# The Name of Multiple Blindfolded



## qqwref (Jan 6, 2009)

We're discussing this on the WCA forum, but I thought it might be useful to get some other opinions. Multi is being changed to a format with a time limit of one hour, so that it can be held in competitions with less hassle for all involved. Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records). Proposals included "one hour bld", "hour cubes bld", and "hour 3x3x3s (blindfolded)".

So, if the multi event is going to have a strict and permanent one hour time limit... What do YOU think it should be called?


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 6, 2009)

what about "1 hour multi BLD"

"one hour bld" sounds nicest, but it doesn't explicitly indicate that there are multiple cubes being solved. And hour cubes bld and hour 3x3x3s (bf) just sound awkward.


----------



## Derrick Eide17 (Jan 6, 2009)

HMBLD (Hourly MultiBLD)

Multi3x3BLD in One Hour

Hour Limit MultiBLD 

MultiHourBLD


----------



## qqwref (Jan 6, 2009)

Derrick Eide17 said:


> MultiHourBLD



Hmm, that sounds like a 3BLD that goes WAAAAAAAAAAAAY over the time limit


----------



## Derrick Eide17 (Jan 6, 2009)

qqwref said:


> Derrick Eide17 said:
> 
> 
> > MultiHourBLD
> ...


----------



## shelley (Jan 6, 2009)

I don't see a problem with just calling it MultiBLD. We don't call FMC Fewest Moves Solution Computed in One Hour.


----------



## blah (Jan 6, 2009)

qqwref said:


> We're discussing this on the WCA forum, but I thought it might be useful to get some other opinions. Multi is being changed to a format with a time limit of one hour, so that it can be held in competitions with less hassle for all involved. *Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records).* Proposals included "one hour bld", "hour cubes bld", and "hour 3x3x3s (blindfolded)".
> 
> So, if the multi event is going to have a strict and permanent one hour time limit... What do YOU think it should be called?





shelley said:


> *I don't see a problem* with just calling it MultiBLD. We don't call FMC Fewest Moves Solution Computed in One Hour.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 6, 2009)

shelley said:


> I don't see a problem with just calling it MultiBLD. We don't call FMC Fewest Moves Solution Computed in One Hour.



Technically I think fewest moves is called "Rubik's Cube: Fewest moves", according to the regulations. Anyway, if we keep multi as the same event, then the current regulations say that we have to grandfather in all of the old records. But if there is a one hour time limit then it is unfair to compare new possible WRs with a 24/24 in over two hours - it would be impossibly difficult to multi 24 cubes in under an hour. So I think the best alternative is to declare the old multiBLD event unofficial (for now), and to create a new multi event which is specifically one hour long. But, you know, I just posted this to stir up some discussion - we don't HAVE to change the name. I'm sure most people will just call it multi unofficially anyway.

Anyway here's another idea for a name: "Hour Multiple Blindfolded".


----------



## LarsN (Jan 6, 2009)

Derrick Eide17 said:


> Hour Limit MultiBLD



I like that one.

Or simply: 60 minutes multibld


----------



## Kian (Jan 6, 2009)

hour limit multibld sounds good.

but wouldn't it be just as easy to amend rule 9i3 to add an exemption for this particular case? that way the name wouldn't have to be changed.


----------



## hr.mohr (Jan 6, 2009)

MultiBLD for the 1 hour event.
MultiBLD Unlimited for the "dude you have too much time on your hand"


----------



## AvGalen (Jan 6, 2009)

blah said:


> qqwref said:
> 
> 
> > We're discussing this on the WCA forum, but I thought it might be useful to get some other opinions. Multi is being changed to a format with a time limit of one hour, so that it can be held in competitions with less hassle for all involved. *Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records).* Proposals included "one hour bld", "hour cubes bld", and "hour 3x3x3s (blindfolded)".
> ...


I don't know when rule 9i3 was added, but FMC used to be 90 minutes. The previous WR of 28 was shared by two people, eventhough one had done it in 90 minutes and the other did it in 60 minutes.

I really dislike all the rule changes. Why not just have Multi-blind as a 60 minute preferred format?


----------



## tim (Jan 6, 2009)

qqwref said:


> Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records).



Actually the renaming wasn't meant to be a way to bypass rule 9i3. I thought it was a good idea to rename the event, because (a) it's almost a new event now and (b) the name "multi blind" doesn't imply a time limit (i know, the name "3x3x3 fewest moves" doesn't imply one too, but maybe that name also isn't good).

And like Kian suggested, we also could easily change rule 9i3 in order to "bypass" that rule. But that's kinda lame .


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 6, 2009)

Wow - I didn't read the WCA forum for two days and suddenly there are 3 new pages on this issue.

Well, for memory sports it's "hour cards". "Hour cubes" doesn't work because it doesn't imply blindfolded. So why not "hour cubes blindfolded"?


----------



## Inusagi (Jan 6, 2009)

I don't really get this. Why do they want to rename it?


----------



## Pedro (Jan 6, 2009)

qqwref said:


> We're discussing this on the WCA forum, but I thought it might be useful to get some other opinions. Multi is being changed to a format with a time limit of one hour, so that it can be held in competitions with less hassle for all involved. Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records). Proposals included "one hour bld", "hour cubes bld", and "hour 3x3x3s (blindfolded)".
> 
> So, if the multi event is going to have a strict and permanent one hour time limit... What do YOU think it should be called?



that's why...


----------



## Micael (Jan 6, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> Well, for memory sports it's "hour cards". "Hour cubes" doesn't work because it doesn't imply blindfolded. So why not "hour cubes blindfolded"?



I was just going to said that. "hour cubes blindfolded" or may be more specific: "hour multipleblindsolved".

Also, in swimming sport there are a challenge we call "swim the hour" (nage ton heure), so why not "multipleblindsolved the hour". Well, may be not...

In such an event, will a guy doing 11/15 beat the one with 10/10?


----------



## tim (Jan 6, 2009)

Micael said:


> In such an event, will a guy doing 11/15 beat the one with 10/10?



No.


----------



## Inusagi (Jan 6, 2009)

Pedro said:


> qqwref said:
> 
> 
> > We're discussing this on the WCA forum, but I thought it might be useful to get some other opinions. Multi is being changed to a format with a time limit of one hour, so that it can be held in competitions with less hassle for all involved. Tim (Habermaas) suggested that we rename the event, possible to bypass rule 9i3 (which says that if you just change the rules for an event you have to keep all the old records). Proposals included "one hour bld", "hour cubes bld", and "hour 3x3x3s (blindfolded)".
> ...



It's still possible to keep the old records even if it's the same name. Just place it behind 1 hours multibld times. Like wca did with Ryosuke Mondos 17/18. Hi's 95th place and should be 3rd...


----------



## Henrik (Jan 6, 2009)

*MultiBLD-Hour* or MBH could be a name.
And the old event could be re-named MultiBLD-Unlimited


----------



## qqwref (Jan 6, 2009)

AvGalen said:


> I don't know when rule 9i3 was added, but FMC used to be 90 minutes. The previous WR of 28 was shared by two people, eventhough one had done it in 90 minutes and the other did it in 60 minutes.


Ooh, that's interesting.



AvGalen said:


> I really dislike all the rule changes. Why not just have Multi-blind as a 60 minute preferred format?


By forcing times to be under an hour, people are trying to create a standard so that the WR can be beaten at any competition that wants to hold multi. With unlimited time, you either have to set aside several hours just for the multi event, or you have to limit the time so much that the WR cannot possibly be beaten at your competition. So, with a strict 60 minute limit, logistics will never stop someone from setting a record, and it is much easier for organizers to hold the event. Just having a "preferred format" of 60 minutes would remove all these advantages, because someone could do 24 cubes or whatever at a competition which decided not to use the preferred format, and then nobody would ever be able to beat that in an hour.


----------



## Ellis (Jan 6, 2009)

Inusagi said:


> Just place it behind 1 hours multibld times. Like wca did with Ryosuke Mondos 17/18. Hi's 95th place and should be 3rd...


I've been wondering why they did that, and I still don't really understand. Was the 17/18 in a different format?


----------



## Ville Seppänen (Jan 6, 2009)

Ellis said:


> Inusagi said:
> 
> 
> > Just place it behind 1 hours multibld times. Like wca did with Ryosuke Mondos 17/18. Hi's 95th place and should be 3rd...
> ...



Yeah, the 17/18 was made before they changed the rules. It used to be so that you had to get them all correct to get a result. So it was a DNF.


----------



## fanwuq (Jan 6, 2009)

~.~ 
I'm not sure, but there is something that I don't like about this change. I'd like to see the current multiBLD still be an event, but perhaps rather than holding that at a regular competition, it can be done somewhere else and just be certified as official (Isn't that what they did for Most cubes in a day?).
MBH sounds good. Chris Hardwick should try it... using BH!


----------



## tim (Jan 6, 2009)

fanwuq said:


> ~.~
> I'm not sure, but there is something that I don't like about this change. I'd like to see the current multiBLD still be an event, but perhaps rather than holding that at a regular competition, it can be done somewhere else and just be certified as official (Isn't that what they did for Most cubes in a day?).
> MBH sounds good. Chris Hardwick should try it... using BH!



What do you mean with "this change"? Creating an entire new event leaves us the chance to keep multiBLD as an event.


----------



## fanwuq (Jan 6, 2009)

tim said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > ~.~
> ...



Ok, so this is just a new event added on? That means that for the original multiBLD, you have to do at least 7 cubes to even bother with it. Where would you do that? (I don't have a chance, the most I can do now is 0/3 with very close DNF on them).
So for this new event, is it still 10min per cube?


----------



## qqwref (Jan 6, 2009)

Yeah, the time limit is either 10 minutes per cube or one hour (whichever is less). And I agree that unlimited time multi should be done outside of competition; in fact I already mentioned that once or twice on the WCA forum


----------



## Dene (Jan 7, 2009)

How about "Solving Multiple Rubik's Cubes Blindfolded with an Hour Time Limit"


----------



## qqwref (Jan 7, 2009)

Good idea Dene, and while we're at it we could rename OH to "Solving a Standard Rubik's Cube Without Touching It with One of Your Hands (Except During Inspection, Where You Can Use Both Hands) or Any Other Object Including Any Other Part of Your Body", or SSRCWTIWOOYHEDIWYCUBHOAOOIAOPOYB for short.


----------



## Dene (Jan 7, 2009)

Sounds like a plan!


----------



## Ryanrex116 (Jan 7, 2009)

I don't think it should be changed, but I was kind of thinking "One hour BLD challenge"


----------



## Simboubou (Jan 7, 2009)

So now, there will be this time limit ?

Ok, so I will just quit cubing.


----------



## tim (Jan 7, 2009)

Simboubou said:


> So now, there will be this time limit ?
> 
> Ok, so I will just quit cubing.



Did you practice for the WR? You can still get one under the new rules.


----------



## Simboubou (Jan 7, 2009)

No, but I started multiblind because single blind had became a matter a speed for me. Now, multiblind will also be a question of speed.


----------



## Stefan (Jan 7, 2009)

Simboubou said:


> So now, there will be this time limit ?
> Ok, so I will just quit cubing.


Bye then.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 7, 2009)

Simboubou said:


> No, but I started multiblind because single blind had became a matter a speed for me. Now, multiblind will also be a question of speed.


What did you want single blind to be about instead of speed? Accuracy, maybe? (Not trying to complain - I'm just genuinely curious what you prefer it to be about.)


----------



## Erik (Jan 7, 2009)

qqwref said:


> Good idea Dene, and while we're at it we could rename OH to "Solving a Standard Rubik's Cube Without Touching It with One of Your Hands (Except During Inspection, Where You Can Use Both Hands) or Any Other Object Including Any Other Part of Your Body", or SSRCWTIWOOYHEDIWYCUBHOAOOIAOPOYB for short.



You're not covering everything there:
Inspecting and Starting the Solving of Standard 3x3x3 Cubies Rubik's Cube Within 15 Seconds on a Second Generation Stackmat Timer Where you are Allowed to Use Both of Your Hands (If you Have Two Hands) to Start the Timer Then Solving it With Only One Hand Without any Human Or Technical Assistance Or The Use of Any Other Object Including Any Other Part of Your Body as Fast as Possible in a WCA Organised Competition.


----------



## Bryan (Jan 7, 2009)

Why not just call it MultiBLD and rename the old event to "Legacy MultiBLD"?


----------



## Simboubou (Jan 7, 2009)

I like this idea. This name is cool.


----------



## Jai (Jan 7, 2009)

Why not just change rule 9i3) to mention that if there's a major change to the event (that would seriously conflict with how it used to be done, ie. people going way over 1 hour before), records can be erased?


----------



## qqwref (Jan 7, 2009)

Jai said:


> Why not just change rule 9i3) to mention that if there's a major change to the event (that would seriously conflict with how it used to be done, ie. people going way over 1 hour before), records can be erased?



Change it in the past, you mean? It doesn't matter what changes we make to the regulations because the 2009 regulations are not actually official yet. So if the 2008 regulations say something about what will happen when we change an event's rules, those are the regulations that we have to follow. I don't understand how you could be confused about this; it's very straightforward. If you change rule 9i3 for the 2009 regulations, it will only affect future changes.


----------



## tim (Jan 7, 2009)

Simboubou said:


> I like this idea. This name is cool.



Nope, that name is just stupid and not descriptive at all.


----------



## Jai (Jan 8, 2009)

qqwref said:


> If you change rule 9i3 for the 2009 regulations, it will only affect future changes.


Oops, forgot about that 
I think 9i3) should be changed anyway, in case this happens again in the future.


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (Jan 20, 2009)

I find this overall a bad plan, the hour limit. Multi BLD is showing how many cubes you can solve blindfolded, not how fast. Why can't people be happy just having 2/2 multi accomplished, whether it is or is not under an hour?


----------



## qqwref (Jan 20, 2009)

Because we want to have multiBLD in a competition. Unless the organizer really, really, really, really loves that event, there is not enough time for someone to sit down and do as many cubes as they can as slowly as they want. The only options for the future of multiBLD are (1) limit the time for everyone to a specific amount so that any competition can hold the event, or (2) don't hold it in competition at all. And it seems that most of the top multi competitors would prefer option 1. I think option 2 is also viable, but it would require a huge rule change and lots of discussion (for example: when is the attempt valid? do you need a WCA delegate to be there? is there a limit on how many attempts someone can do, or how often someone can do an attempt? how do you make it fair to all competitors? etc. etc. etc.).


----------



## rahulkadukar (Feb 6, 2009)

Well I think it should be a completly new category because then I cannot try 100 3x3x3 BLd   *Just Kidding*


----------

