# What should be fair cutoffs for competitions.



## cubeshepherd (Oct 21, 2019)

Here is a thread where you can discuss what are good and fair cutoff times for competitions. Please keep it polite.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

I have noticed a strong trend in cut offs and time limits getting quicker and it’s not good for newer cubers who need to get to a faster level just to get averages. For example in the uk at my first comp Guildford Open 2017 cutoff was 2:30 and I thought that was really hard and now in the uk lots of comps are having 2:00 cutoffs for 5x5 and this I assume is off putting for newer cubers. Many people organising and delegating comps are already at this level and therefore don’t see the problem with faster cutoffs and think it is good as it enables more rounds but it just makes comps better for fast people and worse for beginners when we should be trying to make competitions for everyone.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> I have noticed a strong trend in cut offs and time limits getting quicker and it’s not good for newer cubers who need to get to a faster level just to get averages. For example in the uk at my first comp Guildford Open 2017 cutoff was 2:30 and I thought that was really hard and now in the uk lots of comps are having 2:00 cutoffs for 5x5 and this I assume is off putting for newer cubers. Many people organising and delegating comps are already at this level and therefore don’t see the problem with faster cutoffs and think it is good as it enables more rounds but it just makes comps better for fast people and worse for beginners when we should be trying to make competitions for everyone.


If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.

Number one tip to improve clocks from me is to not hold clock or feet.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.


This is exactly the attitude I was arguing against I’m guessing you average fast enough that you can make most cutoffs and you benefit from having more rounds from short cutoffs. This is unfair for many cubers who can’t make cut offs and the trend is that cutoffs are getting quicker and it will just keep getting harder for newer cubers to do a wide range of events



Underwatercuber said:


> Number one tip to improve clocks from me is to not hold clock or feet.


This is just ridiculous as both events are decent and there is no reason not to hold them


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> This is exactly the attitude I was arguing against I’m guessing you average fast enough that you can make most cutoffs and you benefit from having more rounds from short cutoffs. This is unfair for many cubers who can’t make cut offs and the trend is that cutoffs are getting quicker and it will just keep getting harder for newer cubers to do a wide range of events


Im guessing you don’t have a lot of experience with organizing competitions. Slower cutoffs reduces the number of events or rounds for everyone, fast cutoffs reduce solves for some people. When I started off I wasn’t able to make cuttoffs without putting work into events, I still don’t make them sometimes. Cutoffs will get faster and faster but I doubt they will ever get to a point where they are extremely difficult. If someone really wants to make cuttoffs but is too lazy to put the work into the event they can always hold a competition with slower cuttoffs and only a few rounds and events.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 21, 2019)

I can see the reason for cutoffs, but I can see where people are coming from. I’m thinking of competing in 3x3 OH at Guildford Open 2020, but realised that the cutoff is 40 secs - not reachable for a guy who‘s putting all his work into two handed.
But I don’t think people who don’t make the cutoff should be tossed aside on the results board - they deserve to see their results online. You could do two times, then 3 DNS’s for them.
Edit: Or I’ve got it wrong and everybody who attends a comp has extreme confidence they will make the cutoff. But that just stops beginners from wanting to come, as they’ll see themselves as too slow.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.



It’s better to have more comps with fewer events and more lenient cutoffs. Few comps with tight cutoffs mean that fast cubers who happen to have an open schedule that day get more opportunities but slow cubers or people without time that day get nothing. I have organized comps with lenient cutoffs, and admittedly they’re small comps but it’s really not that bad. Most people solve fast anyway, and if somebody who takes 8-9 minutes for a 7x7 solve starts in the first heat with a bunch of people who take 3 minutes the 9 minute solver will take one solving station while the second and third heats of 3 minutes solvers finish up with the other stations. Not that hard, and everybody wins.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> It’s better to have more comps with fewer events and more lenient cutoffs. Few comps with tight cutoffs mean that fast cubers who happen to have an open schedule that day get more opportunities but slow cubers or people without time that day get nothing. I have organized comps with lenient cutoffs, and admittedly they’re small comps but it’s really not that bad. Most people solve fast anyway, and if somebody who takes 8-9 minutes for a 7x7 solve starts in the first heat with a bunch of people who take 3 minutes the 9 minute solver will take one solving station while the second and third heats of 3 minutes solvers finish up with the other stations. Not that hard, and everybody wins.


A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.


There is a place for both, which is why I strongly support the idea of some major comps having qualifying times like US Nationals has had the last couple of years. But local comps ought to be designed to give the most people the most opportunities. 

Furthermore, I don’t think a lot of cutoffs are even possible for a lot of people. I just timed myself on an Ao5 for a T-perm at just over 5 tps and Ra-perm at just over 3.8 tps. I’ve known those algs for about 4 years, I can’t get them much faster. World class solvers will top out at about 4 times that tps for LL, coincidentally my PBs are just a little better than 4x the world records for most speedsolve events. I don’t believe I’m alone in being someone who enjoys cubing and is willing to put in the work but simply doesn’t have the talent and fast-twitch muscle fibers to make very strict cutoffs.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.


I think your Misunderstanding, increasing cutoffs wouldn’t stop people putting work in it would just allow people who are newer to the community to have more fun at competitions. I’m going to UK Championship this weekend and i didn’t qualify for many events I do and may not make cutoffs for the ones I have qualified for. I am fine with this as it is a big competition and it makes sense in this scenario. What I am against is competitions like Guildford Open 2020 having a cutoff of 40 seconds for oh like petrusquber said because it has discouraged him from doing oh. Guildford Open 2017 was my first comp and the oh cutoff was 1 minute and as a result I got to have an average and was more interested in improving at oh as I had enjoyed getting an average.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> There is a place for both, which is why I strongly support the idea of some major comps having qualifying times like US Nationals has had the last couple of years. But local comps ought to be designed to give the most people the most opportunities.
> 
> Furthermore, I don’t think a lot of cutoffs are even possible for a lot of people. I just timed myself on an Ao5 for a T-perm at just over 5 tps and Ra-perm at just over 3.8 tps. I’ve known those algs for about 4 years, I can’t get them much faster. World class solvers will top out at about 4 times that tps for LL, coincidentally my PBs are just a little better than 4x the world records for most speedsolve events. I don’t believe I’m alone in being someone who enjoys cubing and is willing to put in the work but simply doesn’t have the talent and fast-twitch muscle fibers to make very strict cutoffs.


Saying that comps with slower cutoffs and fewer events and rounds gives more opportunities is pretty subjective, I would say the exact opposite is true actually. Example: A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 with no cuttoffs and a 10 minute time limit gives pretty much everyone the opportunity to get an average. A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 and 1 round of 2x2 with cuttoffs also gives everyone the opportunity to get a 2x2 and a 3x3 average, they just have to work for it.

1. WCAT usually don’t approve extreme cuttoffs unless it’s necessary
2. Why is it fair that everyone else gets less opportunity because some people are slow
3. having slower cutoffs because some people might not be able be able to make normal cutoffs is a poor argument. Yet again if you really want to make them then you can practice. If you are physically unable to make cutoffs then tough luck.
4. You can always hold your own comp if you somehow are really unable to solve faster than normal cuttof times



AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> I think your Misunderstanding, increasing cutoffs wouldn’t stop people putting work in it would just allow people who are newer to the community to have more fun at competitions. I’m going to UK Championship this weekend and i didn’t qualify for many events I do and may not make cutoffs for the ones I have qualified for. I am fine with this as it is a big competition and it makes sense in this scenario. What I am against is competitions like Guildford Open 2020 having a cutoff of 40 seconds for oh like petrusquber said because it has discouraged him from doing oh. Guildford Open 2017 was my first comp and the oh cutoff was 1 minute and as a result I got to have an average and was more interested in improving at oh as I had enjoyed getting an average.


40 seconds isn’t that hard with work. If you want to be catered to then cater yourself and hold your own comp.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

I am holding a comp and have argued for cutoffs to be extended at it also basically all your arguments can be flipped e.g
1. Not sure what you mean by this can you please elaborate I’m not arguing this point as I don’t quite understand what you are saying
2.why is it fair that a lot of people get less opportunity because the fast people want more rounds even though they are already getting more opportunity from the fact they are making finals
3.not really an argument as your just saying that people should be able to make cutoffs even though people can’t because they may be newer to the community or just struggle with getting fast. (You can deny it all you want but natural ability does play a large part in cubing)
4. If you want a comp with more rounds and harsh cutoffs you can always just organise one


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> I am holding a comp and have argued for cutoffs to be extended at it also basically all your arguments can be flipped e.g
> 1. Not sure what you mean by this can you please elaborate I’m not arguing this point as I don’t quite understand what you are saying
> 2.why is it fair that a lot of people get less opportunity because the fast people want more rounds even though they are already getting more opportunity from the fact they are making finals
> 3.not really an argument as your just saying that people should be able to make cutoffs even though people can’t because they may be newer to the community or just struggle with getting fast. (You can deny it all you want but natural ability does play a large part in cubing)
> 4. If you want a comp with more rounds and harsh cutoffs you can always just organise one


1. WCAT wont approve a cutoff unless it’s necessary for the competition. Ex. They won’t allow 5 second 2x2 cutoffs unless having those cutoffs will save an hour. They will prevent ridiculous cutoffs.
2. Opportunity is not equal to handouts, everyone can work to become faster
3. I have seen no evidence of natural ability in cubing playing such a huge role that it would disallow a competitor from making cutoffs, if you have some research that shows otherwise then I would love to see it.
4. Yep, I do organize them and they work out pretty well


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

For Evidence of natural ability compare max parks TPS with basic finger tricks to pretty much any other cubers TPS with more advanced TPS. Yes he has practiced but so have many other people with much lower TPS. Generally the only people who deny natural ability in cubing are people who have it
Also although everyone can work to become faster just because they may be newer doesn’t mean they shouldn’t get to do a full average just so fast people can compete more

Also another example of natural ability is the fact that after 4 years of cubing with lots of practice I have never done a pll sub 1 and someone else I know who cubed for 3 months without even practicing that much could get multiple sub 1 plls


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> For Evidence of natural ability compare max parks TPS with basic finger tricks to pretty much any other cubers TPS with more advanced TPS. Yes he has practiced but so have many other people with much lower TPS. Generally the only people who deny natural ability in cubing are people who have it
> Also although everyone can work to become faster just because they may be newer doesn’t mean they shouldn’t get to do a full average just so fast people can compete more
> 
> Also another example of natural ability is the fact that after 4 years of cubing with lots of practice I have never done a pll sub 1 and someone else I know who cubed for 3 months without even practicing that much could get multiple sub 1 plls


Max could have certain practice routines that others may not, Max may drill sets of algs while others may not, Max could be executing in a slightly different and more optimal way than other people, Max has also done tens of thousands of solves. You can’t just say the reason his TPS is so high is simply natural ability, there are so many factors.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

Ok but explain the other example I gave


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> Ok but explain the other example I gave


You could be executing it in a sub optimal way, you may not have drilled it, you may have not done as many solves as others, etc.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

Well I literally said I had done more solves then him I have drilled all my plls and my execution was better than his he could just turn faster because of natural ability.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> Saying that comps with slower cutoffs and fewer events and rounds gives more opportunities is pretty subjective, I would say the exact opposite is true actually. Example: A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 with no cuttoffs and a 10 minute time limit gives pretty much everyone the opportunity to get an average. A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 and 1 round of 2x2 with cuttoffs also gives everyone the opportunity to get a 2x2 and a 3x3 average, they just have to work for it.
> 
> 1. WCAT usually don’t approve extreme cuttoffs unless it’s necessary
> 2. Why is it fair that everyone else gets less opportunity because some people are slow
> ...



What are extreme cutoffs? They seem to creep, which is reasonable for people who can already make cutoffs and are improving, but for people who are well behind making cutoffs it looks like a farce to keep the in crowd in and the out crowd out, which is not what we should be doing at all. 

Furthermore, you seem to be arguing from the idea that if, for example, 7x7 cutoffs are 8:00 then most people will take 8:00 to solve 7x7. In fact most people will take the same 4-5:00 they would if cutoffs were 5:00, there will just be a few people who, even though they try hard to go fast, will do it in 7-8:00. 



Underwatercuber said:


> If you are physically unable to make cutoffs then tough luck.



Get off your high horse. That’s just ridiculous and hurtful. Reasonable limits are one thing, if somebody takes half an hour to solve a 4x4 they’re probably guessing, but it is entirely possible to practice and still not be fast. I have 1620 timed 6x6 solves recorded, I’ve heard it should take 1000 big cube solves to be “good”. I think that figure was from Kevin Hays, not sure how he defines good, but it’s probably a heck of a lot better than my current Ao100 of 4:20.12.



Underwatercuber said:


> Max could have certain practice routines that others may not, Max may drill sets of algs while others may not, Max could be executing in a slightly different and more optimal way than other people, Max has also done tens of thousands of solves. You can’t just say the reason his TPS is so high is simply natural ability, there are so many factors.



Max is a special talent, anybody who denies that is just denying reality. Sure, he works hard, but do you really think he’s worked harder than the other guys that he more or less routinely beats? Feliks, Kevin, Mats, Patrick Ponce, etc.? Nothing against Max, he wouldn’t have done as well as he has without hard work. But he also has tremendous talent.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

I have done a lot less than 1000 6x6 solves and average around 4:30 and I’m nit a natural at cubing so your right you are unlucky enough to be naturally ‘bad’ at cubing


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> What are extreme cutoffs? They seem to creep, which is reasonable for people who can already make cutoffs and are improving, but for people who are well behind making cutoffs it looks like a farce to keep the in crowd in and the out crowd out, which is not what we should be doing at all.
> 
> Furthermore, you seem to be arguing from the idea that if, for example, 7x7 cutoffs are 8:00 then most people will take 8:00 to solve 7x7. In fact most people will take the same 4-5:00 they would if cutoffs were 5:00, there will just be a few people who, even though they try hard to go fast, will do it in 7-8:00.
> 
> ...


As people get faster and more people join the community you have to lower the cutoffs to keep up with demand.

Solves aren’t everything. I could do a million layer by layer solves with my crappy rubiks brand cube and I’m not going to be super fast. I’m highly doubtful that physical limitations play a major role in not making cutoffs.




One Wheel said:


> Max is a special talent, anybody who denies that is just denying reality. Sure, he works hard, but do you really think he’s worked harder than the other guys that he more or less routinely beats? Feliks, Kevin, Mats, Patrick Ponce, etc.? Nothing against Max, he wouldn’t have done as well as he has without hard work. But he also has tremendous talent.


I agree max is talented, however I don’t believe there are any cutoffs that the only factor preventing people from making them is talent and talent only


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> I don’t believe there are any cutoffs that the only factor preventing people from making them is talent and talent only


I’m not saying that talent is the only thing keeping anybody from making cutoffs, but it could take one person 100 solves to be good enough to make a cutoff and a less talented person 5000 solves. Just because it is possible for a less-talented cuber to do 5000 7x7 solves doesn’t mean they should have to do that before competing.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> As people get faster and more people join the community you have to lower the cutoffs to keep up with demand.


Why?

Also you still seem to be denying natural talent even though we have proved it


----------



## cubeshepherd (Oct 21, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> Well I literally said I had done more solves then him I have drilled all my plls and my execution was better than his he could just turn faster because of natural ability.





One Wheel said:


> I’m not saying that talent is the only thing keeping anybody from making cutoffs, but it could take one person 100 solves to be good enough to make a cutoff and a less talented person 5000 solves. Just because it is possible for a less-talented cuber to do 5000 7x7 solves doesn’t mean they should have to do that before competing.





Underwatercuber said:


> As people get faster and more people join the community you have to lower the cutoffs to keep up with demand.
> 
> Solves aren’t everything. I could do a million layer by layer solves with my crappy rubiks brand cube and I’m not going to be super fast. I’m highly doubtful that physical limitations play a major role in not making cutoffs.
> 
> ...


Since this thread is going no where, where I wanted it to go I have changed the name of the thread to what seems to be the talk among the 3 of you. No worries and I will create a new thread for what my vision of what I wanted. Jut next time, please try to reply to the thread for the purpose of what it is meant for.

EDIT: The thread that I was hoping to me this one like is the one that pjk made, in regards to sharing tip(s): https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/share-a-tip-win-a-qiyi-mini-wuque-m-4x4.75421/


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 21, 2019)

cubeshepherd said:


> Since this thread is going no where, where I wanted it to go I have changed the name of the thread to what seems to be the talk among the 3 of you. No worries and I will create a new thread for what my vision of what I wanted. Jut next time, please try to reply to the thread for the purpose of what it is meant for.
> 
> EDIT: The thread that I was hoping to me this one like is the one that pjk made, in regards to sharing tip(s): https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/share-a-tip-win-a-qiyi-mini-wuque-m-4x4.75421/


Thanks for understanding. I’m glad we could have this discussion, I think it’s a valuable one.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> 3. I have seen no evidence of natural ability in cubing, if you have some research that shows otherwise then I would love to see it.


There's obviously not going to be a scientific study to back this but...

Literally EVERY activity has some component of natural ability to it. To deny that in cubing is to deny reality.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

Let me amend my previous statement, there definitely is natural ability in cubing. I do not believe that it does play a big enough factor though to prevent competitors from making cutoffs at most competitions. Apologies for that.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> Let me amend my previous statement, there definitely is natural ability in cubing. I do not believe that it does play a big enough factor though to prevent competitors from making cutoffs at most competitions. Apologies for that.


The Boston marathon has very strict qualifying standards: you have to run a recognized marathon under a given time (different standards by age group and gender, I would have to run under 3 hours) to qualify to run the Boston marathon. Some people could train for six weeks and qualify, others like myself would have to dedicate years of hard training to barely be able to make it. It’s right and good that they have those standards to allow as many truly competitive people as possible to race in what is one of the most prestigious competitions in the sport. It is also good that local marathons have time limits typically on the order of 7-8, and even up to 12 hours to finish, because like cubing most of the competition in distance running is not against other competitors but against the clock and against one’s own limitations.


----------



## OreKehStrah (Oct 22, 2019)

I think it would require a significantly well-thought out system to work, but it would be cool to see comps with a competitor limit, and then it takes previous results from all the competitors, classifies them into general speed ranges, and calculates a relatively fair cutoff time for each event when given a timeframe/ allotment of time that each event can take place in. If you’ve never competed it could just insert some arbitrary standard agreed time like 4 min or something so that way the cutoff is fair based around the specific competitors of the comp


----------



## Hazel (Oct 22, 2019)

What about the people who don't have the time to practice cubing enough to meet fast cutoff times, or who just don't have cubing as a super high priority? Should they be excluded from competing in 5x5 just because their main passion lies elsewhere and so they don't put in the time to "git gud"?
Look, I totally understand where you're coming from, Underwatercuber. The faster the cutoff times, the more events and rounds can be held, and that's important! But there should be a place for smaller competitions with longer cutoff times. If someone has been cubing for two months, they have no chance at meeting the cutoff times. You can't say that they should just have put in the hard work prior to the competition because it just isn't realistic for anybody to average < 1:30 within two months of starting. And yes, I know there aren't going to be all that many of these people, but there's enough that it's definitely worth putting consideration into.
I've been cubing for six years and I'm sub-11.5 on 3x3, and yet I can't solve a 6x6, 7x7, or megaminx in under the cutoff times at any competition I go to. Could I, if I put in the work and didn't focus 99% of my cubing time on 3x3? Absolutely. But I think it would be nice to be able to go to a competition where I can compete in those events without having to prepare with 100+ solves for each. Some of the most fun competitions I've been to were the ones in which I've been able to participate in events that I'm most often too slow to.

There is definitely a place for competitions with fast cutoff times, but there's also a place for ones with slow ones. It should be a mix, to include the biggest variety of cubers possible in the WCA.


----------



## 2018AMSB02 (Oct 22, 2019)

I am completely for extreme cutoffs if that is what the organizer wants. The organizers are the ones putting in all of the work into competitions, and they should not be obligated to slow down the entire competition to let slower cubers get an average. I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition. I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

PingPongCuber said:


> I am completely for extreme cutoffs if that is what the organizer wants. The organizers are the ones putting in all of the work into competitions, and they should not be obligated to slow down the entire competition to let slower cubers get an average. I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition. I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.


It already is up to the organizers (at least in the US, it’s my understanding that there is some variation worldwide) what cutoffs are going to be. I think the relevant question is what they ought to be. 

A few other notes:

I had been to one competition before organizing my first, and it took a bit of convincing before a few very generous delegates agreed to take a chance on helping me organize a small competition. It’s not really feasible for everybody to organize a competition, organizers should try to make opportunities for competitors. 

Doubling cutoff times will not double the time it takes to do an event: the impact is far smaller than that, because most of the people who want to compete could make the stricter cutoff. 

If you enjoy solving a puzzle and want to compete you should be allowed to do so. It doesn’t have to be that way for every competition, but I believe it would be reasonable to have all competitions other than regional, national, and world championships have quite generous cutoffs and time limits.


----------



## cubeshepherd (Oct 22, 2019)

PingPongCuber said:


> I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition


I think that, that is the wrong lesson to learn/tell new cubers. I do not think that if someone is new to cubing and only been to a couple of comps (if any) should organize a competition, just so that he/she can add the events and cutoff times that it prefers. There is a lot more to organizing a comp then making sure to get the events and cutoff times you want, (but let me leave that for the other thread that jut started with people giving advice for organizing comp). Also, even though the organizer is planning everything and has the ability to create the schedule (which includes cutoff times), I think he/she should think about what makes the most sense over what they want (there have been several times I have not made cutoff for events that I have had at comps I have organized) and the reason for that is because the cutoff time was fair for the comp.

In regards to the cutoff times, I think there should be some consideration taken into account before you decide on cutoff time X. One thing should be the kind of comp (which includes what and how many events you have), the schedule and time you have planned for the day, and the competitor limit.

I think major comps (or even ones that have a competitor limit of 85 or more) should think of having a little more stricter cutoff times for some events (like longer events), but then again if a large comp has the time and decides for a more softer cutoff time then that is great and it gives slower people a better chance at getting a average. I am all for comps having cutoff times that give more people a chance at a average (trust me I have wanted a 7x7 average for a while), but that will not always work out, and again it comes down to the particular comp.



PingPongCuber said:


> I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.





One Wheel said:


> Doubling cutoff times will not double the time it takes to do an event: the impact is far smaller than that, because most of the people who want to compete could make the stricter cutoff.
> 
> If you enjoy solving a puzzle and want to compete you should be allowed to do so. It doesn’t have to be that way for every competition, but I believe it would be reasonable to have all competitions other than regional, national, and world championships have quite generous cutoffs and time limits.


I completely agree with this. I have always went along with what the organizers decided (even if I wish the cutoff times were not as strict as they were). Instead of not competing in a event (if you know you are not going to get a average), I think you should still compete in it. And if it is an event that you really like and want to get better at then you might practice that more and try to get better for next time.

Lastly, none of what I have said has talked or mentioned anything about natural talent verses those that have to work harder to get better. There is not much that needs to be said here. It is harder for the naturally good people to understand the extra work that others are putting in to get better, (and that can be flipped and applied the other way as well), and that again is why I think that every comp organizer and delegate need to keep in mind what is a fair cutoff time.

I feel like I am forgetting to address or say something(s), but for now this is my 2 cents worth of advice. Also, forgive any grammatical errors that there might be. Typing it difficult and I tend to miss somethings here and there, but if I notice anything I will fix it.


----------



## GAN 356 X (Oct 22, 2019)

5 mins 3x3, 2 mins 2x2, 4 mins 4x4, 5 mins 5x5, 8 mins 6x6, 10 mins 7x7, 5 mins Megaminx, 1 min Pyraminx, I min skewb, 5 mins square 1, idk about any other events


----------



## cubeshepherd (Oct 22, 2019)

GAN 356 X said:


> 5 mins 3x3, 2 mins 2x2, 4 mins 4x4, 5 mins 5x5, 8 mins 6x6, 10 mins 7x7, 5 mins Megaminx, 1 min Pyraminx, I min skewb, 5 mins square 1, idk about any other events


Those are really subjective to the comp and pretty much everything I just said above, lol. But then again for certain comps those cutoff times could work and be nice to have.


----------



## Kit Clement (Oct 22, 2019)

Here's the secret about cutoff times: *if they aren't fast enough, you aren't actually saving any time.*

The OH cutoffs at Guildford 2017 were posed, so let's take a look at the results: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/competitions/GuildfordOpen2017/results/all?event=333oh

The 1:00 cutoff affected 3 competitors. That cutoff probably saved about 1-3 minutes in the competition, when you account for the fact that the 9 solves not attempted would have probably been spread out across multiple timers, and may have been using timers that were otherwise not being utilized at the end of a group regardless. Had they used the 40 second cutoff used at a the recent Guildford competition, 14 more competitors would have been cutoff. Why did they make this adjustment? Probably because they looked at the 2017 results and realized that the community is improving, and if they wanted the cutoff to have any use, it would need to be 40 seconds.

You still get to compete in the event and be ranked even if you don't get an average as long as you can meet the time limit, which are almost always generous enough for even a beginner solver at a local competition. Back in the day, just about every competition had a best of x first round, then an average of 5 second round, so even fewer people got to get an average. People realized this was a logistical mess, and so they combined the rounds together, which led to the idea of a cutoff time, as it would be irritating to have to figure out who the top x were in a best of 2 round.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but if you want to make cutoffs, or even second rounds, finals, cutoffs, podium, etc., you have to improve. Simple as that.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 22, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> Here's the secret about cutoff times: *if they aren't fast enough, you aren't actually saving any time.*
> 
> The OH cutoffs at Guildford 2017 were posed, so let's take a look at the results: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/competitions/GuildfordOpen2017/results/all?event=333oh
> 
> ...


The reason I brought up the guildford Open cutoffs was because I was one of the people who only just made it and as a result it made me more interested in OH and cubing as a whole I get we need faster cutoffs in certain cases to allow comps to run smoothly but here in the uk the standard megaminx cutoff is now 1:45 which is very hard for newer cubers to achieve. This makes them less likely to do the event as they know they have to put in a disproportionate amount of effort just to get an average and it also means they have one less thing to do at comps and this will discourage them. Obviously you know more because you are a delegate and have been going to comps a lot longer than me but it seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 22, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> The reason I brought up the guildford Open cutoffs was because I was one of the people who only just made it and as a result it made me more interested in OH and cubing as a whole I get we need faster cutoffs in certain cases to allow comps to run smoothly but here in the uk the standard megaminx cutoff is now 1:45 which is very hard for newer cubers to achieve. This makes them less likely to do the event as they know they have to put in a disproportionate amount of effort just to get an average and it also means they have one less thing to do at comps and this will discourage them. Obviously you know more because you are a delegate and have been going to comps a lot longer than me but it seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist


Seems a bit elitist to rank everyone based on their times.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

Ronxu said:


> Seems a bit elitist to rank everyone based on their times.



Elitist: adj. relating to or supporting the view that a society or system should be led by an elite.

Quite the opposite. Ranking is just ranking. Elitism is saying “you’re not good enough to have a rank.”


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist


It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 22, 2019)

Tabe said:


> It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.


>more people
>18 timers sitting empty while the last couple of 6 minute megaminx competitors finish their last 2 solves.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Dr. Lube said:


> I can't be the only one who couldn't give two squirts of silk for the WCA and their competitions, can I? Everyone says that I should be competing against myself or the clock and neither I nor it have cut-offs.


I'm sure you're not but you're missing out if you do feel that way. WCA competitions are a lot of fun and a great way to meet other cubers.


----------



## cubeshepherd (Oct 22, 2019)

Tabe said:


> seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist
> It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.


I don't necessarily think that is true. For one, cubing has been growing a lot over the last few years and it will continue to do so for a while, so I do not for see people not wanting to compete due to not "making cutoff" for an event or two. If that is/was the attitude for everyone then why did you/do you continue to compete? I think if everyone thinks about it, when you first started out cubing (either for the first time or with a new event) and saw that you would have to work at getting time x, that motivated you to practice and get better, not not complain about the cutoff times and therefore not practicing, which would lead to you never trying to get better/get better. And from my view, if I were to be upset at the cutoff times (despite the fact that they are fair) I ould never have done several events (i.g. 6x6, 7x7, BLD events, OH and Sq1 as of recently), but guess what I dealt with it in a optimistic way and still competed in those events. And as @Kit Clement said you can still almost always get a single, which means you are fast enough to at least get that, so be happy and content with that, and if you really want a average next time then you might work a little harder until the next comp, and not focus as much on the events that you already know you will make cutoff on.

Additionally, you all do realize that the events that are getting the most talk about not making cutoff are ones that will need to take a bit of practice to get better at (such as 6x6, 7x7 Megaminx, BLD events (although BLD is a bit harder to argue). And events like 2x2-5x5 (maybe not always 5x5, but I will add it), 3x3 OH, Pyra, Skewb, Clock if they have a decent one) are events that most people compete in and get averages in. That already is a great number of events that most competitions have and people compete in, and again if there is an event that you want a average in then you will practice a bit more of that event.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Ronxu said:


> >more people
> >18 timers sitting empty while the last couple of 6 minute megaminx competitors finish their last 2 solves.


18 timers + 2 being used = 20 timers, which would imply a large, or very large, competition. No one's asking for loose cutoffs on big competitions.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

Tabe said:


> It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.


Where is the bit that says in order to have more competitors you have to allow more people averages? Or that in order for everyone at the competition to have more fun that everyone has to get an average?

I would argue that having cutoffs which allows for more events and rounds allows more people to stay involved in cubing and to enjoy competitions more.

not only that but cutoffs incentivize improvement, and improvement is usually pretty fun to see


----------



## cubeshepherd (Oct 22, 2019)

Dr. Lube said:


> I can't be the only one who couldn't give two squirts of silk for the WCA and their competitions, can I?


What does that even mean? Based off of what I think you are trying to say, I think you are completely off on saying that.



Dr. Lube said:


> Everyone says that I should be competing against myself or the clock and neither I nor it have cut-offs.


So you are saying that rather then having fun at competing in the event, trying to beat your previous PB's, enjoy meeting new people, and appreciating having a competition to even compete in you are going to complain about a cutoff time that you do not get a average in? If that is what you mean I feel like you are missing a lot about competitions and competing as a whole.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> Where is the bit that says in order to have more competitors you have to allow more people averages? Or that in order for everyone at the competition to have more fun that everyone has to get an average?


Please go back and reread what *I* responded to.


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 22, 2019)

Tabe said:


> 18 timers + 2 being used = 20 timers, which would imply a large, or very large, competition. No one's asking for loose cutoffs on big competitions.


Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Ronxu said:


> Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.


Maybe, maybe not. How much time does it really add? 15 minutes? 10? No different than having a 3-minute 3x3 solver (which DOES happen).


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

Tabe said:


> Maybe, maybe not. How much time does it really add? 15 minutes? 10? No different than having a 3-minute 3x3 solver (which DOES happen).


Those 10-15 minutes really add up when you have a few rounds of a few events.

Cutoffs and time limits are generally more lenient for 3x3 as that’s the most common event, comps usually will cater to newcomers with 3x3 and they plan the schedule on the fact that 3x3 is going to take a while as a result. If that was done for every event the comp would have fewer events and/or rounds


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

Ronxu said:


> Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.


When I’ve organized comps and there has been somebody lagging we’ve started the next round using the other timers. If it’s only a minute or two and we’re on schedule we’ll wait, but if it’s going to be long we go ahead. It really doesn’t add that much time or waste many resources.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> When I’ve organized comps and there has been somebody lagging we’ve started the next round using the other timers. If it’s only a minute or two and we’re on schedule we’ll wait, but if it’s going to be long we go ahead. It really doesn’t add that much time or waste many resources.


That’s still a few minutes in which you aren’t running all the timers that you could be running for an event. Also in cases where something like megaminx round 2 is scheduled directly after megaminx round 1 it complete stops everything until they finish.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

I have a question for the people arguing fast cutoffs aren’t good, what are your thoughts on subsequent rounds? Is “fast” people getting more solves than “slow” people unfair?


----------



## Tabe (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> Those 10-15 minutes really add up when you have a few rounds of a few events.
> 
> Cutoffs and time limits are generally more lenient for 3x3 as that’s the most common event, comps usually will cater to newcomers with 3x3 and they plan the schedule on the fact that 3x3 is going to take a while as a result. If that was done for every event the comp would have fewer events and/or rounds


Let's take it to the extreme - you have four events with loose cutoffs so you've added an hour. What does that cost you? Maybe 1 round of 1 event. 

But, in general, that's not going to happen. You would have maybe 1 event with loose cutoffs that would impact stuff. 

And you can also do stuff like starting the next round or whatever while the previous one is finishing.

I've done comps with loose cutoffs - this is nowhere near the issue you seem to think it is.


----------



## Kit Clement (Oct 22, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> The reason I brought up the guildford Open cutoffs was because I was one of the people who only just made it and as a result it made me more interested in OH and cubing as a whole I get we need faster cutoffs in certain cases to allow comps to run smoothly but here in the uk the standard megaminx cutoff is now 1:45 which is very hard for newer cubers to achieve. This makes them less likely to do the event as they know they have to put in a disproportionate amount of effort just to get an average and it also means they have one less thing to do at comps and this will discourage them. Obviously you know more because you are a delegate and have been going to comps a lot longer than me but it seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist



Don't put words in my mouth. I never said "you have to put in the effort to compete" in my post at all, and you quote it as if I did. As I mentioned, time limits at most competitions are fair enough to let almost anyone get one/two solves. The only exception to this I've consistently seen is 6x6 and 7x7, but it's difficult to have limits above 10 minutes due to the stackmats. In general, I think many WCA events are very open to beginners, and there is no shame in getting your two solves in an event. But if you have any goal, whether it is making cutoff, second round, podium, etc., then you have to work for that to some extent. It is a competition, after all. You might see this as elitist, but I think the WCA does a very good job on providing an inclusive environment for new competitors while also serving as a competition.


----------



## itsrandomstuff (Oct 22, 2019)

cubeshepherd said:


> Here is a thread where you can discuss what are good and fair cutoff times for competitions. Please keep it polite.


Yeah, I've seen this trend of cutoffs getting faster and faster. I think this is unfair for new cubers who have taken a interest in cubing and are looking into competing at competitions. Cutoffs getting faster and faster is probably because cubers are getting faster and faster with new cube hardware. \


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 22, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> Here's the secret about cutoff times: *if they aren't fast enough, you aren't actually saving any time.*
> 
> The OH cutoffs at Guildford 2017 were posed, so let's take a look at the results: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/competitions/GuildfordOpen2017/results/all?event=333oh
> 
> ...


Do you get ranked even if you don’t make the cutoff?


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 22, 2019)

PetrusQuber said:


> Do you get ranked even if you don’t make the cutoff?


yes


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 22, 2019)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> yes


Never knew that. Where does it come up? Or am I misunderstanding and ranked doesn’t mean results put up? Because I’ve never seen a 3 DNS solve.


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 22, 2019)

what do you mean


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> in cases where something like megaminx round 2 is scheduled directly after megaminx round 1



That’s just bad planning.


----------



## AbsoRuud (Oct 22, 2019)

It's harder to get world class. It's very easy to get into the community. All you need to do is be friendly to people and voila, you're in.


----------



## AbsoRuud (Oct 22, 2019)

PetrusQuber said:


> Never knew that. Where does it come up? Or am I misunderstanding and ranked doesn’t mean results put up? Because I’ve never seen a 3 DNS solve.


If you don't make cutoff, your two times are posted, you do not get an Ao5.
If you don't make time limit, your result is a DNF.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 22, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> That’s just bad planning.


If you have slow cutoffs


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 22, 2019)

AbsoRuud said:


> If you don't make cutoff, your two times are posted, you do not get an Ao5.
> If you don't make time limit, your result is a DNF.


So where do their results go?


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 22, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> If you have slow cutoffs


Results still have to be entered after everyone has finished. If you alternate events there doesn’t have to be downtime. Back to back rounds of the same event is a bad plan, regardless of cutoffs.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 22, 2019)

PetrusQuber said:


> So where do their results go?


On the WCA website, along with everyone else's. Here's an example of someone who never completed an average:





Rich Kitching | World Cube Association


The World Cube Association governs competitions for mechanical puzzles that are operated by twisting groups of pieces, commonly known as 'twisty puzzles'. The most famous of these puzzles is the Rubik's Cube, invented by professor Rubik from Hungary. A selection of these puzzles are chosen as...




www.worldcubeassociation.org





As you can see, he has full records, and a national, continental, and world ranking by single. He just lacks an average ranking because he never completed an average.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 22, 2019)

Mike Hughey said:


> On the WCA website, along with everyone else's. Here's an example of someone who never completed an average:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks! I guess not a lot of people will fail the cutoff.


----------



## kadabrium (Oct 22, 2019)

Even with cutoffs as high as theyre now ( close to 40 kinch rank), the majority of comps can still justify time constraint as a reason not to hold 6x6 and 7x7. 

Or take a look at megaminx too. This is a puzzle in between 4x4 and 5x5 in absolute size. its cutoff is one of the lowest out of all the events (<<30 kinch rank), usually numerically equal to that of 5x5. however it is only held <80% as often as the latter.


----------



## Parke187 (Oct 23, 2019)

If you want a comp with easy cutoffs then organize one


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 23, 2019)

Parke187 said:


> If you want a comp with easy cutoffs then organize one


That’s what I have done, but it’s not an option for everyone.


----------



## Parke187 (Oct 23, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> That’s what I have done, but it’s not an option for everyone.


But it is an option for everyone, unless you're in an area with no delegates


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 23, 2019)

Parke187 said:


> But it is an option for everyone, unless you're in an area with no delegates


Not everyone lives in an area with delegates, and even if you have delegates around they have to agree to help you. I’ve had good experiences with my local delegates, but as I’ve mentioned before it took some convincing to get them to agree to let me organize a competition. It’s not as simple as “I want to organize a competition.”


----------



## Parke187 (Oct 23, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> Not everyone lives in an area with delegates, and even if you have delegates around they have to agree to help you. I’ve had good experiences with my local delegates, but as I’ve mentioned before it took some convincing to get them to agree to let me organize a competition. It’s not as simple as “I want to organize a competition.”


I literally said unless you live in an area with no delegates.
Organizing is pretty easy, I'm in the process of doing it now in fact.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 23, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> Not everyone lives in an area with delegates, and even if you have delegates around they have to agree to help you. I’ve had good experiences with my local delegates, but as I’ve mentioned before it took some convincing to get them to agree to let me organize a competition. It’s not as simple as “I want to organize a competition.”


Delegates can travel and the WCA even has funds to help pay for delegates to travel to new areas where competition fees cannot cover travel cost. 

In most cases Delegates help people organize their first competition but sometimes they may expect you to put some work in before reaching out to them. Make a rough draft of a schedule, ready out to venues and figure out cost and availability, etc. There are plenty of people online who would be willing to help you out as well.

if you have been to a competition and not had to drive 8+ hours or fly to it then odds are you can hold a competition, you can co-organize with whoever held the competition, use the same venue, etc. This may not always work but I would guess it would work a pretty good amount of the time.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 23, 2019)

Parke187 said:


> I literally said unless you live in an area with no delegates.
> Organizing is pretty easy, I'm in the process of doing it now in fact.


You’re right, it’s not that hard, but it’s not an option for everybody. Even if it was, think of somebody who’s just starting out, and wants to compete in 4x4. If they average 2:30 and cutoffs are 1:30, then are they going to try organizing a competition with more generous cutoffs, or are they just going to assume they suck and not bother? If it was me I would be inclined to just believe I suck. I went to a competition, read a lot, watched a lot of videos, and decided that I want to compete anyway, so I put in the effort to organize a competition. I wanted to encourage people who are slower to go ahead and compete (with myself squarely in that category) so I argued for, and got the delegates who were helping me to agree, to pretty lenient cutoffs (8:00 7x7, 5:00 6x6, etc.). I’m just arguing that because not everybody will organize a competition the people who do should think about slow cubers at least as much as about fast cubers.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 23, 2019)

I


One Wheel said:


> You’re right, it’s not that hard, but it’s not an option for everybody. Even if it was, think of somebody who’s just starting out, and wants to compete in 4x4. If they average 2:30 and cutoffs are 1:30, then are they going to try organizing a competition with more generous cutoffs, or are they just going to assume they suck and not bother? If it was me I would be inclined to just believe I suck. I went to a competition, read a lot, watched a lot of videos, and decided that I want to compete anyway, so I put in the effort to organize a competition. I wanted to encourage people who are slower to go ahead and compete (with myself squarely in that category) so I argued for, and got the delegates who were helping me to agree, to pretty lenient cutoffs (8:00 7x7, 5:00 6x6, etc.). I’m just arguing that because not everybody will organize a competition the people who do should think about slow cubers at least as much as about fast cubers.


If they are just starting out then they could also just not get an average their first competition and put the work in to make cutoffs at a latter competition.

Having fast cutoffs isn’t “not thinking” about slow competitors, in fact most competitions have very lenient cutoffs or none at all for 3x3 and some begginer events. Catering to new competitors is cool and all but it would be pretty frustrating for all the returning/fast competitors to only have a few rounds of a few events every local competition especially when 70% of the new competitors won’t compete anymore after 1-3 competitions.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 23, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> 70% of the new competitors won’t compete anymore after 1-3 competitions.


Do you think there might be something we could do about that?


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (Oct 23, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> 70% of the new competitors won’t compete anymore after 1-3 competitions.


Maybe it’s because the competitors could only get averages in 3 or 4 events and thought it just wasn’t worth it.


----------



## cubeshepherd (Nov 16, 2019)

So after the recent competition I organized and having talked to some of the competitors and delegate, I am a bit more for stricter cutoff times for competitions. And here are some reasons (most of which the delegate mentioned) but that make sense. Also, these ideas are not fully mine, but rather just me relaying them to this thread.

1. It gets people to actually practice and try to get better (to make cutoff(, then just the mind set of "I am already sub 30 on Pyraminx, so I don't need to practice it much for the comp". But if the competitor sees that the cutoff for Pyraminx is 15 seconds, and he is averaging 17 then he might practice a little more to get sub cutoff. 
In essence the point of this is to get people that are serious at getting better to get better and create a more competitive event(s), rather then just having the expected people make it to the finals like they do most of the time (and I am referring to local/smaller comps and not major one). HOWEVER, I do understand that some people have a harder time getting sub X on a certain event and just want to get a average so I don't have a issues if a organizer wants that, but as a whole I am more for harder cutoff's at comps, then making sure that everyone gets a average (without practicing much).

2. (And this feeds off of 1), but having easier cutoffs at competitions, will not allow you to have either has many events or as many rounds of the events you already have, which is fine if you as the organizer wants that, but again if you want to have more rounds/more events then having stricter cutoff times would be the best way to go.


----------



## Zagros (Dec 17, 2019)

My biggest problem with cutoffs is that they (logically, but it is still annoying) disproportionately affect big cubes, which are what I want to compete in most. I would contest that the reason a lot of people aren't into big cubes is because you probably will be sub-15 on 3x3 by the time you can make a 5 minute 7x7 cutoff. People don't practice big cubes until later in their cubing because it isn't viable for them. Something like a 1:00 OH cutoff is more reasonable because that can be obtained by a fairly new cuber if they put in effort, but often the big cube cutoffs aren't obtainable until one is a lot more experienced.


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 17, 2019)

Zagros said:


> My biggest problem with cutoffs is that they (logically, but it is still annoying) disproportionately affect big cubes, which are what I want to compete in most. I would contest that the reason a lot of people aren't into big cubes is because you probably will be sub-15 on 3x3 by the time you can make a 5 minute 7x7 cutoff. People don't practice big cubes until later in their cubing because it isn't viable for them. Something like a 1:00 OH cutoff is more reasonable because that can be obtained by a fairly new cuber if they put in effort, but often the big cube cutoffs aren't obtainable until one is a lot more experienced.


I’ve dealt with that by organizing my own competitions and arguing strongly for lenient cutoffs, and I’ve noticed a few competitions in my area since I started doing that have had what seem to be more lenient cutoffs. Best of luck, if you’re in the upper Midwest keep an eye out for cheese-themed competitions.


----------

