# Should we remove at least one of the 3 big BLD events? (4x4, 5x5, multi BLD)



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

In short I think it is desirable that *at least one* of the following events would be removed:
- 4x4 BLD
- 5x5 BLD
- Multi BLD

This is an issue that has bothered me for a while now: Blindfolded solving is an impressive way to solve a Rubik's cube. Overall I do like it and like to do it. However there are many downsides to the events, I don't think all of them should be official anymore.

There are 3 main reasons that are build up on each other and a few other reasons for removing at least one of the events.

*1.* The big BLD events *stand too far away from the original "solve a Rubik's cube" concept* on which all of speedcubing is build. To me 4/5/multi BLD is exactly the same as 4x4 OH and 5x5 FMC would be: a side event of a side event. Or: a variant of a variant. Have a look at the chart in the attachment _(or the new link)_ to see what I mean with this. We don't hold any other side events of side events except for BLD.

http://www.pic-upload.de/view-23833561/Chart.jpg.html
View attachment 4246

The problem I have with this is that especially multi-BLD, but also 4x4BLD and 5x5BLD barely have anything to do with speedcubing anymore. It is for the biggest part, just a memory sport. All other events we have don't require memorizing states of cubes, but are just 'fast-puzzling'. Why are we doing memory sports at a speedcubing competition? Don't misunderstand me, I think it is HIGHLY impressive to memorize 20 cubes BLD in an hour, but it does not have much to do with cubing anymore. If you can indeed memorize and solve 20 cubes in an hour, alternatively you could really try to make a career in memory sports!

*2.* Now the fact itself that we have a variant of a variant is not very good, but now think about it: *we have 3 of them* (not including 3x3 BLD). Why 3? It's not like we just have 4x4 OH, but also have 5x5 OH and let's say megaminx OH as well. This doesn't make much sense to me. 

*3.* Also: *the events are too much the same* so they don't add anything to the skills that are required. Almost everyone who is good at 5x5 BLD is also good at 4x4 BLD, and the same goes for multi BLD. Yes BLD does add something to speedcubing, but why have 3 variants of this variant, which are not even much different? The memo technique you can use for all 3 events is just the same. The difference between 4x4 BLD and 5x5 BLD is for the biggest part just the amount of information you have to memorize.
Now yes, you could also argue 7x7 doesn't add anything either. On this I would partly agree. Yes 7x7 and 6x6 and 5x5 are very much the same, to be honest I wouldn't be bothered at all if 7x7 was removed as well. The difference though, is that 7x7 is just a variant of a 3x3 and not a variant of a variant (because that would be 7x7 FMC or OH for example).

*Other reasons:*
- the events take up a lot of time and complicate time-schedules heavily, especially when all 3 events are held. Mostly you can do your attempts whenever you want throughout the whole weekend, but this still requires a lot of organizing hassle. You have to find a judge, you have to talk to the organizer about the fact that you might have to change your group for other events. If you decide to NOT hold the events on the side, you are using up so much time on the main stage that it steals unreasonably much time of more popular events.

- the events are not very popular: now I don't have access to the database, but from experience I would say only a handfull of people actually compete in some of the 3 events (not to mention all 3 events) when they are held. It happens a lot that for example nobody even succeeds on a 5x5 BLD and the podium is empty...

- the events are too hard: this especially goes for 5x5 BLD. 3x3 is already quite hard, 4x4 is managable, but 5x5 is really difficult for some people. 

- it is prone to possible cheating: it happens a lot that you can just do big BLD and multi all day long or even all weekend long. Now I know we all trust each other, but it is sometimes possible that competitor A does a WR on the first solve, which is filmed and put up on the internet and person B can still do the same scramble the next day, or at the end of the day. Do we really trust each other for that long? This does not seem very desirable... Yes you can organize it within a smaller time range, but then the burden on the organization grows again.

In short: 3 big BLD events are too much. Ideally I would like to see all of them go, but I understand a significant amount of people would not be happy with that. I think it's very reasonable and agreeable that at least one of these events would be removed. For those people who have fun at memorizing large quantities of information there would still be other events left in which they can use their skill. Now to which event should go: I don't really care much. Ideally Multi-BLD because that event requires the most memorizing and least amount of creativity in the way you solve it, with 5x5BLD you at least have 2 new types of pieces you have to learn how to solve, whereas multi-BLD is exactly 3x3 BLD times x.

I am interested in the opinion of the rest of the community and look forward to reading your answers. If you want to argue pro or con, please use logical reasoning and explain why you agree or disagree with my reasons, or your own well-elaborated reasons and don't start throwing in comments like: "we have to keep all events, because I think it is impressive" or "we should get rid of all events, because people who memorize that much info scare me" or "we should not remove 4x4 BLD, because I have the NR".


----------



## DeeDubb (Jul 7, 2014)

I would say keep all of them. I think memory sports are pretty amazing, and there's nothing wrong with cubing branching into that field. Especially because it's a combination of memory and dexterity that is extremely unique in the world.


----------



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

DeeDubb said:


> I would say keep all of them. I think memory sports are pretty amazing, and there's nothing wrong with cubing branching into that field. Especially because it's a combination of memory and dexterity that is extremely unique in the world.



I think they are amazing as well. Do we really need all 3 events to present this skill? Do we really need memory sports to be this big in speedcubing? 

Like I said in my original post: please use logical reasoning and explain why you have a certain opinion and why you agree or disagree with my reasons.


----------



## DeeDubb (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> I think they are amazing as well. Do we really need all 3 events to present this skill? Do we really need memory sports to be this big in speedcubing?
> 
> Like I said in my original post: please use logical reasoning and explain why you have a certain opinion and why you agree or disagree with my reasons.



I think the bigger the cubes get, the more it's about memorization ability, and less about actual finger speed. Much the same that the bigger cubes get for speed, it's more about ability to quickly reduce to a 3x3 and less about the 3x3 phase itself. In my opinion, 4BLD and 5BLD are progression from 3BLD, much the same that 4x4 and 5x5 are progression from the Rubik's Cube. I think MBLD is intriguing for a different reason, because it's doing the most you can in a set amount of time. This is very unique in speed cubing. So, yes, i see a place for all these events.

Also, you are asking for logical reasons about an issue that is rooted in personal preference. It's impossible to logically deduce something that people merely have opinions about, so maybe you should change your criteria to ask for cordial and intelligent discourse.


----------



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

DeeDubb said:


> I think the bigger the cubes get, the more it's about memorization ability, and less about actual finger speed. Much the same that the bigger cubes get for speed, it's more about ability to quickly reduce to a 3x3 and less about the 3x3 phase itself. In my opinion, 4BLD and 5BLD are progression from 3BLD, much the same that 4x4 and 5x5 are progression from the Rubik's Cube. I think MBLD is intriguing for a different reason, because it's doing the most you can in a set amount of time. This is very unique in speed cubing. So, yes, i see a place for all these events.
> 
> Also, you are asking for logical reasons about an issue that is rooted in personal preference. It's impossible to logically deduce something that people merely have opinions about, so maybe you should change your criteria to ask for cordial and intelligent discourse.



So you are saying 5x5 is more impressive than 4x4 BLD? I agree on that as well  why would we still need 4x4 BLD then?

Of course this is about personal preference, but it is also about what is good for the community. There are clear reasons for doing something beyond the "do you like the event" question, I hope you understand this. Things like issues for the organization of competitions, place of events in the organigramm and the equalness of events are clear logical arguments and have nothing to do with preference. If I wanted to know how popular these events are I could have simply asked someone who has access to the database.


----------



## DeeDubb (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> So you are saying 5x5 is more impressive than 4x4 BLD? I agree on that as well  why would we still need 4x4 BLD then?
> 
> Of course this is about personal preference, but it is also about what is good for the community. There are clear reasons for doing something beyond the "do you like the event" question, I hope you understand this. Things like issues for the organization of competitions, place of events in the organigramm and the equalness of events are clear logical arguments and have nothing to do with preference. If I wanted to know how popular these events are I could have simply asked someone who has access to the database.



Ok, in that case, I'll step aside, because I don't know anything about the difficulties of organizing BLD events, or how equal they are.


----------



## Roman (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> *the events are too much the same* so they don't add anything to the skills that are required.



I think it's a good argument to remove 5BLD at least.


----------



## Ollie (Jul 7, 2014)

Just some scattered thoughts on this (I've been expecting this thread for a while!)

4BLD:
- adds a new level of difficulty to normal 3BLD solving by introducing center solving. Memorizing a centers 'solution' requires a good degree of planning and track and trace, and during execution the ability to visualize, whereas a 3BLD is mostly linear in its memorization phase.
- adds further difficulty by testing one's capacity. And it is a good amount of information - the equivalent of a 2/3 cube multi which is within most peoples' abilities without a huge deal of practice.
- Execution times are decreasing all the time and to get records it is crucial to memorize and execute fast. It is gradually becoming a similar ball game to 3BLD. So to say that it is far from the 'speedcubing'
- It receives incredibly positive attention from the media.

5BLD:
- tests capacity, nerves and the ability to deal with a full range of piece types.
- it is a 'Mt Everest' type goal that a lot of people strive for. The number of people with successes in the database doesn't indicate a lack of popularity on it's own - a better statistic might be the number of people that have ever tried it. 
- The issue with time constraints can be resolved by; introducing caps (i.e. one hour period for all 4BLD and 5BLD attempts); ensuring everyone contributes to the judging and scrambling processes so that the whole competition can run smoothly and on time so that all events can be held. Yeah, I understand there's a stress in UK comps to have all BLD but I personally like the one hour cap for for 4BLD and 5BLD 

General points:
- nearly all the arguments here can be applied to 6x6x6, 7x7x7 and to some extent 5x5x5 too. 
- I agree with your points on Multi


----------



## thatkid (Jul 7, 2014)

Ollie said:


> - The issue with time constraints can be resolved by; introducing caps (i.e. one hour period for all 4BLD and 5BLD attempts); ensuring everyone contributes to the judging and scrambling processes so that the whole competition can run smoothly and on time so that all events can be held. Yeah, I understand there's a stress in UK comps to have all BLD but I personally like the 1 hour cap for for 4BLD and 5BLD



in the comps that i've been at, sometimes 4BLD is run at the expense of the competitors lunchtime. With regards to issues with judge's etc, it's not very hard to find someone to scramble and in terms of holding up the card, a music stand usually suffices


----------



## Username (Jul 7, 2014)

I personally feel multiBLD should be removed because it's just 3BLD, but more of it. I don't find that it brings anything new to the table, and it takes a long time to have at a comp. (same argument can be used for bigcubes, 5BLD and possibly other events too) Also, I agree with the "side event of a side event" argument, it was one of the first things I thought of when I considered this. 

Note: My arguments might be bad, or even horrible, but this is just my opinion.


----------



## slinky773 (Jul 7, 2014)

Uh oh. Another "should we remove x event?" thread. inb4 more people come and repeat arguments that we have already discussed, adding absolutely nothing more to discuss…**cough* feet *cough**

I have absolutely no objections to keeping all of those events. I don't think removing any of them would be necessary at this moment.

I feel like the main question when we make these "should we remove x event" threads is "how far should we take it?" For example, when we discuss 3x3 WF: the thought of adding variants or "side events" (don't really agree with that name, but who cares, anyway) to challenge ourselves further is already well accepted with 3x3, i.e. no one is asking if we should remove OH, but how far should we take it? with feet? with elbows? while juggling?

Similarly, that is the question here. Well, we can solve 3x3s blindfolded. Why not do 4x4s? 5x5s? more?

For me, the question of how far we should take variations on events is answered by one question: *is it within reason?* Basically, this is what it all boils down do, doesn't it? Is it really reasonable for us to solve 3x3 with feet? Is it really reasonable to solve a 4x4 with a blindfold? For all of those, my answer would be *yes.* If you want to solve 3x3s with blindfolds, I think you should be able to solve 4x4s with blindfolds, too.

The question will pretty obviously pop up later of where it begins to NOT be reasonable. Really, the answer to the question should be pretty obvious when you ask it, in my opinion. For example, 5x5 FMC is… probably not very reasonable for (I think) pretty obvious reasons, though I have never done FMC anything, so I will admit that I am not really in the know-how here. However, clearly if 3x3 FMC is so difficult (well, not really that it's extremely difficult, more like it takes a while) and takes so long (an hour!), I doubt that anything beyond 4x4 FMC is well beyond reasonable.

However, if you wish to really discuss when a variation becomes unreasonable… I suppose it boils down to whether it's *1.* physically possible to do very fast (to stick to the whole *speed*cubing aspect that you mentioned) (e.g. 7x7 OH? Probably not…) and *2.* reasonable to do at competitions (after all, this is (sort of) the reason why Magic was removed) (e.g. 5x5 FMC again). When I talk about how it can be reasonable to do at competitions, I am referring to pretty much everything except for time, since I am more concerned about whether it's reasonable to physically do at a competition, as well as any other factors such as judging (again, magic) and anything else (e.g. doing 3x3 underwater at competition is stupid and unreasonable to do at any sort of venue). I will note here that for either of these points, IMO the closer the answer becomes no (for either of those points) for any given event, the more that popularity and demand must compensate.

If you are considering those two points for 4x4 BLD, 5x5 BLD and Multi BLD, point 1 is pretty much yes for all 3 of them. For point 2, however, I suppose it gets a bit iffy. However, I don't think that *physically,* setting these up at competitions is much more of a hassle than it is to set up events such as 3x3 FMC. Timewise, that may be a different story, but I'm pretty sure that if 10 people wanted to do 4x4 BLD at a competition, they would be able to make time for that, so for me, time is not that big of an issue with considering removal of events,

This all seems reasonable, right? Hopefully I am within reason… I know that people will bombard this thread if I am not! haha



Erik said:


> *1.* The big BLD events *stand too far away from the original "solve a Rubik's cube" concept* on which all of speedcubing is build. To me 4/5/multi BLD is exactly the same as 4x4 OH and 5x5 FMC would be: a side event of a side event. Or: a variant of a variant. Have a look at the chart in the attachment to see what I mean with this. We don't hold any other side events of side events except for BLD.
> View attachment 4244



I couldn't get the attachment, but I get the picture.



> The problem I have with this is that especially multi-BLD, but also 4x4BLD and 5x5BLD barely have anything to do with speedcubing anymore. It is for the biggest part, just a memory sport. All other events we have don't require memorizing states of cubes, but are just 'fast-puzzling'. Why are we doing memory sports at a speedcubing competition? Don't misunderstand me, I think it is HIGHLY impressive to memorize 20 cubes BLD in an hour, but it does not have much to do with cubing anymore. If you can indeed memorize and solve 20 cubes in an hour, alternatively you could really try to make a career in memory sports!



To address what you said about how BLD events have begun to become merely memory sports, not speedcubing events, I would heartily disagree. The memory aspect, while it is (I would imagine) huge in the big cube BLD events, does not overshadow the speed aspect. It, after all, is still timed, so you still have to solve quickly in order to get NR, CR, WR. *There is not much that BLD events take away from the idea of quick-solving.*

Also, what I said at the beginning of this post goes for what you said, too. Variations of variations, as long as they are reasonable, are fine with me.



> *2.* Now the fact itself that we have a variant of a variant is not very good, but now think about it: *we have 3 of them* (not including 3x3 BLD). Why 3? It's not like we just have 4x4 OH, but also have 5x5 OH and let's say megaminx OH as well. This doesn't make much sense to me.



What I said earlier goes for this. Why is this idea so ludicrous? They're all reasonable events.

I feel like this is an instance where you just say a point and it seems reasonable that the point should stand for itself. But I don't really get the reason behind it, so I'm just going to ignore this one.



> *3.* Also: *the events are too much the same* so they don't add anything to the skills that are required. Almost everyone who is good at 5x5 BLD is also good at 4x4 BLD, and the same goes for multi BLD. Yes BLD does add something to speedcubing, but why have 3 variants of this variant, which are not even much different? The memo technique you can use for all 3 events is just the same. The difference between 4x4 BLD and 5x5 BLD is for the biggest part just the amount of information you have to memorize.
> Now yes, you could also argue 7x7 doesn't add anything either. On this I would partly agree. Yes 7x7 and 6x6 and 5x5 are very much the same, to be honest I wouldn't be bothered at all if 7x7 was removed as well. The difference though, is that 7x7 is just a variant of a 3x3 and not a variant of a variant (because that would be 7x7 FMC or OH for example).



As I said earlier, a variant of a variant, as long as it is within reason, *is fine.* Your point about how the events are very similar is valid, but then we would have to apply that to the standard cube events, so your point can't work here. And as I already said, there is not much of a difference when you compare the issue of the similarities of 5x5 through 7x7 and the issue of the similarities of 4/5/Multi BLD, since variants of variations are fine to me. 



> *Other reasons:*
> - the events take up a lot of time and complicate time-schedules heavily, especially when all 3 events are held. Mostly you can do your attempts whenever you want throughout the whole weekend, but this still requires a lot of organizing hassle. You have to find a judge, you have to talk to the organizer about the fact that you might have to change your group for other events. If you decide to NOT hold the events on the side, you are using up so much time on the main stage that it steals unreasonably much time of more popular events.



First: Who wouldn't have the events on the side? That's just selfish. They should be forced to do them on the side; if they want their friends to watch, make them come to the side room. 

Besides that, I guess the time issue is kind of iffy here… So I will say that if a large majority says that they don't want to have 4/5/Multi anymore, considering that plus the time issues, I wouldn't object to having them removed. This is the only point where I will cave, though.



> - the events are not very popular: now I don't have access to the database, but from experience I would say only a handfull of people actually compete in some of the 3 events (not to mention all 3 events) when they are held. It happens a lot that for example nobody even succeeds on a 5x5 BLD and the podium is empty...
> 
> - the events are too hard: this especially goes for 5x5 BLD. 3x3 is already quite hard, 4x4 is managable, but 5x5 is really difficult for some people.



I addressed popularity earlier. As for difficulty, this point will have to be put together with unpopularity to be valid.



> In short: 3 big BLD events are too much. Ideally I would like to see all of them go, but I understand a significant amount of people would not be happy with that. I think it's very reasonable and agreeable that at least one of these events would be removed. For those people who have fun at memorizing large quantities of information there would still be other events left in which they can use their skill. Now to which event should go: I don't really care much. Ideally Multi-BLD because that event requires the most memorizing and least amount of creativity in the way you solve it, with 5x5BLD you at least have 2 new types of pieces you have to learn how to solve, whereas multi-BLD is exactly 3x3 BLD times x.



I will not be one to decide which one will go. I don't really feel that any of them absolutely need to go at this moment. If the community decides that one of them has to go, I guess multi-BLD would probably be the one, for the reasons that you said, I guess.



> I am interested in the opinion of the rest of the community and look forward to reading your answers. If you want to argue pro or con, please use logical reasoning and explain why you agree or disagree with my reasons, or your own well-elaborated reasons and don't start throwing in comments like: "we have to keep all events, because I think it is impressive" or "we should get rid of all events, because people who memorize that much info scare me" or "we should not remove 4x4 BLD, because I have the NR".




I hope I satisfied that here 

EDIT: People have brought up ways that you can take care of the time issue (time caps, lunchtime, etc.), so unless something is brought up which challenges those solutions, I think that the time issue shouldn't be that big of a problem.

EDIT:


sneze2r said:


> ]
> The ranking is dominated by Maskow. Now no one can reach WR except him, so this event is pointless
> Multiblind is stupid



Uh…*Who says that no one can beat him? Also, who says that an event absolutely has to be about the WR? Why can't it be a challenge to do well for, say, NR or CR? Or the best among your group of friends at a competition? There's no reason something has to just be for WR. Also, thanks so much for telling me about all of the ways that Multiblind is a stupid event. Look at all of those list items.

Also, I realize that this post was huge. Sorry. :|


----------



## Tim Wong (Jul 7, 2014)

1. I would have to disagree with your argument that "4/5/multi BLD is exactly the same as 4x4 OH and 5x5 FMC". Like Ollie said, solving 4BLD and 5BLD are quite quite different than 3BLD. BigBLD requires you to be more accurate in blindsolving and it also requires you to solve a different set of pieces (centers). For something like 4x4 OH, it would only require you to practice the event over and over again.

2. I believe that all the BLD events (3/4/5/MBLD) are actually quite different. As someone who takes blindsolving seriously, I approach them with a different mentality. 3BLD is like a 100 meter dash. The type of memory involved in 3BLD is short term (yolo) memory. For bigBLD and MBLD, I use more of a medium range and long term memory. I'm pretty sure most if not all world class blindsolvers would agree with me on this point. You also suggested that we should just compete in memory competitions instead. That is a valid point, but I do not see any deliberate reason to remove the events.

3. You say that these events are too much the same (4BLD people are good at 5BLD too, etc.), and yes this can also be applied to 6x6 and 7x7 which you already mentioned. Your reasoning is because this is a variant of a variant. Yes that is true, but why should we remove it because it's "too far from the original 3x3 concept"?. I believe that these events are relevant enough to speedcubing that they should remain.


Your other reasons:

"the events take up a lot of time and complicate time-schedules heavily, especially when all 3 events are held."

This is usually due to poor organization/time management/over ambitious event list in local competitions. I don't think this is a problem in big competitions such as nationals and worlds.


"the events are not very popular"

Yes, that may be true. But why remove an event just because it's not popular? Also, the database only shows all the people who have obtained official successes.


"In short: 3 big BLD events are too much. Ideally I would like to see all of them go, but I understand a significant amount of people would not be happy with that. I think it's very reasonable and agreeable that at least one of these events would be removed. For those people who have fun at memorizing large quantities of information there would still be other events left in which they can use their skill. Now to which event should go: I don't really care much. Ideally Multi-BLD because that event requires the most memorizing and least amount of creativity in the way you solve it, with 5x5BLD you at least have 2 new types of pieces you have to learn how to solve, whereas multi-BLD is exactly 3x3 BLD times x."

When you say "which event should go: I don't really care much", no offense, but it seems to me that you don't understand or value the differences in bigBLD/MBLD to care which ones stay and which ones go. You also say that multi-BLD is exactly 3x3 BLD times x. I strongly disagree with that. As someone who takes MBLD seriously, it is not as simple as that. There is a lot of skill and technique in memorizing that many cubes, it is not as blunt as just memorizing x number of cubes and then solving x number of cubes. Every cube is approached differently. If I were to do a 25 MBLD cube attempt, I would use long term memory for the first 12, mid-range memory for the next 8, and short-term for the last 5. There are also other techniques in memo/review such as roman rooms/journey/etc that play a big part in the success.


----------



## tseitsei (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> *1.* The big BLD events *stand too far away from the original "solve a Rubik's cube" concept* on which all of speedcubing is build. To me 4/5/multi BLD is exactly the same as 4x4 OH and 5x5 FMC would be: a side event of a side event. Or: a variant of a variant. Have a look at the chart in the attachment to see what I mean with this. We don't hold any other side events of side events except for BLD.
> View attachment 4244



Well, Pyraminx, Megaminx and clock aren't even cubes anymore so they are even further away from the "original concept" than BLD solving IMO



> The problem I have with this is that especially multi-BLD, but also 4x4BLD and 5x5BLD barely have anything to do with speedcubing anymore. It is for the biggest part, just a memory sport. All other events we have don't require memorizing states of cubes, but are just 'fast-puzzling'. Why are we doing memory sports at a speedcubing competition? Don't misunderstand me, I think it is HIGHLY impressive to memorize 20 cubes BLD in an hour, but it does not have much to do with cubing anymore. If you can indeed memorize and solve 20 cubes in an hour, alternatively you could really try to make a career in memory sports!



At top level 4BLD and 5BLD need speedcubing skills AND memorizing skills. Memorizing is only ~50% of total solve time so the other half is speedcubing skills.

Also do you think we should remove FMC as well because that doesn't need any SPEED to be fast so it isn't really SPEEDcubing.



> *2.* Now the fact itself that we have a variant of a variant is not very good, but now think about it: *we have 3 of them* (not including 3x3 BLD). Why 3? It's not like we just have 4x4 OH, but also have 5x5 OH and let's say megaminx OH as well. This doesn't make much sense to me.



In OH you can just use exactly the same method you would normally use so it doesn't really make sense to have many variants of that, but in BLD you need to learn a completely new method to solve the cube and in 3x3 you don't have center pieces to solve which is why we need at least 4bld or 5bld. And another thing is that ANYONE who is able to solve 4x4 OH will be able to solve 5x5,6x6 and 7x7 OH, but in bld if you can solve 4x4 that doesn't mean you can automatically solve 5x5.



> *3.* Also: *the events are too much the same* so they don't add anything to the skills that are required. Almost everyone who is good at 5x5 BLD is also good at 4x4 BLD, and the same goes for multi BLD. Yes BLD does add something to speedcubing, but why have 3 variants of this variant, which are not even much different? The memo technique you can use for all 3 events is just the same. The difference between 4x4 BLD and 5x5 BLD is for the biggest part just the amount of information you have to memorize.


That is true but why do we need 5x5 and 6x6 and 7x7 then? Or feet and OH. You just use the same method to solve anyway so nothing new is added.


> Now yes, you could also argue 7x7 doesn't add anything either. On this I would partly agree. Yes 7x7 and 6x6 and 5x5 are very much the same, to be honest I wouldn't be bothered at all if 7x7 was removed as well. The difference though, is that 7x7 is just a variant of a 3x3 and not a variant of a variant (because that would be 7x7 FMC or OH for example).


This part was already answered before in this post.



> - the events take up a lot of time and complicate time-schedules heavily, especially when all 3 events are held. Mostly you can do your attempts whenever you want throughout the whole weekend, but this still requires a lot of organizing hassle. You have to find a judge, you have to talk to the organizer about the fact that you might have to change your group for other events. If you decide to NOT hold the events on the side, you are using up so much time on the main stage that it steals unreasonably much time of more popular events.


Big cubes take a lot of time too so we should just remove them too. Yes this is a problem, but there is an easy fix: TIME LIMITS... 



> - the events are not very popular: now I don't have access to the database, but from experience I would say only a handfull of people actually compete in some of the 3 events (not to mention all 3 events) when they are held. It happens a lot that for example nobody even succeeds on a 5x5 BLD and the podium is empty...


That's not so much because BLD isn't popular, but because BigBLD is not easy to learn. And at least I (and I would think many others) enjoy the challenge these events bring to the table. I mean if anyone practices for a week they can solve 5x5 normally but I doubt they could learn to solve it BLD in a week. There is an awesome sense of accomplishment every time you raise your blindfold and see a solved cube.



> - the events are too hard: this especially goes for 5x5 BLD. 3x3 is already quite hard, 4x4 is managable, but 5x5 is really difficult for some people.


It is good that we have "easy" events (2x2, pyra, 3x3...) for younger/newer solvers but I think we also need something that challenges more experienced solvers too. And these events do just that. Why should everything be easy?



Spoiler



not sure if this is a serious thread or just a parody/troll thread of the "should we remove feet" -thread


----------



## Reinier Schippers (Jul 7, 2014)

I think 5x5 BLD should be removed and maybe multiblind aswell, or at least limit the time to half an hour. Personally I only know how to solve a 3x3 blind and it gives you an other way to solve the cube. Therefore i think blind is constructive to the speedcubing world. Ofcourse, no one uses blind methods in the normal events (only haiyan comes to my mind). 4x4 BLD gives a bit more commutators knowledge etcera, so that can stay on for me aswell. 5x5 BLD is just a repeat of 4x4 Blind and most of the time these events are held in a small room next to the normal compete area. Therefore spectators who are not cubers (or media) won't take a notice of these events. 

As far for MultiBLD, sometimes my father comes to a competition with me on a saturday and most of the time MultiBLD is scheduled in the morning. He finds MultiBLD the most impressive event of all. It takes an hour though, which in my mind, is too much! If the time limit would be set at like half an hour or even a quarter it would be fine by me.


----------



## Pokrywek (Jul 7, 2014)

I can't see a point of removing any event. If You don't want to provide any event just don't include it in schedule. Simple as that.
There are many people in the world who are interested in this events and if the organiser wish he should have a *possibility* not duty to provide this kinds of events.


----------



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

Thank you all for your extensive answers. I think it's really nice that we can have a serious discussion with good reasoning instead of the general "I don't like it, because it's stupid" arguments...

Some interesting things I'd like to answer to (I can't answer everything )

To Ollie:
Firstly I am glad you agree with me on Multi BLD. With that I think we are already on the same page. Maybe this is also a good opportunity to explain my personal stands here. Personally I don't like any of the bigger BLD events, but on the other hand I can see that not all of them will go and it might not be necessary either. 
I agree 4x4 BLD does add something to 3x3 BLD, though not that much. I think 5x5 BLD only adds marginally to 4x4 BLD (there is barely something different other than midges and edge-centers). I think Multi-BLD has absolutely nothing to add if 5x5 BLD is also an event. Nice that we also agree on 7x7 and 6x6. 

Slinky:
I like the way you are thinking. It is very structured and logical. Your main question: "is it within reason" is a bit too vague for me personally. To me the criteria for a side event are the following:
- should have something to do with speedcubing. That means it has to be related to the Rubik's cube and in solving it.
- should be popular
- should be easy to held at competitions (not take up too much time, easy to organize etc.)
- should provide an extra dimension in skill or way of solving

I really don't understand how you could call multi-BLD still speedcubing and not memory sport btw. For 4x4 this may apply, for 5x5 in lesser amount as well, but multi... absolutely not. Like I said: 7x7 would definitely be a candidate as well.
Selfish is definitely the wrong way to describe not organizing those events. They do require a significant amount of extra time and effort from the organizer and require a seperate room which might not be available at the venue.

Tim:
Like I said before: I agree that in itself 4 and 5 BLD add something to 3 BLD (though not very much). But I really don't see how 4BLD adds to 5BLD or how 5BLD adds to 4BLD. Multi-BLD is even worse. 

If an event is unpopular, that means not many people would compete at it in comp (which is the case). This just takes time away from other events, or requires an unreasonable big amount of time for organizers. Of course this can be overcome, but it definitely is something to think about.

About your last comment: I might sound a bit blunt here, but I do know what I am talking about, competed in all events and am very well aware of the techniques used in the events. Still I have yet to see a good reason why 4 AND 5 AND Multi should all be kept. By saying Multi is 3BLD times x I don't mean that it's as easy, but that it doesn't add much to the problem solving you have to do compared to any of the other events. For example: in 5BLD you also have to memorize more information and be accurate, but you at least have to deal with new pieces.

Tseitsei:
Pyraminx and Megaminx are just variants of the normal cube. Take a look at my scheme. I agree clock is a different thing.
I am sorry, but the rest of your reasoning is kind of bad (some things I have already discussed those issues in my original post).
Please remember that I am not saying all events should be removed, but that 3 of them are just too many.


----------



## kinch2002 (Jul 7, 2014)

I am not enjoying writing this post. My mind is torn. It seems to weird to speak against events that I held such a different opinion on before. When I stopped competing in these bld events, this also coincided with my growing involvement on the organisation side of things. That has no doubt contributed to my change of opinion.

Believe me when I say this: *As an organiser and delegate, one of my biggest wishes, if not the biggest, is that 5bld and Multibld were not official events.*

My opinion is remove 5bld and Multi. Keep 4bld

I hate to disappoint people, especially in the UK where we have a culture of holding most if not all events and have many all-rounders and many big-blders. That's the reason we still hold these events - no because I want to hold them, but because I don't want to make people sad and don't want to receive a torrent of complaints about not holding them.

Now for the explicit reasons:

*They are long events*
Yes, I know FM takes as long, but that doesn't mean this can't be used a reason
*They have a terrible success rate*
They give off the feeling that we are wasting everyone's time, especially the judges'. I can get the statistics later if I need to, but I guess 5bld is <20% and multi probably 50%ish.
*5bld adds about 5% on top of what 4bld already has*
Yes, my memorisation techniques were a little different once I fine-tuned them, but essentially it's the same, with longer concentration periods. I mean, when I learnt 4bld I got a 5bld success at my first attempt the next day. That's not really a Mt. Everest imo. It's just a chance to show how good your concentration is.
*Multi adds 0% on top of what 3bld already has*
In terms of speedcubing that is, not memorisation. The best 3blders should all have a very high success rate anyway, so I don't think the accuracy statement has much going for it.

Yes people will complain, and I will understand why because I would have gone crazy if this had been done a few years ago. But I hope that they can see the rationale behind it. I also hate seeing events removed because it makes the database messy 

As a last word, I'm not that bothered if they stay. We won't be holding them at every competition, and probably will impose stricter time limits on bigbld.


----------



## ryanj92 (Jul 7, 2014)

'2. Now the fact itself that we have a variant of a variant is not very good, but now think about it: we have 3 of them (not including 3x3 BLD). Why 3? It's not like we just have 4x4 OH, but also have 5x5 OH and let's say megaminx OH as well. This doesn't make much sense to me.'

I would argue that these cases are not equivalent. 4OH and 5OH add only a slight difficulty in dexterity - anyone who can solve these cubes two handed, and can solve a 3x3 one handed, can given enough time solve these cubes one handed using exactly the same method. This does not hold true for 4 and 5 BLD, so I think that these events are justified as they each require new solving techniques.
I cannot say the same about multi, hence me picking that one as the most suitable candidate for removal. If you can solve one cube blind, then you can solve many using the same method. This is the only reason that I have attempted multi in comp 

(Also, I presume grzegorz' arguments are not serious given who he is, just saying)


----------



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> My opinion is remove 5bld and Multi. Keep 4bld



Thanks for your honest answer. I think 5bld would maybe be a better choice of the 3 to not remove, because it offers the most difference to 3BLD while at the same time requiring the bulk-info you have to memorize at multi. It would however be a bit odd to have this gap between 3bld and 5bld and 5bld is slower and more difficult than 4bld...


----------



## kinch2002 (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> Thanks for your honest answer. I think 5bld would maybe be a better choice of the 3 to not remove, because it offers the most difference to 3BLD while at the same time requiring the bulk-info you have to memorize at multi. It would however be a bit odd to have this gap between 3bld and 5bld and 5bld is slower and more difficult than 4bld...


You speak exactly what my thoughts were about that


----------



## Jimmy Liu (Jul 7, 2014)

I think 4bld and 5bld could be keep only under the circumstances that we add 4OH,4FT,4FMC and 5OH,5FT,5FMC, because 4bld and 5bld are just the side event of 3bld.


----------



## Renslay (Jul 7, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> I am not enjoying writing this post. My mind is torn. It seems to weird to speak against events that I held such a different opinion on before. When I stopped competing in these bld events, this also coincided with my growing involvement on the organisation side of things. That has no doubt contributed to my change of opinion.
> 
> Believe me when I say this: *As an organiser and delegate, one of my biggest wishes, if not the biggest, is that 5bld and Multibld were not official events.*
> 
> ...



Completely agree.


----------



## DGCubes (Jul 7, 2014)

I only do 3BLD, but I don't see why we need to remove any events. If anything, I think the WCA should be expanding itself to more cubes *cough* 3x3x5 *cough*. Many people do really like 4BLD and 5BLD, and personally I love watching videos of good Multiblinders.


----------



## suushiemaniac (Jul 7, 2014)

I reject the idea of removing certain events from the WCA, simply because everyone has got his/her own personal preferences.
Although most of the arguments for the removal I've read so far in this thread are absolutely reasonable, they don't really provide the overall necessity of removing an event.
Kicking an event out of the WCA should not happen based on someone's ideas, but rather should only be thought about if there is a major or severe issue about organizing competitons or structuring the WCA caused by that event.

In this particular case, hosting 4BLD, 5BLD and 3Multi worked well for years, so I don't see why we should suddenly remove them. Whoever says they're not popular enough: Please define "popularity" clearly by setting a limit to determine whether something is popular or not. SPOILER: This is impossible. Popularity is no objective term, I could even declare anything but 3x3 unpopular, so why not remove all the other NxNxNs?

The point I'm trying to get is: "Hey, there will be new regulations!" is not equal to "Hey, let's overthrow an entire section of the WCA competiton concept!" Blindfolded solving always has, and probably always will be an important part of cubing competitons. There might be only few people participating, but that doesn't lower it's popularity, nor is any competition organizer forced to offer any event with the three magic letter "B", "L" and "D" during his/her competition. And if he/she really is so much into bigBLD, he/she will probably be willing to renounce any of the other events.
So in my opinion, before wanting to remove an event, one should think about the actual *need* to remove it.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 7, 2014)

I think all 3 events should stay.

1) I don't agree with the sentiment that all events run at a cubing tournament should be closely tied to an inspect+solve quickly format (which is how I define "speedcubing").

2) I like the idea of having Mt. Everest style events like 5x5BLD and multiBLD. People run marathons because for a lot of people they are very difficult. I like multi and bigBLD because they are difficult.

3) I have organized 4BLD and 5BLD at events before and it is more difficult to organize than other events, but in my opinion that's what you sign up for when you choose to be an organizer.

*In my opinion,* if we got rid of some of the big cube BLD events then cubing tournaments would be more about inspect+solve quickly format events. I think that would detract from the quality of speedcubing tournaments.

4) My understanding is that you are saying that having three BLD events beyond regular 3BLD is us having too many variations on 3BLD (which is itself a variation on 3x3 speedsolving). I personally view it as we have 18 events, only 4 of which are blind-solving style events. To remove 1 or 2 of these events makes me think that out of 16-17 events only 2 or 3 would be blindfold format events. In my opinion that's terrible, it means nearly all events are the inspect+solve quickly format (and to reiterate: I don't agree that *speed*cubing means as many events as possible should be of this format).

Final thoughts:
In your opinion Erik, what is a good way for supporters of these big cube events to have a good discussion with those who want them removed? I think one issue of these discussions is that I, and maybe some others like me, don't share your view that a speedcubing tournament should be mostly about speedcubing events (which to me means events that are of the inspect+solve quickly format)

To me, *speed*cubing refers to the fact that you are trying to solve a puzzle as quickly as possible under the circumstances agreed upon for that event, while timing yourself. By this definition, every BLD event involves *speed*cubing.


----------



## CyanSandwich (Jul 7, 2014)

If multi was removed I would be pretty heartbroken 

Largely personal reasons, but I enjoy it, and it's the only event I have a chance of ranking highly at.

It's no different to 3BLD in terms of puzzle solving, but it tests endurance, speed and accuracy.

I don't see the need to remove any events at all. But if one BLD event had to be removed I would choose 5BLD, since it's pretty similar to 4BLD.
I really wouldn't want any of them gone though.


----------



## antoineccantin (Jul 7, 2014)

I personally like all of the BLD events because they add something new and different to cubing and competitions. Also, I don't think removing them would do any good. If you think they're too much of a hassle to organize, don't hold these events at the competitions you organize!

As for the argument that they're too similar, 4BLD and 5BLD have a lot in common, yes. The level of difficulty is however quite different. Multi BLD though, is quite different, as you can choose your own skill level!


----------



## EMI (Jul 7, 2014)

I think all three should stay, simply because you don't have to compete in them, and you don't have to offer them at your own competition either (except for championships). IMO events shouldn't be removed just because most people don't do them.
FMC has much less to do with speedsolving, still we do it in competitons. Why? Because it would be stupid to have a second WCA just doing FMC competitions, you can't do only FMC for one whole weekend. Same goes for BLD.
Again, I have absolutely no problem with competitions that only offer a few events, but more rounds.
In fact, 4bld and 5bld are often offered during other events, so it doesn't really affect the schedule anyway.


----------



## Ollie (Jul 7, 2014)

Compromise - replace 5BLD with an official 4BLD Mo3 WR?


----------



## kinch2002 (Jul 7, 2014)

EMI said:


> In fact, 4bld and 5bld are often offered during other events, so it doesn't really affect the schedule anyway.


Not sure how you manage to not let it affect the schedule, but when we've done this, it got so annoying at times that I'm only happy with having them scheduled in their own slot now.
Example conversation when people are doing big bld at random times:
"We need more scramblers and judges. Where is Person A?"
"Oh, he's doing 5bld"
"What about person B?"
"He's judging the 5bld"
"What about person C?"
"He's filming the 5bld"


----------



## Erik (Jul 7, 2014)

cmhardw said:


> I think all 3 events should stay.
> 
> 1) I don't agree with the sentiment that all events run at a cubing tournament should be closely tied to an inspect+solve quickly format (which is how I define "speedcubing").
> 
> ...



1) What do you exactly mean with the inspect+solve format? Besides FMC and BLD everything is inspecting and solving a cube, it's the logical core of speedcubing. However, I'd love to see more variants than just these to be honest though I can't think of any at the moment besides mosaic building. Not entirely sure how this relates to the issue though. We don't FMC other puzzles either.
2) I agree, a bit of a challenge is not that bad, but do we really need 3 of those events though?
3) It does prevent some people from organizing those events though, I think the investment/gain ration is kinda bad for it (in this case time+stress/happy few competitors)
4) Yes this depends on how you view the event-organisation and the criteria you have for other events. That's why I included the graph on how I think the events are build up. Like I said before, I also think 7x7 does not add much and wouldn't be sad at all if it got removed.

Sure, you can call multi or 5BLD speedcubing as well. I'd rather say especially multi-BLD is more of a memory sport though. On the other hand you can call many other things speedcubing as well which we don't do either, when following your definition. 

I think by only asking to remove one of the events I am already being quite considerate. My question to you is also: why 3? What does multi-BLD add to speedcubing, that 5BLD doesn't offer? And also: besides that it would be one event less, which set of skills are no longer demanded if we removed multi for example? Are there ways to improve the other events if we agree to remove one of them, or save time or something?

Btw. some other issue came to my mind: it happens a lot that you can just do big BLD all day long. Now I know we all trust each other, but it is sometimes possible that competitor A does a WR on the first solve, which is filmed and put up on the internet and person B can still do the same scramble the next day, or at the end of the day. This does not seem very desirable... Yes you can organize it within a smaller time range, but then the burden on the organization grows again.


----------



## Gordon (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> 1) What do you exactly mean with the inspect+solve format? Besides FMC and BLD everything is inspecting and solving a cube, it's the logical core of speedcubing. However, I'd love to see more variants than just these to be honest though I can't think of any at the moment besides mosaic building.
> [...]



At the Sébra Open 2014 (https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=SebraOpen2014) there will be a 'Super Solve' event, where the competitors have time to study a solution for a public scramble and then have one attempt to solve it.
It doesn't matter if they just solve it as usual or just apply the reverse scramble.

I think this is a nice idea and I would like to see it more often.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> 1) What do you exactly mean with the inspect+solve format?



I mean events that follow Article A, specifically this portion:


Spoiler



Inspection:
A3a) The competitor may inspect the puzzle at the beginning of each attempt.
A3a1) The competitor is allotted a maximum of 15 seconds to inspect the puzzle and start the solve.
A3b) The judge prepares the timer by turning it on and resetting if necessary. Separately, the judge also prepares a stopwatch for timing inspection.
A3b1) When the judge believes the competitor is ready, he asks "READY?". The competitor must be ready to start the attempt within one minute of being called, else he forfeits his attempt (DNS), at the discretion of the judge.
A3b2) The competitor begins the attempt by confirming his readiness, and the judge uncovers the puzzle and begins timing the inspection.
A3c) The competitor may pick up the puzzle during inspection.
A3c1) The competitor must not apply moves during inspection. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
A3c2) If the parts of the puzzle are not fully aligned, then the competitor may align the faces, as long as misalignments stay within the limits of Regulation 10f.
A3c3) The competitor may reset the timer before he starts the solve.
A3d) At the end of the inspection, the competitor places the puzzle on the mat, in any orientation.
A3d1) The puzzle must not rest on the timer. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A3d2) When 8 seconds of inspection have elapsed, the judge calls "8 SECONDS".
A3d3) When 12 seconds of inspection have elapsed, the judge calls "12 SECONDS".

A4) Starting the solve:
A4b) The competitor places his hands on the elevated sensor unit of the timer. His fingers must be touching the sensors with palms down. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A4b1) The competitor must have no physical contact with the puzzle between the inspection period and the beginning of the solve. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A4d) If a Stackmat timer is in use, the competitor starts the solve by confirming that the timer light is green and then removing his hands from the timer (thus starting the timer).
A4d1) The competitor must start the solve within 15 seconds of the beginning of the inspection. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A4d2) The competitor must start the solve within 17 seconds of the beginning of the inspection. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
A4d3) If a stopwatch is in use, the judge starts the stopwatch as soon as the competitor starts the solve.
A4e) Time penalties for starting the solve are cumulative.
A5) During the solve:
A5a) While inspecting or solving the puzzle, the competitor must not communicate with anyone other than the judge. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
A5b) While inspecting or solving the puzzle, the competitor must not receive assistance from anyone or any object other than the surface (also see Regulation 2i). Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).

A6) Stopping the solve:
A6a) The competitor stops the solve by releasing the puzzle and then stopping the timer. If a stopwatch is in use, the judge stops the stopwatch as soon as the competitor does this.
A6a1) When using a stopwatch as the only timer, the competitor ends the solve by releasing the puzzle and notifying the judge that he has stopped the solve. The judge stops the stopwatch as soon as the competitor does this.
A6a2) When using a stopwatch as the only timer, the competitor's default notification signal consists of releasing the puzzle(s) in his hand and placing his hands on the surface, with palms down. The competitor and the judge may agree on another appropriate notification before the beginning of the attempt.
A6b) The competitor is responsible for stopping the Stackmat timer correctly.
A6b1) If the timer stops before the end of the solve and the timer shows a time strictly below 0.06 seconds, then the attempt is replaced by an extra attempt. A competitor forfeits his right to the additional attempt if the WCA Delegate determines that the timer was stopped deliberately.
A6b2) If the timer stops before the end of the solve and displays a time of 0.06 seconds or higher, then the attempt is disqualified (DNF). Exception: if the competitor can demonstrate that the timer malfunctioned, he may receive an extra attempt, at the WCA Delegate's discretion.
A6c) The competitor must fully release the puzzle before stopping the solve. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A6d) The competitor must stop the timer using both hands, placed flat on the sensors with palms down. Penalty: time penalty (+2 seconds).
A6e) The competitor must not touch or move the puzzle until the judge has inspected the puzzle. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF). Exception: If no moves have been applied, a time penalty (+2 seconds) may be assigned instead, at the discretion of the judge.
A6f) The competitor must not reset the timer until the judge has recorded the result on the score sheet. Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF), at the discretion of the judge.
A6g) The judge determines whether the puzzle is solved. He must not make moves or align faces when examining the puzzle.
A6h) In case of a dispute, moves or alignments must not be applied to the puzzle before the dispute is resolved.
A6i) Time penalties for stopping the solve are cumulative.





Erik said:


> 2) I agree, a bit of a challenge is not that bad, but do we really need 3 of those events though?



For those of us who like BLD, we would say that we *only* have 3 events if we want variety beyond regular 3x3x3BLD.

Let me try to phrase it the other way around: 
"We have 13 speedsolving events (see the above spoiler). Do we really need 13 events of essentially the same format? Surely one of them can go?"

You are an all-rounder, and are really famous for that. You have 13 different speedsolve events to pick from (plus BLD ones that you like, if any, and FMC). I am a BLD solver, I have 4 events that I really like from which to choose (plus FMC and 3x3 speedsolve). Removal of a speedcubing event is removing about 7% of the events you really enjoy competing in (1/13). Removing a BLD event is removing 25% of the events I really like to compete in (1/4). Obviously I will interpret your "let's remove a BLD" event differently than you will.

I don't speak for the community as a whole, but when you ask _me specifically_ that quesiton, then this is how I respond.



Erik said:


> 3) It does prevent some people from organizing those events though, I think the investment/gain ration is kinda bad for it (in this case time+stress/happy few competitors)



If the investment/gain ratio is poor for holding one of those events, then the organizer can choose not to hold it. I don't see anything wrong with a competition that holds 15 events (all of the events, minus 4x4x4BLD, 5x5x5BLD, and multiBLD). That's the organizer's choice. If competitors in those events are upset by this, then they can organize a smaller tournament that includes those events, as well as some speedsolve events to get enough people interested to hold a tournament.



Erik said:


> 4) Yes this depends on how you view the event-organisation and the criteria you have for other events. That's why I included the graph on how I think the events are build up. Like I said before, I also think 7x7 does not add much and wouldn't be sad at all if it got removed.



Your graph doesn't load for me (Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator). I understand the idea that by categorizing the events a certain way that you view 7x7x7 as less necessary than 3x3x3, just as 5x5x5BLD is less necessary than 3x3x3BLD. Still, getting rid of 7x7x7 is removing 1/13 of the speedsolve events, while removing 5x5x5BLD is removing 1/4 of the blindfold events. The relative weight of each change is not the same.



Erik said:


> Sure, you can call multi or 5BLD speedcubing as well. I'd rather say especially multi-BLD is more of a memory sport though. On the other hand you can call many other things speedcubing as well which we don't do either, when following your definition.
> 
> I think by only asking to remove one of the events I am already being quite considerate. My question to you is also: why 3? What does multi-BLD add to speedcubing, that 5BLD doesn't offer? And also: besides that it would be one event less, which set of skills are no longer demanded if we removed multi for example? Are there ways to improve the other events if we agree to remove one of them, or save time or something?



MultiBLD adds another event to compete in. At large tournaments I usually only compete in 6 events (3x3x3, FMC, 3x3x3BLD, 4x4x4BLD, 5x5x5BLD, MultiBLD). These are the events I like doing. My day is already relatively short, as this is only 1/3 of the events offered at a large tournament. If you remove one of them, then that's one fewer event to compete in.

If you don't care to compete in the big BLD events, then why do you care that people like me compete in it?

Let me ask another way: How does it affect you to have people like me compete in one fewer event, an event that you don't care to compete in anyway? My day becomes one event shorter, but I doubt you would notice the difference on the day you compete. If you like to organize events, and are tired of organizing the harder events (which is a legitimate concern, since you are the organizer) then organize a 15 event competition with none of those larger BLD events.



Erik said:


> Btw. some other issue came to my mind: it happens a lot that you can just do big BLD all day long. Now I know we all trust each other, but it is sometimes possible that competitor A does a WR on the first solve, which is filmed and put up on the internet and person B can still do the same scramble the next day, or at the end of the day. This does not seem very desirable... Yes you can organize it within a smaller time range, but then the burden on the organization grows again.



I've not heard of the "all day" rule. In the US and at Worlds you have a maximum of 3 hours to do all of your attempts in either 4x4x4BLD or 5x5x5 BLD. If some competitions allow an "all day" time limit, or even a 2 day time limit, then I would certainly be in favor of at a minimum reducing that to 3 hours.

We have this same issue in 3x3x3BLD by the way (a world record solve video could be placed on the internet before others have done that solve). I treat that as a separate issue inherent to BLD events in general, and not just the bigger cubes BLD.

----------------

Erik, does it not strike you as odd that you and I are again having this same debate about big cube BLD on speedsolving.com? I think the first time was in either 2007 or early 2008. Is there a better venue for us to have our opinions voiced than on speedsolving.com?

Incidentally, this same idea goes for those who start the "remove 3x3x3 with feet" threads, which have popped up nearly every year for a few years now.


----------



## goodatthis (Jul 7, 2014)

Honestly I think all events should stay for a couple of big reasons:

1. They are arguably the toughest events out there, and take tons of practice, dedication, skill, and mental capacity to do. Anyone who holds a record, let alone gets a success, at any of them (well Multi is a bit different but same concept) is usually well respected throughout the cubing community. To strip them of their hard earned successes or records would be painful.

2. You could easily have 4x4 OH, but there really isn't any challenge in that. It is a side event of a side event, but anyone could do it. Not anyone could do 4/5/Multi, that's why only a handful of people have only gotten a success in 4/5bld. The reason why they have so much appeal is because they are the most difficult events to succeed at, just mentioning 4 or 5bld is like mentioning some sort of feared mythical creature. 

3. If you could ask every WCA competitor what their least favorite event is, most would probably say feet, or clock. Just a simple observation, but generally, 4/5/Multi is somewhat well liked and respected. Although I don't think feet should be removed, those threads are more generally supported than these ones.



Erik said:


> So you are saying 5x5 is more impressive than 4x4 BLD? I agree on that as well  why would we still need 4x4 BLD then?



Doing a Rubik's cube with one hand is more impressive than two, then why have 2 handed solving? Or if doing a 7x7 is more impressive than a 6x6, why have 6x6? Or if 6 and 7 are more impressive than other cubic puzzles, how about we keep everything and scratch 5x5? Or if 5BLD is more impressive than any other event, why hold them? Why not just have the W5BLDA? In the end, you need some sort of intermediary challenge. That's why most beginning cubers buy a 4x4 after 3x3, and a 5x5 after that.


Also, one more thing, I think that blindfolded cubing is a specialty category of events. Just like how some cubers are just good at the small puzzles (2,3, Pyra, Skewb) and others are good at bigger ones (5, 6, 7), others are good at minxes (Pyra, mega). The same goes for blindfolded events. Blindfolded cubing needs it's Rami Sbahis, Kevin Hays', and Oscar Roth Andersens.


----------



## porkynator (Jul 7, 2014)

Compromise: reduce time limit for MultiBLD to 20 minutes?


----------



## Amress (Jul 7, 2014)

I think that all of the events should stay, but if one event NEEDED to be removed, I would say multi-blind. It adds the least to the event. I do see the difficulty of the event. I am just saying that in COMPARISON to 4/5 BLD, multi-blind is least important.


----------



## AJ Blair (Jul 7, 2014)

porkynator said:


> Compromise: reduce time limit for MultiBLD to 20 minutes?



I don't see why you would reduce the overall time allowed. If you were to do anything, you could reduce the time limit to 5 minutes per cube instead of 10. That seems like a more reasonable compromise.

What I have to say on the speedcubing versus memory sport discussion is that most people I know refer to themselves as a "cuber" first and foremost, not a "speedcuber". It's all about the community, and I know there are people who set their focus on certain subsets of cubing, including BLD. We would be alienating all of them by removing the events that tie them to the cubing community. It's not appealing to some people to due the "speed" based events and they prefer to focus on the memory side of things.

Also, speedcubing involves massive amounts of memory too, even if it is just muscle memory.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Jul 7, 2014)

cmhardw said:


> stuff



I very much agree with you. I'll try to give my opinion below without repeating points which have already been made too much.

I like cubes/dodecs/whatever, am relatively good at BLD events compared to other events, and have little interest in going to the memory sport community. I've never memorised a deck of cards or anything like that. I'd be disappointed to lose one of the few BLD events available.

However, I'm happy to let organisers go with whatever they want to go with, and am grateful when they do decide to include at least one of 4/5/MBLD. While I like to have all BLD available, if a competition, for example, only has 3BLD (such as Edinburgh Open last year), I'm still grateful to have a competition organised and will accept the events which are scheduled. I didn't hassle anyone to add the other BLD events, I just waited until the next comp where the others are held. So long as they are held at least occasionally, with no pressure on organisers, I'm happy, and will happily give up time from my lunch to compete. Strict time limits can be imposed if 4/5/MBLD are held, At Guildford Summer '13 I wasn't fast enough at 5BLD to get all 3 attempts, but that's my problem, not the organiser's.

I have mixed feelings about the idea of reducing time for multi. Part of me thinks it loses some of its stamina difficulty, part of me thinks it will make it easier to run/scramble, require fewer cubes to be brought to competition and make me less tired for other events (including other BLD).


----------



## kcl (Jul 7, 2014)

If you all don't see it, Erik is clearly outlining how stupid it is to remove an event that is distinctly unique. Obviously big BLD will not be removed, nor will Multi. The reaction to that terrible, much like if we removed feet. 

No event is causing real issues, so why do we give a crap about removing events?


----------



## EMI (Jul 7, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> Not sure how you manage to not let it affect the schedule, but when we've done this, it got so annoying at times that I'm only happy with having them scheduled in their own slot now.
> Example conversation when people are doing big bld at random times:
> "We need more scramblers and judges. Where is Person A?"
> "Oh, he's doing 5bld"
> ...



The last competition I've been at, there were maybe 5 persons doing 4BLD or 5BLD (which seems normal to me, except for the very big comps). I personally just solved during breaks.
Theoretically, you are only allowed to do 4bld and 5bld during events you don't compete in (because you should judge the other groups). I think most people don't compete in all events so if they have their attempts during their missing events, I think it doesn't cause a problem. There definitely hasn't been a problem at the mentioned competition.
Of course it's a different story about 5BLD in the UK ^^


----------



## Antonie faz fan (Jul 7, 2014)

I think multi should leave, as Kim said as well: it is just 3x3 but just more of them. In my opinion it also takes allot of time, I personally ( and I am 100%sure I am not the only one) hate to leave a venue at 20:00 and then drive 3 hours to home and get there really late ( of course you could make the argument that in that case I shouldn't even attend the comp but still).


----------



## BaMiao (Jul 7, 2014)

There's a lot of preoccupation with the term "speedcubing" which I think is misplaced. Let me remind everyone that "WCA" is short for "World Cube Association", and not "World speedCubing Association". In fact, the mission statement doesn't contain the word "speed" at all. The WCA regulates competition having to do with Rubik's puzzles and twisty puzzles, with no requirement that any of it has to be called "speedcubing". That term is just a shorthand that we use because it describes _most_ of the official events. Big BLD and multi-BLD can be described as memory sports, but none of the official memory sport competitions hold these events, and there's no reason the WCA can't. I think having a diverse array of events is a good thing for the community.

I also think it is good that we officially recognize feats that are very difficult, despite their low popularity (so long as it can be reasonably accommodated in competition format, of course). I think Maskow's (and other big MBLDers') attempts are some of the most amazing accomplishments that come out of the cubing community. The feet thread is very preoccupied with how the public is impressed with footsolving. Well, the big BLD events are _much_ more impressive to the general public. These are the events that we should be using to get more exposure.


----------



## TMOY (Jul 7, 2014)

Erik said:


> Now I know we all trust each other, but it is sometimes possible that competitor A does a WR on the first solve, which is filmed and put up on the internet and person B can still do the same scramble the next day, or at the end of the day. Do we really trust each other for that long? This does not seem very desirable...



2g3) Competitors in the Competitors Area must not communicate with each other about the scrambled states of the puzzles of the round in progress. Penalty: disqualification of the competitor from the event, at the discretion of the WCA Delegate.

OK, it's technically not the competitors area, but it falls IMHO into the same category. If someone puts up a video of himself on Internet before the end of the event, even if the event lasts two days, that can be viewed as communication with other competitors (since anybody can go on the net and watch the vid at any time) and should be punished accordingly (again, at the discretion of the delegate).


----------



## Bob (Jul 7, 2014)

Ollie said:


> General points:
> - nearly all the arguments here can be applied to 6x6x6, 7x7x7 and to some extent 5x5x5 too.
> - I agree with your points on Multi



I agree. That is one reason why I think 6x6 and 7x7 should have never become events in the first place.

5x5BLD especially seems to be a waste. There are few competitors who compete in it and it is extremely time consuming and requires a lot of judging time.

This has gotten me curious about something. How often do the following occur:

- Winner of 6x6 is also winner of 7x7
- Winner of 4BLD is also winner of 5BLD.


----------



## DavidCip86 (Jul 7, 2014)

I think that all of the BLD events should remain. Although I don't do BLD, I don't think that all big BLD events are the same. Imo, that's like saying that 4x4-7x7 are the same. I know that big BLD is a pain for organizers, but organizers can choose to not hold it.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

Again, why remove it at all.. 

Just keep it and if organisers wanna hold it then they can.. if they personally don't like it then they don't have to hold it.. 

Just saves the people who have devoted so many hours in practicing these events from being completely screwed over just cus the other half of cubers don't like the event. Same goes for feet.


----------



## qqwref (Jul 8, 2014)

I agree with this. Sure, I'm biased because I've never been too interested in doing heavy BLD stuff - I like solving things fast, so memo bores the heck out of me. And not being a BLDer also penalizes me hard in the sum-of-ranks stats. But I think when I've suggested before that maybe we should remove 5BLD, I had some of the same complaints as people here have - 4BLD and 5BLD are pretty similar,the top ranks tend to be more or less held by the best people, and the difficulty of 5BLD (I've seen several substantial competitions with no successes). It isn't unreasonable to say it'd be better as an impressive unofficial event than as one of the big official ones. And let's not forget that not being an official event doesn't mean nobody will try it. I fully expect 5BLD to remain an unofficial milestone of memo capacity and concentration, with people doing it to prove their skills, just like how people now do 6BLD or 7BLD.

Multi's definitely more of the same (compared to 3BLD), but I do think there's an interesting facet in that event that no other event has. You decide ahead of time what you're going to try for, and then how close you get determines your result. In terms of excitedly wondering who's gonna win, the results can be a lot more unexpected than speedsolving, where it's pretty safe to assume everyone gets roughly their average. Even if some hotshot tries 35 cubes, they could have a bad day and run out of time or get 15 wrong, and someone with much less bravery could take the slow-and-steady route and come out ahead. This kind of exciting finish really can only exist in competition. So if we are to remove one of the four BLD events, I think it's better to get rid of 5BLD than Multi.


----------



## Villyer (Jul 8, 2014)

Multi-BLD seems like the best candidate. There isn't any other multi event, and all that it adds is testing how much someone can remember. At least 4/5BLD require different solving methods.


----------



## Akash Rupela (Jul 8, 2014)

As a delegate and a participant who does almost every event at comps, 
First of all, the 4BLD vs 5BLD being same logic can certainly be applied on 6x6 vs 7x7 too. I think the problem is less about speedcubing vs memory sports, more about organisation(might be the delegate bias, I am not sure). The events definitely do take a decent amount of time(specially when you decide to hold all). Memory sports is only half the picture. Execution is a crucial role too. Even the most professional memory sportsmen out there will take a good amount of time getting used to numerous fingertricks and getting world class on the events.
4BLD should definitely stay, it doesn't take too much time. Cutoffs can be kept to help managing too.
MBLD is surely much more of a memory sport thing than just solving the cube fast. But it is a very impressive thing to present cubing to non-cubers and media(sometimes the superhuman factor)
5BLD is mostly a redundant form of 4BLD with very less new stuff. 5BLD rankings are mostly same as 4BLD, multi BLD rankings are quite different.
If we are to remove one event, I would vote for 5BLD. 
Otherwise, we can just continue to hold them as and when we have time. With increasing amount of competitiors, maybe it gets more important to have blind-special competitions once in a while where the focus is on blind events mainly. 
TL DR: There is not a very strict need to remove anything, but out of the given options, 5BLD sounds most reasonable to remove.


----------



## Hari (Jul 8, 2014)

I feel neither of the 3 should be scrapped and if I were forced to pick one, it would be 5BLD. As mentioned previously by users, multi is way different from 3BLD. Ofcourse, if one were to present the argument that people world class in the 3BLD rankings are also good at multi, it's only because someone who's world class at 3BLD would most likely invest the practise and time required to achieve the memo techniques and speed required for multi. Probably reducing the time from 10 mins per cube to 5 or 6 maybe would be good. That would atleast filter out some competitors who take 20mins for a 2 or 3 cube multi. 4BLD isn't very time consuming at all imo. A strict 10min per attempt limit could be implemented at bigger comps with more participants. In the last comp I went for 4BLD(local), there were just 3 participants and it doesn't really require that much manpower and time that people think it does. In fact it takes less time than a round of 3x3 in comps I've been to as all the 4BLD solvers solve at the same time and finish ALL 3 attempts one after the other. I have not experienced a comp with 5BLD however and I do agree that for the new pieces and challenge introduced, the time trade-off may not be worth it. But I am still not for the removal of any of the 3 as blind solving imo is not just a branch off of 3x3. If that were the case, then you'd see the best in the world at 3x3 top the BLD charts as well, which is clearly not the case. 
Alternatively as Akash said above, special blind comps held regularly could probably encourage the scrapping of the events from comps with a lot of competitors and time issues.


----------



## Erik (Jul 8, 2014)

cmhardw said:


> For those of us who like BLD, we would say that we *only* have 3 events if we want variety beyond regular 3x3x3BLD.
> 
> Let me try to phrase it the other way around:
> "We have 13 speedsolving events (see the above spoiler). Do we really need 13 events of essentially the same format? Surely one of them can go?"
> ...



You know I really admire you for your BLD skills and your contribution to the community for this, so I hope you don't take it as a personal attack of any kind 
The fact that you specialize in the niece-event BLD is your own preference. There were people who specialized in magics as well and there are some that specialize in megaminx or FMC for example. I don't think the WCA should take into account every single cuber with its own preference, but think about the whole picture. It's logical you are against this, but I think it's a fair thing to do. I will come back to this later at the end of my post.



> Your graph doesn't load for me (Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator). I understand the idea that by categorizing the events a certain way that you view 7x7x7 as less necessary than 3x3x3, just as 5x5x5BLD is less necessary than 3x3x3BLD. Still, getting rid of 7x7x7 is removing 1/13 of the speedsolve events, while removing 5x5x5BLD is removing 1/4 of the blindfold events. The relative weight of each change is not the same.



Will try to upload again in the original post soon.




> I've not heard of the "all day" rule. In the US and at Worlds you have a maximum of 3 hours to do all of your attempts in either 4x4x4BLD or 5x5x5 BLD. If some competitions allow an "all day" time limit, or even a 2 day time limit, then I would certainly be in favor of at a minimum reducing that to 3 hours.



Then this should definitely be fixed in the regs, no matter what what the outcome of this thread is.



> We have this same issue in 3x3x3BLD by the way (a world record solve video could be placed on the internet before others have done that solve). I treat that as a separate issue inherent to BLD events in general, and not just the bigger cubes BLD.



You know the chances of this happening are much much lower, compared to my scenario. Not impossible (sadly), but you'd have to be quite fast in uploading.



> Erik, does it not strike you as odd that you and I are again having this same debate about big cube BLD on speedsolving.com? I think the first time was in either 2007 or early 2008. Is there a better venue for us to have our opinions voiced than on speedsolving.com?
> 
> Incidentally, this same idea goes for those who start the "remove 3x3x3 with feet" threads, which have popped up nearly every year for a few years now.



Not sure where you want to go with this? We discuss it on speedsolving.com because our sport is speedcubing of which BLD is a small part as well... 
The feet discussion has been going on for a while now, though the reasoning in removing feet is kinda poor.

I can see from your personal point of view how you divide all events in BLD and non-BLD or rather speedsolving and non-speedsolving (which also includes FMC). From your post I think your point of view is that Blindsolving is equal in the hierarchy to Speedsolving. On this I strongly disagree. The core of our sport is speedcubing, solving cubes fast. Wasn't it 1982 where we speedsolved the 3x3? Our first truely official website used to be speedcubing.com. Blindfolded solving has always been a nieche-area, just like FMC. My problem is only that we have 4 of those events which make blindfolded solving an overly represented sub-event of speedcubing. It's like doing 3x3 FMC, Sq-1 FMC, 4x4 FMC and FMC-head-to-head as well, which would all make no sense to me whatsoever (though FMC head2head is kinda fun), just like 3x3 OH-BLD or solving with 1 foot.


@ Goodatthis:
1. all events are tough to be good at. The fact that people lose records come with the removal of all events, like Multi-old style and magics.
2. I think you are exaggerating when calling it "some sort of feared mythical creature". I think for something like 5BLD, most people just lack the patience to learn it. Still impressive, but 25 moves FMC is also impressive, just like sub-10 averages on 3x3.
3. Feet nor clock, have the downsides of these 3 big-BLD events. The comparison can't be made this way. Also: 4BLD is not comparable to clock, but more like clock-FMC (a side event of a side event)




TMOY said:


> 2g3) Competitors in the Competitors Area must not communicate with each other about the scrambled states of the puzzles of the round in progress. Penalty: disqualification of the competitor from the event, at the discretion of the WCA Delegate.
> 
> OK, it's technically not the competitors area, but it falls IMHO into the same category. If someone puts up a video of himself on Internet before the end of the event, even if the event lasts two days, that can be viewed as communication with other competitors (since anybody can go on the net and watch the vid at any time) and should be punished accordingly (again, at the discretion of the delegate).


It's a bit naive to think this is not a problem. Would you really trust everyone to be honest and not look at the WR video if they had the chance? It's like scrambling your own cube.

@ Bob: would be interesting to see. Sadly I don't have access to the database :/

@ the "why not decide the organizer what to organize" argument: yes lets then also make every possible other event official, the organizer can choose anyway. Rainbow cube, golden cube, head2headFMC, 4x4 OH, 3x3 OH-BLD and of course relays as well... I think the WCA should only offer a limited amount of events which all provide a different challenge and be significantly different from each other. You need to set good boundaries so organizers are likely to organize a large quantity of the events, so everyone will have the chance to compete in all events as well. Currently, the amount of events is just too big to fit in a 2 day competition without setting crazy time-limits, the need of side stages or competition days of 12 hours. And yes, 7x7 is a big time consumer too. Arguably too big, just like 6x6.


----------



## TMOY (Jul 8, 2014)

Erik said:


> It's a bit naive to think this is not a problem. Would you really trust everyone to be honest and not look at the WR video if they had the chance? It's like scrambling your own cube.


Then don't give them the chance. It's the competitor's responsibility to make sure that the other competitors can't see the video before they have done their own attempt.


----------



## Antonie faz fan (Jul 8, 2014)

Or whe could say it is not allowed to have all 3 of them at 1 comp?


----------



## Hari (Jul 8, 2014)

Antonie faz fan said:


> Or whe could say it is not allowed to have all 3 of them at 1 comp?


Then what would you do at an even like Nats or Worlds where people travel huge distances for these events? There are people who specialize in multi or 5BLD and they could miss out on a podium or potential records because of that.


----------



## Erik (Jul 8, 2014)

TMOY said:


> Then don't give them the chance. It's the competitor's responsibility to make sure that the other competitors can't see the video before they have done their own attempt.





> _I've not heard of the "all day" rule. In the US and at Worlds you have a maximum of 3 hours to do all of your attempts in either 4x4x4BLD or 5x5x5 BLD. If some competitions allow an "all day" time limit, or even a 2 day time limit, then I would certainly be in favor of at a minimum reducing that to 3 hours._


_
_


> Then this should definitely be fixed in the regs, no matter what what the outcome of this thread is.




..


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

The Poll is pretty conclusive.. I don't see why we need further debate really.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 8, 2014)

@Erik

Honestly, your arguments about 5BLD being able to be removed do make sense. Reading it from others here too, I can see that a lot of people seem to care very much about the sum-of-ranks stat, and tons of people would benefit from the removal of such a difficult event.

If I think in terms of the bigger picture I can definitely understand the arguments that 5BLD being removed has many benefits to many people.

One thing that I *HATE* about our sport is that someone like me can specialize in an event for 9 years (I started big BLD seriously in 2005), build up a bit of a legacy related to that event (co-inventing the BH method with Daniel Beyer, set WRs and get podiums at World Championships) and then have that event dropped and any progress made effectively erased. Sure the results will remain on the World Cube Association site, but I would certainly lose my spot on the World Records in most events list, which I have been very proud of for a long time. In 20 years I doubt many people will know that a 5BLD event used to exist, other than a few people in the community who get interested in the history of speedcubing and poke around on the WCA page.

I can concede that there are good reasons to remove 5BLD to benefit the community as a whole. However, I'm completely pissed off that, personally, any legacy I was hoping to create with dedicating so many hours of my life to a puzzle would then be half erased. I hope you can understand that I have a very hard time not taking that personally >:|

As a delegate I will certainly campaign, hard, that 5BLD not be removed, but if the community as a whole decides to remove it then I will have no choice but to go along with that decision.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

cmhardw said:


> but if the community as a whole decides to remove it then I will have no choice but to go along with that decision.



Have you seen the poll results? lol


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 8, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> Have you seen the poll results? lol



I like your enthusiasm


----------



## Erik (Jul 8, 2014)

cmhardw said:


> @Erik
> 
> Honestly, your arguments about 5BLD being able to be removed do make sense. Reading it from others here too, I can see that a lot of people seem to care very much about the sum-of-ranks stat, and tons of people would benefit from the removal of such a difficult event.
> 
> ...



Of course I understand, but I am not trying to get all events removed and completely undo your work. I hope you noticed that as well. You do make it sound like the whole BH system would be useless if one of the events would go, which is obviously not true. Actually I think of all 3 big BLD events 5 BLD makes the most sense to NOT remove, because it is a good mix of new pieces (and thus the most new problems you need to solve) and bulk info to memorize. The biggest candidate for me would be multi, because multi has the least to do with speedcubing and only requires the extra skill of memorizing bulk info. Why did you focus on 5 BLD in your post and don't mention multi one time btw? According to your WCA profile you only competed once in multi since the change from old to new.

As to the poll: a poll is only a poll. Maybe a poll wasn't even a good idea because it's the perfect tool to misinterpret data because:
1. the poll mostly will attract people who have a heart for the event, while people who don't care about either the event OR the WCA's policy would probably just ignore it
2. is only a selection of the people on THIS forum (and not even all of them)
3. popularity is only one of the aspects involved in discussions like this (if the WCA would always do what the majority wants, we'd already have the option of doing relays and 2x2 BLD)


----------



## Micael (Jul 8, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> *As an organiser and delegate, one of my biggest wishes, if not the biggest, is that 5bld and Multibld were not official events.*



This is the only good argument to remove bigBLD in my opinion: it is difficult to hold. All other arguments are debatable imo.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

Micael said:


> This is the only good argument to remove bigBLD in my opinion: it is difficult to hold. All other arguments are debatable imo.



It is not difficult to hold. It just depends how lazy you are and how much work you want to put into your event. 

Also there is a lot of personal biased here based on whether you do or do not compete in the event yourself.


----------



## Bindedsa (Jul 8, 2014)

Micael said:


> This is the only good argument to remove bigBLD in my opinion: it is difficult to hold. All other arguments are debatable imo.


This seems like the worst argument to me. If the organizer does not want to hold the even he/she does no have to, but you want to just completely remove the option, meaning the only people affected are those who would hold/compete in 5bld are not able to. Seems like saying, I don't really like ketchup on my burgers so we should not allow ketchup on any burgers.


----------



## kinch2002 (Jul 8, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> It is not difficult to hold. It just depends how lazy you are and how much work you want to put into your event.



Thanks for letting me know that I should be less lazy.



Bindedsa said:


> This seems like the worst argument to me. If the organizer does not want to hold the even he/she does no have to, but you want to just completely remove the option, meaning the only people affected are those who would hold/compete in 5bld are not able to. Seems like saying, I don't really like ketchup on my burgers so we should not allow ketchup on any burgers.



Yes, 200 people have said this argument of not having to hold the event. I still disagree with it. Either I hold it and it's anywhere from annoying to a nightmare, or I don't hold it and people complain at me.

Also, we should have 500 official events because we don't have to hold them all if we don't want to. There's no harm in having an event if somebody wants to do it.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> Thanks for letting me know that I should be less lazy.



No problem. 

I'm not going to be all prissy about it because it's a fact. Some organisers won't hold BBLD/MBLD because they simply CB*F*A. 



kinch2002 said:


> Either I hold it and it's anywhere from annoying to a nightmare



I read that as it being an annoyance/nightmare to yourself. Although I'm sure you will correct me.



kinch2002 said:


> Also, we should have 500 official events because we don't have to hold them all if we don't want to. There's no harm in having an event if somebody wants to do it.



*Sarcasm detection result pending...*


----------



## Bindedsa (Jul 8, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> Yes, 200 people have said this argument of not having to hold the event. I still disagree with it. Either I hold it and it's anywhere from annoying to a nightmare, or I don't hold it and people complain at me.
> 
> Also, we should have 500 official events because we don't have to hold them all if we don't want to. There's no harm in having an event if somebody wants to do it.


So you would rather no one have the option to compete/hold 5BLD/MBLD event officially and get no complaints? That seems unfair. Perhaps we should not just add all the events we can think of, but we definitely should not be removing events just because come organizers don't want competitors to be disappointed when an event is not held and removing the options of others to hold it at all.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 8, 2014)

Erik said:


> Of course I understand, but I am not trying to get all events removed and completely undo your work. I hope you noticed that as well. You do make it sound like the whole BH system would be useless if one of the events would go, which is obviously not true. Actually I think of all 3 big BLD events 5 BLD makes the most sense to NOT remove, because it is a good mix of new pieces (and thus the most new problems you need to solve) and bulk info to memorize. The biggest candidate for me would be multi, because multi has the least to do with speedcubing and only requires the extra skill of memorizing bulk info. Why did you focus on 5 BLD in your post and don't mention multi one time btw? According to your WCA profile you only competed once in multi since the change from old to new.



Understood, I was going off the recent batch of posts where people said that, although they may not want an event removed, that 5x5x5BLD would make sense to be the one to go first. I did not remember that you were campaigning more for multiBLD as the one that makes sense to be the first to go (if we get rid of an event).

I feel similarly, although I don't focus on multi as much as the experts, it still sucks for those who really consider multiBLD to be their main event. I can say that the arguments for removing an event seem practical enough, especially from an organizer's perspective, but that doesn't mean that I like the option of removing a current event.



Erik said:


> As to the poll: a poll is only a poll. Maybe a poll wasn't even a good idea because it's the perfect tool to misinterpret data because:
> 1. the poll mostly will attract people who have a heart for the event, while people who don't care about either the event OR the WCA's policy would probably just ignore it
> 2. is only a selection of the people on THIS forum (and not even all of them)
> 3. popularity is only one of the aspects involved in discussions like this (if the WCA would always do what the majority wants, we'd already have the option of doing relays and 2x2 BLD)



It is good to get an idea of how the community feels, but I agree that the poll in this thread probably does attract more people who really focus on BLD events than it would a general sample of the cubing community. The poll is also limited by being on a forum where the primary language is English.

--------------

TL;DR

I can see that there are benefits to the community as a whole (minus those who like the event removed) if one of the BLD events is removed, and in particular it would make organizers' job a little easier to do as well. However, I still don't like it 

My reasoning mainly comes from the fact that removing an event will probably affect organizers in a slightly positive way, it may affect the majority of cubers in a slightly positive way, and it would definitely affect those who like the event in a very negative way. In my opinion the losses outweigh the gains. Of course my opinion is swayed based on the fact that I like these events, so I admit that I am biased here.

Chris


----------



## TMOY (Jul 8, 2014)

Erik said:


> 1. the poll mostly will attract people who have a heart for the event, while people who don't care about either the event OR the WCA's policy would probably just ignore it


Yes, of course, and that's perfectly normal. I would really hate it if it got decided by a bunch of 12-year olds who don't even do 3BLD that I should give up bigBLD/multi. At least people who compete or have competed in the events know what they're talking about.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 8, 2014)

TMOY said:


> Yes, of course, and that's perfectly normal. I would really hate it if it got decided by a bunch of 12-year olds who don't even do 3BLD that I should give up bigBLD/multi. At least people who compete or have competed in the events know what they're talking about.



My train of thought ( \m/ ) exactly. 

Surely if it's attracting only the people who compete/care, then it's their opinions that matter the most. 

Why do we want to ask the entire speedcubing community in order to get a "general consensus" when more than half of them don't even compete/care about the event!! 

Pollution.


----------



## kinch2002 (Jul 8, 2014)

I think I'm done here for now. I've said what I needed to. Thank you to those of you who can discuss in a sensible manner, which I have found to be a larger proportion than normal in these threads. As I said in my original response to this thread, I don't care that much if we keep everything. I can deal with that. Just wanted to put forward my opinion, but I'm quite willing to respect other people's point of view.

All I ask is please don't complain to me if we don't hold them at UK comps that I delegate/organise, or if the cutoffs/any other constraints seem harsh. OK cool


----------



## ollicubes (Jul 8, 2014)

I dont see any reasons to remove any of them. Every person can not like everything. For example I dont care less about fewest moves or rubik's clock. Although I don't like them I'm not saying that they should be removed from the official events because I know that there are lot's of people who likes thouse events. 

In fact all BLD events are giving you a diffrent kind of challenge.
Fir example when I know well how to do 4BLD there was so much things to learn until I said 'Now I know 5bld well"

So yes, I don't want that any of these events get removed. Thanks


----------



## Goosly (Jul 8, 2014)

I voted "No, we should keep all events (please explain)" so I have to explain why



Erik said:


> Now yes, you could also argue 7x7 doesn't add anything either. On this I would partly agree. Yes 7x7 and 6x6 and 5x5 are very much the same, to be honest I wouldn't be bothered at all if 7x7 was removed as well. The difference though, is that 7x7 is just a variant of a 3x3 and not a variant of a variant (because that would be 7x7 FMC or OH for example).



I won't argue a 7x7 doesn't add anything. It does. It adds layers. 4BLD and 5BLD add layers too. MBLD adds cubes. They're all interesting.

Currently I don't feel the need to remove any event.


----------



## Ollie (Jul 8, 2014)

Would a 4BLD Mo3 'test' a competitor's concentration and big cube ability as well as a lone 5BLD single? 

Replacing 5BLD with a 4BLD mean official record puts less pressure on time schedules, addresses the problem of redundancy and addresses the accuracy problem in official 5BLD attempts by encouraging consistency whilst using half the energy of doing 3 official 5BLD solves.


----------



## A Leman (Jul 9, 2014)

Most of my points have been made above so it was sensible for me to wait before replying in that respect. I can’t help but wonder WHY someone who has not put any serious practice into the BLD events would make a thread like this. I am also concerned that it seems like the BLD events were being singled out and victimized because they require more skills than fast fingers. Is the major downside that they have a large effect on some people’s sum of ranks? 

The argument that we should just leave cubing and go to do Memory Sports is probably the most inconsiderate and most invalid point that I have found on this thread. If you had an interest in memory sports, then you would know that there is actually nowhere to go. Memory sports does not have the organizational experience or prevalence that the WCA does. In fact, as far as I know, there is not a single official delegate in North America! We have one competition that is unofficial with events that are not comparable to the very small international community. There have even been talks about putting together small competitions in people’s apartments (I wonder if it was similar for cubing in the early days). Furthermore, BLD and memory sport have very different events and they only benefit each other in the way that cross-training can help an athlete. 

I have also felt that 4BLD, 5BLD, and Multi are actually quite different in terms of how I think of the event. I think there is a significant difference between 4BLD and 5BLD in particular. I like 5BLD more because odd cubes normally have much better hardware, midges are not the same as edges since most of the MU cycles are not supercube safe and T-centers in particular are very different and easily my favorite big cube piece type to solve. In terms of memo, 4BLD is basically a one pass while 5BLD requires review to be accurate.



Erik said:


> This is an issue that has bothered me for a while now: Blindfolded solving is an impressive way to solve a Rubik's cube. Overall I do like it and like to do it





Erik said:


> Maybe this is also a good opportunity to explain my personal stands here. Personally I don't like any of the bigger BLD events


Which is your real personal stand?


Erik said:


> Tim:
> About your last comment: I might sound a bit blunt here, but I do know what I am talking about, competed in all events and am very well aware of the techniques used in the events. Still I have yet to see a good reason why 4 AND 5 AND Multi should all be kept. By saying Multi is 3BLD times x I don't mean that it's as easy, but that it doesn't add much to the problem solving you have to do compared to any of the other events. For example: in 5BLD you also have to memorize more information and be accurate, but you at least have to deal with new pieces.



Tim is a NAR holder in the event that you are over-generalizing. Perhaps he also knows what he is talking about. You have competed in MultiBld ~33 times and your best score is a 3. I am fairly certain that that is a score that can be achieved with a complete ignorance of the techniques.


kinch2002 said:


> Not sure how you manage to not let it affect the schedule, but when we've done this, it got so annoying at times that I'm only happy with having them scheduled in their own slot now.
> Example conversation when people are doing big bld at random times:
> "We need more scramblers and judges. Where is Person A?"
> "Oh, he's doing 5bld"
> ...


I have noticed that many BLD solvers are older than the average competitor and are looked at as the “adults” in the room that should be helping to smoothly run the competition which is good, but it is not completely fair to Person A to be relied upon to such an extent that it is a problem when he/she competes in the event that he/she drove X miles for and is the reason that he/she is there to begin with. I can understand how these events can cause problems for organizers though and I would support any ideas you have in terms of stricter cutoffs.


----------



## vd (Jul 9, 2014)

I think all BLD events should stay.
As for multi, one thing that was not mentioned here many times, yet I think it is very important is that multi is not only testing memory of a solver, but also accuracy of solving 3x3 BLD. For example, my last result at comp was 10/13 caused by bad accuracy, while I had no problem to memorize all the informations within the time limit. Furthermore, at top level multi, speedsolving part is important too - if someone is attempting like 20 cubes, it is very big difference if he needs 1:30 to solve one, thus having only 30 minutes for memo, or 0:30 to solve one, having 50 minutes for memo.
Considering big cubes BLD, I do partially agree that the events are kind of similar, but the big difference is, solving 4BLD is still mostly about short term memory and fast execution, while at 5BLD, it is long term memory and accuracy that are important. I do believe that the difference between these 2 events is indeed bigger than difference between 6x6 and 7x7, which was mentioned here many times already.


----------



## Dene (Jul 9, 2014)

Bob said:


> Winner of 6x6 is also winner of 7x7



And also winner of 5x5, and 4x4, and 3x3, and OH, and 2x2, and megaminx...

Fast people will be fast. That's just the way it is. Erik of all people would surely understand.



AJ Blair said:


> What I have to say on the speedcubing versus memory sport discussion is that most people I know refer to themselves as a "cuber" first and foremost, not a "speedcuber". It's all about the community, and I know there are people who set their focus on certain subsets of cubing, including BLD. We would be alienating all of them by removing the events that tie them to the cubing community. It's not appealing to some people to due the "speed" based events and they prefer to focus on the memory side of things.



^^ The best thing said in this thread. (A thread otherwise full mostly of crap).


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

kinch2002 said:


> Not sure how you manage to not let it affect the schedule, but when we've done this, it got so annoying at times that I'm only happy with having them scheduled in their own slot now.
> Example conversation when people are doing big bld at random times:
> "We need more scramblers and judges. Where is Person A?"
> "Oh, he's doing 5bld"
> ...



That's because the majority of persons from D-Z are sitting at the back of the room practicing (because they are fast and therefore seemingly excluded from judging) or making cube towers.

The regulation is that all competitors should be available for judging and scrambling at any time. Not just for the events that they are competing in.

Too many organisers are scared to pick on people they don't know for judging. It's much easier to ask someone that you know and who always judges right...?


----------



## Erik (Jul 9, 2014)

A Leman said:


> I can’t help but wonder WHY someone who has not put any serious practice into the BLD events would make a thread like this.



Is this supposed to insult me? Or is this just a provocation? I think my argumentation is quite neutral and unbiased actually.



> The argument that we should just leave cubing and go to do Memory Sports is probably the most inconsiderate and most invalid point that I have found on this thread. If you had an interest in memory sports, then you would know that there is actually nowhere to go. Memory sports does not have the organizational experience or prevalence that the WCA does. In fact, as far as I know, there is not a single official delegate in North America! We have one competition that is unofficial with events that are not comparable to the very small international community. There have even been talks about putting together small competitions in people’s apartments (I wonder if it was similar for cubing in the early days). Furthermore, BLD and memory sport have very different events and they only benefit each other in the way that cross-training can help an athlete.



Multi-BLD is for the largest part just a memory sport where no extra skills are required (compared to 3BLD) than the ability to memorize bulk-information. I think we can all agree on this. Seeing our sport is called 'speedcubing' and not 'memory sports' I think especially multi-BLD is the odd man out and doesn't really belong into speedcubing (especially considering we already have 3BLD and 5BLD). Maybe you misinterpreted what I said? What I said was


> If you can indeed memorize and solve 20 cubes in an hour, alternatively you could really try to make a career in memory sports!



This was a serious motivational suggestion and a praise to those who are actually that good, because the top-multi BLD cubers really do have memorizing capabilities of memory-sport athletes.



> Which is your real personal stand?



As you can conclude from both quotes you posted, I like BLD-cubing in itself but don't like the bigger BLD events. You have to understand that there is a difference in the appreciation of an event and the neutral evaluation of the suitedness of an event.



> Tim is a NAR holder in the event that you are over-generalizing. Perhaps he also knows what he is talking about. You have competed in MultiBld ~33 times and your best score is a 3. I am fairly certain that that is a score that *can* be achieved with a complete ignorance of the techniques.



Please tell me where I said Tim doesn't know what he is talking about? Of course he does, the only thing I wanted to make clear is that I also know what I am talking about, which I think you also understood (I highlighted your own "can"). The result someone has in an event is no garuantee of the knowledge about the event. AvG is terribly slow at 3x3 and most other cubes but knows more than most people.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> That's because the majority of persons from D-Z are sitting at the back of the room practicing (because they are fast and therefore seemingly excluded from judging)



Wish I'd've known this earlier so I could get out of judging.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

Kirjava said:


> Wish I'd've known this earlier so I could get out of judging.



You already do...

WGC2014

"Can you judge please"

"No I'm busy" *Practices and ignores me*


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> You already do...
> 
> WGC2014
> 
> ...



Well why would I judge? I'm seemingly excluded!


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

When I say that it is seemingly apparent I obviously mean that it is an observation on what usually happens.

You know that. 

Anyway.. Sorry but I'm fresh outta troll food today.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> When I say that it is seemingly apparent I obviously mean that it is an observation on what usually happens.
> 
> You know that.



I have always judged when I've been threatened with disqualification for not doing so. 

These people can be made to judge, so what you are claiming is a complete non-issue.

I guess you didn't know that.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

Kirjava said:


> I have always judged when I've been threatened with disqualification for not doing so.
> 
> These people can be made to judge, so what you are claiming is a complete non-issue.
> 
> I guess you didn't know that.



It's a shame that this is your mentality and that the threat of disqual is required to encourage you to help out.

I know that anyone can be made to judge. This is exactly my argument. I'm referring to competitions that I have not organised. 

I'd recommend reading over my posts once more for clarity.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> It's a shame that this is your mentality and that the threat of disqual is required to encourage you to help out.



Oh well.



BillyRain said:


> I know that anyone can be made to judge. This is exactly my argument. I'm referring to competitions that I have not organised.
> 
> I'd recommend reading over my posts once more for clarity.



You told Daniel that people aren't available because regulations are not being enforced in this way, but I've seen him enforce them often so this issue he is facing cannot be due to the reason you have brought up.


----------



## Dene (Jul 9, 2014)

I'm pretty sure all this conversation is going to get deleted, but while it's all here I should say I think it's a shame you poms seem to have a lot of trouble finding keen volunteers. I remember the lowest point here in Australia (a few years ago), but since then we always have young kids super keen to help out. We always stress at the start that we need volunteers, and people always put their hand up. You just have to be careful to watch them judging


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

Kirjava said:


> You told Daniel that people aren't available because regulations are not being enforced in this way, but I've seen him enforce them often so this issue he is facing cannot be due to the reason you have brought up.



There is more than one organiser in the UK. 

I guess you didn't know this.



Kirjava said:


> this issue he is facing cannot be due to the reason you have brought up.



Daniel is the one who suggested that the lack of judges contributed to the issue in the first place.. :s



Dene said:


> I'm pretty sure all this conversation is going to get deleted, but while it's all here I should say I think it's a shame you poms seem to have a lot of trouble finding keen volunteers.



Yeah, a big part of the problem is attitudes like this:

"I have always judged when I've been threatened with disqualification for not doing so."

"It's a shame that this is your mentality and that the threat of disqual is required to encourage you to help out."

"Oh well."


----------



## Dene (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> Yeah, a big part of the problem is attitudes like this:
> 
> "I have always judged when I've been threatened with disqualification for not doing so."
> 
> ...



Ya well Kirjava's a **** so I wouldn't expect any different. Perhaps you should stress in the opening announcement that you need volunteers and anyone can help, and be taught what to do. That's what we started doing and it works a charm.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> There is more than one organiser in the UK.
> 
> I guess you didn't know this.



I don't see how that's relevant; it is still causing an issue when things are being followed correctly by the organiser I mentioned. 



BillyRain said:


> Daniel is the one who suggested that the lack of judges contributed to the issue in the first place.. :s



Indeed. And you said that this is because regulations are not being used to force people to judge, when they are.

I'm not saying that regulations are always being followed by everyone. I'm saying that even when they are the issue Daniel initially laid out about 5BLD still exists, while you are saying that if regulations were followed completely, it would not.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

Kirjava said:


> I don't see how that's relevant; it is still causing an issue when things are being followed correctly by the organiser I mentioned.



I'm sorry but they are not. There are too many times events struggle with judges and so many younger competitors/new competitors are sitting around being unapproached. 

But regardless, I said what I said so as to avoid your subtle suggestion that I have some kind of vendetta against Daniel, which I most definitely do not.



Kirjava said:


> Indeed. And you said that this is because regulations are not being used to force people to judge, when they are.



Please see above.



Kirjava said:


> I'm not saying that regulations are always being followed by everyone.



Yes you did, please see above.



Kirjava said:


> I'm saying that even when they are the issue Daniel initially laid out about 5BLD still exists, while you are saying that if regulations were followed completely, it would not.



Daniel said that when BBLD is taking place, he has trouble finding judges (Person B and C). If some of the idle competitors were forced to judge, this issue would no longer exist at that time.


----------



## TMOY (Jul 9, 2014)

Dene said:


> I'm pretty sure all this conversation is going to get deleted, but while it's all here I should say I think it's a shame you poms seem to have a lot of trouble finding keen volunteers. I remember the lowest point here in Australia (a few years ago), but since then we always have young kids super keen to help out. We always stress at the start that we need volunteers, and people always put their hand up. You just have to be careful to watch them judging



What Daniel and Billy describe is not the most common situation in Europe. Usually, when xolunteers don't come by themselves, we shout "We need judges" once or twice and people come and help out. I've very rarely seen anybody being threatened of disqualification, and I have yet to see anybody being actually disqualified for not helping out, although I think it could teach a good lesson to a**es who never volunteer.

Judging big BLD is a bit different, since they are long events, people may actually have good reasons for not wanting to judge. The most common one is that their next event starts only a couple of minutes later and they don't want to miss it.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

TMOY said:


> Judging big BLD is a bit different, since they are long events, people may actually have good reasons for not wanting to judge. The most common one is that their next event starts only a couple of minutes later and they don't want to miss it.



In the UK BBLD is moving towards being scheduled only so this excuse would not be valid.


----------



## porkynator (Jul 9, 2014)

Erik said:


> Multi-BLD is for the largest part just a memory sport where no extra skills are required (compared to 3BLD) than the ability to memorize bulk-information. I think we can all agree on this. Seeing our sport is called 'speedcubing' and not 'memory sports' I think especially multi-BLD is the odd man out and doesn't really belong into speedcubing (especially considering we already have 3BLD and 5BLD). [...]



Saying blindcubers can do memory sports instead is like saying speedcubers can do speedstacking instead. Or that FMCers can go play chess.
Remove all events pls.
We don't need WCA, we have other sports we can practice.

Solving the cubes is a big part of multiBLD. Having a perfect memo and not being able to solve any cube leads you to 0/N, which is a DNF. Also, in memory sports the recall phase is usually not timed: you have a fixed time, like 5 minutes, to recall, so being fast at recalling stuff is not that important, while it is in blindcubing.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 9, 2014)

BillyRain said:


> I'm sorry but they are not. There are too many times events struggle with judges and so many younger competitors/new competitors are sitting around being unapproached.



When the regulations are enforced to the maximum possible extent, there are still reasons why people cannot judge (because they are unable to do so or are busy judging 5BLD). 

Making sure regulations are followed all the time by everyone is not a magic cure all that ensures we always have people available for judging like you think it is.



BillyRain said:


> But regardless, I said what I said so as to avoid your subtle suggestion that I have some kind of vendetta against Daniel, which I most definitely do not.



I wasn't suggesting this. Please avoid such misattributions to myself.



BillyRain said:


> Yes you did, please see above.



No I didn't, you're lying. I said they're followed when Daniel is looking for judges.



BillyRain said:


> Daniel said that when BBLD is taking place, he has trouble finding judges (Person B and C). If some of the idle competitors were forced to judge, this issue would no longer exist at that time.



I've seen Daniel force idle competitiors to judge, so he must have already tried this. Issue existant.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 9, 2014)

Kirjava said:


> When the regulations are enforced to the maximum possible extent, there are still reasons why people cannot judge (because they are unable to do so or are busy judging 5BLD). Making sure regulations are followed all the time by everyone is not a magic cure all that ensures we always have people available for judging like you think it is. I wasn't suggesting this. Please avoid such misattributions to myself. No I didn't, you're lying. I said they're followed when Daniel is looking for scramblers. I've seen Daniel force idle competitiors to judge, so he must have already tried this. Issue existant.



K.


----------



## Angel Lim (Jul 10, 2014)

Erik said:


> This is an issue that has bothered me for a while



I don't see why it bothers you so much. If you hate how it takes so long to set up in comps, then simply don't hold it in comps.
Also, most people posting here aren't as bothered as you over this. They are saying things like "If I _had_ to remove one of the events, I'd pick 5bld, etc etc. That's very different than outright saying: "I HATE 5BLD, MUST DELETE THE EVENT NOW!"

As a side note, it's strange to me how you don't care which of the three big bld events you want removed. Three events bad enough that you had to make a post about removing one of them. _But you don't care which one gets removed._ *What happens if one of the events were to get removed, I guess you're fine with only two bad events instead of three? Hm.*



Erik said:


> It happens a lot that for example nobody even succeeds on a 5x5 BLD and the podium is empty...



That's the point. Blind events are hard. Blind events are even harder when you're competing to win. That's why it's so rewarding when someone gets a success, for the spectator and the solver. Morever, blind events are the only events where even a success is worth celebrating, a dynamic that's unlike any of the other events. One of the most memorable moments in my cubing career was when I did a 5bld successfully at Worlds 2013. Removing 5bld robs everyone of this kind of experience. Removing 5bld just because no one places isn't a reason to remove to the event at all. 



Erik said:


> it is prone to possible cheating



I don't know how you could be asking everyone for "logical reasoning" when this is one of your arguments.



Erik said:


> *the events are too much the same*



They're not. 

--

You're going to need more compelling arguments to get one of these events removed. For one, your points don't state any actual issues that are urgent and need to be addressed immediately, and two, you're going against the status quo, which is always tough. As a supporter of the status quo, I don't see any reason for me to provide any thing "compelling" because we've had these big blind events for years and it's worked fine.

*I'm confident that all big bld events are here to stay, so here's another argument to add to your list of dough: Removing 5x5 blindfolded (or any other big bld event) as an official event means a better sum of ranks for me! *


----------



## Lazy Einstein (Jul 10, 2014)

Angel Lim said:


> I'm confident that all big bld events are here to stay, so here's another argument to add to your list of dough:* Removing 5x5 blindfolded (or any other big bld event) as an official event means a better sum of ranks for me! *



..and Erik. All BLD solving PWNS his Sum of Rank standing. Probably the "real" reason why he started this thread bahaha.


----------



## RayLam (Jul 10, 2014)

the reasons should not be like"time-consuming,not popular"and more.
and 4b and 5b ain't lilke 4oh and 5fm,mblf is not repeated 3b.


----------



## DeeDubb (Jul 10, 2014)

If sum of ranks is an underlying reason to get rid of an event, I think that's absolutely selfish and disgusting that anyone would vote for preventing someone from doing something they love competitively simply so their own number can improve on a meaningless list. Do you really care about your sum of ranks? Why don't you practice the events that you're bad at instead of trying to remove them. (This isn't directed at anyone particular, just hypothetical for anyone who would want to get rid of an event to change their sum of ranks).


----------



## qqwref (Jul 10, 2014)

I don't think *anyone* is seriously suggesting their personal sum of ranks as the main justification for wanting an event removed.


Anyway, a thought: compared to speedsolving, where a better solver is faster on the same events, BLD is something where showing off involves not only going faster, but also being able to do longer and more difficult events (bigger puzzles, more cubes). The difference between an amazing BLD solver and a good one is partly speed, but it is also memo capacity, concentration, consistency. Perhaps events like 5BLD and multi are not hard to run because organizers suck or because there isn't enough time, but because difficult BLD accomplishments are just not suited for a competition format. We may have an event where top BLDers can really show their skill, but it's at the cost of organizers who have to plan their schedule/venue around a substantial amount of time where several skilled competitors and good judges are 100% occupied. And it can be a little silly to refer to people as 1st, 2nd, 3rd place when perhaps not even 3 people can finish a 5BLD. Remember not every competitor will be a Marcell or a Maskow.

Would impressive BLD accomplishments be better off in an exhibition format (like blindfold chess) or a record-breaking format (like a Guinness World Record attempt), instead of a competition event format?


PS: Maybe feet was added as a joke, but 5BLD was added to show off Pochmann's new ability


----------



## WinterCub3r (Jul 10, 2014)

because its not foot solving


----------



## DrKorbin (Jul 10, 2014)

Erik said:


> *1.* The big BLD events *stand too far away from the original "solve a Rubik's cube" concept* on which all of speedcubing is build.


What's wrong with a variation of a variation? Like it's something bad.



Erik said:


> *2.* Now the fact itself that we have a variant of a variant is not very good, but now think about it: *we have 3 of them* (not including 3x3 BLD). Why 3? It's not like we just have 4x4 OH, but also have 5x5 OH and let's say megaminx OH as well. This doesn't make much sense to me.


We have 14 non-bld events. Why 14?
I mean, what, a "why x?" is a real argument?



Erik said:


> *3.* Also: *the events are too much the same*


No. Why is similarity of the events determined by a person who is not good at them?



Erik said:


> - the events take up a lot of time and complicate time-schedules heavily, especially when all 3 events are held. Mostly you can do your attempts whenever you want throughout the whole weekend, but this still requires a lot of organizing hassle. You have to find a judge, you have to talk to the organizer about the fact that you might have to change your group for other events. If you decide to NOT hold the events on the side, you are using up so much time on the main stage that it steals unreasonably much time of more popular events.


Mean of 3 FMC takes a lot of time, let's remove it also.
The organization problems you mentioned here have several ways to be fixed.



Erik said:


> - the events are not very popular
> - the events are too hard


One implies the other. Nothing bad anyway.



Erik said:


> - it is prone to possible cheating


Pretty specific case, and can be busted easily.



Spoiler



Not sure if you were serious or just want to improve your sum of ranks.





Spoiler



We should not remove 4x4 BLD, because I have the NR


----------



## Erik (Jul 10, 2014)

DrKorbin said:


> What's wrong with a variation of a variation? Like it's something bad.



A variation of a variation already indicates that the event is not very much related to our core event: speedsolving a 3x3. It's like you have an all-round athletics organization which also organizes a version of chess where you have to run 20 meters after each move.



> No. Why is similarity of the events determined by a person who is not good at them?



Why do people constantly feel the need to insult me? Again: my knowledge about big-BLD is more than suited to be able to judge how similar the events are. Then why don't you explain what is so incredibly different? Most world-class big-BLD cubers agree that the events are very similar. So far everyone in this thread has failed to provide anything but personal feelings like this. 


> _I have also felt that 4BLD, 5BLD, and Multi are actually quite different in terms of how I think of the event._





> Mean of 3 FMC takes a lot of time, let's remove it also.


I agree. Best of 2 or average of 2 would be better.



> The organization problems you mentioned here have several ways to be fixed.



Ok, please tell me how to hold all 3 big-BLD events in a venue with 1 room without space for a 2nd stage and without having to delete or heavily comprimize any of the other events?



> Pretty specific case, and can be busted easily.



Yes let's solve this, no matter what the outcome of this thread is. http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...5x5-multi-BLD)&p=995240&viewfull=1#post995240



> Not sure if you were serious or just want to improve your sum of ranks.



And thank you for the 2nd insult.



qqwref said:


> I don't think *anyone* is seriously suggesting their personal sum of ranks as the main justification for wanting an event removed.



Looks like you are wrong. The quality of this forum really is dropping 




Angel Lim said:


> I don't see why it bothers you so much. If you hate how it takes so long to set up in comps, then simply don't hold it in comps.
> Also, most people posting here aren't as bothered as you over this. They are saying things like "If I _had_ to remove one of the events, I'd pick 5bld, etc etc. That's very different than outright saying: "I HATE 5BLD, MUST DELETE THE EVENT NOW!"
> 
> As a side note, it's strange to me how you don't care which of the three big bld events you want removed. Three events bad enough that you had to make a post about removing one of them. _But you don't care which one gets removed._ *What happens if one of the events were to get removed, I guess you're fine with only two bad events instead of three? Hm.*



lol calm down. You basically mis-interpreted everything that you can possibly mis-interpret.



> That's the point. Blind events are hard. Blind events are even harder when you're competing to win. That's why it's so rewarding when someone gets a success, for the spectator and the solver. Morever, blind events are the only events where even a success is worth celebrating, a dynamic that's unlike any of the other events. One of the most memorable moments in my cubing career was when I did a 5bld successfully at Worlds 2013. Removing 5bld robs everyone of this kind of experience. Removing 5bld just because no one places isn't a reason to remove to the event at all.



It is a fair argument against organizing it in the first place. Like Daniel said: it's a hassle to organize. Why invest time in organizing an event for a handfull of people when I don't even know there will be any results?



> I don't know how you could be asking everyone for "logical reasoning" when this is one of your arguments.



Please explain what is unlogical about my argument and also tell me why my described scenario is not a problem.



> They're not.



Then why don't you explain what is so incredibly different? Most world-class big-BLD cubers agree that the events are very similar. So far everyone in this thread has failed to provide anything but personal feelings like this.


> I have also felt that 4BLD, 5BLD, and Multi are actually quite different in terms of how I think of the event.







Lazy Einstein said:


> ..and Erik. All BLD solving PWNS his Sum of Rank standing. Probably the "real" reason why he started this thread bahaha.


I'll nominate this one for the "funniest-post-of-the-year" when the forum awards come up again :tu


----------



## Tim Wong (Jul 10, 2014)

Erik, I think you understand perfectly well what we (Angel, Oleg, Arrik, Ollie, me, and other world class blind solvers) are saying.

You just accused angel of misinterpreting everything that he could possibly interpret? I agree 100% with what angel is saying, and his arguments make much more logical sense than yours, no offense. We've already gone over the point of whether it is hard to organize these events or not. It is just as hard to organize other events such as FMC mo3. Why haven't you complained about that?

You just mentioned above: _"Then why don't you explain what is so incredibly different? Most world-class big-BLD cubers agree that the events are very similar. So far everyone in this thread has failed to provide anything but personal feelings like this."_

From what world-class big-BLD cubers just mentioned in this thread, these events are very *different*. Do I need to list out all of them?

It also strikes me that you don't care which one of these events get removed. Like Angel said, this is odd because you're making all these arguments against all 3 of the events (4BLD, 5BLD, and MBLD) yet you don't care which one gets removed as long as one of them does. I don't want to jump to conclusions, but this makes me want to believe that you simply want as many bigBLD/MBLD events to be removed to improve your sum of ranks. Whether you agree with that or not, I don't see why else you would care so much about removing these events if you don't really care about them. Like deedubb said earlier, I think it is very selfish to vote to remove an event just because you want to improve your sum of ranks. I put in a lot of time and effort into getting good at BLD and I do not want that effort to be wasted. You also suggested that we should just do other memory sports. Yes we can certainly try other memory sports, but that is not a logical reason to remove these events.

Speaking of being logical, you accused us of failing to provide logical evidence instead of personal feelings. "I have also felt that 4BLD, 5BLD, and Multi are actually quite different in terms of how I think of the event." This is a perfectly logical argument that states how someone approaches events differently. Would you approach a 100m dash and a marathon the same way? No.

You also disagree with my statement that MBLD is x times 3BLD. Your official PB is a 3/3 in 18 minutes after competing in the event 36 times (not counting MBLD old style). Achieving that score can easily be accomplished by using your "x times 3BLD" approach." Not much review or time management is needed to accomplish that. Can you do that with 20 cubes? No. That would exceed the 1 hour limit. There are strategies to approach MBLD. For world class BLDers, it is not as simply as x time 3BLD. Since you are only mediocre at the event, it is not in your place to decide how difficult the event is.

I think it is quite obvious that the majority would like to have all of these events remain. No one else seems to care as much as you do about having the events removed. You argued that only the people who care about BLD respond to the poll so it is inaccurate. Well, the people that haven't voted don't care enough to have these events removed.

P.S. Nice performance by Netherlands in the semi finals today.


----------



## Erik (Jul 10, 2014)

Tim Wong said:


> You just accused angel of misinterpreting everything that he could possibly interpret? I agree 100% with what angel is saying, and his arguments make much more logical sense than yours, no offense. We've already gone over the point of whether it is hard to organize these events or not. It is just as hard to organize other events such as FMC mo3. Why haven't you complained about that?



Most of his post is about how he thinks it is weird that specifically myself, being a non-world class BLD cuber wants one of the events removed. What is logcal about this?



> You just mentioned above: _"Then why don't you explain what is so incredibly different? Most world-class big-BLD cubers agree that the events are very similar. So far everyone in this thread has failed to provide anything but personal feelings like this."_
> 
> From what world-class big-BLD cubers just mentioned in this thread, these events are very *different*. Do I need to list out all of them?



Yes please do explain what is so significantly different about the events. That is what I asked, didn't I? And please come up with better reasons than the way you feel about the event.



> It also strikes me that you don't care which one of these events get removed. Like Angel said, this is odd because you're making all these arguments against all 3 of the events (4BLD, 5BLD, and MBLD) yet you don't care which one gets removed as long as one of them does.



Yes I don't care, that is correct. Haven't I written that the fact that we have *3* of these events concerns me? 3 big-BLD events make blindfolded solving an overly represented nieche event. Therefore I think it makes perfect sense to remove one of them. Why the sudden interest in my personal preferences?



> I don't want to jump to conclusions, but this makes me want to believe that you simply want as many bigBLD/MBLD events to be removed to improve your sum of ranks. Whether you agree with that or not, I don't see why else you would care so much about removing these events if you don't really care about them. Like deedubb said earlier, I think it is very selfish to vote to remove an event just because you want to improve your sum of ranks.


Again, there is no reason for insulting me. 



> I put in a lot of time and effort into getting good at BLD and I do not want that effort to be wasted. You also suggested that we should just do other memory sports. Yes we can certainly try other memory sports, but that is not a logical reason to remove these events.


Yes I know what it's like to invest time in something like that and I admire your skills. I understand that you want to further make use of these skills, which I think you can if one of the events gets deleted. Remember it is still about only *one* of the events, not all of them.



> Speaking of being logical, you accused us of failing to provide logical evidence instead of personal feelings. "I have also felt that 4BLD, 5BLD, and Multi are actually quite different in terms of how I think of the event." This is a perfectly logical argument that states how someone approaches events differently. Would you approach a 100m dash and a marathon the same way? No.



The argument: "the events are different, because I feel they are different" is possibly one of the worst arguments you can use to prove the events are different. 100m dash and marathon require entirely different *skills* while in 4BLD/5BLD/multiBLD the skills required are greatly similar.



> You also disagree with my statement that MBLD is x times 3BLD. Your official PB is a 3/3 in 18 minutes after competing in the event 36 times (not counting MBLD old style). Achieving that score can easily be accomplished by using your "x times 3BLD" approach." Not much review or time management is needed to accomplish that. Can you do that with 20 cubes? No. That would exceed the 1 hour limit. There are strategies to approach MBLD. For world class BLDers, it is not as simply as x time 3BLD. Since you are only mediocre at the event, it is not in your place to decide how difficult the event is.



Again: the result of a competitor does not prove poor knowledge of the event, it's like saying Arnaud doesn't have any knowledge about 3x3. I am perfectly aware of the methods and techniques used in all of the big-BLD events. 
The only thing MBLD has to offer that the other events don't may indeed be time-management, or better said: knowledge of your own skill. I wouldn't call that a significant difference, an exceptional extra challenge or the requirement of new skills that would justify it being a seperate official event.


----------



## Sajwo (Jul 10, 2014)

Actually the most senseless thing about 4BLD and 5BLD is that the mo3 is not officially ranked. It's just obvious they should be.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jul 10, 2014)

Since this thread is devolving very rapidly, I'm (temporarily) locking it.

Just because the poll says something (I haven't even checked what the results are) or someone said something in this thread doesn't mean a particular outcome will result, although we certainly don't take event changes lightly.

No matter what happens, the WRC will make sure that the WCA considers any significant arguments put forth in this thread before accepting a proposal or working to consider a change.


----------

