# Should the Face-turning Octahedron be WCA official?



## cashis (Jan 22, 2015)

So, recently my friend gave me his octahedron, and I've kinda fallen in love. 
I was thinking that it really isn't a shape mod (that I know of), and it's kinda a puzzle of its own, like skewb was before it was made official.
I know not many people speedsolve octa (or even have one), but I'm sure if made official, there would be way more interest. I personally think octahedron would add a really cool event to the WCA, that would bring more variety. 
If you agree, comment why, and if you don't, also comment why. Just posting for feedback, and seeing if there's interest 
edit: I'm talking about the 8 axis face turning ones, sorry


----------



## Stefan (Jan 22, 2015)

The answer is 75 (currently).


----------



## cashis (Jan 22, 2015)

Stefan said:


> The answer is 75 (currently).



answer to what exactly ?


----------



## guysensei1 (Jan 22, 2015)

cashis said:


> answer to what exactly ?



He's talking about how vague your question is. There are 75 octahedral puzzles. Which one are you talking about?


----------



## Stefan (Jan 22, 2015)

cashis said:


> answer to what exactly ?



Did you even click the link?


----------



## uyneb2000 (Jan 22, 2015)

No, because we don't need any more events.


----------



## AlexMaass (Jan 22, 2015)

Yeah, which octahedron are you even talking about?


----------



## cashis (Jan 22, 2015)

AlexMaass said:


> Yeah, which octahedron are you even talking about?



I myself have a Dayan Octahedron, but I'm sure if it was added to the WCA, there would be puzzle specifications.
Sorry for being uneducated


----------



## cubizh (Jan 22, 2015)

cashis said:


> I myself have a Dayan Octahedron, but I'm sure if it was added to the WCA, there would be puzzle specifications.


This type of puzzle is called a Face-turning Octahedron (FTO).
To me personally FTOs are not very appealing to solve given the shape and the method that I use.
Also, I don't see it having much (if any) popularity enough to warrant being an official WCA event.


cashis said:


> Sorry for being uneducated


Nothing wrong with not having enough knowledge, just don't miss the opportunity to learn something new when you can.
You can read more here about this puzzle: http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/octaface.htm

EDIT: Actually, Dayan only made Corner Turning Octahedrons. Same shape different puzzle completely: http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/octahed.htm


----------



## AlexMaass (Jan 22, 2015)

cubizh said:


> This type of puzzle is called a Face-turning Octahedron (FTO).


Um I have one of these, its a corner turning octahedron, its like a megaminx version of a pyraminx
It could be solved like a edges only 3x3 though, so it wouldn't add much new. And there's not enough time in competitions for new events to be added.


----------



## cashis (Jan 22, 2015)

cubizh said:


> This type of puzzle is called a Face-turning Octahedron (FTO).
> To me personally FTOs are not very appealing to solve given the shape and the method that I use.
> Also, I don't see it having much (if any) popularity enough to warrant being an official WCA event.
> 
> ...



Thanks, this was a crash& burn thread , lol


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 22, 2015)

uyneb2000 said:


> No, because we don't need any more events.



I hate this argument.


----------



## penguinz7 (Jan 22, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> I hate this argument.



me too.The only other thing I have to say is Team Factory.


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 22, 2015)

penguinz7 said:


> me too.The only other thing I have to say is Team Factory.



Team Factory is a logistical impossibility.


----------



## uyneb2000 (Jan 22, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> I hate this argument.


I just thought about it, and I sounded like a jerk, sorry.

That being said, I think there should be new events occasionally. But I have to ask, are there any octahedrons designed for speed, and anyone who speedsolves them? Is there a possibility that octahedron as an event might become the next Skewb?

Also, what do you think about 3x3 cube relays or 2x2-nxn relays?


----------



## ChickenWrap (Jan 22, 2015)

I would love new events, but it already sucks when competitions don't include all the events in the first place. (Especially since there are never competitions near me!)


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 22, 2015)

I think "we have enough events already don't add anything new" is quite good and perfectly valid argument.

We currently have a set of official events that already represent a good variety of puzzles (IMO) and if we have too many events every event is being held more and more rarely which I think is bad. Now we can still just fit all the existing events in 2 day comp so everybody can compete in their chosen event. If we had more events we would have to leave some out and maybe only hold some events only once or twice a year. Not good IMO. 

So as I have said before: We have just the right amount of events now so pls dont add anything new... No new events are constantly added to other sports either (track&field, swimming etc etc...)


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 22, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> I think "we have enough events already don't add anything new" is quite good and perfectly valid argument.
> 
> We currently have a set of official events that already represent a good variety of puzzles (IMO) and if we have too many events every event is being held more and more rarely which I think is bad. Now we can still just fit all the existing events in 2 day comp so everybody can compete in their chosen event. If we had more events we would have to leave some out and maybe only hold some events only once or twice a year. Not good IMO.
> 
> So as I have said before: We have just the right amount of events now so pls dont add anything new... No new events are constantly added to other sports either (track&field, swimming etc etc...)



What is it about competitions not holding all events that is bad?

There are certainly a lot of puzzles/events that could fit the bill to be official. I think that as long as a particular puzzle/event has developed methods of solving, is popular on a global scale, and has the ability to be implemented in competition (procedurally, for scrambling, for data entry), then it should be considered for eventhood.

There are already some events that rarely get held as it is in some parts of the world (e.g. feet in the USA, 4BLD/5BLD everywhere, FMC means of 3). Should we remove some events to make the others more palatable for organisers to accommodate?

And the Olympics does just fine with changing events.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jan 22, 2015)

The OP is talking about a corner turning octahedron. I personally think that replacing pyra with this could be a good option in a few years time.


----------



## Hssandwich (Jan 22, 2015)

cube-o-holic said:


> The OP is talking about a corner turning octahedron. I personally think that replacing pyra with this could be a good option in a few years time.



YOU TAKE THAT BACK


----------



## penguinz7 (Jan 22, 2015)

cube-o-holic said:


> The OP is talking about a corner turning octahedron. I personally think that replacing pyra with this could be a good option in a few years time.



How dare you...


----------



## Lucas Wesche (Jan 22, 2015)

cube-o-holic said:


> The OP is talking about a corner turning octahedron. I personally think that replacing pyra with this could be a good option in a few years time.



I agree wholeheartedly


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jan 22, 2015)

Hssandwich said:


> YOU TAKE THAT BACK



No =P

It's very similar to solve so once the WRs stop progressing I think it's a good idea. Also the luck factor is reduced but it's still just as easy to solve which means it's still appealing to younger siblings who are dragged along to comps.


----------



## DGCubes (Jan 22, 2015)

cube-o-holic said:


> The OP is talking about a corner turning octahedron. I personally think that replacing pyra with this could be a good option in a few years time.


The very nature of this idea is sacrilegious! Pyra is the best event of all time. We must worship the mighty Pyraminx!


----------



## TMOY (Jan 22, 2015)

To all the cubers advocating the addition of VTO (vertex turning octahedron): do you realize that it is nothing else than a 3^3 mod with tips added ?

IMHO FTO is the only octahedron which could be considered for addition, and it's still far from being popular enough.


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 22, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> What is it about competitions not holding all events that is bad?
> 
> There are certainly a lot of puzzles/events that could fit the bill to be official. I think that as long as a particular puzzle/event has developed methods of solving, is popular on a global scale, and has the ability to be implemented in competition (procedurally, for scrambling, for data entry), then it should be considered for eventhood.
> 
> ...



I don't know what you want to say with the first link but I can tell you what is bad about not holding all events:
I think that everyone should have as many opporturnities as possible to compete in any WCA event they choose... if they only get 1 try/year that can be very discouraging for them to practise.

Also I have to tell you that your last claim is simply not true. In finland we have all events in (almost) every comp if we only can have 2 or competitors for that event. So we practically have all events that someone wants to compete in at every comp. Which I think is very nice 

+ olympics is IMO not comparable to speedcubing since it holds events from so many different sports... I think speedsolving is better compared to track&field or swimming or gymnastics. Olympics mainly host sports that are popular enoughto gain some media attention...


----------



## cashis (Jan 22, 2015)

TMOY said:


> To all the cubers advocating the addition of VTO (vertex turning octahedron): do you realize that it is nothing else than a 3^3 mod with tips added ?
> 
> IMHO FTO is the only octahedron which could be considered for addition, and it's still far from being popular enough.



I'm an idiot and have no idea what I'm talking about, I dont know the difference between any octahedrons and was poorly informed when I posted this, and I apologize for that. 
however there's a lot of 3x3 shape mods that have been looked at being added (mirror blocks) and I dont really see why shape mods are so bad. They bring a lot of variety, and even if it is essentially the same solve, there's a lot of variety


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 22, 2015)

cashis said:


> I'm an idiot and have no idea what I'm talking about, I dont know the difference between any octahedrons and was poorly informed when I posted this, and I apologize for that.
> however there's a lot of 3x3 shape mods that have been looked at being added (mirror blocks) and I dont really see why shape mods are so bad. *They bring a lot of variety, and even if it is essentially the same solve, there's a lot of variety*



What did I just read...

They are essentially the same solve BUT IN THE SAME SENTENCE you say that they bring a lot of variety


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 22, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> I don't know what you want to say with the first link but I can tell you what is bad about not holding all events:
> I think that everyone should have as many opporturnities as possible to compete in any WCA event they choose... if they only get 1 try/year that can be very discouraging for them to practise.
> 
> *Also I have to tell you that your last claim is simply not true. In finland we have all events in (almost) every comp if we only can have 2 or competitors for that event. So we practically have all events that someone wants to compete in at every comp. Which I think is very nice *


This isn't the case everywhere.
At the competition I described above (which I am helping organise), there simply was not enough time to hold 2x2 along with everything else, so it was removed from the events list before the competition becoming official in the interest of allowing more competitors to attend the competition. The competitive speedcubing community here is large enough that we regularly have competitions with around 100 competitors, and it is very difficult to accommodate even half of the official events because of it. Thus it is unreasonable for us to consider holding a competition with every event unless we increase the number of judging stations (and thereby staff, who we all want to be capable and efficient and experienced), but at a certain level the logistical planning is simply too much.
If we have more events, the urge to hold every event diminishes due to its futility.

I am not in favour of saying "We have enough official events" if there are unofficial events that are just as viable.



> + olympics is IMO not comparable to speedcubing since it holds events from so many different sports... I think speedsolving is better compared to track&field or swimming or gymnastics. Olympics mainly host sports that are popular enoughto gain some media attention...


The Olympics is comparable in some regard because the events held at each iteration change, just like cubing competitions. There are obviously some "regular" events (especially 3x3) that many would consider a necessity at most competitions, in the same way that we expect track and field events at the Summer Olympics every four years.


----------



## CiaranBeahan (Jan 22, 2015)

I'm going to say no to this because yet again when anybody suggests that a new puzzle should be added to the WCA, there's always another puzzle that is in higher demand that people would like to see added to the WCA e.g 8x8 and other puzzles


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

CiaranBeahan said:


> I'm going to say no to this because yet again when anybody suggests that a new puzzle should be added to the WCA, there's always another puzzle that is in higher demand that people would like to see added to the WCA e.g 8x8 and other puzzles


There's always interest for other things. 
I mean i'm weird in liking 8 sided puzzles, and some people like bigBLD, and some like geranium puzzles. 
You can't really say "no" to one thing just because there are others options


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> What did I just read...
> 
> They are essentially the same solve BUT IN THE SAME SENTENCE you say that they bring a lot of variety



Okay? So? 5x5 and 7x7 are essentially the exact same thing, but we have those. 
Octahedron is like a big pyraminx.
Sorry for the repetition


----------



## pdilla (Jan 23, 2015)

I just busted out my CT-Octohedron after reading this thread. 

I hate it.


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

pdilla said:


> I hate it.




you don't have to participate


----------



## qqwref (Jan 23, 2015)

cashis said:


> Okay? So? 5x5 and 7x7 are essentially the exact same thing, but we have those.


What? Lol no.

And the corner-turning octahedron is just a 3x3x3 with center orientation and no corners. Boring. The shape also does not make it conducive to turning fast.


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

qqwref said:


> What? Lol no.
> 
> And the corner-turning octahedron is just a 3x3x3 with center orientation and no corners. Boring. The shape also does not make it conducive to turning fast.



I'm not sure what the real difference between 5x5 and 7x7 are, other than one takes more time and there's more pieces. I dont know man, ill probably just stop defending octahedron, I guess I'm the only one who likes it. 
Its just a shame that so many people dont want to add events because competitions wont hold them


----------



## TMOY (Jan 23, 2015)

You''re probably not the only one who likes it. But events don't get added only because a couple of people like them.

6^3 and 7^3 got added in 2009 because as soonas they got released in 2008, there was instantaneously a big interest in them, ans many comps decided to hold them as unofficial events. Skewb got added in 2014 because people advocated for it for several years and because unofficial Skewb events were regularly held at comps. I hhave yet to see any unofficiel octahedron event.


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 23, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> This isn't the case everywhere.
> At the competition I described above (which I am helping organise), there simply was not enough time to hold 2x2 along with everything else, so it was removed from the events list before the competition becoming official in the interest of allowing more competitors to attend the competition.



Yes I know that but your claim was:


> There are already some events that rarely get held as it is in some parts of the world (e.g. feet in the USA, *4BLD/5BLD everywhere*, FMC means of 3).


So I just wanted to say that this is not the case everywhere 



> The competitive speedcubing community here is large enough that we regularly have competitions with around 100 competitors, and it is very difficult to accommodate even half of the official events because of it. Thus it is unreasonable for us to consider holding a competition with every event unless we increase the number of judging stations (and thereby staff, who we all want to be capable and efficient and experienced), but at a certain level the logistical planning is simply too much.
> If we have more events, the urge to hold every event diminishes due to its futility.


I also understand this and that is exactly why I think we should NOT have more events because more events means more staff members and more logistics is needed. And I'm not saying that EVERY comp should hold EVERY event. I'm just saying that there is certainly some limit for the number of events where it starts to go bad. Think if we had significantly more events (which we eventually will have if we just keep increasing the number of official events constantly...), let's say 50+ events for example. Then we would probably have events that are held in 1 out of 5 or even fewer comps. So here in Finland it would mean that the event is held maybe once a year or once every 2 years. Now I would say that it is very discouraging to practise for something you get to do once a year maybe if that one comp happens to fit your schedule :/ .

That's why I think it is important to not have too many official events. And I think everyone who organizes comps should at least try (I understand it may not be always possible) to hold every events in 2 comps. I mean like if comp number 1 didn't hold event X then I think comp number 2 should hold event X even if they then had to leave out some event Y that was just held in the previous comp of the same area...



> I am not in favour of saying "We have enough official events" if there are unofficial events that are just as viable.



What would you say is a good amount of official events then? Or do you think that whenever there is enough interest in some new event it should be added?
If so then that will eventually be a problem because we will eventually have HUGE amount of events that all (except popular ones like 3x3 and 2x2) get held at 1 out of 10 comps. Not good IMO.



> The Olympics is comparable in some regard because the events held at each iteration change, just like cubing competitions. There are obviously some "regular" events (especially 3x3) that many would consider a necessity at most competitions, in the same way that we expect track and field events at the Summer Olympics every four years.


Well yeah, we don't have time to hold every event at every comp but I don't think we should be changing official events too lightly... Adding too many events has the problem I have already tried to explain above. And removing events I find very unfair towards people who have put a lot of time and effort to practising those events.


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 23, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> So I just wanted to say that this is not the case everywhere


Fact: On a global scale, 4BLD was held at about 1 in every 4 comps in 2014 (with an average of about 1 success every competition).
On a global scale, 5BLD was held at about 1 in every 5 comps in 2014 (with an average of about 0.7 successes every competition).
I have no problem with saying that 4BLD and 5BLD get held rarely.



> I also understand this and that is exactly why I think we should NOT have more events because more events means more staff members and more logistics is needed. And I'm not saying that EVERY comp should hold EVERY event. I'm just saying that there is certainly some limit for the number of events where it starts to go bad. Think if we had significantly more events (which we eventually will have if we just keep increasing the number of official events constantly...), let's say 50+ events for example. Then we would probably have events that are held in 1 out of 5 or even fewer comps. So here in Finland it would mean that the event is held maybe once a year or once every 2 years. Now I would say that it is very discouraging to practise for something you get to do once a year maybe if that one comp happens to fit your schedule :/ .
> 
> That's why I think it is important to not have too many official events. And I think everyone who organizes comps should at least try (I understand it may not be always possible) to hold every events in 2 comps. I mean like if comp number 1 didn't hold event X then I think comp number 2 should hold event X even if they then had to leave out some event Y that was just held in the previous comp of the same area...


I'm not sure about the "more staff" and "more logistics" if competitions intentionally don't try holding as many events as possible, but rather hold events that will still provide a worthwhile experience for the competitors overall.

I agree with the statement that there can be too many events. I don't think we've reached that point.

By the standard you set of holding an event maybe 1 in 5 competitions, 5BLD isn't looking too good.

I like the idea of trying to hold as many of the events as possible across multiple competitions, which is why BASC 5 is a 2-day competition (most of the time, we only hold 1-day competitions here).



> What would you say is a good amount of official events then? Or do you think that whenever there is enough interest in some new event it should be added?
> If so then that will eventually be a problem because we will eventually have HUGE amount of events that all (except popular ones like 3x3 and 2x2) get held at 1 out of 10 comps. Not good IMO.



The relative number of events is just that--relative. With the current event list, I don't think we should remove anything (unless judging becomes logistically unfeasible), but there are many advocated unofficial events (maybe not well-advocated, but still) that, with proper development could likely become official.

Another constant issue for organisers is that cubing is growing overall, so it inherently should become more difficult to hold competitions.


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 23, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> Fact: On a global scale, 4BLD was held at about 1 in every 4 comps in 2014 (with an average of about 1 success every competition).
> On a global scale, 5BLD was held at about 1 in every 5 comps in 2014 (with an average of about 0.7 successes every competition).
> I have no problem with saying that 4BLD and 5BLD get held rarely.


Globally yes. In Finland we had 4 comps last year. All had 4BLD and 2 had 5BLD 



> I agree with the statement that there can be too many events. I don't think we've reached that point.


I think we are quite balanced right now. But we shouldn't keep adding more and more events. What we have now is good.



> By the standard you set of holding an event maybe 1 in 5 competitions, 5BLD isn't looking too good.


Yes it would be nice if 5BLD was held more often . I totally agree with that... This just further proves my point that we shouldn't be adding new events if we struggle to hold the ones we have now often enough.



> I like the idea of trying to hold as many of the events as possible across multiple competitions, which is why BASC 5 is a 2-day competition (most of the time, we only hold 1-day competitions here).


:tu



> The relative number of events is just that--relative. With the current event list, I don't think we should remove anything (unless judging becomes logistically unfeasible), but there are many advocated unofficial events (maybe not well-advocated, but still) that, with proper development could likely become official.


There are many events that could be official in the sense that they would fit the WCA quite well and be quite easy to organize. I agree with that. BUT those should not be made official because (once again) IMO we shouldn't have too many official events.



> Another constant issue for organisers is that cubing is growing overall, so it inherently should become more difficult to hold competitions.


And this also just further proves my point:
Cubing is growing and it is getting harder to organize comps because we have more competitors. Then why would we make that organizing even harder by adding new events as well as new competitors? 

tl:dr Don't fix it if it isn't broken. You'll just end up breaking it...


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 23, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> tl:dr Don't fix it if it isn't broken. You'll just end up breaking it...



That's just so wrong.

Perhaps the reason why 4BLD and 5BLD aren't held so much is that they're tough to schedule.

I don't get what you mean by "adding more and more events". All that's been added in the last five years has been skewb. We have fewer events now than we did in 2009.


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 23, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> That's just so wrong.
> 
> Perhaps the reason why 4BLD and 5BLD aren't held so much is that they're tough to schedule.
> 
> I don't get what you mean by "adding more and more events". All that's been added in the last five years has been skewb. We have fewer events now than we did in 2009.



Well if we have problems scheduling the existing events to our comps then why would we want to add even more events to make scheduling even harder?

And by "adding more and more events" I mean that we shouldn't take it as a habit to add more events just because someone happens to like them. Skewb was only added a year ago and people are already planning for the next event to be added...

I'm just trying to say that having too many events isn't good because then events get held more seldom. And I don't think that is good. I think everyone should have possibilities to compete in their chosen event at reasonable intervals. Not something like once every 10 comps or so... You can disagree with that because that's just my opinion but that is the point I am trying to get across to you here


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> Globally yes. In *Finland* we had 4 comps last year. All had 4BLD and 2 had 5BLD
> 
> 
> I think we are quite balanced right now. But we shouldn't keep adding more and more events. *What we have now is good*.
> ...



1. Not everyone lives in Finland, I'm glad its so great over there, but most comps don't have 4 or 5 BLD. Pick a random comp and chances are it wont have 5BLD. It's not that there isn't necessarily enough time, but there's not exactly interest in those events from a fair portion of cubers. Even in the cubing community, not many people can do 4 or 5 BLD. Only 137 people have ever even got an official single for 5... 
2. This is an opinionated statement. Who says its good? You? I understand that not everybody wants octahedron either. But I think at this point, the arguments gone past octahedron and to the point that we really shouldn't be afraid to add new events just because they won't get held. Far more people have gotten a skewb time officially already. That just proves that adding new events is a good thing, and I'm fairly certain more comps hold skewb than 5BLD.
tldr; don't be afraid to add new events just because current ones aren't doing so hot.


----------



## Hssandwich (Jan 23, 2015)

Why shouldn't it be made official? I'm not saying that octahedron would be the most popular choice, but something lots of people seem to want like 3x3x5 etc. The WCA coped fine when the magics were around, at least i think, as I wasn't cubing at the time. We have one. Less event than we did 3 years ago.


----------



## tseitsei (Jan 23, 2015)

cashis said:


> 1. Not everyone lives in Finland, I'm glad its so great over there, but most comps don't have 4 or 5 BLD. Pick a random comp and chances are it wont have 5BLD. It's not that there isn't necessarily enough time, but there's not exactly interest in those events from a fair portion of cubers. Even in the cubing community, not many people can do 4 or 5 BLD. Only 137 people have ever even got an official single for 5...
> 2. This is an opinionated statement. Who says its good? You? I understand that not everybody wants octahedron either. But I think at this point, the arguments gone past octahedron and to the point that we really shouldn't be afraid to add new events just because they won't get held. Far more people have gotten a skewb time officially already. That just proves that adding new events is a good thing, and I'm fairly certain more comps hold skewb than 5BLD.
> tldr; don't be afraid to add new events just because current ones aren't doing so hot.



Ofcourse it is opinionated. These are matters of opinion. And IMO what we have now is working quite well. 

I also suggest that you (re-)read my post just above yours


----------



## cashis (Jan 23, 2015)

tseitsei said:


> Ofcourse it is opinionated. These are matters of opinion. And IMO what we have now is working quite well.
> 
> I also suggest that you (re-)read my post just above yours



oh whoops, well yeah I didn't see that one but I guess it is all up to opinion.


----------



## BaMiao (Jan 24, 2015)

Has everyone forgotten about what it took for skewb to get added as an event? Even before it was added, skewb had a sizable community of people actively practicing. There were multiple well-documented methods. It was held unofficially at many competitions.

Is there any puzzle that comes close that? If you can't name one, then don't even bother trying to argue that something should be added.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 24, 2015)

cashis said:


> Far more people have gotten a skewb time officially already. That just proves that adding new events is a good thing


Nah, it proves that Skewb is popular (which is good, because it'd be dumb to add an event that wasn't!). Of course, since it's such a simple puzzle to learn, and since lots of people want to record times in as many official events as they can, I'm sure lots of people have competed in Skewb even though they wouldn't have touched Skewb if it wasn't official.

I'd like to note that even without considering any of the long events (4/5bld, multi, 6/7, fmc) it is often still difficult to hold everything in a large local competition. In the US even local competitions can hold >100 people, and since many are one-day, you often won't get a chance to do the event you like without going to a bigger competition like Nationals. So adding another event means that even a lot of people who attend competitions will end up not having a chance to do it - and if it IS held, it may be instead of another event. So it'd better be something that's worth it  Skewb was but I don't know of any unofficial event that is both interesting and popular.


----------



## obelisk477 (Jan 24, 2015)

Well since we're clearly disregarding OP at this point:

Get rid of feet. Add team BLD


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Jan 24, 2015)

obelisk477 said:


> Well since we're clearly disregarding OP at this point:
> 
> Get rid of feet. Add team BLD



How about 15 puzzle?


Or none altogether. We don't really need any new events with the stereotypical schedules we have now. I highly doubt TeamBLD, 15 puzzle, or FTOs would be added with the scheduling, regulations, and current major interests that we have.

If we do get a new event, I might just place it in HOOAH2015. (Tentative competition)


----------



## Ranzha (Jan 24, 2015)

obelisk477 said:


> Well since we're clearly disregarding OP at this point:
> 
> Get rid of feet. Add team BLD



That's not how it works.
That's not how any of this works.

People often disregard what it really takes for an event to become official.
There need to be concise, stylistically identical, cogent regulations and regulation changes to accommodate the event amongst the other events; the event needs to be popular; the event needs to be added to TNoodle; the event needs to be able to be integrated in the WCA database.

At the moment, 3x3 Team BLD isn't as popular now as it used to be, though very recently people have been posting some other puzzles team BLD.
Addition in TNoodle is easy since all it requires are 3x3 scrambles.
What we need are consistent regulations (which are a pain to try making without pissing anyone off) and database integration capabilities (which seems to be the biggest challenge).

I don't get why some people are under the impression that by removing an event, we "have a spot open" on the official event list. *We don't.*


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jan 25, 2015)

Ranzha said:


> That's not how it works.
> That's not how any of this works.
> 
> People often disregard what it really takes for an event to become official.
> ...



This is a good summary.

To take just one part of example, Skewb support required someone to write a random-state scrambler for TNoodle. Chen Shuang stepped up to the plate, and this was a critical step. Skewb was not going to happen otherwise.

While we're there is no limit on the number of events, there are various reasons competitors/organizers/Delegates/the WRC/the Board would like them to stay manageable. In particular, big competitions feel pressure to hold all events, *regardless of anyone's personal opinion whether they need to*.

So, in practice, we need to balance opportunity costs: if we add an event, it should be worthwhile compared to other events we could add.
We have not tried to resolve an exact set of criteria, but we are keeping track of the issue: https://github.com/cubing/wca-documents/issues/183

Personally, I believe FTO is just barely unique/interesting enough, but I don't think there will enough interest unless there is an unexpected surge, and it is not unique enough compared to other interesting events we could add.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 25, 2015)

I just wanna add that I don't know who changed the topic title, but the original poster (cashis) says he has a Dayan Octahedron, which is vertex turning and not an FTO.

As for FTOs, the mechanism is kind of iffy... I remember when I was speedsolving it the triangular centers use to pop relatively regularly. I'm not sure if this is fixable. Oh yeah, and it's the same puzzle as the Rex Cube  It's a fun puzzle but I don't want to see it in competition.


----------



## semiprime799 (Aug 14, 2020)

Just a bump because I'm curious as to what people think about this right now.


----------



## Nmile7300 (Aug 14, 2020)

I don't think you should have bumped this, but FTO seems to be super popular right now. It seems that when this thread was made almost no one wanted FTO in the WCA but now, people are optimizing it and pushing for it to be added.


----------



## zslane (Aug 14, 2020)

I'd like to see it become popular enough to become a WCA event for no other reason than it will encourage manufacturers to put out decent, modern hardware.


----------



## ribbon method (Aug 14, 2020)

yes because its interesting and fun to see wr be broken in that event if it was added


----------



## LukasCubes (Aug 14, 2020)

cashis said:


> So, recently my friend gave me his octahedron, and I've kinda fallen in love.
> I was thinking that it really isn't a shape mod (that I know of), and it's kinda a puzzle of its own, like skewb was before it was made official.
> I know not many people speedsolve octa (or even have one), but I'm sure if made official, there would be way more interest. I personally think octahedron would add a really cool event to the WCA, that would bring more variety.
> If you agree, comment why, and if you don't, also comment why. Just posting for feedback, and seeing if there's interest
> edit: I'm talking about the 8 axis face turning ones, sorry


can I see a picture of it


----------



## Nmile7300 (Aug 14, 2020)

LukasCubes said:


> can I see a picture of it


Please pay attention to when people posted things. That post is from 2015, and the member who posted it hasn't been seen since last year.


----------



## semiprime799 (Aug 15, 2020)

LukasCubes said:


> can I see a picture of it


----------

