[quote:59e0djki]A5b) While inspecting or solving the puzzle, the competitor must not have any assistance from anyone or any object (other than the surface). Penalty: disqualification of the solve.[/quote:59e0djki] This goes for all events except OH solving. So technically, it's legal to hit the cube against the surface to align faces during your solve? Why would this be allowed for two handed solving but not one handed solving?

Also, if this does get changed for more puzzles, it probably shouldn't include Magics. I wouldn't suggest allowing the table to be used for OH though, because you'll get people who will be loudly smacking the table with their cube. I'd vote for "Don't use the table for all events except Magic". As for feet, hopefully that'll just go away

i think all events should be used of the table, the reason the table is there is for holding the stackmat and timer

What's bad about using the surface? Doesn't seem unnatural to me. I'd allow it for all events. Would also get rid of one more hard to control rule ([url=http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/regulations/#onehandedsolving:3pf1tgqn]C1b1[/url:3pf1tgqn]). Yay for making the judge's life easier. cubetalk: Please correct your typos, your message is unclear and appears to contradict itself.

Plus, as was discussed in IRC, I don't think using the table is going to give anyone much of an advantage at OH, except for slower solvers. Good OH solvers can realign the cube with their fingers. This just makes things easier for somewhat slower solvers (and judges).

Sorry about my last post, what i meant to say was: I don't think the table should be used for events. The only reason the table is there is to hold the stackmat and timer. But yet again, some bad OH solvers may need the table every now and then the cube may drop. I am one of those people

[quote="cubetalk":2zmss59v]I don't think the table should be used for events. The only reason the table is there is to hold the stackmat and timer.[/quote:2zmss59v] What do you do with the cube when you stop the solve and are not allowed to hold it anymore? And where do you put it down between inspection and solving?

[quote="cubetalk":2sq3wc3l][quote="Lucas":2sq3wc3l][quote="cubetalk":2sq3wc3l]I don't think the table should be used for events. The only reason the table is there is to hold the stackmat and timer.[/quote:2sq3wc3l] What do you do with the cube when you stop the solve and are not allowed to hold it anymore? And where do you put it down between inspection and solving?[/quote:2sq3wc3l] to a scrambler[/quote:2sq3wc3l] Wrong, the answer to both of those is "a table"

all right buddy, i don't wanna get into a fight with some guy over the internet so ok... you don't gotta be defensive..

[quote="cubetalk":2tzx62am]all right buddy, i don't wanna get into a fight with some guy over the internet so ok... you don't gotta be defensive..[/quote:2tzx62am] I think what's he trying to indirectly say is: [quote:2tzx62am]Look, at lot of the stuff you're saying doesn't make sense. Perhaps it's due to lack of knowledge of the current regulations, or perhaps that you've never competed in competition before. So please, experience a competition at least once before suggesting how to change them.[/quote:2tzx62am]

Back on topic, I agree that it is silly to allow use of the table in 2H cubing, but not OH.

Thanks for the feedback. I agree that there is hardly any advantage from using the surface for one-handed solving. In 2008 I got a DNF because of this. C1b1 will be removed for 2009. Ron

Just a comment, We don't call two-handed solving "two-handed solving"; rather, we call it "speed solving". There is no regulation in speed solving that the competitor must use two hands; they may use whatever part of the body they wish. If a competitor could more quickly solve the cube by using their nose (a la Michel Gondry), that would be perfectly acceptable. In a more realistic example, a competitor who is disabled could solve the cube with one hand or with their feet. The speed solve event does not dictate that competitors use two hands to solve the cube, only that they don't use a robot or something. One-handed solving is different because it tests how the competitor can solve while using no body part other than one of their hands. It would be reasonable to require that the competitor doesn't use ANYTHING to aid in the solving besides that hand--that includes their nose, their feet, their arm, the table. Having said that, I agree with what has been said--it is a difficult rule to enforce and it doesn't really add anything. But let's not argue with comparisons between speedsolving and one-handed solving. While in practice the only difference between the two events is the number of hands you use while solving the cube, the definitions of the events are very different. Speedsolving is solving the cube by any means possible without outside aid, while one-handed solving is solving the cube using exactly one hand and no other part of your body.

Nice that it's removed. It only brought trouble I think Imagine you drop the cube during a OH solve, because the cube hits the table it can also move a bit. It's not unlikely that there will be some allignment changings after the drop. I'll gladly use the non-existence of the rules to smack my cube on the table if my cube doesnt do what I want during OH Btw, it's quite logical speed solving is not called two-handed-solving. Isn't it the same with swimming where there is only the free event? Who invented that you have to solve a rubiks cube with 2 hands? People are allowed to use their nose too if they want Anyway, just wanted to say that it's good the rule is removed

[quote="Erik":2ep463pt]I'll gladly use the non-existence of the rules to smack my cube on the table if my cube doesnt do what I want during OH [/quote:2ep463pt] Actually, I somewhat fear that newbies won't take the time to practice doing the cube one-handed without the use of the table and you'll get people that will do this. Of course, this would fall under the "Don't disturb other competitors", but it might be nice reminder in the one-handed section that if you can only solve OH by smacking the table, you shouldn't compete in it.

Who cares if they solve it by only smacking? 1. it's not really possible to do that 2. it will not exactly make them much faster 3. if you need the smacking you are a noob in the first place 4. warn and then disqualify the competitor if he/she is bothering anyone

[quote="Erik":2sg6mh5d]Who cares if they solve it by only smacking? 1. it's not really possible to do that 2. it will not exactly make them much faster 3. if you need the smacking you are a noob in the first place 4. warn and then disqualify the competitor if he/she is bothering anyone[/quote:2sg6mh5d] 1. Yes it is. If you have alignment issues with your cube, the table does make it possible to solve. 2. Correct, the newbies are wanting to just finish, they not looking for the WR. 3. Agreed. 4. Yes, but it's much easier to do this if the regulations have something that warns the user to not do this in the first place. If it's not explicitly called out, you may get judges that allow it at some competitions, but not at others. Plus, it's the difference between a judge pointing to something that explicitly tells the user not to do something, as opposed to trying to convince the user that it falls under disturbing others, and that others actually do get disturbed by it, etc.

I thought Erik was clearly only kidding? Do you really believe people would intentionally use the table for OH solving, let alone in a way disturbing others? I very much doubt it. I expect common sense and common courtesy to prevent it. And not "prevent" in the sense of "I want to do it but I guess I better don't" but in the sense of not even thinking about doing it.

I will only talk about One-Handed. Ok the new rule has good points, but I really don't like it. Specially for one reason : If we allow the competitor to use the table, then some competitors can use it as another hand, and that could be very ugly OH cubing. Because if we use the table correctly, and if you've practiced with it, you can significantly improve your times. And that's very very ugly cubing. A One Handed solve, is a solve with one hand, not a solve with one hand and one table. In 3x3 speedsolve, we can allow it, because it makes the competitor lose time... And that's not intentional. Imagine you meet someone, you're WR Holder of One-Handed, and he asks you to show him good solves. Will you really answer "Well, I need a table otherwise I average more than 25 secs" ? I find it ridiculous. And to prevent smacking, I think we should put DNF when the cube touches the table and the timer is not stopped right after it.

[quote="Edouard Chambon":1oo30vy5]if we use the table correctly, and if you've practiced with it, you can significantly improve your times.[/quote:1oo30vy5] 1. I doubt that. 2. Why would anyone practice that instead of practicing the right way?

1. I understand you can doubt. But I don't. 2. Stephan... You said "the right way". So that means that the other one is not the right one. Thus, why allowing it ?

I also don't want to see this regulation removed. If you cannot align your cube using only your one hand, you should be disqualified.

1. Please show me [b:2poqdxyt]one[/b:2poqdxyt] cuber who's significantly faster in OH using the table. 2. I meant the "right way" [b:2poqdxyt]to be fast[/b:2poqdxyt]. Please answer again, i.e., tell me why someone would practice that cumbersome slow way using the table rather than the much better way not using it. Oh wait, that's right. You believe using the table is the significantly better way. Nevermind. You're a pretty good OH solver without using the table, Edouard. How much faster are you when you're using the table?

I've always been against this special regulation for 1H, unless someone proves you can be much faster when using the surface and people consider the event's nature may be altered. It's impossible to enforce article C1b1 (the judge can't really see wether the competitors aligns faces or not when picking up the cube). And you can still drop the cube and take it with another grip. If you keep it, at least be logical, please, and apply the same rule for cubing with feet.

[quote="StefanPochmann":w7d4ev5f]Do you really believe people would intentionally use the table for OH solving, let alone in a way disturbing others?[/quote:w7d4ev5f] I honestly think you would get a lot of new people who rarely practice OH entering and using the table because they can't get proper 90 degree turns. Maybe I'm the only one.

I have to admit, I did it a little bit when I first tried OH. I don't think it would be very disruptive, though, especially on a stackmat. If you can't reliably make 90 degree turns, sometimes you get a little bit mixed up. I don't really get to a situation where I need it even now, though (and I'm still quite slow at OH). I don't think it would affect the nature of the event, just allow a few of the worse solvers to do what they may or may not already do at home when they get misaligned.

[quote="StefanPochmann":2jrgp35g]1. Please show me [b:2jrgp35g]one[/b:2jrgp35g] cuber who's significantly faster in OH using the table. 2. I meant the "right way" [b:2jrgp35g]to be fast[/b:2jrgp35g]. Please answer again, i.e., tell me why someone would practice that cumbersome slow way using the table rather than the much better way not using it. Oh wait, that's right. You believe using the table is the significantly better way. Nevermind. You're a pretty good OH solver without using the table, Edouard. How much faster are you when you're using the table?[/quote:2jrgp35g] 1. Of course, that does not exist actually... Because it's forbidden by the rule. So it would be difficult for me to show you someone... 2. Maybe it's slow for you... But I don't think it is for everybody. I just don't see why to allow it except that it is easier for the judge. When somebody can not do a good 90° turn, I just think he is bad at OH. Why would we allow him to be helped ??

[quote="Edouard Chambon":tvb79d21] When somebody can not do a good 90° turn, I just think he is bad at OH. Why would we allow him to be helped ??[/quote:tvb79d21] Because he is just that: bad at OH. Helping him only saves time for everyone. It doesn't endanger those that are good at OH.

Do you really want to see champions who use 5, 10, 20 times or even more the table during a solve ?

[quote="Edouard Chambon":e96ami2s]Do you really want to see champions who use 5, 10, 20 times or even more the table during a solve ?[/quote:e96ami2s] Do you really think someone who does that will ever be a champion?

a simple (maybe not the best though) solution would be to say that competitors SHOULD NOT use the surface during OH. If they do it excessively, they can be disqualified.

[quote="Bob":2rcl971n]a simple (maybe not the best though) solution would be to say that competitors SHOULD NOT use the surface during OH. If they do it excessively, they can be disqualified.[/quote:2rcl971n] Or maybe "should not make loud noise" would be good. If they do it once or twice accidentally, that's fine. If they're doing it constantly because that's how they solve, disqualify. Plus, it's in the regulations, so it's known that the noise (which is my main concern) should be avoid, but using the table is fine.

[quote="Edouard Chambon":38atpm3p]Do you really want to see champions who use 5, 10, 20 times or even more the table during a solve ?[/quote:38atpm3p] I find it very hard to believe that someone has practiced OH extensively but still cannot make 90 degree turns the first time, every time.

Bob : I don't like rules which can have different signification depending on who is the judge/WCA deleguate. We need to be clear about this. blade740 : I average 20 sec and still have problems on some moves, every solves.

[quote="Edouard Chambon":241jnrqf]Bob : I don't like rules which can have different signification depending on who is the judge/WCA deleguate. We need to be clear about this. blade740 : I average 20 sec and still have problems on some moves, every solves.[/quote:241jnrqf] would you get better if you practiced using the table?

[quote="Edouard Chambon":1th6hidh]Bob : I don't like rules which can have different signification depending on who is the judge/WCA deleguate. We need to be clear about this.[/quote:1th6hidh] But we already have rules like that: 1c3, 1c4, 1d2, 2t, 6b, 6b1, 6c, 6d, 7b, 7d, 7e, 7h2, 8a4, and 9r3. In particular, see 7e. I see your point, though, but this would not be something new to our regulations.

I just want to keep these regulations !

I think the reason that in One Handed solving the surface isn't allowed is because the point is that your solving it with one hand and nothing else. As mentioned above we don't call normal solving two handed solving. If so then it would probably be illegal to use the surface.

[quote="Roboguy777":ki8cae9r]I think the reason that in One Handed solving the surface isn't allowed is because the point is that your solving it with one hand and nothing else.[/quote:ki8cae9r] That is a valid viewpoint. But as the WCA demonstrated last year by allowing two-handed inspection for OH, it's not quite their current philosophy. (I disagree with it, but I don't have individual authority to direct cubing.) Anyhow, if you're new, how about not "thinking" of reasons things were decided before. They evolved to their current state through the work of many people, who think about OH in different ways. If you're going to try to say that something should be done a certain way, how about you try to explain why that's a good way to do it?

Using the surface is legal when you should be solving using "only" your feet. It's just inconsistent for no reason. Either allow use of the surface for all events, or disallow use of the surface for OH and get rid of the feetsolving event (yeah, I went there!).

what exactly does "using the surface" means? in OH you can use the surface in a way...if your cube falls on the table, you can pick it up and continue...if you couldn't use the surface, dropping the cube would result in a DNF. I think the rules are good as they are now (concerning this specific topic)

In my experience as a competitor and as a judge, the critical sequence is when you use your body (torso) as an aid in OH solving. This situation is extremely difficult to judge. Using the surface (table) as an aid will not benefit the elite speedcuber, but might be helpful for the average solver. Thus, I support the change in the regulations so that the competotor might be able to use the surface during the solve. Personally, I may benefit from it due to my lousy times, but it will not change the world record. [quote="Shelley":3cit3slv]Using the surface is legal when you should be solving using "only" your feet. It's just inconsistent for no reason. Either allow use of the surface for all events, or disallow use of the surface for OH and get rid of the feetsolving event (yeah, I went there!).[/quote:3cit3slv] Shelley, what about the following line of reasoning: the only event where the inspection time is included in the total time is in blindfolded; therefore this event is inconsistent with the other ones, therefore it should be retired!? I am the first to admit the stupidity of this line of reasoning. Do you second my opinion? /Anders

I think that it is sometimes necessary to use the surface while solving, namely in the event of a pop. Imagine you popped during an OH solve: There's no feasible way to pick up the pieces and put them in one handed, all the while holding the cube. The same goes for fixing parity cases that are a result of putting pieces back incorrectly. Come to think of it, I have actually never seen anyone fix a pop for any event without resting the puzzle on the table. The idea that someone is going to use the table to their advantage for every solve, let alone every few turns is a bit ridiculous. I don't see how someone could be faster using the table, slamming to realign wastes time, and solving the cube while it is resting on the table is extremely impractical, as the table restricts both the number of possible moves and the ease of actually performing them. I also can't see new cubers adopting anything like this as their main method either. Most new cubers are unaware of the regulations, and regardless of what is actually legal, they are going to try to emulate the fastest solvers who will be using the traditional style of OH solving. As for the noise issue, there is already a rule in place that prevents you from disturbing the competitors in any situation, so there is no need to restate this regulation in another place.

[quote="DavidWoner":2btfmefu]I think that it is sometimes necessary to use the surface while solving, namely in the event of a pop. Imagine you popped during an OH solve: There's no feasible way to pick up the pieces and put them in one handed, all the while holding the cube. The same goes for fixing parity cases that are a result of putting pieces back incorrectly. Come to think of it, I have actually never seen anyone fix a pop for any event without resting the puzzle on the table.[/quote:2btfmefu] C1b2. It's not quite well-phrased and comprehensive enough, but it essentially covers it.

[quote="DavidWoner":2h8iyxgl]Come to think of it, I have actually never seen anyone fix a pop for any event without resting the puzzle on the table. [/quote:2h8iyxgl] with 2-handed cubing it's perfectly possible...actually, I think there's a video of Tomasz Zolnowsky doing this at Euro 2008 finals...let me search... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge0pfNTWAZs

[quote="Pedro_S":1nmo35h9] with 2-handed cubing it's perfectly possible...actually, I think there's a video of Tomasz Zolnowsky doing this at Euro 2008 finals...let me search... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge0pfNTWAZs[/quote:1nmo35h9] I agree that its possible, just harder. Still, I have never seen anyone do it without the aid of a surface. Even in that video, Tomasz holds the cube against his stomach, which is technically a surface. Also, 3x3 pops are quite simple. It is not so simple on cubes of a higher order. Now that 6x6x6 and 7x7x7 are official, you have to consider the frequency and complexity of the pops on these cubes, and give the competitor a reasonable chance to fix them.