned, you have a different standard for the misalignment (30 or 60 degrees). Making the standard 45 degrees for these layers allows a uniformity in the allowable misalignment. In this case, since the slice turn isn't counted as a misalignment (in my eyes), I feel this case should be counted as solved. It may look like a +2, but as we have the picture of the 4x4 in the regulations, you can have multiple misalignments and still have the puzzle considered solved.
Ron (2010-04-12 12:19:09 +0000)
Thanks for your feedback. My question is mainly about what Regulations 2009 say about this case, and whether/what we should change for Regulations 2010. To answer Dan's remarks under Regulations 2009. [quote:2drpv5cv]As you said, the "/" move is a full 180 degrees, so half of that turn (going by similarities in cube puzzles) would be 90 degrees.[/quote:2drpv5cv] Art. 10f says: "cube shaped puzzles: =< 45 degrees". Square-1 is a cube shaped puzzle. Since this is definitely beyond 45 degrees, it is counted as 1 move. [quote:2drpv5cv]If you are seriously counting the (1,0) as a full move, then there is no point to having a misalignment rule.[/quote:2drpv5cv] Square-1 is a puzzle (the only?) where a move can be done, even if the allowable misalignment has not been reached. In this case there is a move or a misalignment of 30 degrees. The question is whether we need to apply "Art. 10e4) If more than one move is needed, the solve is ruled DNF." In other words: when does a misalignment become a move? Only when the misalignment is beyond a boundary (in this case 45 degrees) or also when the misalignment is followed by a move of a perpendicular plane? Without the vertical move, the U position would not be a penalty, because of the MISALIGNMENT rule. With the vertical move, the U position suddenly becomes a move instead of a misalignment. Now if the vertical misalignment would be less than 45 degrees, and thus no move. But the U layer would say it is 1 move away. So that would be +2. I think according to Regulations 2009, we should interpret this case as: to solve this case we need to do "/" and "(-1,0) without /". That is 2 moves. [quote:2drpv5cv]It may look like a +2, but as we have the picture of the 4x4 in the regulations, you can have multiple misalignments and still have the puzzle considered solved.[/quote:2drpv5cv] I think that is a different case, because the vertical move is perpendicular to the horizontal move. For 4x4 this would look very different. To answer Dan's remarks under Regulations 2010. (We would need change to make this clearer) The vertical misalignment IMO should be considered a move, because it is >= 45 degrees. The horizontal misalignment IMO should be considered a move, because it is followed by another move (the vertical one). So result is DNF.
blade740 (2010-04-12 13:41:50 +0000)
I have had this exact case before. The judge tried to give me a +2, but I insisted it was a DNF. Now that I reread the regulations, I think the case is +2. To be fair, the square-1 isn't exactly cubical (and even if it were, it has so little in common with other 'cubical' puzzles that it really can't be classified under the same level of rules. So, there are two ways to interpret this under the 2009 regulations: if you consider square-1 a cubical puzzle, then the limit is 45 degrees on each turning plane. In this case, the (1,0) is NOT a full move, and the / is a full move. Therefore, the case should be +2. However, the square-1 is not exactly cubical. And even if it were, it shares so little with the rest of the cubical puzzles that it's really incorrect to class it as such. Instead of using 45 degrees, I would consider square-1 under 10h. Because the rest of the puzzles allow you to go halfway to the next turn, I would take the horizontal tolerance to be <=15 degrees and vertical to be <=90 degrees. This would mean that the (1,0) IS a full move, but the half of a / is not (regulations say that <=45 degrees on cubic puzzles is solved, so the case at exactly 90 degrees on square-1 would be solved as well) In this case the result is also +2. In my opinion, this state is exactly 1.5 turns away from solved. Because the regulations say that exactly half of a complete turn is still valid, it should be considered +2. I would suggest using "halfway to the next turn" for square-1, rather than 45 degrees.
deadalnix (2010-04-12 14:41:38 +0000)
I think we should male this complicated. 45° for all square one moves should the regulation. The more complicated the rules are, the more error prone they are. That would have made this puzzle a +2 I guess (/ move isn't correct, upper layer move is).
Pedro_S (2010-04-14 14:15:44 +0000)
The main thing here is "what is a move in square-1?" 45 degrees on a 3x3 is not a move, because you can't turn any perpendicular axis. But 30 degrees on square-1 is a move, IMO, because you can turn the /. Using the same logic, the full / is a move, but not half of it, because then you can't turn the perpendicular layers. I think 90º should be allowed for the /, and the usual 45º for U and D, because square-1 is not as firm or tight as a 3x3, and the U and D layers can misalign quite easily when you drop the puzzle. About the case in the picture...That's really awkward, because on the 3x3, if you do U and "half R", you get a +2. On the square-1, if you do (1,0), it shouldn't be a +2, according to 2009 regs. So, if you do a half / after a (1,0), you'd have no penalty...but the puzzle looks not solved to me. That way you could do just half of the last / everytime and save some tenths of a second...
Dene (2010-04-15 12:25:34 +0000)
I agree with Ron that in this case, according to the 2009 regulations the puzzle is 2 moves away from solved. I use 10h to defend this position: 10h) Other puzzles are solved according to the solved state as defined in the generally accepted goal of the puzzle, with the regulations of the cube solved state applied when applicable. This is clearly not solved in the generally accepted goal of the puzzle. I understand that I am a bit late, and I see that the 2010 regulations have made it such that this counts as solved with no penalty. This is nice from the perspective of a Sq1 solver, but I still disagree with it. On any other puzzle, if the puzzle is in such a state as one side is turned and another side is turned through that side, the puzzle is a +2 or DNF depending on the degree of the second turn (the first turn is always counted as 1 move off). For consistency, I think we should apply the same logic to Square-1. I am happy with / being >90 for +2, but I am with blade740 in the fact that (1,0) counts as a move. Of course, this means that to avoid a +2 in Sq1 solving one would have to be VERY careful in their alignment and placement of the puzzle. I don't necessarily see this as a negative. Just a personal account: I very regularly neglect to make the final (-1,0) turn while solving my Sq1, because that way I can throw it down after an algorithm without wasting time aligning it and I know I am safe in the knowledge that it is within the 45 degree barrier. I think this is taking advantage of the rule, and I think it is the same as ignoring AUF on a 3x3, which will always result in a +2. I don't think it should be allowed for people to take advantage of a regulation in this way.
Pedro_S (2010-04-15 12:41:47 +0000)
[quote="Dene":2pdckhm5] Just a personal account: I very regularly neglect to make the final (-1,0) turn while solving my Sq1, because that way I can throw it down after an algorithm without wasting time aligning it and I know I am safe in the knowledge that it is within the 45 degree barrier. I think this is taking advantage of the rule, and I think it is the same as ignoring AUF on a 3x3, which will always result in a +2. I don't think it should be allowed for people to take advantage of a regulation in this way.[/quote:2pdckhm5] I think (1,0) is different from a U turn on the 3x3. One turn on the 3x3 is 90 degrees, because other moves aren't possible with other angles. But that's not the case with Square-1. Each full turn is divided into more turns, depending on the puzzle state. For square-shaped square-1, you have 8 possible angles to turn. That also makes it harder to define what should count as +2, because, from solve position, (1,0) is a valid turn, but (-1,0) is not.
Dene (2010-04-15 12:57:50 +0000)
If we make it +2 for more than half a turn (so 15 degrees to the right and 30 degrees to the left) then the competitor still has 45 degrees to play around with (just not in two directions). I don't see this as difficult to put in the regulations, it just means having a little bit extra written down.
Ron (2010-04-15 18:50:59 +0000)
I still think that any misalignment followed by a perpendicular move should be considered a move. Under WCA Regulations 2010 this would result in +2 for this case. Under WCA Regulations 2009 the vertical misalignment rule is 45 degrees instead of 90 degrees. So the result of this case is DNF. Ron
Dene (2010-04-15 23:19:15 +0000)
[quote="Ron":1y2klohz]I still think that any misalignment followed by a perpendicular move should be considered a move. Under WCA Regulations 2010 this would result in +2 for this case. [/quote:1y2klohz] Are you sure? It doesn't look like that to me unless I'm missing something.