# Red Bull Rubik's Cube World Championships



## lejitcuber (Oct 25, 2017)

This was announced today: https://www.redbullmindgamers.com/rubiks

Edit: WCA response here: https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...-the-red-bull-rubik-s-cube-world-championship


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 25, 2017)

Huh? okay thats interesting, don't now how popular it will be if it's not an official WCA comp.


----------



## Sajwo (Oct 25, 2017)

Ron Van Bruchem said:


> Rubik told me in June that they would start organizing competitions themselves, if we would not cooperate with them, under their conditions.



Short summary:
Rubik's decided to cooperate with Redbull. You have national qualifiers and the final in Boston, US. You need to use Rubik's Brand cube and there are 3 events:
- 3x3 1vs1, best of 5 solves
- 3x3 OH, best of 3, without inspection
- "rescramble", best of 1 - you need to copy the scramble. Probably a nice event for top BLDers.

Probably it will be their first competition in the RSA(Rubik's Speedsolving Associacion), which was announced at the beginning of this year. It is actually made only for the fastest cubers in the World - aspects of real sports are starting to show up right there.

This obviously will be a big competition to WCA, as Rubik's and Redbull are huge companies with a lot of money. Awards can be mind-blowing. I think speedcubing will expand very quickly in 2018, which is obviously a good thing for our community.

Generally I really like the idea and I am curious what will be the outcome of their actions in the upcoming years. Maybe we will se Rubik's Cube on 2024 Olympics, as Erno promised. I just don't like the events, they are just silly and reckless.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 25, 2017)

I am so done with Rubik’s right now.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 25, 2017)

Interesting, though the Rubik's brand lawsuit against the cubicle is going to turn many people away. Theres a lot of things on my mind and I'm not very good at expressing my thoughts through text, so I'm going to think of this for a while. This will probably be the biggest change in cubing since the formation of the WCA itself.


----------



## Sion (Oct 25, 2017)

Ehh... at least in the case of the lawsuit going through, I got my Rubiks v2 to become a crunchy and fast speedcube to keep my passion. I need more work on that really crappy 4x4.


----------



## applezfall (Oct 25, 2017)

cool I guess I might compete in one in hungry or something


----------



## efattah (Oct 25, 2017)

The same shift to 'versus' mode happened at the first ever mega-sponsored freediving/breath holding competition in 2005-- definitely more spectator friendly, kind of as we saw at worlds with the team competition.

For the rescramble event, you could use a BLD method, but simplified LMCF would probably be the fastest method for that event by far. LBL methods have too poor recognition for this style of event, during F2L & LL, but a fast corners first method doesn't suffer from recognition problems as you can (in such methods) pre-solve the corners during the inspection, and even solving the edge pieces one at a time you can still get sub-10 solves.


----------



## shadowslice e (Oct 25, 2017)

I'll leave this here


----------



## imvelox (Oct 25, 2017)

This is just terrible news in my opinion, that will damage speedsolving.

I'll report Chris Morris' comment here, which I find very interesting:



Spoiler



This is a huge blow for multiple reasons:

First, this is being run by people who do not understand the puzzle or the competitive scene AT ALL. This is proven many times in the article where they spread blatant misinformation and based on what the general public's perception of the cube is: 
"The Rubik's Cube, is the ultimate symbol of intelligence, problem-solving and creativity" - We all know this one. 
"...to find out who is the fastest and smartest Cube solver in the largest, most professional Rubik’s Cube tournament the world has yet seen." - Umm did Worlds 2017 not happen? Or any other WC/ National Championship before that?
In addition, the sheer monstrosity that is the "rescramble" event proves that these people have no idea what they're doing; The regular event and OH rip-off are at least relevant, but they might as well hold redi cube if they're gonna just start making **** up.

Second, as Ron pointed out himself, this was organised in secret. Why not involved the largest speedcubing organisation in the world to help you organise something? Oh because that's not what the public want, right, gotcha, they just want to see "omg he turn fast". This is the main issue in my opinion; leaving the WCA out of the organisation of this is giving the finger to all the hard work done over the years to build what we have today. 

This will damage speedcubing in my opinion, as it will totally misrepresent the image of speedsolving by holding events in weird formats (1v1 knockout are you ****ing kidding) so new competitors that are intrigued by this will expect this when starting out. It's blatant pandering to the general public without taking any of the speedsolving community or its established practices into consideration.

One last thing, better give Dana a quick congratulations for winning the "female only" event they're holding. The concept of that is a whole nother kettle of fish that I'm not touching.


----------



## CornerCutter (Oct 25, 2017)

This is not good for the speedcubing community. It's really to bad this is happening.


----------



## DGCubes (Oct 25, 2017)

My first thoughts:

This is disgusting. I honestly can't believe they're doing this to cubing. As cool as it would be to have a hyped up super-competitive scene, the truth is that's just not what cubing is. I don't go to competitions to compete and win prize money; I go to hang out with friends and experience the amazing community. I honestly hope a lot of fast 3x3 solvers vocally boycott this and explain why it's not the way cubing should be done. The most competitive thing I ever want to see in cubing is a Worlds-style head-to-head final round.

I'm appalled by their blatant disregard of the WCA. None of us would be doing this without all the amazing people who have put so much work into growing cubing into what it is today. Sure, Rubik's made the cube, but people like Tyson, Ron, and way too many more people to name have brought it into the 21st century.

Maybe my opinions will change after giving the idea some more time, but that's where I stand as of now.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 25, 2017)

After a little more thought, I still like some of the concepts this has, but I do not like the execution.
Having large competitions sponsored by large companies is a very cool concept that I like. I also like the Idea of having many regional/Qualifying competitions where the top competitors get spots in a "Finals" Competition. However ,I feel as if this would not be nearly as fun as WCA comps because of the fact that the people running it are not cubers themselves, and probably don't know what cubers really want. As many people have pointed out, I feel as if they have completely left out the WCA and it seems to be because they didn't accept some of the terms they wanted. They don't seem to care much about the community either which is not really helping their case. However, I do think that if it is successful, that It would greatly increase the number of cubers, and as a result WCA competitors.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 25, 2017)

I'm going to break from the crowd a little bit and say that I actually like, and welcome, most of the things Rubik's and Red Bull are doing here. I welcome the idea of larger competitions that feature spectator-friendly events and bigger payoffs.

I especially like the idea of events that feature no inspection. I have long believed that the true world speed record should feature no inspection time at all.

However, like others have said before me, I do strongly reject the bypassing of the WCA. The WCA are the ones who have set the standards and processes. They should be a partner in this venture.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 25, 2017)

My thoughts:

I think that this is messed up that they would try and do this to cubing. They want to make cubing a competitive thing where it's all just to show off. They don't give a crap about the WCA and the years of hard work that they have put into this amazing community and what it is. I am also appalled that those in the video were willing to do that although my opinion may change later after I see how they organize this. If they did it solely for the money then I have lost all respect for those in the video.

I hope my opinions change with this as more information but for now I am disgusted at how Rubik's has flipped the bird at the WCA and with it the entirety of the speedcubing community (except those few who got some money out of this)

also I think best of 5, best of 3 and best of one formats are dumb for these events and no inspection is pointless


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Oct 25, 2017)

I really hope that all the fast people boycott this. Like people before have said, it's not right that Rubik's should just sweep in and benefit from the 14 years of hard work put into the WCA. Just stop.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 25, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I really hope that all the fast people boycott this. Like people before have said, it's not right that Rubik's should just sweep in and benefit from the 14 years of hard work put into the WCA. Just stop.


Well they already have the approval of Michal Rzewuski, Dana Yi, The weyer brothers and Alexandre Carlier and they could probably buy some more approval.


----------



## VenomCubing (Oct 25, 2017)

Cubing isn't a spectator sport in the slightest. if it was, this would've happened a long time ago, and nobody would've cared. Cubing is for cubers, not spectators. The whole idea of 1v1 is completely stupid. I would quit speedcubing if all events ended up turning into this cesspool.


----------



## efattah (Oct 25, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> I really hope that all the fast people boycott this. Like people before have said, it's not right that Rubik's should just sweep in and benefit from the 14 years of hard work put into the WCA. Just stop.



Well the WCA benefitted from 22 years (1981-2003) of Rubik's original product, Rubik's original world championship and the other competitions it spawned and the community that they created... While I'm not a big fan of the Rubik company, that's the truth.

I've seen this type of thing happen in other sports. In the end it doesn't matter if you 'like' something or not. The people with more money, and the better eye for media & sponsorship always win in the end, if they execute well. Newcomers to an established scene rarely win, but it does happen. A similar example could be said of a video game community that was dominated by Nintendo and Sega. Until the giants (Sony and Microsoft) came in and destroyed the old community and created a new one with the Playstation and Xbox. And before that the game community itself was created by Atari, until Nintendo and Sega came in.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 25, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> lolwat


Here's where I'm coming from on the "no inspection" thing:

1) To me, inspection is a skill and, as such, it should be timed and included as part of the solution time. So somebody who is faster at inspection but slightly slower at actually solving would be rewarded versus someone who always uses the full 15 seconds for inspection but is faster actually solving. Put another way - by combing inspection and solving, a competitor's time will more accurately reflect the time used to solve the cube. If you have 11 seconds of inspection time and 7.4 seconds of solving, it took you 18.4 seconds to solve - not 7.4.

2) Consider this analogy: Inspection is akin to giving somebody a running start in a sprint running race. Except we don't do that. Runners start from a dead stop. Starting from "a dead stop" in cubing would be including inspection time as part of the solve.

I get that people are used to separating out inspection time and I'm not really advocating for a change. I just personally have always thought that it made sense to combine inspection and solving into one complete time.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 25, 2017)

Underwatercuber said:


> no inspection is pointless



Not at all. No inspection increases the importance of recognition and actual puzzle solving relative to the importance of dexterity. Inspection is the reason that 2x2 is a silly event: once you figure out how to one-look a solve you can learn how to more efficiently one-look the solve, but the only part that really counts (at least for reasonably fast solvers) is a straight-up dexterity contest.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Oct 25, 2017)

efattah said:


> Well the WCA benefitted from 22 years (1981-2003) of Rubik's original product, Rubik's original world championship and the other competitions it spawned and the community that they created... While I'm not a big fan of the Rubik company, that's the truth.
> 
> I've seen this type of thing happen in other sports. In the end it doesn't matter if you 'like' something or not. The people with more money, and the better eye for media & sponsorship always win in the end, if they execute well. Newcomers to an established scene rarely win, but it does happen. A similar example could be said of a video game community that was dominated by Nintendo and Sega. Until the giants (Sony and Microsoft) came in and destroyed the old community and created a new one with the Playstation and Xbox. And before that the game community itself was created by Atari, until Nintendo and Sega came in.


Cubing was all but dead until early 2000s.
The WCA brought it back.


----------



## pjk (Oct 26, 2017)

Tabe said:


> I'm going to break from the crowd a little bit and say that I actually like, and welcome, most of the things Rubik's and Red Bull are doing here. I welcome the idea of larger competitions that feature spectator-friendly events and bigger payoffs.


I'd also agree with this. More competitions, more organization, more ideas, and a bigger community is only better. It isn't bypassing the WCA as far as I see. I think having Red Bull sponsoring competitions is a massive step for the community, and something we should be super excited about.

@cmhardw (Chris Hardwick) posted this on FB about an hour ago which is worth reading:


> This is my personal and open letter to the WCA community.
> 
> Many of you have heard that the Rubik's Cube Speedsolving Association (RCSA) has made public their plan to host a cubing World Championship in 2018 in partnership with Red Bull.
> 
> ...



Also worth reading this if you missed it:
https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/...g-association-a-message-from-ernő-rubik.63311


----------



## Rubix Cubix (Oct 26, 2017)

I also think the no inspection makes sense as well. If you say to a non Cuber I can solve this in 10 seconds, then you look at it for 15 seconds before you make a turn, to them it would still be considered "solving" it.

Also didn't 3x3 no inspection used to be an official event?


----------



## pglewis (Oct 26, 2017)

So many things suddenly make a lot more sense to me.


----------



## Tabe (Oct 26, 2017)

Rubix Cubix said:


> I also think the no inspection makes sense as well. If you say to a non Cuber I can solve this in 10 seconds, then you look at it for 15 seconds before you make a turn, to them it would still be considered "solving" it.


Thank you. I was trying to think of a good way to say this exact same point, but couldn't find the right words, so I left it out of my post entirely


----------



## theawesomecuber (Oct 26, 2017)

I think I have a couple original thoughts to throw in.

First, the cubing community should distance itself as far as possible from the Rubik's company. The cubing community has done perfectly well without them for over 10 years, and ever since they've shown interest in speedcubing there has been controversy after controversy.

Second, the WCA should absolutely retaliate. Obviously cubing shouldn't become a full-on spectator sport, but I think that there needs to be more video from competitions around the world posted onto YouTube, perhaps an official WCA channel. I'm sure there are more ways to appeal to a more general public, maybe we could get big competitions on TV at some point! haha maybe that's asking a bit too much.

I really hope that we as a community respond more than just expressing anger. Please, everyone, cooperate together so we can actually make a difference. Thanks.


----------



## Ghost Cuber (Oct 26, 2017)

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I really don't care about this at all as long as it doesn't try to interfere with the WCA.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 26, 2017)

This is all about MONEY. I call BS on the legacy crap. 

I could care less about Rubiks adding, changing, or removing events. I actually like that part considering there are some aspects of the current rules I've always thought needed refining. 

I completely agree with @Tabe about the inspection process. Here's how I always saw it. 2 solvers both get 15 second averages. Yet one of them only uses 5 seconds of inspection on average, the other uses 14. It's obvious what this means. I always thought the 15 seconds was too much and not quite the best way to keep a even starting point.

But that is unimportant compared to what RCSA is doing. It's sad that they're starting they're own sanctioning body. Swooping in and stealing all of the work the WCA has done to grow the cubing scene. 

Anyone who buys the "Erno is noble and wants to ensure his legacy" argument is naive. If this was true. For one, Rubik would have jumped into making viable speedcubes as soon as third party companies started producing cubes that were infinitely better at a fraction of the cost. But no they didnt. Which brings up the number 2. They were still making their money on shitty design because not enough ppl new there were better options. 
Now that a larger part of the world is wising up to the world of hardware. I'm willing to bet my life that Rubik saw the writing on the wall. Sales will, or are already dropping because there are more and more companies producing quality cubes. 

And so the RCSA is born. 

The sad part is it'll work. Money talks. Sponsored events where prize money is way bigger. Is going to steal all the top cubers. And they will take over as the main cubing body in the future. All while stepping over the WCA and all the work they've done out of love for their hobby. Not PROFITS. 

I think it's great that cubing will gain popularity. I just think it's sad that it's because of money..


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

Fixed description but couldn't fix it enough for them to cancel it :/


----------



## turtwig (Oct 26, 2017)

VenomCubing said:


> Cubing isn't a spectator sport in the slightest. if it was, this would've happened a long time ago, and nobody would've cared. Cubing is for cubers, not spectators. The whole idea of 1v1 is completely stupid. I would quit speedcubing if all events ended up turning into this cesspool.



I have to say I disagree with this idea that cubing is only for cubers. Of course it's nice to have our own in-group kind of thing, but I don't think it's bad if 'outsiders' can enjoy it as well, even if it's not what we think of as cubing.

Overall, I think that this competition will be good for cubing. Of course, as a cuber, the way this is advertised looks silly and cringey, but I don't think they're harming the WCA or its competitions. It's not like the WCA is going to disappear or all the top cubers are going to sell-out and never go to WCA competitions again. This is really just like the episodes of the Chinese game show "The Brain" that Feliks and some other cubers participated in. We can't expect non-cubers to try and understand how we run our competitions, so I think having these kinds of events is a good way to 'introduce' the public to speedcubing.

EDIT: If Rubik's starts to use this competition to try to ban or destroy WCA competitions, it would be horrible, but so far from what I see, I don't think (or at least I hope) that the two types of competitions can exist together.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 26, 2017)

pglewis said:


> So many things suddenly make a lot more sense to me.


On the other hand, if they'd just skipped the lawsuit part and gone straight to this they could have had the opportunity to have a really great amateur-professional symbiosis with WCA. Instead they chose to create as thorough a divide as they could between the WCA and the Really Silly Attorneys.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

One Wheel said:


> On the other hand, if they'd just skipped the lawsuit part and gone straight to this they could have had the opportunity to have a really great amateur-professional symbiosis with WCA. Instead they chose to create as thorough a divide as they could between the WCA and the Really Silly Attorneys.


Well you do realize if they could stop making cubing stores and knock out the WCA then they would have 100% of the cube market and would make 100% of money at any competition. Makes sense why they would do it.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 26, 2017)

Underwatercuber said:


> Well you do realize if they could stop making cubing stores and knock out the WCA then they would have 100% of the cube market and would make 100% of money at any competition. Makes sense why they would do it.



This sums up my entire view in way fewer words! Its about money. Not cubing.


----------



## AidanNoogie (Oct 26, 2017)

Is Rubik's trying to destroy the WCA now?


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 26, 2017)

AidanNoogie said:


> Is Rubik's trying to destroy the WCA now?


There is no evidence at all that this is the case, and seems to be unlikely.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

First video on YouTube I have seen so far where someone actually states their opinion instead of just making a video where they tell you to relax so they can get views.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 26, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> There is no evidence at all that this is the case, and seems to be unlikely.



They don't have to actively try to destroy the WCA. They just have to do what they're doing now. Create a bigger better paying system. Eventually WCA will be reduced in importance as a by product


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

Jacob Ambrose just laid everyone thing out perfectly 

“To Summarize current news in the cubing world: RCSA is a new organization with a lot of money from the Rubik's Cube. They have threaten organizations like WCA and companies like the cubicle with ultimatums and law suits and now they intend to hold competitions sponsored by Red Bull behind the backs of WCA. 




My Views:
Money is not what this is about, WCA has not made any profit from developing speedcubing in any way over the past 15 years. We have only promoted speedcubing in communities around the world in fair conditions. RCSA is now taking that and dumping large amounts of money to deter cubers from WCA events and to their own. 

WCA and competing in competitions has always been about an individuals growth, sure we have ranks and podiums and records, but at the end of the day most cubers are more focused on how they did and how their improving, that's what's important and what keeps cubers into speedcubing (not everyone can be world class) RCSA is now taking head to head style to actively compete to win a competition and then qualify for the "~World Championship~". Newcomers are now unwelcome as there is a very small chance that they would be doing more than 3 solves at the competitions, middle class cubers aren't going to see any benefit in loosing to world class cubers, and world class cubers, well I hope that they put that prize money to good use. 

As for me, I'll continue to support WCA and spread speedcubing with official competitions. I hope that RCSA will stop their power crazy suicide bomb.

-Jacob”


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 26, 2017)

kbrune said:


> They don't have to actively try to destroy the WCA. They just have to do what they're doing now. Create a bigger better paying system. Eventually WCA will be reduced in importance as a by product


I really doubt that will happen, as long as people want to host, delegate and compete in WCA competitions, the WCA will not die. In fact, I even think that the number of WCA competitions could drastically increase if this was successful.


----------



## Mellis Ferton (Oct 26, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> I really doubt that will happen, as long as people want to host, delegate and compete in WCA competitions, the WCA will not die. In fact, I even think that the number of WCA competitions could drastically increase if this was successful.


I agree. Some people who have never heard of speedcubing may know Red Bull, and hear about this. A part of people might be interesting into solving one, and another part might be into speedsolving! More speedcubers would be the best for the WCA. More people going to competitions, and *maybe *more people hosting competitions.


----------



## RedJack22 (Oct 26, 2017)

I've been reading all these comments, and it's honestly quite interesting (and cool) how passionate people are about cubing! 

Now I don't a whole lot of room to talk, as I've never been to a comp before, and have only been cubing for about 7-8 months, but as efattah said above: "The people with more money, and the better eye for media & sponsorship always win in the end, if they execute well." There is a reason why Monster Energy now is NASCAR's main sponsor; they have the money, and they want to make more of it.

If you think about it, this could give cubing a new look, which isn't inherently a bad thing. However, as the old saying goes: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The community is fantastic right now (from my perspective), and there's nothing about that seems to need change.

One thing that I haven't seen is the fact that competition (in terms of Rubik's vs. WCA) ALWAYS leads to improvement. The fact is, if Rubik's competitions are better than WCA competitions, then people will leave the WCA for Rubik's; that is basic economics. However, it might be such a thing that nobody likes the new style of comps, and then Rubik's will fail colossally!

This doesn't mean cubing will suck now; it's just a part of change, and the I guess the best thing to do is to take it with our best foot forward, because who knows? It might be one of the best things that has ever happened to cubing!

-Jack, from JCB ShortFilms


----------



## Mellis Ferton (Oct 26, 2017)

RedJack22 said:


> I've been reading all these comments, and it's honestly quite interesting (and cool) how passionate people are about cubing!
> 
> Now I don't a whole lot of room to talk, as I've never been to a comp before, and have only been cubing for about 7-8 months, but as efattah said above: "The people with more money, and the better eye for media & sponsorship always win in the end, if they execute well." There is a reason why Monster Energy now is NASCAR's main sponsor; they have the money, and they want to make more of it.
> 
> ...


Honestly one of the best I've seen so far.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 26, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> I really doubt that will happen, as long as people want to host, delegate and compete in WCA competitions, the WCA will not die. In fact, I even think that the number of WCA competitions could drastically increase if this was successful.





Mellis Ferton said:


> I agree. Some people who have never heard of speedcubing may know Red Bull, and hear about this. A part of people might be interesting into solving one, and another part might be into speedsolving! More speedcubers would be the best for the WCA. More people going to competitions, and *maybe *more people hosting competitions.



I didn't say that WCA would die. My point is that Rubik will become the relevant body. And competing in WCA events won't hold any importance. Winning a WCA event will be meaningless. It'll become like a practice session or trainging grounds for up and coming talent. Not to say that this is terrible either. I just think that the WCA should remain as the most revered body of speedcubing relevance. Since they created the scene as it is today from the ground up. WCA should have championships sponsored by Big money. Rubik should stay as a manufacturer much like all the others. The NHL isn't run by CCM or any other company that sells hockey equipment. Im not laying this out the way i'd like but somewhere in there is truth.

Rubik is after money plain and simple. And they will stomp on the WCA to get it if they have to.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 26, 2017)

kbrune said:


> I didn't say that WCA would die. My point is that Rubik will become the relevant body. And competing in WCA events won't hold any importance. Winning a WCA event will be meaningless. It'll become like a practice session or trainging grounds for up and coming talent. Not to say that this is terrible either. I just think that the WCA should remain as the most revered body of speedcubing relevance. Since they created the scene as it is today from the ground up. WCA should have championships sponsored by Big money. Rubik should stay as a manufacturer much like all the others. The NHL isn't run by CCM or any other company that sells hockey equipment. Im not laying this out the way i'd like but somewhere in there is truth.
> 
> Rubik is after money plain and simple. And they will stomp on the WCA to get it if they have to.




I doubt winning a WCA comp would become meaningless, as this is really in the eye of the beholder. I do see a point with the last 3 sentences, and one of the things I don't like with this is that you have to use rubik's 3x3s.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 26, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> I doubt winning a WCA comp would become meaningless, as this is really in the eye of the beholder. I do see a point with the last 3 sentences, and one of the things I don't like with this is that you have to use rubik's 3x3s.



Exactly. Everything Rubik is doing sheds light on their true motives. Lawsuits, limiting hardware to their product. Take over the cubing world while it's still not quite mainstream yet.


----------



## RedJack22 (Oct 26, 2017)

Mellis Ferton said:


> Honestly one of the best I've seen so far.



Thanks. I really appreciate it!


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Oct 26, 2017)

Feliks Zemdegs just liked a post on Instagram (by Antonie Paterakis) supporting boycotting this competition.


----------



## cuber314159 (Oct 26, 2017)

I dont think we should completely boycott it but educate the public that Rubik's cubes are rubbish and that the WCA is better, that way we can grow speedubing without letting Rubik's mess it up


----------



## Miro (Oct 26, 2017)

Why WCA denied cooperate with RSA? Can someone write relevant info?


----------



## tx789 (Oct 26, 2017)

Having the manufacturer of the equipment running comps is a conflict of interest. Also these comps for the redbull world championship is likely to have a lot of issues it will be like comps in and around 2004. Their lack of experience may be what kills it for them. People did not know how to run comps back in the day because the had not be ran yet. In addition that the organizers don't cube leads to issues with format. 

Personally the lack of events they have would make it boring. They go on about the mind and intelligence need for solving a cube without including BLD or FMC. FMC would be too boring as far as they are concerned in the way the WCA does it. Deciding not to have BLD shows a lack of research in my opinion. Which would be crippling. 

We will have to see what this brings. It could be a failure, who knows maybe the WCA will end up with bigger sponsors once they realise that WCA comps are so, so much better established. The fact you can just turn up to a comp easily is something that needs to stay for growth of cubing. 

Rubiks certainly are not helping themselves with this. Redbull must of noticed the negative reaction. 

The format proposed could be fun to do as a unoffical event but as the way of ranking competitors? It would be different. 

Still the lawsuit seems to focus only on 3x3 and the event at this comp all involve 3x3. It is interesting to note.


To summarise a manufacturer of the equipment used in a comp is a conflict of interests and should be avoided at all costs. Having people run a comp with no knowledge of what they are doing is stupid. It may seem simple to them but there are a lot of small things you don't think of that will affect the comp. Time limits for competitors, logistics of scrambling, penalties ,and more. There are a lot of things I can't think of but I am sure if you ask people around in 2003, they can give you a list. 



This is not the end of the world. Redbull is likely expecting a certain turnout of publicity and if the event does not reach that level, then they are unlikely to sponsor again.


----------



## DhruvA (Oct 26, 2017)

Rubik's is getting greedy.
The sponsored the World Championships and also made the competitors in nations cup use the rsc. If they want more, they better make some good cubes. Suing TheCubicle was bad enough already and now this thing.

I hope nobody competes in this and makes the comp a flop.
They probably haven't even decided some regulations to be followed and this also seems quite amateur to me.
WCA put in so many years of hardwork into making speedcubing a thing and now rubik's can't do anything to compete with that.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 26, 2017)

Competition Cuber said:


> BOYCOTT THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!


It would be nice if they could be quietly convinced to drop the whole thing, but ultimately more effective will be to use the publicity. How expensive/feasible would it be for WCA to buy youtube ads that play on videos about Red Bull Mind Games?


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 26, 2017)

Miro said:


> Why WCA denied cooperate with RSA? Can someone write relevant info?


Probably something along the lines of everyone uses Rubik's products or no deal.


One Wheel said:


> It would be nice if they could be quietly convinced to drop the whole thing, but ultimately more effective will be to use the publicity. How expensive/feasible would it be for WCA to buy youtube ads that play on videos about Red Bull Mind Games?


That money is better spent elsewhere.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 26, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> That money is better spent elsewhere.



Probably so, but at least it's a more constructive way to piss off Red Bull/Rubik's/RSA/Seven Towns than boycotting them. If they can introduce modern speedsolving to a broader audience, and WCA can be there to say that there is more to it than facing off against some inhumanly fast person.


----------



## CarterK (Oct 26, 2017)

Does this have anything to do with this?


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

tx789 said:


> Personally the lack of events they have would make it boring. They go on about the mind and intelligence need for solving a cube without including BLD or FMC. FMC would be too boring as far as they are concerned in the way the WCA does it. Deciding not to have BLD shows a lack of research in my opinion. Which would be crippling.


This event is 100% to show off speedcubing. Fmc and bld aren’t super spectator friendly events and therefore they will not have them.


----------



## Micah Walker (Oct 26, 2017)

This whole thing is kind of dumb! this competition is clearly being run by a couple ginormous organazations who have never been to a speedsolving competition, and are just trying to make money. I'm happy they're trying to promote speedcubing, but the way they're going about it doesn't work for the community!
A better way to promote speed cubing might be having a couple top cubers in a commercial, or what they did at worlds last year at Worlds with the head-to-head event. 
I think the best thing we can do as a community is boycotting this whole thing!


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 26, 2017)

The plot thickens...


----------



## sqAree (Oct 26, 2017)

Props, Dana's way of handling this seems reasonable.


----------



## Sajwo (Oct 26, 2017)

Underwatercuber said:


> The plot thickens...



So how exactly a 18 years girl that is not yet a candidate can change anything?


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 26, 2017)

Underwatercuber said:


> This event is 100% to show off speedcubing. Fmc and bld aren’t super spectator friendly events and therefore they will not have them.



I agree on FMC, and BLD at my level too. But high-level BLD can be very entertaining. I was at the post office the other day mailing a couple of cubes and the guy behind the counter started telling me how when he was in school he thought he was hot stuff because he could solve one side. Now his kids play with them, and he saw a crazy youtube video recently: some kid had a scrambled cube and he was looking at it, getting ready to solve it, then they put a blindfold on him . . . The poor guys mind was absolutely blown.



Sajwo said:


> So how exactly a 18 years girl that is not yet a candidate can change anything?



She's got the fastest 3x3 single by a female in the WCA database by over a second and fastest average by over 1/3 of a second. They're interested in single times, and they've announced that they'll have a female division. The fastest female (3x3) speedcuber in the world has tremendous leverage.


----------



## RicardoRix (Oct 26, 2017)

I can't see how this can be a bad thing. The Rubiks-RedBull event is purely targeted to the elite competitors and will if anything raise the profile of cubing in general. The events don't really cross-over with the WCA events, and the rescramble actually looks very cool, this will hopefully throw up a new side of cubing, much like BLD to sighted solving.
The WCA in no way will be badly affected. They ARE the everything of the general community and this is not under threat, anyone can join in, the records will still stand, there events will still go ahead and welcome everyone, noobs, and oldies to compete and solve alongside the best cubers.

About the money thing, RedBull just throw money away on Advertising, it's just a big advert, unlikely to be seen as a money spinner.

And the no inspection thing, I'm all for it.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Oct 26, 2017)

#handsoffourcubes


----------



## Sajwo (Oct 26, 2017)

One Wheel said:


> She's got the fastest 3x3 single by a female in the WCA database by over a second and fastest average by over 1/3 of a second. They're interested in single times, and they've announced that they'll have a female division. The fastest female (3x3) speedcuber in the world has tremendous leverage.



Just a competitor like me or you. Your speed doesn't determine anything. Feliks is even a better example, yet he has no influence in WCA or RSCA at all.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 26, 2017)

Sajwo said:


> Just a competitor like me or you. Your speed doesn't determine anything. Feliks is even a better example, yet he has no influence in WCA or RSCA at all.


I don't know how much influence Feliks has, but considering the general dearth of world class female (or any female) speedcubers they need every one they can get and any given one (especially the best) will have outsized weight. Feliks' influence is also greatly reduced by the fact that he does not currently hold the WR single.


----------



## DGCubes (Oct 26, 2017)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> #handsoffourcubes



I first read that as "hands of four cubes," lol.

Interesting discussion though. I'm definitely not as against it as I originally was, especially now that there's potential for the WCA to get involved, according to Dana. I'll refrain from stating a definite opinion until we get more information though.


----------



## CLL Smooth (Oct 26, 2017)

This is just fine. Everything is going to be OK.


----------



## Nestor (Oct 26, 2017)

After I resigned as a delegate I had no idea how things with the RSA had been proggressing and I was shocked to see this. Initially I was excited about the news: I saw it as an opportunity to grow cubing and provide a well deserved spotlight and cash for top cubers and asumed that the WCA had finally reached an agreement with Rubiks. Then I learned what happened behind doors and I was irritated to say the least.

Already made my rant on facebook:

This is frustrating. For years thousands of people have put great effort and work to promote cubing, advance cube designs and popularize the mental sport. Then comes Rubiks trying to rip a profit out of the popularity created by the community, suing stores and trying to replace the WCA, doing so in secret behind the back of those they claim to support.

Shame on Red Bull for not approaching or getting informed about the community.


----------



## pglewis (Oct 26, 2017)

cuber314159 said:


> I dont think we should completely boycott it but educate the public that Rubik's cubes are rubbish and that the WCA is better, that way we can grow speedubing without letting Rubik's mess it up



My cynicism creeps dives in at this point. Educate the public. The same public that more than three and half decades later thinks it's spelled "Rubix", that you solve one side at a time, and solving methods involve math. I don't see it.


----------



## pglewis (Oct 26, 2017)

Nestor said:


> After I resigned as a delegate I had no idea how things with the RSA had been proggressing and I was shocked to see this. Initially I was excited about the news: I saw it as an opportunity to grow cubing and provide a well deserved spotlight and cash for top cubers and asumed that the WCA had finally reached an agreement with Rubiks. Then I learned what happened behind doors and I was irritated to say the least.
> 
> Already made my rant on facebook:
> 
> ...



Matches a lot of my sentiments.

The problem I'm having is Seven Towns/Rubik's Brands have shown me zero evidence that they're out to improve the sport. Other hardware manufacturers have put in hard work to iterate design improvements while Seven Towns repeatedly uses their resources to attempt to shut them down crying "inferior knock offs" and "unfair competition". The WCA has nurtured this hobby into a bone fide sport, codifying regulations and legitimizing competitions. Then Rubik's Brands steps in, again, trying to push a "Rubik's Brand only" ultimatum.

In their capable hands Rubik's has languished as a long-expired viral fad for over 40 years. They could be making amazing hardware right now. So far they've used their name recognition and resources for corporate bullying instead of working to be a best of breed company. At no point have they shown any evidence that they're out to do anything more than line their own pockets from a reborn popularity they have little to do with.


----------



## Rama (Oct 26, 2017)

Dis... I like.


----------



## obelisk477 (Oct 26, 2017)

inb4 they use hand scrambles or random move sequences for the scrambling algorithms...


----------



## bgcatfan (Oct 26, 2017)

My turn to chime in  (also, similarly to RedJack, I've never been to a competition. But I've lurked since 2003).

I've long thought that the commercial and entertainment aspects of cubing have huge potential and have been largely untapped. One idea that I've contemplated, more seriously since watching highlight videos of this year's World Championships, is to create a "Made for TV" YouTube broadcast of a cubing competition. Create the storyline, edit the video footage, add some interviews and commentary (afterwards, not during) and I think it will be a huge success. Live broadcasting is not interesting, imho, it has to be a special-made show.

In addition, although the current WCA competition format is ok, head to head format is more interesting from an entertainment standpoint. See the guanlong/sail tournaments + nations cup for examples. I really like watching these competitions. However, these competitions don't count for anything (which probably contributes to it's relaxed and fun atmosphere). The complication is in the fact that it's difficult to keep any sort of records based on these events, with the current WCA regulations. I'd like to see more of these events, but not in place of the current WCA events. Perhaps some new categories of world records could be created, if these were to become official events. No one would worry, though, about not being able to compete their normal amount at a competition (i.e., lose and be out after 3 solves).

Also thoughts on the Rubik's World Championship. This is only one tournament [and it actually models the 1982 world championship]. The desire to compete more will lead to involvement with the WCA, as there are not many RSCA tournaments at this point in time.



tx789 said:


> Having the manufacturer of the equipment running comps is a conflict of interest.


Definitely agree with this, especially in the case that Rubik's loses the lawsuit. If they don't, then it will be complicated internationally.

If Rubik's continues to enforce only their brand of cube, and the sanctioning bodies start to battle, then I think the standard tournament structure with all brands (i.e. WCA) could win out by finding a bigger sponsor than Rubik's does.

Sorry, long post. My thoughts on inspection: Rubik's set the precedent for inspection at the original World Championship in 82, so inspection is nothing new. What I find odd is the inconsistency. The Red Bull championship, with inspection for speedsolving, but not the other two events. And WCA, for no inspection for Blind, but for everything else.


----------



## sqAree (Oct 26, 2017)

This might seem obvious but the fact that Rubik's isn't able to make good hardware might distract:

In my opinion Rubik's ability to build good cubes should in no way be related to the choice of cubes in competitions (whether that be WCA or Red Bull or whatever comes in the future). It seems very important that competitors are allowed to use the cubes they're the most comfortable with, no matter who manufactured them. This should remain true even if Rubik's starts making good cubes in the future.


----------



## pglewis (Oct 26, 2017)

sqAree said:


> This might seem obvious but the fact that Rubik's isn't able to make good hardware might distract:
> 
> In my opinion Rubik's ability to build good cubes should in no way be related to the choice of cubes in competitions (whether that be WCA or Red Bull or whatever comes in the future). It seems very important that competitors are allowed to use the cubes they're the most comfortable with, no matter who manufactured them. This should remain true even if Rubik's starts making good cubes in the future.



Agreed, though if the hardware is good enough people are happily willing to accept tighter control. I won't name names but maybe a computer company named after a fruit that rhymes with zapple.


----------



## AlphaSheep (Oct 26, 2017)

I've seen some comments on Facebook and on the Youtube video that are basically attacking Dana, Alexandre, and the Weyer brothers for appearing in the video. I have to say, I'm incredibly disappointed in the people who would hold something like this against those cubers.

For the record, in this post when I refer to Rubik's, I should make it explicitly clear that I mean both Rubik's Brand Limited (RBL) and the Rubik's Cube Speedsolving Association (RCSA) because I don't see any evidence that they are independent organisations with independent interests. Every action that RCSA has taken appears to be with the intention of promoting or increasing profits of RBL. And we all know that RBL's recent actions have not been in the best interest of speedcubing in general. But lets put that aside for now, because it clouds our judgement of the current situation.

I think people are being pretty stupid and emotional here. There are a lot of people angry about this competition, hoping that it will fail, etc, and that's not really the right attitude. With clouded emotions, it's actually difficult to see that this is actually really good for the community. Imagine, if you can, that this event did not have the Rubik's name attached. Imagine Rubik's and GAN had no connection whatsoever, and that this competition had been organised by Red Bull and GAN only (or perhaps even Qiyi or Moyu, if you really don't like GAN). Even if it falls outside the WCA, is that really an issue? How is this different from any other unofficial competition with unofficial events. People are slamming the 1v1 format, claiming that's not what cubing is about, but then why do people at competitions so often race each other, and why do a number of big competitions have head to head finals?

Also, I feel people are assuming that Rubik's started this. I don't know if that's really a safe assumption to make. I get the impression and think it's more likely that Red Bull had the idea first, and approached Rubik's. There's an awful lot of Red Bull logos, and other than on the cubes, there's actually no Rubik's logo anywhere and RCSA isn't mentioned at all.

I think a lot of angry people are making a big noise and calling for boycotts, which will only hurt the WCA, and more importantly the cubing community in the long run. This is very different to a WCA competition, and even if it does turn out bad, I'm sure that the organisers will learn and improve for the next time. I have every confidence that this type of competition can work out well in the future. I even don't have a problem with only one brand of cube being allowed, as long as they provide the cubes and actually set them up properly (no one wants a repeat of the 1982 mess).

So, before I go on, I'd like to make it clear that the competition itself is a good thing, and I strongly believe that the cubing community should respect the decisions of anyone who decides to compete, just as they should respect the decisions of anyone who chooses not to. Don't attack people for their choices. I always believed our community was better than that, and it's incredibly disappointing to read insults, even one call for Dana's delegate status to be revoked. If that sort of thing did actually happen, I'd resign as a delegate on the spot, because that's not the sort of organisation that I want to be a part of.

So now here's the stuff that should people should actually be worried about:

The name. They use the words "World Championship 2018". The World Championship has been organised by the WCA every 2 years since 2003. To use the same name as an existing well established competition is completely hypocritical. This is especially true as Rubik's has always made such a big deal about intellectual property infringement. Intellectual property, I should add, that European courts ruled they have no legitimate claim to due the fact that they irresponsibly let the patent expire in 2000, so they have to try abuse trademark law to protect it. It's a completely different competition format. Are they trying to cause confusion by using the same name? You'd think they'd respect that the World Championship already has a meaning in the cubing community and come up with a different name for this.
The countries involved. They call it a "world" championship, but there are only 17 countries with qualifier events. For reference, the actual World Championship in 2017 had cubers from 64 different countries. What about the rest of us. Ignoring the fact that the continent I live on has been completely ignored as usual (I guess it's kind of justifiable, but then they include Turkey which is actually slower than Algeria), but what about those countries which actually do have really fast competitors? South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, Poland, UK? South America is also horribly underrepresented. Argentina and Peru both have really strong cubing communities. Where are their qualifiers?
Finally, I think I must emphasis that unlike the other two points, this point is pure speculation. Rubik's must have had some input in the organisation of this (why else would they be using Rubik's Speed Cubes instead of the GAN cubes that all those appearing in the video normally use). Rubik's is well aware of the WCA, and knows that the WCA has a lot of expertise in running competitions. The fact that this happened behind the scenes without input from the WCA is very suspicious. Is this Rubik's hinting to the WCA that they can run competitions without the WCA? This is the one point that I'm seeing crop up in almost every comment, but I really do think that it is the smallest of the real issues.

*TL;DR*: Don't attack people for their choices; this competition is probably a good thing although the "World Championship" part of the name is in bad faith; and the world is more than just 17 countries.


----------



## pglewis (Oct 26, 2017)

AlphaSheep said:


> So, before I go on, I'd like to make it clear that the competition itself is a good thing [...]



If this were isolated I would agree. I could probably even get past the fact that they're doing a complete end-run around the WCA, who has spent the past decade and a half refining regulations, event organization, expanding participation, and collecting statistics that have become the defacto standard in the sport. But it's not an isolated thing and in context with other factors over the past couple years it feels like another salvo fired over the bow of the only community that actually knows how to correctly spell their brand name. 

Will good things come out of it? Almost certainly, if from the exposure alone, but I'm not sure about the ends justifying the means. I'm obviously in the group that is very uncomfortable with the directions RBL have been trying to steer things and it's not completely just resistance to change. 



AlphaSheep said:


> [...] and I strongly believe that the cubing community should respect the decisions of anyone who decides to compete [...]



Agreed and I can't stress it enough: do not demonize anyone regardless of where they stand. In-fighting is ugliest possible outcome.


----------



## kbrune (Oct 27, 2017)

Underwatercuber said:


> This event is 100% to show off speedcubing. Fmc and bld aren’t super spectator friendly events and therefore they will not have them.



Fast BLDers are awesome to watch!



RicardoRix said:


> the rescramble actually looks very cool, this will hopefully throw up a new side of cubing, much like BLD to sighted solving.



Yeah watching someone scramble is exhilarating! It's "match the scramble" from the weekly comp. Most ppl who have participated will say similarly. It's fun to do a few times but pretty boring to watch. Bad event considering their aim is to offer spectator friendly "WOW he's fast" stuff.


----------



## Max Cruz (Oct 27, 2017)

One good thing about this is there are now tiers of competition. Only the fastest get to compete. Unlike WCA competitions where 90% of competitors are whiny ten-year-olds (no offense to whiny ten-year-olds). 

Think about the WCA as a training ground for the Rubik's competitions and the Olympics.


----------



## obelisk477 (Oct 27, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> Think about the WCA as a training ground for the Rubik's competitions and the Olympics.



No thanks.


----------



## Cale S (Oct 27, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> One good thing about this is there are now tiers of competition. Only the fastest get to compete. Unlike WCA competitions where 90% of competitors are whiny ten-year-olds (no offense to whiny ten-year-olds).
> 
> Think about the WCA as a training ground for the Rubik's competitions and the Olympics.



WCA has been holding competitions for over a decade AND already has continental and World Championships. I will never see this as a level above the WCA Worlds


----------



## T1_M0 (Oct 27, 2017)

Everything would be completely fine if just it wasn't called a World Championship. Say the name was Red Bull Rubik's Cube World Tour and no one would see it disabling the real worlds/euros.


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 27, 2017)

T1_M0 said:


> Everything would be completely fine if just it wasn't called a World Championship. Say the name was Red Bull Rubik's Cube World Tour and no one would see it disabling the real worlds/euros.


This plus qualifiers in more countries with events and formats that make more sense (OH bo3 no inspection and match the scramble lul) and this could be really cool.


----------



## efattah (Oct 27, 2017)

We live in a free world where people can do anything they want (generally speaking...), and one should embrace that.

Using the example of other similar developing sports, I have seen this all before, and the moment that one group starts to 'panic' and calls for 'boycotts' and tries to somehow 'stop' or 'prevent' another group from holding an event, that has ALWAYS (historically) led to the eventual collapse of the group trying to block things. The world moves forward by DOING things, not by STOPPING OTHERS from doing things.

The correct attitude is to simply let history take its course. Either the event is successful and grows, or it will be a failure and that's the end. If two organizations want to independently compete and try to attract cubers, viewers, and sponsors, that is natural free competition and that is what our society is based upon. The moment that you start with a fear based mentality of trying block another group from doing something, then you become worse than them. If you are angry that Rubik is suing the cubicle, consider that the lawsuit is an act of blocking. By you (WCA members) trying to 'block' the Rubik's competition you are stooping down to the same level as them. If you want to take the high road and be the better group/organization, then you never try to block your competitor organization at all, but instead beat them at their own game by hosting better events. You win by doing your part well, not trying to prevent your opponent from succeeding. At a cubing competition, do you try to solve your fastest? Or do you try to sabotage your opponents? Both can lead to you winning the competition. One is honorable, the other leads to eventual disqualification.

I love what the WCA has done over the years, therefore I strongly urge *against* any type of boycotting activity, anti-advertising campaigns or anything like that, which historically ends badly.


----------



## Goosly (Oct 27, 2017)

In case it hasn't been posted here yet, Dana Yi made a video explaining her opinion:


----------



## cuber314159 (Oct 27, 2017)




----------



## Duncan Bannon (Oct 27, 2017)

Goosly said:


> In case it hasn't been posted here yet, Dana Yi made a video explaining her opinion:



Thats PERFECT go DANA!


----------



## pglewis (Oct 27, 2017)

Goosly said:


> In case it hasn't been posted here yet, Dana Yi made a video explaining her opinion:



Excellent attitude about this.


----------



## Max Cruz (Oct 27, 2017)

I was wondering what the community's response to the CCA was when it was established? Was there just as much backlash? 

I believe in letting Rubik's prove itself, i.e. giving them the benefit of the doubt. The WCA works, but sometimes, progress necessitates drastic changes. 

After all, Blackberrys were good before the iPhone.


----------



## RedJack22 (Oct 27, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> I was wondering what the community's response to the CCA was when it was established? Was there just as much backlash?
> 
> I believe in letting Rubik's prove itself, i.e. giving them the benefit of the doubt. The WCA works, but sometimes, progress necessitates drastic changes.
> 
> After all, Blackberrys were good before the iPhone.



Good point about BlackBerry phones. I hadn't thought of that, but it really is true. 

If Rubik's does prove that it can do this, then they have every right to do it. I just hope the WCA doesn't go away (or the Cubicle.us).


----------



## tx789 (Oct 27, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> I was wondering what the community's response to the CCA was when it was established?



Haiyan Zhuang founded that after he was banned and I think it was seen as a bit of a joke. No one took it too seriously. I don't think was heard of it at all. A little in 2010. China has always seemed distant. You don't see many Chinese Cubers on forums and facebook groups.


----------



## hcfong (Oct 27, 2017)

tx789 said:


> Haiyan Zhuang founded that after he was banned and I think it was seen as a bit of a joke. No one took it too seriously. I don't think was heard of it at all. A little in 2010. China has always seemed distant. You don't see many Chinese Cubers on forums and facebook groups.



It definitely wasn't seen as a joke or not being taken seriously. It was limited to the Chinese cubing community, so the cubing community outside of China didn't really notice much about it, but in China the CCA has caused quite some problems for the WCA organisers there, including threats and manipulations. And as far as I know, it wasn't founded by Haiyan Zhuang, but it was founded as a response to his suspension for manipulating and threatening behaviour by people who were on his side. For more information, read Chris Kruegers post here


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Oct 28, 2017)

You're all blind.

The issue is the impression that rubiks have left. When they initiated the lawsuit against TC they implied that they wanted to be in charge and were willing to go to extreme lengths to get their way. Now, when they announce this people automatically assume this is to take over cubing. And it very well could be an attempt.

I am totally against this. 

As for everybody saying that we're overreacting, no, we're not. Rubik's have already cemented themselves as a pile of **** who only cares about money and doesn't think about the community. It's only reasonable to assume that it's the same for this, and judging by the reaction, it seems to be that way.



Max Cruz said:


> One good thing about this is there are now tiers of competition. Only the fastest get to compete. Unlike WCA competitions where 90% of competitors are whiny ten-year-olds (no offense to whiny ten-year-olds).
> 
> Think about the WCA as a training ground for the Rubik's competitions and the Olympics.


This is not true. I'm considered slow, and I'm not a "whiny ten-year old". Plenty of older cubers are not good enough to make it to the world championships, so I don't know why you're saying this.


----------



## asacuber (Oct 28, 2017)

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...-the-red-bull-rubik-s-cube-world-championship


----------



## Micah Walker (Oct 28, 2017)

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...-the-red-bull-rubik-s-cube-world-championship
The WCA board recently posted a response to the cubing community's concerns about the Red Bull Rubik's Cube world championship.
Thoughts?


----------



## obelisk477 (Oct 28, 2017)

Micah Walker said:


> https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...-the-red-bull-rubik-s-cube-world-championship
> The WCA board recently posted a response to the cubing community's concerns about the Red Bull Rubik's Cube world championship.
> Thoughts?



I sincerely appreciate the kindness of spirit that everyone has about being supportive of people who will choose to participate in the Red Bull comp, but money will destroy kindness every time. I don't forsee this happening, but do you want to know how to just bury this thing in the sand? Have the WCA invalidate all the past results of anyone who chooses to participate in the Red Bull championships.

This would of course be a last ditch effort if there cannot be reconciliation with Rubiks, but I just have no patience for the type of spirit that Rubik's is taking regarding this whole thing. Fighting fire with fire would not lose with that sort of regulation. It also has the advantage of costing no money, from a practical perspective.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 28, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> I sincerely appreciate the kindness of spirit that everyone has about being supportive of people who will choose to participate in the Red Bull comp, but money will destroy kindness every time. I don't forsee this happening, but do you want to know how to just bury this thing in the sand? Have the WCA invalidate all the past results of anyone who chooses to participate in the Red Bull championships.
> 
> This would of course be a last ditch effort if there cannot be reconciliation with Rubiks, but I just have no patience for the type of spirit that Rubik's is taking regarding this whole thing. Fighting fire with fire would not lose with that sort of regulation. It also has the advantage of costing no money, from a practical perspective.




I do not wish for the WCA to do a move like that, I would be extremely unpleased if they did. Just respect peoples decision on wether they want to compete or not. The biggest thing I've disliked about this whole situation is how people have labeled people who are competing in this as "sellouts" and have bashed them. This is not a community I want to see act like that.


----------



## obelisk477 (Oct 28, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> I do not wish for the WCA to do a move like that, I would be extremely unpleased if they did. Just respect peoples decision on wether they want to compete or not. The biggest thing I've disliked about this whole situation is how people have labeled people who are competing in this as "sellouts" and have bashed them. This is not a community I want to see act like that.



I don't think they've sold out either, and my suggestion was merely a suggestion of a possible solution. And I think you can still respect their decision and support such an aforementioned regulation. 

I've seen no one suggest a real solution to this problem that would resolve it completely in this thread, and this idea does that. The community is virtually in agreement that the Red Bull competition, if it continues in the manner that it seems to be going currently, should not be held and is in poor taste. The suggested regulation was not meant to be an affront to those who have already committed at all, but moreso a statement to Rubiks, and would effectively force them into talks about how to work together with the WCA. It could even be a bluff for all I care.

TL;DR My previous statement was a suggested pragmatic solution to force Rubiks hand, not an attack on interested competitors. It is not out of spite at all, but instead would be something the WCA could do that would actually have some teeth to it in dealing with this issue.


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Oct 28, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> I don't think they've sold out either, and my suggestion was merely a suggestion of a possible solution. And I think you can still respect their decision and support such an aforementioned regulation.
> 
> I've seen no one suggest a real solution to this problem that would resolve it completely in this thread, and this idea does that. The community is virtually in agreement that the Red Bull competition, if it continues in the manner that it seems to be going currently, should not be held and is in poor taste. The suggested regulation was not meant to be an affront to those who have already committed at all, but moreso a statement to Rubiks, and would effectively force them into talks about how to work together with the WCA. It could even be a bluff for all I care.
> 
> TL;DR My previous statement was a suggested pragmatic solution to force Rubiks hand, not an attack on interested competitors. It is not out of spite at all, but instead would be something the WCA could do that would actually have some teeth to it in dealing with this issue.


I get were your coming from, but I don't think it's the right solution.


----------



## turtwig (Oct 28, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> The suggested regulation was not meant to be an affront to those who have already committed at all, but moreso a statement to Rubiks, and would effectively force them into talks about how to work together with the WCA. It could even be a bluff for all I care.



How would punishing competitors of the Rubik's competition get Rubik's to do anything for the WCA? If someone chooses to compete even if they are essentially banned from the WCA, they clearly care about Rubik's a lot more than the WCA anyway.

In any case, doing something like that would defeat the whole point of being against Rubik's recent actions. We don't like that they're trying to destroy our community and force people to use Rubik's brands, so removing people's freedom to choose which competitions they can compete in and banning them if they choose otherwise will only make Rubik's look better in comparison to the WCA.


----------



## AlphaSheep (Oct 28, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> I've seen no one suggest a real solution to this problem that would resolve it completely in this thread, and this idea does that. The community is virtually in agreement that the Red Bull competition, if it continues in the manner that it seems to be going currently, should not be held and is in poor taste. The suggested regulation was not meant to be an affront to those who have already committed at all, but moreso a statement to Rubiks, and would effectively force them into talks about how to work together with the WCA. It could even be a bluff for all I care.
> 
> TL;DR My previous statement was a suggested pragmatic solution to force Rubiks hand, not an attack on interested competitors. It is not out of spite at all, but instead would be something the WCA could do that would actually have some teeth to it in dealing with this issue.


Seriously? I'm actually disgusted that you'd suggest this. This sort of action would be blatantly unfair to those competitors, and anyone with a genuine sense of justice would be sickened if they were to take such a drastic action. That is not the sort of organisation I would want to be a part of.

In case you hadn't picked up on this, this whole thing is about freedom of choice. Rubik's want to limit competitors freedom of choice, while the WCA is set on preserving it. If the WCA were to start limiting peoples choices, then we'd just be stuck with two organisations that limit freedom of choice, and where would that leave us? I know you want to teach Rubik's a lesson or something, but there's that old saying that fighting fire with fire just leaves everyone burnt.

Cubing is a hobby, and at the end of the day, cubers just want to enjoy their hobby without having to get dragged into petty politics. If the WCA really wants to get through this, they have to do exactly what they have said they will do - carry on holding awesome competitions all around the world with a variety of events.


----------



## obelisk477 (Oct 28, 2017)

AlphaSheep said:


> Seriously? I'm actually disgusted that you'd suggest this. This sort of action would be blatantly unfair to those competitors, and anyone with a genuine sense of justice would be sickened if they were to take such a drastic action. That is not the sort of organisation I would want to be a part of.
> 
> In case you hadn't picked up on this, this whole thing is about freedom of choice. Rubik's want to limit competitors freedom of choice, while the WCA is set on preserving it. If the WCA were to start limiting peoples choices, then we'd just be stuck with two organisations that limit freedom of choice, and where would that leave us? I know you want to teach Rubik's a lesson or something, but there's that old saying that fighting fire with fire just leaves everyone burnt.
> 
> Cubing is a hobby, and at the end of the day, cubers just want to enjoy their hobby without having to get dragged into petty politics. If the WCA really wants to get through this, they have to do exactly what they have said they will do - carry on holding awesome competitions all around the world with a variety of events.



Oh, I wasn't saying that my idea *should* happen, but I'm saying it *could* and it would probably be very effective.

Now, *should* we do it? It is better to take the moral high ground and not do so I suppose; but someone with money (Rubiks), who who cares about making more money, is almost always more efficient and effective at achieving their ends than those who are trying to place nice and doing it for fun. And anyone who doesn't understand that is naïve. So that must be kept in mind in whatever we decide to do as a community.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 28, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> Oh, I wasn't saying that my idea *should* happen, but I'm saying it *could* and it would probably be very effective.
> 
> Now, *should* we do it? It is better to take the moral high ground and not do so I suppose; but someone with money (Rubiks), who who cares about making more money, is almost always more efficient and effective at achieving their ends than those who are trying to place nice and doing it for fun. And anyone who doesn't understand that is naïve. So that must be kept in mind in whatever we decide to do as a community.



Effective at what? Does the WCA want to be known as an organization that ostracizes people, or one that welcomes people? Does the end justify the means, or, what is more likely in my opinion, adopting the means you propose render the end you have in mind impossible?


----------



## AlphaSheep (Oct 29, 2017)

obelisk477 said:


> but someone with money (Rubiks), who who cares about making more money, is almost always more efficient and effective at achieving their ends than those who are trying to place nice and doing it for fun. And anyone who doesn't understand that is naïve.


I think that is definitely true when the established body is the one with money, but it's certainly not true when the established body has the largest support base, and the general support base is against the body with the money. If you want an example, just look at the success of open source software.


----------



## mDiPalma (Oct 29, 2017)

looking forward to this event! gonna start practicing match-the-scramble!

hopefully the rsa wont violate ethical standards or their own regulations, unlike other organizational bodies in this community...


----------



## tien cubes (Oct 31, 2017)

Red Bull seems to want more good on itself than the cube community.


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 31, 2017)

tien cubes said:


> Red Bull seems to want more good on itself than the cube community.


No way! An energy drink company trying to make money instead of asking some kids playing with plastic toys what they want!


----------



## Max Cruz (Oct 31, 2017)

ComputerGuy365 said:


> You're all blind.
> 
> The issue is the impression that rubiks have left. When they initiated the lawsuit against TC they implied that they wanted to be in charge and were willing to go to extreme lengths to get their way. Now, when they announce this people automatically assume this is to take over cubing. And it very well could be an attempt.
> 
> ...



Once again, no offense to "whiny ten-year olds." However, what I meant by this was the majority of cubers are irrelevant in a competitive context. Sure, there always has to be someone at the bottom, but I know I do not watch regional tennis tournaments. Rather, I watch the Wimbledon.

Edit:
Is there a separate RSCA forum yet? I would love to voice my opinion on there as well.


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Oct 31, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> Once again, no offense to "whiny ten-year olds." However, what I meant by this was the majority of cubers are irrelevant in a competitive context. Sure, there always has to be someone at the bottom, but I know I do not watch regional tennis tournaments. Rather, I watch the Wimbledon.


No offense taken, I'm not a whiny ten year old. My point is, you're not just eliminating whiny ten year olds with this, you're eliminating a lot (I'd say >95%) of cubers.


----------



## Sajwo (Oct 31, 2017)

ComputerGuy365 said:


> No offense taken, I'm not a whiny ten year old. My point is, you're not just eliminating whiny ten year olds with this, you're eliminating a lot (I'd say >95%) of cubers.



Practice more.


----------



## Zerksies (Oct 31, 2017)

I am quite disgusted with all of these negative posts. Have you ever looked at a competition from a spectators perspective it's quite boring. You have one person look at a cube and solve it you eliminate a few times and wow you have a clear winner. It's more exciting to see a two cubers going at it with races in a elimination style tournament. If i had anything to do with the rules i would eliminate the 15 second examination.


----------



## Kit Clement (Oct 31, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> You have one person look at a cube and solve it you eliminate a few times and wow you have a clear winner.



Corporate corruption aside, this is what people take exception to -- cubing times are incredibly variable. Having a knockout based on just a handful of times which only are used to determine the winner of that particular match rather than the title as a whole makes the winner far less clear than the setup of a WCA competition otherwise would. A 5 second solve in an average of 5 has huge meaning, but a 5 second solve has comparably little meaning in a knockout match, especially if your opponent happened to screw up in that same match. A WCA competition takes solves out of the context of who your opponent is at that time and determines who actually solved the cube the fastest that day.


----------



## Zerksies (Oct 31, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> determines who actually solved the cube the fastest that day.


So doesn’t this competition. It shows who the fastest on any given day


----------



## AlphaSheep (Oct 31, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> So doesn’t this competition. It shows who the fastest on any given day


It really only shows who was consistently faster than the person they were paired with in each single solve, which is not necessarily the same thing as who is faster overall. Because certain solves don't count in the WCA averages, there are some pretty cool dynamics that come into play. One example is "Shepping" - to "Shep" someone is to be consistently slower than someone on the first 4 solves, but get a faster average. Here's an example:

Person A:
9.50, 10.50, 11.50, 12.50, 9.50
Person B:
9.00, 10.00, 11.00, 12.00, 12.00

In the first 4 solves, A is consistently 0.5 seconds slower than B, so in the Red Bull system, B wins 4 to 1. In the WCA system, A has an average of 10.50, and B has an average of 11.00, so A wins by half a second.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 31, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> I am quite disgusted with all of these negative posts. Have you ever looked at a competition from a spectators perspective it's quite boring. You have one person look at a cube and solve it you eliminate a few times and wow you have a clear winner. It's more exciting to see a two cubers going at it with races in a elimination style tournament. If i had anything to do with the rules i would eliminate the 15 second examination.



The Red Bull format is better for entertainment, worse for figuring out who's actually better. Which format is better depends on what your goal is.


----------



## cuber314159 (Oct 31, 2017)

One Wheel said:


> The Red Bull format is better for entertainment, worse for figuring out who's actually better. Which format is better depends on what your goal is.


Entertainment from what perspective- I'd far rather cube myself than watch someone else cube unless that person was very fast, but even that gets boring. to make cubing entertaining for non cubers is stupid as they would probably enjoy cubing more if they learned to do it themselves


----------



## Kit Clement (Oct 31, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> So doesn’t this competition. It shows who the fastest on any given day



The part of that sentence you left out of the quote gives the reason why this doesn't do that.

Most sports systems that use a playoff/postseason bracket format also are guilty of this, to be honest. MLB is by far the worst offender -- they play 162 games, which should be more than enough to determine who the best teams actually are, and then let 10 of the 30 teams fight for the title in just a handful of games more, at most 20 for one team, but usually about 13-15 games for the winning team. The team with the best regular season record very frequently does not win the World Series because of letting things come down to matchups and a bit of randomness. 

College football had it done the best until they began following the money and expanded their 2 team final into a 4 team playoff. But of course, this is probably the one sport where you could afford to have an expanded playoff due to the sheer number of teams in collegiate sports and the extremely short season of games, giving little basis to say who is the best team.

At least most sports have other factors with respect to matchups. Some batters tend to do better against certain pitchers, some pitchers/batters do better in certain ballparks, etc. You can argue that the playoff system is a good thing because it forces the best teams to play high level competition rather than just be really good against bad opponents and not be able to beat the best teams. But cubing has none of these factors -- you can solve a cube with or without the context of an opponent. So why add in this random component of an opponent when you can simply just find out who can solve the cube fastest? I totally get the argument that head-to-head is more exciting for someone who doesn't know cubing, but it definitely is not the ideal way to determine the best cuber.


----------



## One Wheel (Oct 31, 2017)

cuber314159 said:


> Entertainment from what perspective- I'd far rather cube myself than watch someone else cube unless that person was very fast, but even that gets boring. to make cubing entertaining for non cubers is stupid as they would probably enjoy cubing more if they learned to do it themselves



I agree it's more enjoyable to solve a cube yourself than to watch somebody else do it. I'm sure it's also more enjoyable to actually participate in motocross or rally racing than it is to watch it. Red Bull has proven that they can make really enjoyable television out of head-to-head extreme sports (arguable whether cubing fits, but I digress). That's their goal: good television. To be clear: I object to the rules about using rubik's brand cubes, and I object to calling it a world championship. It's a terrible way to determine a champion. I also object to the relatively minor point that the claim that a "speedsolve" is a new event. I think that the format is a great way to introduce non-cubers to the sport, and I have no objection as a television format.


----------



## Sue Doenim (Oct 31, 2017)

ComputerGuy365 said:


> Rubik's have already cemented themselves as a pile of [poo] who only cares about money and doesn't think about the community.





obelisk477 said:


> I sincerely appreciate the kindness of spirit that everyone has about being supportive of people who will choose to participate in the Red Bull comp, but money will destroy kindness every time.





Ronxu said:


> No way! An energy drink company trying to make money instead of asking some kids playing with plastic toys what they want!


Money, money, money.
You've heard of the golden rule.
Whoever has the gold makes the rules.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Nov 1, 2017)

This was on insta today


----------



## kprox1994 (Nov 1, 2017)

I think it would be cool if the RCA was like the Harlem Globetrotters to the WCA being the NBA. The RCA would just be for run to watch nonserious events and the WCA is for serious competition.


----------



## Sai Ashish Vure (Nov 1, 2017)

DGCubes said:


> My first thoughts:
> 
> This is disgusting. I honestly can't believe they're doing this to cubing. As cool as it would be to have a hyped up super-competitive scene, the truth is that's just not what cubing is. I don't go to competitions to compete and win prize money; I go to hang out with friends and experience the amazing community. I honestly hope a lot of fast 3x3 solvers vocally boycott this and explain why it's not the way cubing should be done. The most competitive thing I ever want to see in cubing is a Worlds-style head-to-head final round.
> 
> ...


I really agree with DG here on the fact that cubing is a community for uniqueness and not competition. I would LOVE to see a final round that has 2 solvers face of solve by solve. Like Worlds 2013. This 1v1 is just too much. What I hate more is the fact that we have to use Rubik's Brand Cubes instead of our own ones.


----------



## theawesomecuber (Nov 1, 2017)

Now that I think the dust has settled, I'm going to try to give an unbiased (lol) analysis of both competition formats, and which one is better for cubers and spectators. I'll first bring up every game mode (event) of the Red Bull competition, then follow up with some other thoughts.

Speed Cubing:
- 1v1, first to 3 victories moves on: I think 5 solves is fine, though in a format like this, I think it might make sense to have more solves to win in later rounds of the competition. I'll elaborate on the 1v1 format later.
- Vague amount of inspection: I find it odd they don't mention how much inspection the competitors have, seems rather important. Maybe there's no limit and speed cubing is just speedBLD now . Probably not haha.

Fastest Hand:
- 1v1, first to 2 victories moves on: Best of 3 is way too few solves. This competition will be over in like 2 minutes for anyone decent.
- No inspection: I'll talk about this later on, but for now I want to bring up how little sense this makes. Why does Speed Cubing have inspection but this doesn't? Are they trying to emphasize how fast your hand is moving? Isn't your hand moving faster in Speed Cubing? I don't understand the inconsistency.

Rescramble:
- 1v1, first to 1 victory moves on: 1 solve is no way to measure skill, this is awful from a competitive point of view. From the spectator's point of view, this isn't really a problem, but still, a competent Rescramble solve will be pretty impressive, I think this competition would benefit by showcasing it more.
- This seems like an interesting event for a spectator if the competitors have no idea how to do it, like in this video. Seeing the competitors ponder and struggle over trying to figure out how to get the colors to the right place is exciting. However, competitors are not stupid. This is obviously really easily done with any BLD method, meaning that ordinary BLD cubers would look back and forth between both cubes, and experienced BLD cubers would quickly memorize the scrambled cube, then execute many moves until boom, the cubes are matched. This isn't as exciting as watching the competitors think hard. Obviously, memorizing the scramble with one look would be incredibly impressive, but I think a simple BLD solve would be even more impressive, because the end result is the familiar fabled solve position. Overall, I think it's interesting but not well thought out, which isn't surprising considering who is organizing this competition. (oops my bias is out a bit)

And some thoughts on more specific subjects.

Inspection:

I'm seeing a perplexing amount of people arguing that removing inspection time would make sense. As an experienced cuber, let me lay down my reasoning for inspection being a genius addition to the sport of cubing. Firstly, and most obviously, inspection reduces the effects of luck. A massive factor in no inspection solves is whether the pieces you want are right in front of you. This is removed with inspection, where you have time not only to find your pieces, but to deal with ugly situations. Secondly, and I think more importantly, consider the flow of a solve with inspection. You find out your first moves, then during those moves you plan out what the next moves will be, then during those moves you plan the next moves, and so on. Now remove inspection. A solver will be so overwhelmed at the start that his solve, the start especially, will be incredibly choppy. This is because you didn't have the time at the start to plan out your moves, meaning that each move you do is only solving whatever pieces you were lucky enough to see first, further leading to a decrease in consistency. For these reasons, an inspection period benefits the solver by removing luck and improving consistency.

1v1 Format:

Now there are obvious concerns mentioned above that this format measures skill differently from average, which is more accepted as a good way to measure skill. In reality, there's no objectivity to this, especially when you only have 3 or 5 solves. I honestly have no real issue with this format, as long as they don't use a single elimination system, which would be plain unfair. An idea I had is to have everything leading up to the finals or semi-finals or whatever be with this 1v1 system, then have the rest of the rounds be singles, where a competitor sits down and does his solves. I honestly think that the latter system might be better for the spectator. I'm imagining a commentator doing analysis on the times they're getting and the anticipation of someone needing to get a sub 8 time or something in order to podium. I don't think the difference between the two is that significant, just an idea I had.

Rubik's Speedcube:

"The Red Bull Rubik’s World Championship is managed by Red Bull Mind Gamers independently of Rubik’s Brand Ltd. As a measure of legal transparency and compliance, Red Bull has acquired a license to use Rubik’s Intellectual Property in professional speedcubing via the Rubik’s Cube Speedsolving Association." From the RCSA blog post. I guess part of the terms of the license was limiting the freedom of choice of the competitors. Obviously, I think this is stupid, I'm mostly upset that Rubik's has to be part of our community in any way, they don't represent our interests.

Thanks for reading this behemoth.


----------



## Zerksies (Nov 1, 2017)

I love the idea of no inspection times, but they both get the same scramble. And they do a race to 5-9 games. In a tournament style of double elimination


theawesomecuber said:


> Now that I think the dust has settled, I'm going to try to give an unbiased (lol) analysis of both competition formats, and which one is better for cubers and spectators. I'll first bring up every game mode (event) of the Red Bull competition, then follow up with some other thoughts.
> 
> Speed Cubing:
> - 1v1, first to 3 victories moves on: I think 5 solves is fine, though in a format like this, I think it might make sense to have more solves to win in later rounds of the competition. I'll elaborate on the 1v1 format later.
> ...


I love the idea of no inspection times, but they both get the same scramble. And they do a race to 5-9 games. In a tournament style of double elimination. You get 100 competitors in a qualifier take the players with the top 32 times then go to a double elimination tournament. Everyone seems to be held up on "their" times an PB's.


----------



## ComputerGuy365 (Nov 1, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> I am quite disgusted with all of these negative posts. Have you ever looked at a competition from a spectators perspective it's quite boring. You have one person look at a cube and solve it you eliminate a few times and wow you have a clear winner. It's more exciting to see a two cubers going at it with races in a elimination style tournament. If i had anything to do with the rules i would eliminate the 15 second examination.


This isn't what cubing was meant to be. Rubik's are trying to make it a spectator sport when it clearly is not. The community likes it as it is. They're trying to jam the square peg in the circular hole.



Sajwo said:


> Practice more.


Hey, I'm trying  I almost hit sub-2 on 5 yesterday


----------



## Gomorrite (Nov 1, 2017)

Why wouldn't cubing be an "spectator sport"?


----------



## Zerksies (Nov 1, 2017)

As i have said have you ever really watched a cubing competition? It's boring as hell. And I've been doing this for a decade. A race format would make this interesting.


----------



## theawesomecuber (Nov 1, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> I love the idea of no inspection times, but they both get the same scramble. And they do a race to 5-9 games. In a tournament style of double elimination. You get 100 competitors in a qualifier take the players with the top 32 times then go to a double elimination tournament. Everyone seems to be held up on "their" times an PB's.



As I explained, I think no inspection time is an awful idea, but the rest of what you explain would be perfectly fine for a competition.



Gomorrite said:


> Why wouldn't cubing be an "spectator sport"?



Cubing isn't a spectator sport because it is not entertaining to watch. Especially from the point of view of someone who doesn't cube. Sure, it might be impressive to look at for a bit, but trust me, no one wants to sit down and watch a whole competition of cubers moving their hands fast for a while until the cube is solved. 

Every popular sport is intuitively interesting. Football (in the states) has a humongous audience because it is filled with bursts of interesting action, where anything could happen. You can track individual players with ease, and make informed predictions about what could happen, even without a background in Football.

I think a general rule of thumb about whether a sport could have a large audience is if interesting commentary is possible. As an example that relates to me specifically, rock climbing competitions are able to have fascinating commentary, since commentators can talk about the different possible routes and what the setters intended and so on. I can't imagine a cubing competition could have commentary deeper than talking about the background of the cubers and the times they're getting, but during the action itself, the solve, there's nothing to say since you can't track where they're at.

Obviously, the intention of trying to make cubing more of a spectator sport is the money, but from the perspective of the cubing community, I don't think having spectators would be beneficial. If we want to introduce new people into the community, I honestly think the best thing to do would be to put montages on YouTube for more competitions.


----------



## turtwig (Nov 1, 2017)

theawesomecuber said:


> Cubing isn't a spectator sport because it is not entertaining to watch.



Maybe that's why people like Zerksies are suggesting that it may be a good idea to have race formats.

I agree that cubing isn't as good for spectating as some sports like soccer, for the reasons you have mentioned. However, we can look at other sports, such as the 100m dash. It is similar to cubing in several ways, it's quick, there's no interaction between the players, and it's just a race to see who does something the fastest. As far as I can tell though, the 100m dash is quite a popular event to watch (at least every 4 years at the Olympics), so I think it's safe to suggest that cubing can entertain in a similar way.



theawesomecuber said:


> I honestly think the best thing to do would be to put montages on YouTube for more competitions.



Wait, so are non-cubers supposed to enjoy watching us cube or not?


----------



## Rafael Paulino (Nov 2, 2017)

I'm trying to be unbiased but yeah.

I think this a very big step for cubing. Since Red Bull is endorsing this and Red Bull is a really big company, I think cubing will become more known to the public. But is this what Rubik's wants the public to see??? I see people who compete for prizes and bragging rights other than normal comps where most people go for fun. If Rubik's did do this with the WCA and stopped suing everyone, it would work out.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Nov 3, 2017)

Just for the lolz. Don’t take offense if you don’t agree


----------



## efattah (Nov 4, 2017)

Regarding inspection time, consider that there are already several events that don't allow inspection. While these are not WCA events they are well known. Two examples are the Guinness record for the most 3x3's solved in one hour (around 375 cubes by Mats Valk). The other is the Guinness record for most cubes solved underwater (8 by Kevin Hays). Both of these allow you at best to inspect only the first cube and the rest are done on the fly with no inspection. Mats is probably currently the best cuber in the world with no inspection if you watch his Guinness video, it appears he loses only around 1.5 seconds by not having inspection. For a while I was training to beat the underwater record and so I was also practicing without inspection. Certain methods fare better than others. ZZ is probably the worst method if you don't have inspection because of EOLine.

My personal opinion is that 3x3 should have both a category with inspection and another one without inspection. In fact, one could even argue for a 'genius' category that allows 1 minute of inspection. This is incredibly exhausting (to see that far ahead), but it would actually make for a marvelous display of skill, as with 1 minute some advanced cubers might be able to see (for example ) the entire F2L in the inspection.


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Nov 4, 2017)

Please, everyone


----------



## Ronxu (Nov 4, 2017)

efattah said:


> My personal opinion is that 3x3 should have both a category with inspection and another one without inspection. In fact, one could even argue for a 'genius' category that allows 1 minute of inspection. This is incredibly exhausting (to see that far ahead), but it would actually make for a marvelous display of skill, as with 1 minute some advanced cubers might be able to see (for example ) the entire F2L in the inspection.


We need fewer events, not more.


----------



## One Wheel (Nov 4, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> We need fewer events, not more.


First: why?
Second: ok, get rid of trivial events: 2x2, skewb, pyraminx, and clock all require some skill to learn how to solve, but within any given quintile or so of rankings the differences are probably 80-90% (maybe more) due to dexterity and luck, not puzzle solving skill.


----------



## applezfall (Nov 4, 2017)

One Wheel said:


> First: why?
> Second: ok, get rid of trivial events: 2x2, skewb, pyraminx, and clock all require some skill to learn how to solve, but within any given quintile or so of rankings the differences are probably 80-90% (maybe more) due to dexterity and luck, not puzzle solving skill.


TRIGGERED


----------



## Ronxu (Nov 4, 2017)

One Wheel said:


> First: why?
> Second: ok, get rid of trivial events: 2x2, skewb, pyraminx, and clock all require some skill to learn how to solve, but within any given quintile or so of rankings the differences are probably 80-90% (maybe more) due to dexterity and luck, not puzzle solving skill.


Worlds was 4 days and they still couldn't manage to fit more than 2 rounds of quite a few events. Adding skewb was a mistake but removing it now wouldn't make sense. Clock and feet should go for reasons that people have gone over multiple times. 5BLD doesn't really make sense to me. Very few people compete in it and the same people who are good at it are also good at 4BLD. Big cubes have a similar problem but at least people compete in them.


----------



## One Wheel (Nov 4, 2017)

Ronxu said:


> Worlds was 4 days and they still couldn't manage to fit more than 2 rounds of quite a few events. Adding skewb was a mistake but removing it now wouldn't make sense. Clock and feet should go for reasons that people have gone over multiple times. 5BLD doesn't really make sense to me. Very few people compete in it and the same people who are good at it are also good at 4BLD. Big cubes have a similar problem but at least people compete in them.



I understand that people like more attempts to set records and personal bests, but if the result of a competition, but if the purpose of a competition is to determine a champion, and the results are not dependent on luck, subsequent rounds are really unnecessary. 

As far as your points on events: agreed on skewb, unless there was serious consideration of cutting events, in which case it should be on the list. I haven't learned 4BLD and 5BLD yet, but I know that 4BLD has the issue of choosing an orientation whereas 5BLD is more rapid rote tracing and memorization. Feet also adds more than "it's fun": on a spectrum from rewarding dexterity to rewarding efficiency in solving 3x3, regular speedsolve and OH are fairly close together at the dexterity end of the spectrum. FMC is obviously at the extreme efficiency end of the spectrum, and feet is nowhere close to FMC, but it does reward efficiency (and dealing with poor visibility) significantly more than 2H or OH does.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Nov 5, 2017)

It is quite possible to choose orientation on 5BLD too; several of us do it regularly. But I admit I don't know if any of the fast 5BLD people choose orientation.

I only ever choose from the 6 easy orientations, but I know François Courtès chooses from all of them. It's actually one of the most fun things about 5BLD for me, when it's useful for a given solve.


----------



## One Wheel (Nov 5, 2017)

Mike Hughey said:


> It is quite possible to choose orientation on 5BLD too; several of us do it regularly. But I admit I don't know if any of the fast 5BLD people choose orientation.
> 
> I only ever choose from the 6 easy orientations, but I know François Courtès chooses from all of them. It's actually one of the most fun things about 5BLD for me, when it's useful for a given solve.



Uff da. So much for that argument. I was figuring with the fixed centers it would be more like 3BLD that way. Got a better argument for keeping 5BLD than the fact that it's mind-numbingly awesome? I'd be happy to advocate for 6 and 7BLD, but I understand the logistical difficulties with that.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Nov 5, 2017)

Well, one thing that is true is that changing orientation on 5BLD is very different from changing orientation on 4BLD - with 5BLD you have to do algorithms to fix it after you pick a different orientation. So that is a significant difference between 5BLD and 4BLD.


----------



## cuber314159 (Nov 5, 2017)

Can we please have a separate thread for discussions on whether 5 bld should be an WCA event.


----------



## Max Cruz (Nov 5, 2017)

theawesomecuber said:


> Cubing isn't a spectator sport because it is not entertaining to watch. Especially from the point of view of someone who doesn't cube. Sure, it might be impressive to look at for a bit, but trust me, no one wants to sit down and watch a whole competition of cubers moving their hands fast for a while until the cube is solved.



Why can not cubing be a spectator sport? As Zerksies and others have said, there's nothing wrong with translating cubing to a racing format to make it more "entertaining to watch."



Underwatercuber said:


> Just for the lolz. Don’t take offense if you don’t agree



Very funny.


----------



## One Wheel (Nov 6, 2017)

cuber314159 said:


> Can we please have a separate thread for discussions on whether 5 bld should be an WCA event.


It's tangentially relevant, and the Red Bull World Championships are pretty well discussed ad nauseum at least until new info comes out.


----------



## Tanay B. (Nov 6, 2017)

turtwig said:


> I have to say I disagree with this idea that cubing is only for cubers. Of course it's nice to have our own in-group kind of thing, but I don't think it's bad if 'outsiders' can enjoy it as well, even if it's not what we think of as cubing.
> 
> Overall, I think that this competition will be good for cubing. Of course, as a cuber, the way this is advertised looks silly and cringey, but I don't think they're harming the WCA or its competitions. It's not like the WCA is going to disappear or all the top cubers are going to sell-out and never go to WCA competitions again. This is really just like the episodes of the Chinese game show "The Brain" that Feliks and some other cubers participated in. We can't expect non-cubers to try and understand how we run our competitions, so I think having these kinds of events is a good way to 'introduce' the public to speedcubing.
> 
> EDIT: If Rubik's starts to use this competition to try to ban or destroy WCA competitions, it would be horrible, but so far from what I see, I don't think (or at least I hope) that the two types of competitions can exist together.



We're cubing for ourselves (and the community), not the public. We don't need to change the way we cube if it works well. It's not mainstream and it's not for everyone. I don't know about all of you out there, but I'm not going to change the way I cube for the public.


----------



## Gomorrite (Nov 6, 2017)

She could be a strong candidate for the rescramble competition.


----------



## Sajwo (Nov 6, 2017)

Tanay B. said:


> We're cubing for ourselves (and the community), not the public. We don't need to change the way we cube if it works well. It's not mainstream and it's not for everyone. I don't know about all of you out there, but I'm not going to change the way I cube for the public.



You should speak for yourself and not on behalf of everyone.


----------



## Cube Factor (Nov 6, 2017)

In my opinion, I feel like this competition could be would create a form of competition between the wca and the Red Bull/Rubik's orginizations. Competition like this always allows for growth of the community and a general improvement of quality. This is why YouTube has been going downhill, there is no competing website that is an alternative, so YouTube doesn't need to try and beat anyone so it has become sloppy. I feel like this competition could really expand and improve the community. However, the problem with this competition, is that non of the stuff I listed above will probably happen if the competition is a success. This is because although it is not confirmed, it seems like Rubik's/ Redbull's intention is to completely replace the wca and curbing stores with their own products and competitions. I feel like Rubik's/Red Bull is treating this competition less like an alternative for the community, but more as a permanent replacement. This is my main issue with this competition. I would be fine if this competition would help expand the community, but it feels like their intention for this competition isn't to expand or improve the community, it is to convert community to their own company, which will not work and could possibly break the community apart and cubing will just die out. That is my main concern. I didn't word this very well because it is hard for me to express my thoughts in words so i ramble a lot but I hope my point is clear.


----------



## bgcatfan (Nov 6, 2017)

Gomorrite said:


> She could be a strong candidate for the rescramble competition.


One of the world's best blind solvers demonstrating that this is basically going to be approached similarly to a blind solve, which someone mentioned earlier. Interesting that she split the corners and edges into two steps. I wonder how much time the shorter memorization chunks (2 looks) save in the solve compared to a true blind solve (1 look).


----------



## Sajwo (Nov 6, 2017)

I think it could be faster with CFOP, sub20 is definitely doable


----------



## Gomorrite (Nov 6, 2017)

bgcatfan said:


> One of the world's best blind solvers demonstrating that this is basically going to be approached similarly to a blind solve, which someone mentioned earlier. Interesting that she split the corners and edges into two steps. I wonder how much time the shorter memorization chunks (2 looks) save in the solve compared to a true blind solve (1 look).


Maybe it is not so much about being faster than about being safer (to avoid a DNR)?

And she didn't just start doing this now, this video is from July:


----------



## Underwatercuber (Nov 6, 2017)

Gomorrite said:


> Maybe it is not so much about being faster than about being safer (to avoid a DNR)?
> 
> And she didn't just start doing this now, this video is from July:


She did it differently then. In this Redbull version she did it in 2 looks wheras that one is one look. Plus the old version isn’t a DNF wheras her Redbull ones were.


----------



## turtwig (Nov 6, 2017)

Tanay B. said:


> We're cubing for ourselves (and the community), not the public. We don't need to change the way we cube if it works well. It's not mainstream and it's not for everyone. I don't know about all of you out there, but I'm not going to change the way I cube for the public.



We don't have to change the way we cube. It's just one competition that's different.


----------



## YLK RUBIKS (Nov 8, 2017)

What you need to know+ Our thoughts


----------



## Max Cruz (Nov 9, 2017)

I love the Red Bull drink. Anyone else? How has this changed your tastes?


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Nov 9, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> I love the Red Bull drink. Anyone else? How has this changed your tastes?


I actually prefer Monster.


----------



## greentgoatgal (Nov 9, 2017)

Max Cruz said:


> I love the Red Bull drink. Anyone else? How has this changed your tastes?


Never tried it


----------



## xyzzy (Nov 9, 2017)

YLK RUBIKS said:


> What you need to know+ Our thoughts



The actual content in this video doesn't start until 2:30 and how is expressing your thoughts in a _video_, where the actual video is of unrelated 2×2×2 solves, any better than just typing out what you have to say? ("you" = whoever made this, in case you weren't the one who made it and you're just linking it here.)


----------



## Max Cruz (Nov 9, 2017)

xyzzy said:


> The actual content in this video doesn't start until 2:30 and how is expressing your thoughts in a _video_, where the actual video is of unrelated 2×2×2 solves, any better than just typing out what you have to say? ("you" = whoever made this, in case you weren't the one who made it and you're just linking it here.)



Well, a video gets "views" while a post does not.


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Nov 9, 2017)

Ordway Persyn said:


> I actually prefer Monster.


I prefer water


----------



## Competition Cuber (Nov 9, 2017)

FastCubeMaster said:


> I prefer water


I prefer soda


----------



## Zerksies (Nov 9, 2017)

Sajwo said:


> You should speak for yourself and not on behalf of everyone.


I would prefer the Red Bull Competition. Everyone is worried about their "precocious times". They do not understand what it is like to come back from behind in a race format. Going against a better competitor pushing yourself to be better and in the end becoming better. Everyone's going to say i force myself to be better, that's not true. You have no idea what it is to push yourself till you are behind and need to win. You will gain better experience. Everyone is hating this because it's different. If i had any say in this you would have no inspection times. You would be presented with a cube and have to solve against someone else.


----------



## CLL Smooth (Nov 9, 2017)

Zerksies said:


> I would prefer the Red Bull Competition. Everyone is worried about their "precocious times". They do not understand what it is like to come back from behind in a race format. Going against a better competitor pushing yourself to be better and in the end becoming better. Everyone's going to say i force myself to be better, that's not true. You have no idea what it is to push yourself till you are behind and need to win. You will gain better experience. Everyone is hating this because it's different. If i had any say in this you would have no inspection times. You would be presented with a cube and have to solve against someone else.


I like the perspective of this post. I race with my friends sometimes and it's a totally different competitive feel. Ultimately, I like the WCA format better for many reasons but that doesn't mean that there's not any point to this format.


----------



## mark49152 (Nov 30, 2017)

RCSA gives its response to the negative reaction to the announcement. This isn't dated, but I've only just come across it and haven't seen it posted here before. http://www.rubiks-rcsa.com/red-bull-mindgamers-rubiks-world-championship/


----------



## Elo13 (Dec 1, 2017)

turtwig said:


> I agree that cubing isn't as good for spectating as some sports like soccer, for the reasons you have mentioned. However, we can look at other sports, such as the 100m dash. It is similar to cubing in several ways, it's quick, there's no interaction between the players, and it's just a race to see who does something the fastest. As far as I can tell though, the 100m dash is quite a popular event to watch (at least every 4 years at the Olympics), so I think it's safe to suggest that cubing can entertain in a similar way.



Cubing and the 100m dash aren't very comparable. In the 100m dash, it's clear who is leading, how close the others are, and how close the finish line is. In cubing, seeing those things can be hard even for cubers, let alone non-cubers. All they will see is people turning cubes really fast and suddenly getting it solved. That doesn't make for a very good spectator sport in my opinion.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Dec 1, 2017)

Elo13 said:


> Cubing and the 100m dash aren't very comparable. In the 100m dash, it's clear who is leading, how close the others are, and how close the finish line is. In cubing, seeing those things can be hard even for cubers, let alone non-cubers. All they will see is people turning cubes really fast and suddenly getting it solved. That doesn't make for a very good spectator sport in my opinion.


Your forgetting their using Rubik’s brand cubes so there will be no “fast solves”


----------



## pglewis (Dec 4, 2017)

mark49152 said:


> RCSA gives its response to the negative reaction to the announcement. This isn't dated, but I've only just come across it and haven't seen it posted here before. http://www.rubiks-rcsa.com/red-bull-mindgamers-rubiks-world-championship/



Quite a bit of reassurance there, I hadn't seen this. 



> Legal disputes: it is unfortunate that disputes over intellectual property arose near the launch of a new professional speedcubing initiative.



I'll just chalk that up as a serious understatement.


----------



## mark49152 (Dec 4, 2017)

pglewis said:


> I'll just chalk that up as a serious understatement.


Inclement weather: it is unfortunate that a heavy spell of rain occurred near the launch of a new professional speedcubing initiative.


----------



## Max Cruz (Dec 4, 2017)

pglewis said:


> I'll just chalk that up as a serious understatement.



Hardware: it is unfortunate that better-performing puzzles were released near the launch of a new professional speedcubing initiative.


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Dec 24, 2017)

Expandcubing said:


> Hi, I am a retired cuber and I have just heard about this Redbull Rubik's Cube World Championships. I have participated in couple of WCA competitions during my career. Although it may seem strange but one of the reasons I gave up cubing was because it seemed to me like a knockoff hobby or sport or activity and not quite legit in a way. I would have been more willing to participate in competitions where there was an "Equal" chance for everyone so by using same Product provided by the organisers i.e. Rubik's Brand Speedcube or any other single branded speedcube, rather than having some fast speedcubers having better custom cubes because they can break it in more or have other people make custom lubrications for them which would make their cubes very fast. This for me seemed unfair so what Redbull is doing is more Fair and in general I would have hoped that WCA and any other organistion would provide puzzles instead of competitors using their own. After all you don't go to an official football (soccer) game on a Sunday league game and use your own ball that you practice in the park but the one that are provided by officials and approved by FIFA. (This is only general example and I know it has no direct link to speedcubing). Only dilemma I used to see here was that Rubik's did not have any speedcubes until recently. But with new rubik's speedcube this issue is now solved and it is easily as good as other speedcubes out there in the market where this would not have been possible where there were no speedcubes from Rubik's. What Redbull is doing is only good for cubers. If I was still cubing I would go to Redbull competitions and not the WCA because for me allowing people to use different brands of cubes with different speed capabilities is unfair. No hate to anyone. Only my personal opinion. This is how I saw cubing and how I see it now. Thanks!


What if people perform horribly with the Rubiks brand and others naturally fit in with the turning? People are allowed to customize their own cubes because it’s all about personal preference nowadays. That’s part of the enjoyment of cubing. Everyone having to use a crappy Rubik’s cube would kill part of the life in cubing


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 24, 2017)

Expandcubing said:


> Hi, I am a retired cuber and I have just heard about this Redbull Rubik's Cube World Championships. I have participated in couple of WCA competitions during my career. Although it may seem strange but one of the reasons I gave up cubing was because it seemed to me like a knockoff hobby or sport or activity and not quite legit in a way. I would have been more willing to participate in competitions where there was an "Equal" chance for everyone so by using same Product provided by the organisers i.e. Rubik's Brand Speedcube or any other single branded speedcube, rather than having some fast speedcubers having better custom cubes because they can break it in more or have other people make custom lubrications for them which would make their cubes very fast. This for me seemed unfair so what Redbull is doing is more Fair and in general I would have hoped that WCA and any other organistion would provide puzzles instead of competitors using their own. After all you don't go to an official football (soccer) game on a Sunday league game and use your own ball that you practice in the park but the one that are provided by officials and approved by FIFA. (This is only general example and I know it has no direct link to speedcubing). Only dilemma I used to see here was that Rubik's did not have any speedcubes until recently. But with new rubik's speedcube this issue is now solved and it is easily as good as other speedcubes out there in the market where this would not have been possible where there were no speedcubes from Rubik's. What Redbull is doing is only good for cubers. If I was still cubing I would go to Redbull competitions and not the WCA because for me allowing people to use different brands of cubes with different speed capabilities is unfair. No hate to anyone. Only my personal opinion. This is how I saw cubing and how I see it now. Thanks!


I appreciate the perspective, but on the other hand:
A) unlike ball sports, you are the only person competing with your cube. A better analogy might be bicycle racing, where each person uses their own bike, adjusted and even designed to work for them. 
B) most of the difference in cubes these days is not "cube A is better than cube B," but a matter of preference in feeling. Lubes are cheap and really available to everyone. There is an argument for magnetic cubes, but even there if you're willing to put in a little work it's not difficult or expensive. My current 3x3 main cost less than $4 including magnets.


----------



## pglewis (Dec 24, 2017)

Post is now gone but I'll just say

A) There is nothing unfair when all competitors have access to the same hardware
B) It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 24, 2017)

Expandcubing said:


> Hi, I am a retired cuber and I have just heard about this Redbull Rubik's Cube World Championships. I have participated in couple of WCA competitions during my career. Although it may seem strange but one of the reasons I gave up cubing was because it seemed to me like a knockoff hobby or sport or activity and not quite legit in a way. I would have been more willing to participate in competitions where there was an "Equal" chance for everyone so by using same Product provided by the organisers i.e. Rubik's Brand Speedcube or any other single branded speedcube, rather than having some fast speedcubers having better custom cubes because they can break it in more or have other people make custom lubrications for them which would make their cubes very fast. This for me seemed unfair so what Redbull is doing is more Fair and in general I would have hoped that WCA and any other organistion would provide puzzles instead of competitors using their own. After all you don't go to an official football (soccer) game on a Sunday league game and use your own ball that you practice in the park but the one that are provided by officials and approved by FIFA. (This is only general example and I know it has no direct link to speedcubing). Only dilemma I used to see here was that Rubik's did not have any speedcubes until recently. But with new rubik's speedcube this issue is now solved and it is easily as good as other speedcubes out there in the market where this would not have been possible where there were no speedcubes from Rubik's. What Redbull is doing is only good for cubers. If I was still cubing I would go to Redbull competitions and not the WCA because for me allowing people to use different brands of cubes with different speed capabilities is unfair. No hate to anyone. Only my personal opinion. This is how I saw cubing and how I see it now. Thanks!



Forgive me, but I'm about to put my tin-foil hat on for a moment. This really doesn't seem like an authentic post from a community member.

I can't think of a single cuber in this community that has stopped competing and calls themselves a "retired cuber" in the way that this person does. The only exception is Kevin Hays, but he still competes, and the whole "retired" thing is really a meme now because of how silly it is to call someone a retired cuber. I don't think many people who have attended a "couple of WCA competitions" and stopped would refer to themselves as a "retired cuber" in any way.
Calling our sport a "knockoff hobby" conveniently uses the same language of "knockoff" that Rubik's would use to describe other brands of cubes.
This clip honestly sounds like it came from a PR department: "But with new rubik's speedcube this issue is now solved and it is easily as good as other speedcubes out there in the market where this would not have been possible where there were no speedcubes from Rubik's. What Redbull is doing is only good for cubers." The major sentiment about the Rubik's Speedcube is that it is far better than their previous versions, but still pales in comparison to modern, top-end cubes today.
There's a lot of talk here about what is fair/unfair regarding the use of cubes. I'm curious what competitions this person actually attended. At about every competition I've been to, just about all of the cubers there are trying out other people's cubes, talking about their personal preferences for what they like in their cube, and even borrowing others' cubes when they aren't using them to compete. It seems almost obvious why it is fair for people to bring their own cubes, as peoples preferences and turning styles require different types of cubes. To counter the FIFA example, in no professional bowling tournament do you get bowling balls provided to you, with the exception of an occasional spare ball that has a promotional cover. This is because bowling balls are made to meet the needs of the bowler, just as cubes are made to meet needs of individual cubers. A team sport like FIFA cannot compare to individualized sports like cubing. (Edit: looks like many others have given similar analogies)
"Expandcubing" is a very strange name for a throwaway account, and almost seems to explain why it was made.
Just before I started writing this post, the original post was deleted, and I'm curious if this was by the user or by an admin/mod.


----------



## pglewis (Dec 24, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> This clip honestly sounds like it came from a PR department



My money is on garden variety troll.


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 24, 2017)

pglewis said:


> My money is on garden variety troll.



I mean, you're probably right. I was wearing my tin-foil hat while writing that post.


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 24, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> To counter the FIFA example, in no professional bowling tournament do you get bowling balls provided to you, with the exception of an occasional spare ball that has a promotional cover. This is because bowling balls are made to meet the needs of the bowler, just as cubes are made to meet needs of individual cubers. A team sport like FIFA cannot compare to individualized sports like cubing. (Edit: looks like many others have given similar analogies).



Golf is another excellent analogy, also horse racing, both the horse and the tack. Most motorsports are tightly enough regulated that you could argue that everybody's using essentially the same equipment, but you could argue the opposite too. Pretty much anything that's judged on style you use your own equipment, but sticking to objective competitions you could also go with skiing, especially alpine, and pretty much any winter racing sport like bobsled, luge, or speedskating.


----------



## mark49152 (Dec 24, 2017)

Kit Clement said:


> Just before I started writing this post, the original post was deleted, and I'm curious if this was by the user or by an admin/mod.


He deleted it himself.


----------



## Tony Fisher (Dec 24, 2017)

theawesomecuber said:


> Inspection:
> 
> I'm seeing a perplexing amount of people arguing that removing inspection time would make sense. As an experienced cuber, let me lay down my reasoning for inspection being a genius addition to the sport of cubing. Firstly, and most obviously, inspection reduces the effects of luck. A massive factor in no inspection solves is whether the pieces you want are right in front of you. This is removed with inspection, where you have time not only to find your pieces, but to deal with ugly situations. Secondly, and I think more importantly, consider the flow of a solve with inspection. You find out your first moves, then during those moves you plan out what the next moves will be, then during those moves you plan the next moves, and so on. Now remove inspection. A solver will be so overwhelmed at the start that his solve, the start especially, will be incredibly choppy. This is because you didn't have the time at the start to plan out your moves, meaning that each move you do is only solving whatever pieces you were lucky enough to see first, further leading to a decrease in consistency. For these reasons, an inspection period benefits the solver by removing luck and improving consistency.


Choppiness, slowness, inconvenience, benefits etc are irrelevant. A solve begins the moment you see the cube and the timer must start at that point. The only real question is the best way to physically start and stop the timer. When I see cubers demonstrating their skills to non cubers I feel really uncomfortable when they look at it first. The general view is that it's cheating (in terms of what solving a puzzle means and not specific WCA rules).
I personally feel the objection to losing inspection time is purely down to people putting a huge amount of time and effort into a particular approach and the low times they have achieved. They do not wanting that destroyed. That of cause is totally understandable and I'd feel the same in their position. However that doesn't stop it being an illogical arbitrary head start on the timer and destroying the purity of solving a Rubik's Cube as fast as possible. It should never have been introduced in the first place however it feels too late to change it now, upset so many people and wipe out years of solve times.


----------



## Sajwo (Dec 24, 2017)

Tony Fisher said:


> Choppiness, slowness, inconvenience, benefits etc are irrelevant. A solve begins the moment you see the cube and the timer must start at that point. The only real question is the best way to physically start and stop the timer. When I see cubers demonstrating their skills to non cubers I feel really uncomfortable when they look at it first. The general view is that it's cheating (in terms of what solving a puzzle means and not specific WCA rules).
> I personally feel the objection to losing inspection time is purely down to people putting a huge amount of time and effort into a particular approach and the low times they have achieved. They do not wanting that destroyed. That of cause is totally understandable and I'd feel the same in their position. However that doesn't stop it being an illogical arbitrary head start on the timer and destroying the purity of solving a Rubik's Cube as fast as possible. It should never have been introduced in the first place however it feels too late to change it now, upset so many people and wipe out years of solve times.



I am not sure if you should take part in such a discussion, as you are not even speedcuber. Inspection is essential to speedcubing, because it helps to optimize the total solving time by allowing you to plan ahead and optimizing the time is accompanying us from the very beginning of the WCA (improvement in the hardware, allowing stickerless, concaved, pillowed cubes, ridges, florian holes etc). It helps us to determine who is better than another.. Without inspection majority of people would do *almost*-random or very inefficient moves just to have illusion of a progress. You can't show your true potential and skill if you start straight away. That doesn't sound like fun at all.


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 24, 2017)

Sajwo said:


> I am not sure if you should take part in such a discussion, as you are not even speedcuber. Inspection is essential to speedcubing, because it helps to optimize the total solving time by allowing you to plan ahead and optimizing the time is accompanying us from the very beginning of the WCA (improvement in the hardware, allowing stickerless, concaved, pillowed cubes, ridges, florian holes etc). It helps us to determine who is better than another.. Without inspection majority of people would do *almost*-random or very inefficient moves just to have illusion of a progress. You can't show your true potential and skill if you start straight away. That doesn't sound like fun at all.


I disagree. Inspection time is an arbitrary innovation that is no more inherent to speedcubing than a particular color scheme. It has allowed for some really cool innovation in methods that would not have been feasible without it, and for that reason as well as continuity in records I think it ought to be maintained.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Dec 24, 2017)

Tony Fisher said:


> Choppiness, slowness, inconvenience, benefits etc are irrelevant. A solve begins the moment you see the cube and the timer must start at that point. The only real question is the best way to physically start and stop the timer. When I see cubers demonstrating their skills to non cubers I feel really uncomfortable when they look at it first. The general view is that it's cheating (in terms of what solving a puzzle means and not specific WCA rules).
> I personally feel the objection to losing inspection time is purely down to people putting a huge amount of time and effort into a particular approach and the low times they have achieved. They do not wanting that destroyed. That of cause is totally understandable and I'd feel the same in their position. However that doesn't stop it being an illogical arbitrary head start on the timer and destroying the purity of solving a Rubik's Cube as fast as possible. It should never have been introduced in the first place however it feels too late to change it now, upset so many people and wipe out years of solve times.


As a speedcuber, inspection time might be arbitrary but it makes solving much more interesting and fun, and that's enough justification for me. It's a hobby, so I think being interesting is worth the compromise. Using the time well is a skill that's hard to master for some methods like CFOP and Roux. Other things like ZZ and CSP are really cool but are practically useless without inspection time. I get why some people prefer the idea of not having inspection time because it's more pure and objective, but I strongly disagree with it being better for competitions.


----------



## Tony Fisher (Dec 24, 2017)

Sajwo said:


> I am not sure if you should take part in such a discussion, as you are not even speedcuber. Inspection is essential to speedcubing, because it helps to optimize the total solving time by allowing you to plan ahead and optimizing the time is accompanying us from the very beginning of the WCA (improvement in the hardware, allowing stickerless, concaved, pillowed cubes, ridges, florian holes etc). It helps us to determine who is better than another.. Without inspection majority of people would do *almost*-random or very inefficient moves just to have illusion of a progress. You can't show your true potential and skill if you start straight away. That doesn't sound like fun at all.


It isn't essential at all since you can solve a cube as fast as you can without it. In addition you are welcome to inspect for as long as you want providing you start the timer at the beginning of the actual solve (the moment you look at it). As for me not being a speedcuber, firstly I devised my own method, was speedcubing before most members on this forum were born and practiced for hours on end and timed my solves. Never once did I consider peaking at the cube before starting my watch. Secondly since I don't do it now but still have an interest in all aspects of puzzles I can be objective.
You talk about not fun, and a whole host of other reasons you don't like it. Once again they are all irrelevant. It's about solving a Rubik's Cube from start to finish regardless of anything else. That's the very basis of what you are doing and over a period of time you would have discussions on forums like this and develop different approaches. Just look at Mats Valk's 374 solves in one hour with no inspections. He fell into a natural rhythm and coped just fine. It was nice to watch pure solving for once. And if you couldn't cope then someone else who can will beat you. 
Once again I will repeat that I think it would be kind of unfair to drop it now and force people to change. But I have yet to hear a single convincing argument why it even exists.


----------



## pglewis (Dec 24, 2017)

Tony Fisher said:


> Once again I will repeat that I think it would be kind of unfair to drop it now and force people to change.



Agreed. Precedent has been set, stats have been amassed, and entire methods have been developed around the rule and pushing the toothpaste back into the tube isn't easy. 



Tony Fisher said:


> But I have yet to hear a single convincing argument why it even exists.



As best I can figure, simply due to the precedent set by the World Championships in the 80's? 

If I consider competition conditions without inspection I think a lot of single solves might come down to the luck of what you initially see in your random orientation. Someone could be blessed with an orientation that initially exposes an easy cross or x-cross while someone else may have that information on the back/bottom. I understand the "purity" opinion, if you tell the average person you can solve a cube in under 20 seconds they're going to expect to say "go" and start a timer. But there may still be a slim argument for a little more fairness in competition through inspection.


----------



## efattah (Dec 26, 2017)

On the topic of inspection, I personally think it would be *extremely* interesting to eliminate inspection times for the extremely fast events (2x2, skewb, pyraminx etc.) I have often wondered what the limit for 2x2 solving is without inspection. Quite dramatically slower than the current times, for sure.


----------



## whatshisbucket (Dec 27, 2017)

efattah said:


> On the topic of inspection, I personally think it would be *extremely* interesting to eliminate inspection times for the extremely fast events (2x2, skewb, pyraminx etc.) I have often wondered what the limit for 2x2 solving is without inspection. Quite dramatically slower than the current times, for sure.


I'd be curious to see what the best solvers could do. I'd think 3.5-4.5 or so for each of those events.


----------



## Sajwo (Jan 16, 2018)

Their page has been updated. There will be first National Qualifiers in Vienna next month.

A few interesting things:

- For 3x3 speedsolving there will be 8 seconds of preinspection
- Each competitor will receive Rubik's Speedcubes, but they will be allowed to use their own cubes (!!!)
- You need to have 3 or 5 of your cubes, depending on an event


----------



## Sion (Jan 17, 2018)

Sajwo said:


> Their page has been updated. There will be first National Qualifiers in Vienna next month.
> 
> A few interesting things:
> 
> ...


Looks like someone gave up trying to eliminate competition.


----------



## pglewis (Jan 17, 2018)

Sajwo said:


> Their page has been updated. There will be first National Qualifiers in Vienna next month.
> 
> A few interesting things:
> 
> ...



Curious that they've decided to bring inspection back, it seemed like there was quite a bit of support for no inspection in the conversation here. 

With my paranoia somewhat tamed I'm very interested to see how this pans out, if they decide to continue with future events, and what they learn and address from the challenges of this first one. I expect hiccups, flaws, and some complaints but an exhibition like this with top level talent could be really entertaining.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 17, 2018)

pglewis said:


> Curious that they've decided to bring inspection back, it seemed like there was quite a bit of support for no inspection in the conversation here.


I thought I remembered that it was the one-handed version (fast hand) that was no inspection? So maybe this is decreasing the inspection for regular 3x3x3, not increasing it?


----------



## pglewis (Jan 17, 2018)

Mike Hughey said:


> I thought I remembered that it was the one-handed version (fast hand) that was no inspection? So maybe this is decreasing the inspection for regular 3x3x3, not increasing it?



Ah that very well may be and I just assumed it was no inspection for everything.


----------



## AlphaSheep (Jan 18, 2018)

Interestingly, it's only open to people aged 16 years or older... I wonder what the reasoning was for that decision?


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Jan 18, 2018)

AlphaSheep said:


> Interestingly, it's only open to people aged 16 years or older... I wonder what the reasoning was for that decision?


Maybe so it looks more professional to the outside world.
But on the other hand, kids solving cubes fast seem to amaze a lot of people.


----------



## Mikel (Jan 18, 2018)

Sajwo said:


> Their page has been updated. There will be first National Qualifiers in Vienna next month.
> 
> A few interesting things:
> 
> ...



Per the Rulebook they state:

"2.2. All participants are provided with standard Rubik’s speedcubes by the organisers. If they prefer, participants are also allowed to use their own customized cubes at the events."


"Their own customized cubes" does not specify if they can use any brand or the RSC. I would still bet on them being required to be RSC's.


----------



## Sajwo (Jan 18, 2018)

Mikel said:


> Per the Rulebook they state:
> 
> "2.2. All participants are provided with standard Rubik’s speedcubes by the organisers. If they prefer, participants are also allowed to use their own customized cubes at the events."
> 
> ...




I'm pretty sure that both Michal and Antonie confirmed that you can use whatever cube you want and that there will be very high price. They couldn't say what their source was, but we should find out quite soon


----------



## GlowingSausage (Jan 31, 2018)

Red Bull Mind Gamers released the full version of the
Red Bull Rubik’s Cube Tournament Rules
and added the
TERMS OF PARTICIPATION
Haven't read it yet but it looks pretty extensive.


----------



## CornerCutter (Jan 31, 2018)

GlowingSausage said:


> Red Bull Mind Gamers released the full version of the
> Red Bull Rubik’s Cube Tournament Rules
> and added the
> TERMS OF PARTICIPATION
> Haven't read it yet but it looks pretty extensive.


People under 16 aren't allowed? That unqualifies a lot of top cubers.


----------



## AidanNoogie (Jan 31, 2018)

CornerCutter said:


> People under 16 aren't allowed? That unqualifies a lot of top cubers.


irs because you have to be 16 to drink Red Bull.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 31, 2018)

Some of the rules differences are fascinating. No +2s, for instance. I suppose that introduces complications that would be confusing to spectators.

I think the reason for the limitations to inspection time are due to the fact that inspection time makes little sense to spectators. The whole thing is very much geared towards making it as engaging to spectators as possible.


----------



## GlowingSausage (Jan 31, 2018)

This is very interesting:
(Red Bull Rubik’s Cube Tournament Rules)
Article 8. Cubes
8.2. Cubes may be enhanced and modified as long as the design of the Rubik’s Cube remains and is comparable
to the provided Standard Rubik’s Speedcubes.
8.2.1. Alternatives to colored tiles, stickers or colored plastic pieces are allowed. Color schemes may differ from
the Standard Rubik’s Speedcube, as long as every side has one uniform and unique color.
8.2.2. Sides of 50.0 mm to 58.00 mm are allowed, as long as all sides are of equal length.

Maybe the use of Rubik's Brand cubes isn't mandatory after all?


----------



## One Wheel (Feb 1, 2018)

GlowingSausage said:


> This is very interesting:
> (Red Bull Rubik’s Cube Tournament Rules)
> Article 8. Cubes
> 8.2. Cubes may be enhanced and modified as long as the design of the Rubik’s Cube remains and is comparable
> ...


8.2 is oddly and ambiguously worded, but as I read 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 I think that's the case. I don't think Rubik's has ever made a cube with "colored plastic pieces," and I really don't know how you would modify a cube to change the edge length by 8mm.


----------



## Tabe (Feb 1, 2018)

GlowingSausage said:


> Maybe the use of Rubik's Brand cubes isn't mandatory after all?


Yeah, they've removed that restriction.

One BIG difference is that you have to provide 5 cubes for the events. Can't just give them one to use over and over.



One Wheel said:


> I really don't know how you would modify a cube to change the edge length by 8mm.


That's not at all what that rule is saying. It's cubes have to be anywhere from 50-58mm in size. So Valk Mini 474s are out, Sail 60s are out but Valk 3s and the like are OK.


----------



## One Wheel (Feb 1, 2018)

Tabe said:


> That's not at all what that rule is saying. It's cubes have to be anywhere from 50-58mm in size. So Valk Mini 474s are out, Sail 60s are out but Valk 3s and the like are OK.


I was just saying that you really can't reconcile that rule and a requirement that competitors use Rubik's Speedcubes. Other than the rules about stickerless puzzles (which is potentially ambiguous) and the size rule (which is not ambiguous) you could interpret the rules to say that the RSC must be used, although competitors may modify it prior to competing.


----------



## Tabe (Feb 1, 2018)

One Wheel said:


> I was just saying that you really can't reconcile that rule and a requirement that competitors use Rubik's Speedcubes. Other than the rules about stickerless puzzles (which is potentially ambiguous) and the size rule (which is not ambiguous) you could interpret the rules to say that the RSC must be used, although competitors may modify it prior to competing.


The rules don't say that at all:

8.1 All athletes are provided with Standard Rubik’s Speedcubes by the organizers. If they prefer, athletes are also allowed to use their own customized cubes at the tournament.


The rule is pretty clear. You can use whatever you want so long as the cube is 50-58mm in size and has uniform colors.


----------



## One Wheel (Feb 1, 2018)

Tabe said:


> The rules don't say that at all:
> 
> 8.1 All athletes are provided with Standard Rubik’s Speedcubes by the organizers. If they prefer, athletes are also allowed to use their own customized cubes at the tournament.
> 
> ...


All I was saying is that except for the 50-58mm rule you could interpret the rules to mean that the base cube has to be an RSC. With that rule you're right, it's clear that other cubes can be used.


----------



## pjk (Sep 22, 2018)

Live updates here:
https://mindgamers.redbull.com/rubiks

$30k in prizes, look forward to seeing how this goes.


----------



## adimare (Sep 22, 2018)

lol


----------



## cubeshepherd (Sep 22, 2018)

adimare said:


> lol


That is funny that you notice the same thing. I was just about to post the same thing as I saw your post come in. You were 10 seconds to fast for me : )


----------



## Loser (Sep 22, 2018)

The competitors will be provided with GanX to use if they would like according to the description of Feliks's GanX vid

Also, I'm trying to go and watch as I live nearby, but I cannot find the spectator registration thing anymore. Anyone know anything about this?


----------



## Underwatercuber (Sep 30, 2018)

Loser said:


> The competitors will be provided with GanX to use if they would like according to the description of Feliks's GanX vid
> 
> Also, I'm trying to go and watch as I live nearby, but I cannot find the spectator registration thing anymore. Anyone know anything about this?


 they did an extremely poor job with streaming, they only streamed finals, they streamed with a phone and they streamed on awful platforms


----------



## Loser (Sep 30, 2018)

Underwatercuber said:


> they did an extremely poor job with streaming, they only streamed finals, they streamed withba phone and they streamed on awful platforms


didn't they stream on twitch?


----------



## Underwatercuber (Sep 30, 2018)

Check these out, he explains the situation pretty well, second video is the one explaining the streaming stuff but the first one has some good stuff too


----------



## pjk (Oct 1, 2018)

Looks like there was a video made about the competition here:


----------



## Waffle Cuber (Oct 1, 2018)

I love Phil in the audience lol


----------

