# The "Why I hate this event..." and "Why this event should be added" thread



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

Many people are complaining about certain events or want an event to be added. Instead of making separate threads, just talk about them in here.


Feet. 

Disgusting, stupid if you don't get on TV, and just meh. Not interesting as it used to be for some people. 

(I will admit, I was interested in Feet Solving, but then I stopped attempting it due to the stupidity I found in doing it.)


----------



## ColeTen99 (Apr 22, 2014)

2x2-4x4 Relay would be an interesting event, but i agree foot solving is ridiculous


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

ColeTen99 said:


> 2x2-4x4 Relay would be an interesting event, but i agree foot solving is ridiculous



Why would it be interesting?


----------



## Lucas Garron (Apr 22, 2014)

Team BLD is sufficiently different from the other events to be interesting, and is very popular. I really think we can make it work.

And I can always dream about speed BLD. 
(Someday when I'm not busy with WRC stuff I'll find a way to make it popular.)


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> Team BLD is sufficiently different from the other events to be interesting, and is very popular. I really think we can make it work.
> 
> And I can always dream about speed BLD.
> (Someday when I'm not busy with WRC stuff I'll find a way to make it popular.)





Oooh what about 15 puzzle

SpeedBLD looks like good event. Would be complicated to fit in though...


----------



## TinaIsAwesome (Apr 22, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Oooh what about 15 puzzle


I'm totally against 15 puzzle. I hate that thing...
But relays and team blind would be very cool.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

TinaIsAwesome said:


> I'm totally against 15 puzzle. I hate that thing...
> But relays and team blind would be very cool.




Not if you attempt it BLD.


----------



## CriticalCubing (Apr 22, 2014)

Yeah. Relays would be cool. Instead of being pro at one event, you have to be a pro in all events to be no 1. And the person who is no 1 in relay would probably be no 1 in most other events (I said probably.)


----------



## Chree (Apr 22, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Oooh what about 15 puzzle
> 
> SpeedBLD looks like good event. Would be complicated to fit in though...



Are we talking physical 15 puzzle (which very few people own) or virtual 15 puzzle (which would be difficult to judge)?

Either way, I'm against it. If 15 puzzle is allowed, you might as well add 2048 into the mix.


----------



## TDM (Apr 22, 2014)

CriticalCubing said:


> Yeah. Relays would be cool. Instead of being pro at one event, you have to be a pro in all events to be no 1. And the person who is no 1 in relay would probably be no 1 in most other events (I said probably.)


No, whoever's pro in the events that take longer will be pro at relays. Think about it; what's going to matter more, being very good at 2x2 and being decent at 7x7, or being decent at 2x2 and very good at 7x7?


----------



## CriticalCubing (Apr 22, 2014)

TDM said:


> No, whoever's pro in the events that take longer will be pro at relays. Think about it; what's going to matter more, being very good at 2x2 and being decent at 7x7, or being decent at 2x2 and very good at 7x7?



Being decent at 2x2 and very good at 7x7. I understand your point


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 22, 2014)

feet: feet sucks
skewb: its just another 2x2
6x6+7x7: they are the same as 5x5 but they waste more time
5bld: its the same as 4bld but it wastes more time


----------



## Ollie (Apr 22, 2014)

10461394944000 said:


> feet: feet sucks
> skewb: its just another 2x2
> 6x6+7x7: they are the same as 5x5 but they waste more time
> 5bld: its the same as 4bld but it wastes more time



feet: say why it sucks rather than it just sucks
skewb: maybe
6and7: maybe
5bld: no

going on the same logic:

fmc: its the same as 3x3 but it wastes more time


----------



## penguinz7 (Apr 22, 2014)

I have nothing against 15 puzzles, but they aren't twisty puzzles, which is why they are not in the WCA, the same reason clock and the magics were removed.


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 22, 2014)

Ollie said:


> feet: say why it sucks rather than it just sucks
> skewb: maybe
> 6and7: maybe
> 5bld: no
> ...



feet: chj likes it
also ok sure keep 5bld, its not really that bad and I have a chance of podiuming if everyone else dnfs.

also fmc isnt the same as 3x3 because not the same strategy or anything and people who are good at fmc aren't necessarily good at 3x3. everyone who is good at 5bld is good at 4bld, everyone who is good at 6x6/7x7 is good at 7x7/6x6.


----------



## Yes We Can! (Apr 22, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Feet.
> 
> Disgusting, stupid if you don't get on TV, and just meh. Not interesting as it used to be for some people.



Even stupider if you get on TV in my opinion. It gives off a picture of speedcubing as a joke. Granted, it's not the most serious sport but feet solving just makes it look ridiculous.
It's bad for the image. Speedcubing is already viewed as geeky enough. It's like, there's reciting pi and then there's reciting pi with your armpit.


Also: If you are organising a competition and want to have feet, at least don't put it late in the day (especially in summer...).


----------



## Divineskulls (Apr 22, 2014)

penguinz7 said:


> I have nothing against 15 puzzles, but they aren't twisty puzzles, which is why they are not in the WCA, the same reason *clock* and the magics were removed.



Clock was never removed...


----------



## Lucas Garron (Apr 22, 2014)

Chree said:


> Are we talking physical 15 puzzle (which very few people own) or virtual 15 puzzle (which would be difficult to judge)?



Physical, of course.

Right now, all the physical 15 puzzles are terrible. If Moyu ever makes a 15 puzzle, I think this would actually be awesome.
If it becomes popular enough, I think the 15 puzzle actually has good potential to become an official event.
It used to be on the UWRs back in the day.

We already have enough events under 10 seconds, so perhaps a 24 puzzle would be a better idea.


----------



## ilikecubing (Apr 22, 2014)

I have always viewed feet as a 'strange' event.

Maybe 2x2 single should be removed because of obvious reasons? Average should stay.


----------



## TDM (Apr 22, 2014)

ilikecubing said:


> Maybe 2x2 single should be removed because of obvious reasons? Average should stay.


Why should it be removed? There isn't any problem with 2x2 single. And 2x2 singles would still happen anyway. Removing singles from the record list is pointless.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> Physical, of course.
> 
> Right now, all the physical 15 puzzles are terrible. If Moyu ever makes a 15 puzzle, I think this would actually be awesome.
> If it becomes popular enough, I think the 15 puzzle actually has good potential to become an official event.
> It used to be on the UWRs back in the day.




The metal 15 puzzles with lube are actually pretty decent.. The plastic ones are a different story.

Clock is not necessarily a twisty puzzle, and magics were removed because they weren't really puzzles.

Also, it would take time to go under 10 seconds for 15 puzzle. (Fringe or LBL) with 2H. OH (Look at Ben's video) would be pretty weird but fun to get good times with..


----------



## Carrot (Apr 22, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> Physical, of course.
> 
> Right now, *all the physical 15 puzzles are terrible.* ...
> 
> We already have enough events under 10 seconds, so perhaps a 24 puzzle would be a better idea.



I used to average sub 10 with my physical 15 puzzle that I bought for less than 0.5 USD in Thailand. That's like like 10 tile slides per second (~5-7 slides per second), I doubt I managed to do that with a terrible 15 puzzle... (But I agree that it's hard to find the good ones)

Also, 24 puzzle would be awesome! given you can solve 15 puzzles in 8 seconds I get that a 25 can be solved in around 17.5 seconds. (just scaling up distances and pieces)

EDIT:


strakerak said:


> The metal 15 puzzles with lube are actually pretty decent.. The plastic ones are a different story.
> 
> Clock is not necessarily a twisty puzzle, and magics were removed because they weren't really puzzles.
> 
> Also, it would take time to go under 10 seconds for 15 puzzle. (Fringe or LBL) with 2H. OH (Look at Ben's video) would be pretty weird but fun to get good times with..



I still need to try the metal ones! (but I can't convince myself to pay that much, it costs like 50 times more than the decent plastic ones haha)


----------



## ~Adam~ (Apr 22, 2014)

I would be happy to lose feet, clock and switch pyraminx for corner turn octahedron when records are stable.

I also think team BLD (if it can work), 2x2 MBLD with 10 min time limit, 2x3x3 and 3x3x5 would make good events but am content with the current selection of events overall and IMO nothing really needs changing ATM.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 22, 2014)

Carrot said:


> I used to average sub 10 with my physical 15 puzzle that I bought for less than 0.5 USD in Thailand. That's like like 10 tile slides per second (~5-7 slides per second), I doubt I managed to do that with a terrible 15 puzzle... (But I agree that it's hard to find the good ones)
> 
> Also, 24 puzzle would be awesome! given you can solve 15 puzzles in 8 seconds I get that a 25 can be solved in around 17.5 seconds. (just scaling up distances and pieces)
> 
> ...





You can order from Barnes and Noble. It should show one with a envelope pouch somewhere in the box. It has a decent antipop mech too xD
Lube up the bottom of the piece, rather than the freepiece on the puzzle.

Oh, by the way, my PB single on the 15 puzzle physical was 7-8 seconds.... But since there weren't really any proper scrambles, I would not count that as a real PB.


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 23, 2014)

TDM said:


> Why should it be removed? There isn't any problem with 2x2 single. And 2x2 singles would still happen anyway. Removing singles from the record list is pointless.


Yeah, even though 2x2 singles are mostly luck, they aren't hurting anything, and don't take any longer to judge. Plus they are kinda fun.


----------



## megaminxwin (Apr 23, 2014)

Feet needs to be removed, its such a stupid event anyway. If it was going to be replaced with anything, I'd go with 15 puzzle. It's quick, it's easy to scramble, it has a different scrambled state each time (so not like magic/master magic), and it's a lot of fun to do. Everything else can stay, they all have good reasons, but feet doesn't have any good reason these days...


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 23, 2014)

megaminxwin said:


> Feet needs to be removed, its such a stupid event anyway. If it was going to be replaced with anything, I'd go with 15 puzzle. It's quick, it's easy to scramble, it has a different scrambled state each time (so not like magic/master magic), and it's a lot of fun to do. Everything else can stay, they all have good reasons, but feet doesn't have any good reason these days...


I agree that feet needs to be removed, but 15 puzzles should not be added. It isn't a twisty puzzle. There is a reason that it is called the world CUBING association.


----------



## TinaIsAwesome (Apr 23, 2014)

Rocky0701 said:


> ...but 15 puzzles should not be added. It isn't a twisty puzzle.


I completely agree with this except I don't care whether or not feet is an event.


----------



## Mikel (Apr 23, 2014)

Rocky0701 said:


> I agree that feet needs to be removed, but 15 puzzles should not be added. It isn't a twisty puzzle. There is a reason that it is called the world CUBING association.



The WCA could change their mission to allow twisty and slidey puzzles. I would be for the addition of 15 puzzle. I think it would attract non-cubers because it is 2D and easy to learn. The 15 puzzle is also very well-known outside of the speedcubing community. No one I know outside of cubing has heard of a pyraminx, Square-1, Rubik's clock, megaminx, or even 4x4+ cubes, but I'm sure a lot of people have heard or seen the 15 puzzle.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

Mikel said:


> The WCA could change their mission to allow twisty and slidey puzzles. I would be for the addition of 15 puzzle. I think it would attract non-cubers because it is 2D and easy to learn. The 15 puzzle is also very well-known outside of the speedcubing community. No one I know outside of cubing has heard of a pyraminx, Square-1, Rubik's clock, megaminx, or even 4x4+ cubes, but I'm sure a lot of people have heard or seen the 15 puzzle.



It might attract more puzzle enthusiasts, but then we will see more new competitors choosing 15 puzzle over 3x3, which was the original puzzle introduced in 1982. Also, I have met people that are not speedcubers point out certain puzzles. (2x2-5x5, Pyraminx, and Megaminx.) Not "sooper roobiks cyoob."


----------



## DoctorPepper (Apr 23, 2014)

Im probably in the minority here but 8x8 would be cool.

However i guess people who are good at 6-7 would be the same people at 8.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Apr 23, 2014)

strakerak said:


> The metal 15 puzzles with lube are actually pretty decent.. The plastic ones are a different story.



I have one of the standard "nice" metal ones, but I've never tried lubing. Does CRC work well?



Rocky0701 said:


> 15 puzzles should not be added. It isn't a twisty puzzle. There is a reason that it is called the world CUBING association.



Actually, it's the "world CUBE association".

9a is very specific right now, but there's no reason that can't change if the community is interested in closely related puzzles. (However, such a change would need a *good* reason.)


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> I have one of the standard "nice" metal ones, but I've never tried lubing. Does CRC work well?



I haven't tried it. Out of the three I have had, the first one was great with the wear in. (Had it for six years.) The second one had vegetable oil in it, since I didn't know lube for puzzles existed (This was four years ago.) And the third one had cubicle lube and it was decent. (Three years ago)


----------



## Fawn (Apr 23, 2014)

cube-o-holic said:


> switch pyraminx for corner turn octahedron



i actually really like this. I don't do pyraminx, so whether it should be removed or jot isn't my concern. But I like the idea of adding corner-turning octahedron. I've had one for like 6 years. I even made my own algorithms :'(


----------



## Carrot (Apr 23, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> Actually, it's the "world* CUBE *association".
> 
> ~link that says otherwise~



So no Tetrahedrons? Dodecahedrons? weird 2D puzzles called clock? pillowed 7x7x7s?


----------



## qwertyt1 (Apr 23, 2014)

You should find the most popular ones and add a poll


----------



## AlexMaass (Apr 23, 2014)

Jim said:


> i actually really like this. I don't do pyraminx, so whether it should be removed or jot isn't my concern. But I like the idea of adding corner-turning octahedron. I've had one for like 6 years. I even made my own algorithms :'(



Its actually pretty much the megaminx version of pyraminx actually, I would be sad if pyraminx was removed, its not a bad event. 

Also, wouldn't it be a good idea to make a slidey puzzle association instead of the WCA adding it as an event?


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 23, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> I have one of the standard "nice" metal ones, but I've never tried lubing. Does CRC work well?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh yeah, sorry. Also i really doubt that the community would be very interested in adding 15 puzzle, i may be wrong though.


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 23, 2014)

Rocky0701 said:


> Oh yeah, sorry. Also i really doubt that the community would be very interested in adding 15 puzzle, i may be wrong though.



I wouldn't be interested in adding it, so I doubt many other people would be.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

We'd have to wait and see. I remember writing a really yucky proposal months back....


----------



## TMOY (Apr 23, 2014)

AlexMaass said:


> [The corner-tutning octahedron is] actually pretty much the megaminx version of pyraminx actually, I would be sad if pyraminx was removed, its not a bad event.


It is in fact only a 3^3 mod with no corners and orientable centers (plus the tips). Not really the best replacement for pyraminx IMHO.


----------



## Tim Major (Apr 23, 2014)

Yes said:


> Even stupider if you get on TV in my opinion. It gives off a picture of speedcubing as a joke. Granted, it's not the most serious sport but feet solving just makes it look ridiculous.
> It's bad for the image. Speedcubing is already viewed as geeky enough. It's like, there's reciting pi and then there's reciting pi with your armpit.
> 
> 
> Also: If you are organising a competition and want to have feet, at least don't put it late in the day (especially in summer...).



It gives a horrible impression to almost any noncuber. I've had a few friends who fully respect cubing, even a few of them can solve a cube, but whenever they hear about feetsolving they either think it's a joke, or it's the stupidest thing they have heard.

Anyway, apart from just feet which I hate, I dislike 6x6 and 7x7 for a few reasons, including;
-time constraints. They take so long. And if you say "don't host them" when hosted they are mean of 3 due to the time it takes to solve them, and I don't think mean of 3 is a good format for any event, when possible the format should ignore the best and worst result.
-it offers little over 5x5, and the fastest 6x6 and 7x7 solvers are generally the fastest 5x5 solvers.
-hardware, there is only one viable choice, this isn't the WCA's fault obviously.

The only thing I like about 6x6 and 7x7 is that there are people who average 12+ at 3x3 who are fast at 6x6/7x7, but 3x3 has a bigger effect on 5x5 meaning only fast 3x3 solvers can be world class at those events.

And then I hate Pyraminx due to tips. I wish when it was originally added to the WCA is was just a tetrahedron, without the tips. As well as making it a better event in my opinion, it would also allow advancements in hardware.

Don't get me wrong, I like Pyraminx obviously, but I would like it far more and actually have it as my favourite event if it didn't have tips.

Edit: As for corner turn octahedron, this is only similar to a Pyraminx if you use an L4E like method on Pyraminx. The top 50 solvers currently at Pyraminx don't really use a method that compares anything like the corner turn octahedron. I have 2, and average 20-40 iirc (I think the puzzle would be probably 15~ if official or faster). It's basically a Pyra->Megaminx like how 3x3->Megaminx, but isn't solved in any way similar to Pyra.


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Apr 23, 2014)

Tim Major said:


> stuff



Agreed about feet and pyra tips. Both are stupid.



> I dislike 6x6 and 7x7 for a few reasons, including time constraints. They take so long. And if you say "don't host them" when hosted they are mean of 3 due to the time it takes to solve them, and I don't think mean of 3 is a good format for any event, when possible the format should ignore the best and worst result.


They can be done in reasonable amounts of time if there are cutoffs. I don't think MO3 is really a problem for big cubes. The purpose of AO5 is essentially to allow for one solve with a pop. It's for equipment failure, and that's the only point to it. Big cubes (or at least Shengshous) don't explode very often. At worst, lockups that take a few seconds to fix, or small pops, happen. Compared to the amount of time it takes to solve a big cube, they're pretty insignificant. With pops, the difference between 10s and 30s on a 3x3 is a lot bigger than 5:00 and 5:20 or something like that.


> it offers little over 5x5, and the fastest 6x6 and 7x7 solvers are generally the fastest 5x5 solvers.


The centers are different. But whether of not there's a big enough difference to merit an extra event is total opinion. No point in arguing about it. I don't see why it's a problem that the fastest with 5 are also the fastest with 6 and 7. The skills overlap. Obviously. Why is that something you dislike? Do you want different people to be the best at events? I think that if someone is skilled enough to be world class at 5x5, there's no reason it should be considered a bad thing that they're going to be good at 6 and 7 too. 


> hardware, there is only one viable choice, this isn't the WCA's fault obviously.


 This will change. Moyu is coming out with stuff.


----------



## SolveThatCube (Apr 23, 2014)

10461394944000 said:


> feet: feet sucks
> skewb: its just another 2x2
> 6x6+7x7: they are the same as 5x5 but they waste more time
> 5bld: its the same as 4bld but it wastes more time





Ollie said:


> feet: say why it sucks rather than it just sucks
> skewb: maybe
> 6and7: maybe
> 5bld: no
> ...



I agree with both of yas, but I do feet because I can't do BLD and cause why not?


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Apr 23, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> We already have enough events under 10 seconds, so perhaps a 24 puzzle would be a better idea.


Whaaaa... Someone who is literally in charge of the competitive cubing world and knows how pushed for time comps are thinks we should find events that are longer than they need to be? 
24 puzzle is a great idea, but so is 15 puzzle, and I definitely don't think that it being a sub 10 event is a reason to not have it. I'm a bit surprised to hear anyone say that.


> Right now, all the physical 15 puzzles are terrible.


One idea that might be worth exploring is "official" virtual comps. Yes, judging would indeed be difficult, but I'm sure you could find a way to set it up so that when you sign up for the competition, the sim will give everyone the same scrambles, and measured can be taken to prevent scrambles being stolen and inspected before competing. I'm sure ways around this are easy, but most people aren't cheaters and anyone who is world class at it will be watched by enough people that if they're cheating, it'll likely be noticed eventually. Time wouldn't be even close to as much of an issue with this as it is at regular competitions, so multiple sizes of sliding puzzles could be offered, and maybe virtual cubes also. It sounds easier to organize than a regular competition in terms of time, judging, travel, and other things like that, but much more difficult in terms of technology. I don't know. Might be worth considering.



> I wouldn't be interested in adding it, so I doubt many other people would be.


Um... why not? I'm really surprised you wouldn't want that.


----------



## Bindedsa (Apr 23, 2014)

IRNjuggle28 said:


> One idea that might be worth exploring is "official" virtual comps. Yes, judging would indeed be difficult, but I'm sure you could find a way to set it up so that when you sign up for the competition, the sim will give everyone the same scrambles, and measured can be taken to prevent scrambles being stolen and inspected before competing. I'm sure ways around this are easy, but most people aren't cheaters and anyone who is world class at it will be watched by enough people that if they're cheating, it'll likely be noticed eventually. Time wouldn't be even close to as much of an issue with this as it is at regular competitions, so multiple sizes of sliding puzzles could be offered, and maybe virtual cubes also. It sounds easier to organize than a regular competition in terms of time, judging, travel, and other things like that, but much more difficult in terms of technology. I don't know. Might be worth considering.


The logic that most people are not cheaters is no reason to make cheating easier. The moment electronics are the main focus of a competition things get complicated. It's unrealistic, physical puzzles are so much easier to judge and I'm sure if any company took into account speedsolving, it would be easy to make a better puzzle. Would it not be simpler than a cube? the mechanism is pretty simple.


----------



## SolveThatCube (Apr 23, 2014)

WE REALLY DON'T NEED ANY VIRTUAL PUZZLES TO BE AN EVENT. IT'S STUPID AND THAT'S LOGIC. FULL STOP


----------



## Tim Major (Apr 23, 2014)

IRNjuggle28 said:


> I don't think MO3 is really a problem for big cubes. The purpose of AO5 is essentially to allow for one solve with a pop. It's for equipment failure, and that's the only point to it. Big cubes (or at least Shengshous) don't explode very often.



Big cubes are probably the most common cubes to pop now days. Back in 2010 I remember constant pops of all puzzles, but now it's only really big cubes.

Kevin got denied multiple WRs and even first at WC 2011 due to a pop. The ideal structure for every event in my opinion in ao10000000000000000
But since that's not viable, you gotta make it work, so ao5 is viable. mo3 is far from ideal, but done to save time. That's why I dislike mo3 events.

I think Jay won this 7x7 comp due to mo3 too https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=CanberraSummer2014&allResults=1#777

It works both ways, screws over good solvers, but also makes their averages inconsistent with what they actually average due to lucky/good solves.


----------



## Ninja Storm (Apr 23, 2014)

10461394944000 said:


> everyone who is good at 6x6/7x7 is good at 7x7/6x6.



*ahem hem*


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Apr 23, 2014)

Bindedsa said:


> The logic that most people are not cheaters is no reason to make cheating easier. The moment electronics are the main focus of a competition things get complicated. It's unrealistic, physical puzzles are so much easier to judge and I'm sure if any company took into account speedsolving, it would be easy to make a better puzzle. Would it not be simpler than a cube? the mechanism is pretty simple.



Sure, the mechanism would be simpler than a cube, but there's no way a physical puzzle would be faster than using a keyboard on a sim, no matter how good the mechanism was. 

So it could be a "semi-official" sort of thing. Something where cheating doesn't gain you anything. I don't think fear of people cheating is a reason to not do that. Is the goal to enjoy solving, or to prevent cheating? Physical puzzles are easier to judge, but I bet everyone would hate solving them. You would have to spend time scrambling it that you don't have to spend on a sim, and you'll be slower at solving. I'd rather have an event with the possibility of cheaters than a crappy version of a puzzle that nobody will like as well as a sim.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

No virtual competitions. Whatsoever. Sims or not, NO. It is stupid and takes the fun out of physically solving a puzzle. You really think we will just enter times into the WCA database, if someone ends up getting a like, what. 3.31? I don't think so.


----------



## Sajwo (Apr 23, 2014)

Please, do not add 15 puzzle. It's even more stupid than feet solving


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

No feet solving is even more stupid that 15 puzzle.


----------



## Bindedsa (Apr 23, 2014)

IRNjuggle28 said:


> Sure, the mechanism would be simpler than a cube, but there's no way a physical puzzle would be faster than using a keyboard on a sim, no matter how good the mechanism was.
> 
> So it could be a "semi-official" sort of thing. Something where cheating doesn't gain you anything. I don't think fear of people cheating is a reason to not do that. Is the goal to enjoy solving, or to prevent cheating? Physical puzzles are easier to judge, but I bet everyone would hate solving them. You would have to spend time scrambling it that you don't have to spend on a sim, and you'll be slower at solving. I'd rather have an event with the possibility of cheaters than a crappy version of a puzzle that nobody will like as well as a sim.



What does cheating at an official event get you now? Nothing more than it would in an semi-official event. The difference between UWR and WR is the legitimacy and the trust in the WCA system. Official virtual events simply will not work and your idea sounds no different from just using Ben's simulator now? I am not really interested in 15 puzzle becoming official though I use the sim quite regularly, but if it any way became official it would have to be a physical puzzle.



strakerak said:


> No feet solving is even more stupid that 15 puzzle.


That implies that 15 Puzzle is stupid. Feet solving being an official event is as ridiculous to me as hand stands races being in the Olympics would be.


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Apr 23, 2014)

They should add 2x2 OH.


----------



## IRNjuggle28 (Apr 23, 2014)

strakerak said:


> No virtual competitions. Whatsoever. Sims or not, NO. It is stupid and takes the fun out of physically solving a puzzle.


The fun of solving 15 puzzle has nothing to do with "physically" solving it. Nobody does that. 

Straterek & Blindedsa:
OK, I see where you guys are coming from. I think the conclusion to come to is that 15 puzzle shouldn't be official. Just doesn't seem like it can be worked out well. 

This is unrelated to competitions, but if Moyu or somebody made a 15 puzzle that was decent, do either of you think you'd prefer it to a sim?


----------



## Bindedsa (Apr 23, 2014)

IRNjuggle28 said:


> This is unrelated to competitions, but if Moyu or somebody made a 15 puzzle that was decent, do either of you think you'd prefer it to a sim?



I would say yes, I dislike computer cubes when compared with physical ones, so I don't see why it would be different for a sliding puzzle.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

Bindedsa said:


> *That implies that 15 Puzzle is stupid*. Feet solving being an official event is as ridiculous to me as hand stands races being in the Olympics would be.



Considering that to some people, it is.


----------



## Ranzha (Apr 23, 2014)

Is anyone besides Lucas and me actually down to see Team BLD implemented?


----------



## Ollie (Apr 23, 2014)

Has anyone actually justified their reasons for saying feet is stupid? Other than "feet is just stupid?" I've seen the argument from a non-cuber's perspective but when has any WCA decision been made on what non-cubers think...

Also, don't a lot of the same arguments for feet apply for OH as well?

As for 15 puzzle, where would be draw the line between a 'twisty' puzzle and just a generic puzzle? A lot of the same logic for putting in 15 puzzle also applies to adding Sudoku as an official event, to give an extreme example.


----------



## kcl (Apr 23, 2014)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Is anyone besides Lucas and me actually down to see Team BLD implemented?



I think it would be fun. I would vote for it.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Is anyone besides Lucas and me actually down to see Team BLD implemented?




I am actually all for it, but it sounds complicated to implement. Would it be timed as you are a caller or the solver. Would it be best of 2 and see which result is better regardless of what position you are in, or a standard average of five for each competitor in each position?


----------



## kcl (Apr 23, 2014)

Yeah, but OH is semi cool. Feet is just kind of disgusting.



Ollie said:


> Has anyone actually justified their reasons for saying feet is stupid? Other than "feet is just stupid?" I've seen the argument from a non-cuber's perspective but when has any WCA decision been made on what non-cubers think...
> 
> Also, don't a lot of the same arguments for feet apply for OH as well?
> 
> As for 15 puzzle, where would be draw the line between a 'twisty' puzzle and just a generic puzzle? A lot of the same logic for putting in 15 puzzle also applies to adding Sudoku as an official event, to give an extreme example.


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 23, 2014)

Ninja Storm said:


> *ahem hem*



if you and someone who averages 10 minutes on 7x7 both started doing 6x6, you would be faster.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Apr 23, 2014)

Ollie said:


> A lot of the same logic for putting in 15 puzzle also applies to adding Sudoku as an official event, to give an extreme example.



15-puzzle is a permutation puzzle which can be scrambled and solved like all current events, Sudoku isn't. I'm not saying add 15-puzzle, but I don't think your analogy works.


----------



## Pryge (Apr 23, 2014)

How about 3x3x2? Theirs actually Pll's for it on le internet


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 23, 2014)

I am meh for cuboids.


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 23, 2014)

strakerak said:


> I am actually all for it, but it sounds complicated to implement. Would it be timed as you are a caller or the solver. Would it be best of 2 and see which result is better regardless of what position you are in, or a standard average of five for each competitor in each position?


How about an average of 3 for each position, then the two remaining times are averaged and would be the total time for that team of two. That would require each person to be good at calling, and solving to get a good time.


----------



## AmazingCuber (Apr 23, 2014)

I would be all in for team events, as they would add a whole new, awesome aspect. I think Team BLD would be awesome, but don't forget factory solves either!


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Apr 23, 2014)

AmazingCuber said:


> I would be all in for team events, as they would add a whole new, awesome aspect. I think Team BLD would be awesome, but don't forget factory solves either!



YES JUST YES


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 24, 2014)

AmazingCuber said:


> I would be all in for team events, as they would add a whole new, awesome aspect. I think Team BLD would be awesome, but don't forget factory solves either!


Yeah, but factory solves would be impossible to define, because there are many different methods and sub methods to solving, what some consider to be a step, others might not.


----------



## applemobile (Apr 24, 2014)

I demand 15 puzzle with feet is added.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 25, 2014)

applemobile said:


> I demand 15 puzzle with feet is added.




Stupid. Not even Ben can break the WR. Possibly like, whoever is good at feet. Rami...


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 25, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Stupid. Not even Ben can break the WR. Possibly like, whoever is good at feet. Rami...



iirc chj has done 15 puzzle sim with feet subminute

also there's no way I would get 15 puzzle wr if it was actually an event, I'm barely sub 20 on realpuzl


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 25, 2014)

It is because most 15 puzzles are turdlike.


----------



## porkynator (Apr 25, 2014)

Why are we even talking about 15 puzzle? It isn't a twisty puzzle nor a rubik's product. Just because some people in the community like it it doesn't mean we should add it. We might as well add 2048, minesweeper or shirt-folding.

Also, once I wasn't against feet at all, but I've been changing my mind recently.


----------



## Tim Major (Apr 25, 2014)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Is anyone besides Lucas and me actually down to see Team BLD implemented?



I think it's one of the most popular suggestions but until a method of implementation is thought up...

Stopping people from listening, etc


----------



## XTowncuber (Apr 25, 2014)

One other point on 15 puzzles: misalignment penalties would be a pain to judge using the current standards we use for twisty puzzles. Measuring half of a slide wouldn't be too easy.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 25, 2014)

XTowncuber said:


> One other point on 15 puzzles: misalignment penalties would be a pain to judge using the current standards we use for twisty puzzles. Measuring half of a slide wouldn't be too easy.



It would be judged based on the area of the tile. If the misaligned tile goes over at least half of the number above, then it is misaligned. Although, the slidypuzzles I had never really misaligned... They just stayed put after the solve, even after shaking it a bit.


----------



## XTowncuber (Apr 25, 2014)

strakerak said:


> It would be judged based on the area of the tile. If the misaligned tile goes over at least half of the number above, then it is misaligned. Although, the slidypuzzles I had never really misaligned... They just stayed put after the solve, even after shaking it a bit.



What if 3 tiles in the bottom row are off by 1 slide? DNF? +2? What if only 2 in the bottom row are off by a slide? 

I'm not really against adding it but I think it would be hard to judge. Also doesn't it kind of take a long time to scramble properly?


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 25, 2014)

XTowncuber said:


> What if 3 tiles in the bottom row are off by 1 slide? DNF? +2? What if only 2 in the bottom row are off by a slide?
> 
> I'm not really against adding it but I think it would be hard to judge. Also doesn't it kind of take a long time to scramble properly?





If it can be solved with one push (move) then it would be a +2. If it is two moves, then it is DNF. 

Also, scrambling would be different, as it SHOULD be a solve to scramble. The random move sequence is very icky.


----------



## Royiky (Apr 25, 2014)

Rocky0701 said:


> Yeah, but factory solves would be impossible to define, because there are many different methods and sub methods to solving, what some consider to be a step, others might not.



What about move move factory solves


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 25, 2014)

XTowncuber said:


> What if 3 tiles in the bottom row are off by 1 slide? DNF? +2? What if only 2 in the bottom row are off by a slide?
> 
> I'm not really against adding it but I think it would be hard to judge. Also doesn't it kind of take a long time to scramble properly?



actually if there was a random state scrambler for real 15 puzzle (i don't know of any, apart from using an optimal solver and manually reversing the solution) it would be faster than using random move scrambles because the average optimal solution length is only about 52


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Apr 25, 2014)

10461394944000 said:


> actually if there was a random state scrambler for real 15 puzzle (i don't know of any, apart from using an optimal solver and manually reversing the solution) it would be faster than using random move scrambles because the average optimal solution length is only about 52



That is something I did not know


----------



## Rocky0701 (Apr 25, 2014)

Royiky said:


> What about move move factory solves


Yeah, but it would have to be like 5 or 10 moves instead of one.


----------



## 10461394944000 (Apr 26, 2014)

strakerak said:


> That is something I did not know


http://kociemba.org/fifteen/fifteensolver.html


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (May 1, 2014)

Anyone else hate feet?


----------



## AlexCube (May 1, 2014)

2x2 blindfolded and one-handed!


----------



## Coolster01 (May 1, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Anyone else hate feet?



My least favorite bump ever ;(


----------



## Sajwo (May 1, 2014)

I demand removing feet and clock as official events.


----------



## Ninja Storm (May 1, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Anyone else hate feet?



As my previous post had words deemed too explicit for SS, I'll rephrase.

Stop forcing your opinion down other people's throats. Nobody cares how much you hate feet.


----------



## kcl (May 2, 2014)

strakerak said:


> Anyone else hate feet?



I hate pyraminx, I guess they should just remove it. I hate megaminx, I guess they should just remove it. 

Come on dude. Nothing is getting removed.


----------



## Ollie (May 2, 2014)

The only arguments for getting rid of feet are that it's disgusting (feet are cleaner than hands, usually) and that it's stupid, but without any justification why it is. 

Close this thread. If someone puts forward a decent argument for removing/adding a specific event then it will get it's own thread. This makes it easier for WCA and forum members to consider all the arguments for and against since all the arguments for a specific event will be in one place, rather than filtering through one long pointless thread full of stupid comments like "7bld with one foot" and arguments for 5/6 different event suggestions.


----------



## applemobile (May 2, 2014)

Remove feet. It's dangerous.


----------



## Lucas Garron (May 2, 2014)

Ollie said:


> The only arguments for getting rid of feet are that it's disgusting (feet are cleaner than hands, usually) and that it's stupid, but without any justification why it is.



You have some partial justification in that sentence already. And people *do* have more justification for these things.
Maybe you'd disagree with them, but it hardly helps your case to dismiss them.



Ollie said:


> Close this thread. If someone puts forward a decent argument for removing/adding a specific event then it will get it's own thread. This makes it easier for WCA and forum members to consider all the arguments for and against since all the arguments for a specific event will be in one place, rather than filtering through one long pointless thread full of stupid comments like "7bld with one foot" and arguments for 5/6 different event suggestions.



People will want to discuss adding events no matter what. Nearly all of it is useless, so it might as well be in one place.

If something is actually a real contender for an event, someone will make a separate thread for it anyhow.


----------



## Ollie (May 2, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> You have some partial justification in that sentence already. And people *do* have more justification for these things.
> Maybe you'd disagree with them, but it hardly helps your case to dismiss them.



I don't have an opinion either way. Using this thread as an example, the only decent argument put forward is by Cornelius regarding how feet impacts the image of cubing in a negative way. The other arguments are mere statements that "feet is stupid" which carries no weight. I could replace "feet" for "one-hand" and the argument remains the same.



Lucas Garron said:


> People will want to discuss adding events no matter what. Nearly all of it is useless, so it might as well be in one place.
> 
> If something is actually a real contender for an event, someone will make a separate thread for it anyhow.



If someone makes a single thread for something and stimulates a good debate, how likely are you to keep referring to this thread with all the useless comments in one place?

EDIT: obviously not saying everyone's comments are stupid and people are capable of making good arguments in this thread, of course. Why settle for 12 carat gold when you can have 24?


----------



## DoctorPepper (May 2, 2014)

Idk why but I'd love to see shape mods in future WCA competitions. Ghost cube, anyone?


----------



## 10461394944000 (May 2, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> People will want to discuss adding events no matter what. Nearly all of it is useless, so it might as well be in one place.



classic moderator, closing threads that people want open and not closing stupid threads.

but anyway, we should remove 6x6 and 7x7 and replace them with 3x3 underwater because I say so.


----------



## Lucas Garron (May 2, 2014)

Ollie said:


> I don't have an opinion either way. Using this thread as an example, the only decent argument put forward is by Cornelius regarding how feet impacts the image of cubing in a negative way.



Then this thread is not a good example, and you haven't good reasons for not holding feet.
(Your first post didn't say anything about "in this thread", it made a universal statement about arguments against feet.)




Ollie said:


> If someone makes a single thread for something and stimulates a good debate, how likely are you to keep referring to this thread with all the useless comments in one place?


Not very? Most of the useless comments are about events that simply don't have enough merit.

EDIT: obviously not saying everyone's comments are stupid and people are capable of making good arguments in this thread, of course. Why settle for 12 carat gold when you can have 24?[/QUOTE]
Because we won't have 24?

I don't mind having a silly thread where everything throws out what their opinions on puzzles. The title of this thread is very apt for that.



10461394944000 said:


> classic moderator, closing threads that people want open and not closing stupid threads.


?



10461394944000 said:


> but anyway, we should remove 6x6 and 7x7 and replace them with 3x3 underwater because I say so.


??


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (May 2, 2014)

I was just attempting to keep discussion going. 

Yeah. Keep everything in this thread, anyway. You don't want the annoying repost of why the same event should be removed or whatever. It is spam. Just like the accomplishment thread.


----------



## Ollie (May 2, 2014)

Lucas Garron said:


> Then this thread is not a good example, and you haven't good reasons for not holding feet.
> (Your first post didn't say anything about "in this thread", it made a universal statement about arguments against feet.)



I'm not making any arguments for or against feet. I couldn't care less. I do care about annoying threads popping up on the homepage that don't accomplish anything. I also care about evidence and giving sound justifications for potentially removing an event, which was why I made my OP in the first place. The burden of proof is on those who are claiming it should be removed, and personally "it is stupid" is not valid on its own.


----------



## KongShou (May 2, 2014)

1. the competitor base is ridiculously small. Barely anyone only focus on feet as a main event.
2. Feets are sweatier than hands that most of them really stink. In terms of hygiene im sure most people would agree that feet is dirtier, even if not scientifically. Feet is also less socially acceptable. You'd be pretty weird if you just got your feet out in public. The same does not apply to hands.
3. It seem more natural to use hands than feet to solve a cube as fast as possible. Hands are much more advanced and agile than feet. Most would struggle to even pick up a cube with their feet. Let along solve a cube.
4. Cubers image is damaged. All non cubers I know regard feet solving as the most stupid of the events.
5. There are other events that seems to be more suitable. Lots has been pointed out in this thread. 
5. Inconvenience. A round of feet requires you to take your shoes and socks off. Place the stackmat with timer on the floor and it is a pain to judge feet. Especially the scramblers. There was an image of a scrambler wearing gloves to scramble cube for feet. People generally don't want to touch cubes that has just been solved by someone elses feet.


----------



## Bindedsa (May 2, 2014)

KongShou said:


> 1. the competitor base is ridiculously small. Barely anyone only focus on feet as a main event.
> 2. Feets are sweatier than hands that most of them really stink. In terms of hygiene im sure most people would agree that feet is dirtier, even if not scientifically. Feet is also less socially acceptable. You'd be pretty weird if you just got your feet out in public. The same does not apply to hands.
> 3. It seem more natural to use hands than feet to solve a cube as fast as possible. Hands are much more advanced and agile than feet. Most would struggle to even pick up a cube with their feet. Let along solve a cube.
> 4. Cubers image is damaged. All non cubers I know regard feet solving as the most stupid of the events.
> ...



Other than the cubers image, those are all reason it should not be hosted. If people are willing to scramble and go through the process, why not? I don't ever plan to do feet, but why would I care.


----------



## Ulbert (May 2, 2014)

Okay, if I have to be honest I think feet is pretty disgusting. I know there are people out there who are great at feet and probably dislike other events. But seriously, with your feet? You have hands because of a reason. (Not that reason huehuehue) But they should add 3x3 three handed instead.


----------



## AlexCube (May 2, 2014)

KongShou said:


> 1. the competitor base is ridiculously small. Barely anyone only focus on feet as a main event.
> 2. Feets are sweatier than hands that most of them really stink. In terms of hygiene im sure most people would agree that feet is dirtier, even if not scientifically. Feet is also less socially acceptable. You'd be pretty weird if you just got your feet out in public. The same does not apply to hands.
> 3. It seem more natural to use hands than feet to solve a cube as fast as possible. Hands are much more advanced and agile than feet. Most would struggle to even pick up a cube with their feet. Let along solve a cube.
> 4. Cubers image is damaged. All non cubers I know regard feet solving as the most stupid of the events.
> ...



I agree. Also it's funny when non-cubers say "What? They do the cube with their feet? They must be awfully addicted and stupid" Not nice!


----------



## (X) (May 2, 2014)

I think 15-puzzle should be added as an official WCA-event. It would add diversity to competitions while being well within the limits of what can be an official puzzle, IMO.


----------



## Sa967St (May 2, 2014)

I found it interesting to read about all the support for the addition of 15-puzzle, especially after all the negativity in this thread from last year.

I have two main concerns about 15-puzzle as a WCA event:

1) Despite it being conceptually similar to a twisty puzzle and belonging to puzzle theory, it's a too different kind of puzzle. It goes against the Mission of the WCA.

2) Since the tiles are on one side, it's not something that judges and spectators can easily watch. It would be harder than other puzzles to judge (e.g. telling whether a move has been done during inspection), and it would be useless to watch for fun if all you can see is the back.


----------



## Ollie (May 3, 2014)

Sa967St said:


> I found it interesting to read about all the support for the addition of 15-puzzle, especially after all the negativity in this thread from last year.



People should probably read the thread and see why it got all that negativity.


----------



## EeeeeWarne (May 3, 2014)

I feel that each event should be its own type of event testing different things.
3x3 tests how fast you can solve a 3x3 cube
OH essentially tests your dexterity, if you can solve one with two hands, OH is not about solving it anymore, but about dexterity
Feet tests your dexterity with your feet. It is just another event like OH testing dexterity, so it is duplicated.
The WCA shouldn't have events that duplicate each other, so there shouldn't be feet (also, it appears silly to outsiders (more silly than a bunch of people solving puzzles and competing) and to many cubers as well).


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (May 3, 2014)

Sa967St said:


> I found it interesting to read about all the support for the addition of 15-puzzle, especially after all the negativity in this thread from last year.




You can thank me for that one!



Ollie said:


> People should probably read the thread and see why it got all that negativity.



I made the stupidest points about adding the puzzle. It wasn't even a proposal.


----------



## goodatthis (May 12, 2014)

I think that it is much harder to get a competitor base for brand new puzzles, because face it, probably 85% of the speedcubing community does not time themselves on non-WCA puzzles (with maybe the exception of 8x8-11x11), and I'd probably say 50% of the speedcubing community do not own non WCA puzzles. So I think the better approach here is to look for new events, like relays or teamBLD as mentioned earlier. 

Here are some of my ideas: 

Team BLD:
2 people, solver and inspector (or caller), the inspector cannot touch the cube and the solver must don the blindfold before the puzzle is revealed. The inspector is the one to say, "Ready."There is 15 seconds of inspection, where the solver can move the cube around for the inspector to see, and the solver puts his hands on the timer to start. The inspector may predetermine moves for the solver to make and communicate them to him, but the solver cannot make any moves until he starts the timer. Penalty for the inspector touching the puzzle: plus 2, all other violations are DNFs.

Relays: 
(2x2-4x4)

All three puzzles are revealed at once, and the competitor has the normal 15 second inspection. He solves all three puzzles, and stops the timer. Plus 2s are cumulative, and one DNF is a DNF for the entire attempt. The competitor may solve the cubes in any order, as well as do another cube before completing one, but he has to have all three cubes solved when he stops the timer.

Multiple 3x3s (Multi-speedsolve)

This is very similar to MultiBld, the competitor chooses the amount of cubes he wants to solve (min 5) with 15 seconds of inspection total, solves them, and the time is then divided by the number of cubes solved, and scoring should be in a similar format to FMC or MultiBLD. Some comps may have multiple attempts, some may just have one. Plus 2s are cumulative, DNFs are a complete DNF.


----------



## Ollie (May 12, 2014)

goodatthis said:


> Team BLD:
> 2 people, solver and inspector (or caller), the inspector cannot touch the cube and the solver must don the blindfold before the puzzle is revealed. The inspector is the one to say, "Ready."There is 15 seconds of inspection, where the solver can move the cube around for the inspector to see, and the solver puts his hands on the timer to start. The inspector may predetermine moves for the solver to make and communicate them to him, but the solver cannot make any moves until he starts the timer. Penalty for the inspector touching the puzzle: plus 2, all other violations are DNFs.



Should judges hold paper? Because if so it would have to go in front of the solvers face and it would considerably block the view of the caller. That assumes that there is a considerable advantage to peeking, since some judges may not notice that what is being called out does not match what is being performed by the solver. Theoretically, my caller could say any old nonsense that sounds vaguely like cubing language to a naive judge and I could peek under my blindfold and solve the cube like normal (with some dramatic pauses to look the part.)

You also need to entertain the possibility of other competitors overhearing move sequences before their turn to solve comes up.


----------



## uberCuber (May 12, 2014)

^ Make solvers hold the cube over/behind their head


----------



## TMOY (May 12, 2014)

goodatthis said:


> Multiple 3x3s (Multi-speedsolve)
> 
> This is very similar to MultiBld, the competitor chooses the amount of cubes he wants to solve (min 5) with 15 seconds of inspection total, solves them, and the time is then divided by the number of cubes solved, and scoring should be in a similar format to FMC or MultiBLD. Some comps may have multiple attempts, some may just have one. Plus 2s are cumulative, DNFs are a complete DNF.



Well, no. Either competitors are ranked by average and, since speed tends to decrease with then number of cubes, there's absolutely no point in choosing more than the minimum 5 and that event is just a 5-cube relay, or they are ranked by number of cubes and this is just a contest of who can get his hands on the most 3^3s. Multiblind is interesting because the intrinsical difficulty of the solve increases with the number of cubes, this is not the case here.


----------



## goodatthis (May 14, 2014)

Thanks for bringing that up. One way I've seen people do TeamBLD is where the solver puts his arms over the inspectors shoulders (the inspector is sitting down, the solver is standing up) so the cube is in front of the inspector. Here's a link to solving like that: http://youtu.be/HshosSpHCCA 

So if someone were solving like that, the judge could put the paper over the inspector's head and in front of the solver's face. Or just say in the rules, "Judges must be able to hold an object between the solver and the cube without blocking the inspector's vision." 


And about the overhearing of move sequences, I'm not too sure about how scrambling procedures work with the WCA, I just thought that everyone got different scrambles, but if they didn't, it would be akin to someone talking about their solve afterwards and another person getting the same scramble. In theory there could be a rule to prevent it, but it would be like how you're not supposed to talk about the SAT questions after the test, but there really isn't a way to stop you nor would it really help someone that much.


----------



## Ollie (May 14, 2014)

goodatthis said:


> Thanks for bringing that up. One way I've seen people do TeamBLD is where the solver puts his arms over the inspectors shoulders (the inspector is sitting down, the solver is standing up) so the cube is in front of the inspector. Here's a link to solving like that: http://youtu.be/HshosSpHCCA
> 
> So if someone were solving like that, the judge could put the paper over the inspector's head and in front of the solver's face. Or just say in the rules, "Judges must be able to hold an object between the solver and the cube without blocking the inspector's vision."
> 
> ...



That's quite a nice solution to the problem of paper-holding and peeking, providing that the solver was comfortable standing up (especially if a pair of competitors took particularly long to solve.) The caller would have to keep his head down and stop him/herself from leaning back, since the judge would have to ensure that the paper covered the solver's view, which is the only problem I can think of right now (could be a problem in practical terms.)


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (May 14, 2014)

You do realize judges could go ahead and check if any extra moves are made (If F2L codes are NOT set)

And if TeamBLD persists then the groups should be randomized per round and then the teams should be announced at a certain time before the round.


----------

