# Skewb will be an Official WCA event?



## Michael Womack (Jul 29, 2013)

I heard from Mitch Lane on FaceBook that he talked to Lucas Garron that Skewb will soon be an Offical WCA event. Can someone give me more info about it?

Here is some more info from Ranzha:


Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> There is no proof of this.
> 
> At Worlds this past weekend I attended the regulations discussion on Saturday, and addition of skewb (and addition of events/categorization of events generally) was brought up. Of course, it's not really wise to add an event so close to a World Championship, but the WRC (Vincent Sheu and Lucas Garron) are on track with adding skewb.
> One of the issues brought up with adding _any_ events, however, was the lack of policy or established criteria of adding events.


----------



## DrKorbin (Jul 29, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> Skewb will _soon_ be an Offical WCA event



How soon?


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 29, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> I think Jan 1 2014.



There is no proof of this.

At Worlds this past weekend I attended the regulations discussion on Saturday, and addition of skewb (and addition of events/categorization of events generally) was brought up. Of course, it's not really wise to add an event so close to a World Championship, but the WRC (Vincent Sheu and Lucas Garron) are on track with adding skewb.
One of the issues brought up with adding _any_ events, however, was the lack of policy or established criteria of adding events.


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Jul 29, 2013)

If this is right we WILL have a competition on January 1st with Skewb being the main event!

WELCOMESKEWB2014


----------



## tx789 (Jul 29, 2013)

If this is true this it would be nice. I feel like getting fast at it. I hope New Zealand has more comps.


----------



## Ross The Boss (Jul 29, 2013)

they arent even twisty puzzles. they and clock shouldnt be events.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 29, 2013)

TheCubeMaster said:


> magic and master magic should still be WCA events



Obviously you have no idea why magics were removed in the first place. To prevent ignorance, click here.


----------



## DavidCubie (Jul 30, 2013)

Skewb shouldn't be an official event


----------



## tx789 (Jul 30, 2013)

As said many times it adds something new and would be more popular than feet. It's the the most popular unofficial event. It's a quick event. It easier to judge than magics. Also people have wanted it for years.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 30, 2013)

tx789 said:


> It easier to judge than magics.



This comparison should not be made as a reason for skewb's addition.

*As with a previous skewb addition discussion thread, unless you have a legitimate argument against skewb (i.e. anything other than "I don't want/like skewb"), don't clutter this thread.*


----------



## tx789 (Jul 30, 2013)

Why shouldn't it be added? may be a better question. But you need to balance the pros and cons. It a short event for example is a pro another is it adds something new rather than some similar, 8x8 is not something new just a larger NxNxN puzzle that would take ages in a comp. There are scramblers that have been made. There are many pros. Cons could be it another event and we have 17 already.

Edit: I want to see skewb as a official event just to clarify my view point


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Jul 30, 2013)

Guess I'll finally go learn a good method then, cool. I'm glad to see this announced (or leaked) a while in advance of it becoming official, so people can start practicing for it if they are interested.


----------



## cityzach (Jul 30, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> I agree with you I also am wondering why the Super Square-1 or the nxnxn Dodecahedrons like the Gigaminx arn't an event yet.



Literally no one likes the Super Square-1, and gigaminx isn't an event because it would take too long, similar to the 8x8. 

anyway, I would love to see skewb as an official event. It's quick and fun.


----------



## brandbest1 (Jul 30, 2013)

I have nothing against Skewb. This will be fun, seeing who will get the first WR in it.


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 30, 2013)

brandbest1 said:


> I have nothing against Skewb. This will be fun, seeing who will get the first WR in it.



Ge look up and see Who the UWR holder for skewb and there times are like 3 sec.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 30, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> Ge look up and see Who the UWR holder for skewb and there times are like 3 sec.



UWR holder checking in, can confirm 

I'm sure that with some practice, Sarah/Meep/Odder/MaeLSTRoM can take the records for themselves.

In the meantime, Skewb Race anyone?


----------



## Spaxxy (Jul 30, 2013)

Well, I finally have an excuse to get a skewb!


----------



## SatoshiPikachu (Jul 30, 2013)

Ooooh, cool. I've been wanting to get a Skewb for ages, and like Spaxxy, this might just be the perfect excuse to get one  It's really too bad I'm about to become a college student, so I won't have money to buy it, though XD


----------



## ianography (Jul 30, 2013)

If you don't want Skewb to be official, 

You're wrong.

<3


----------



## TheDubDubJr (Jul 30, 2013)

I think Skewb will add a nice, quick event to competitions similar to Pyraminx. 
If it is true and is being added at the beginning of 2014, then I will be getting mine soon and will start practicing!


----------



## cubecraze1 (Jul 30, 2013)

This will definitely get my skewb back out!  I used to be quite good at it but I stopped practising.  So, I won't be very fast at all :3


----------



## ottozing (Jul 30, 2013)

Oh boy, another Event I can get beaten at by Feliks :tu

Seriously though, Skweb will be a nice addition to the other official events. Looking forward to hearing more about this.


----------



## Vincents (Jul 30, 2013)

There is a ridiculous amount of misconstrued, misrepresented, garbled, and in some cases, just plain wrong information in this thread (including from you, Sarah).

Tyson/I and Lucas/I had two separate discussions on (generally) adding events. Now that Worlds is over, that has become more feasible. That's all we said during the WRC meeting. Just sit tight.


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 30, 2013)

Lol.. at first comp WR is going to be broken so many times. 

Basically the first person to solve officially will hold the WR for something like a few seconds


----------



## YddEd (Jul 30, 2013)

Just ordered a LanLan Skewb because
1) I don't have one and want one
2) *If* it *will* be an official event, I'll be able to compete

Does faz do skewb?
What does he avg?


----------



## AvGalen (Jul 30, 2013)

WCA: make it so!


----------



## Goosly (Jul 30, 2013)

BillyRain said:


> Basically the first person to solve officially will hold the WR for something like a few seconds



_9i2) All the results of a round are considered to take place on the last calendar date of the round. If a regional record is broken multiple times on the same calendar date, only the best result is recognised as breaking that regional record._


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 30, 2013)

Goosly said:


> _9i2) All the results of a round are considered to take place on the last calendar date of the round. If a regional record is broken multiple times on the same calendar date, only the best result is recognised as breaking that regional record._



Oh you know what I mean! I obviously meant it theoretically -.-


----------



## Goosly (Jul 30, 2013)

I know what you mean, but people who are not familiar with the regulations might actually have believed that in the first ever round of skewb, the delegate should keep track of which record is set first


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jul 30, 2013)

Yay. Something else that I want to compete in. Bringing my tally up to 5 events.

Better learn a good method.
Do I remember a Meep/Kir method knocking around?


----------



## BillyRain (Jul 30, 2013)

Goosly said:


> I know what you mean, but people who are not familiar with the regulations might actually have believed that in the first ever round of skewb, the delegate should keep track of which record is set first



Okay <3



cube-o-holic said:


> Do I remember a Meep/Kir method knocking around?



Yes. I am learning it already. Want to not suck at this event.

http://meepinator.atspace.com/skewb.html


----------



## CubeRoots (Jul 30, 2013)

There's already enough events... It's hectic fitting them all into 2 days as it is.
It's not something new, just something similar... just another random twisty puzzle that turns in a slightly different way - oooohhhh big deal.
It's influenced by luck quite a lot.
WR chase will be annoying.
I think that we should probably be reducing events rather than adding them.


----------



## cubesonfire (Jul 30, 2013)

I feel great about skewb. Better learn a good method now


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jul 30, 2013)

Definitely add the skewb, that is a great addition indeed. It is a different puzzle altogether, yet still fast to solve. That'll be a fun sight AND sound; all those clicky skewbs hehe. :tu


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jul 30, 2013)

CubeRoots said:


> There's already enough events... It's hectic fitting them all into 2 days as it is.



So you are suggesting getting rid of feet and clock to make way for skewb?

Great idea Laurence.


----------



## Owen (Jul 30, 2013)

I averaged 20 seconds in skewb years ago. I'll have buy new stickers and re-learn!


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 30, 2013)

Owen said:


> I averaged 20 seconds in skewb years ago. I'll have buy new stickers and re-learn!



I have to do the same thing with mine.


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 30, 2013)

Updated the thread with a poll.


----------



## krnballerzzz (Jul 30, 2013)

It's all lies Skewb will never be an official event.


----------



## tx789 (Jul 30, 2013)

krnballerzzz said:


> It's all lies Skewb will never be an official event.



But this is Andrew he hates Skewb. He doesn't want this to happen


----------



## Sa967St (Jul 31, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> Updated the thread with a poll.


Poll edited. The options (and the question itself) were not clear at all before.

IMO the poll is very pointless. All of this has been discussed before, and whether it's added or not isn't solely based on a popularity contest. 

If this thread should serve any purpose, it should be be for discussing how far along skewb is towards becoming an official event, and how it will or won't work.


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 31, 2013)

Sa967St said:


> Poll edited. The options (and the question itself) were not clear at all before.
> 
> IMO the poll is very pointless. All of this has been discussed before, and whether it's added or not isn't solely based on a popularity contest.
> 
> If this thread should serve any purpose, it should be be for discussing how far along skewb is towards becoming an official event, and how it will or won't work.



That turns my poll answer into no But I wanted Yes.


----------



## Sa967St (Jul 31, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> That turns my poll answer into no But I wanted Yes.


The numbers still add up. Don't worry about what your result says you voted for.


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 31, 2013)

Sa967St said:


> The numbers still add up. Don't worry about what your result says you voted for.



Thank you.


----------



## Dene (Jul 31, 2013)

I'm going to just throw it out there... I will do everything I can to prevent skewb from becoming an official event (which is probably not much but if I put my mind to it I could at least try...). The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.


----------



## Username (Jul 31, 2013)

Dene said:


> I'm going to just throw it out there... I will do everything I can to prevent skewb from becoming an official event (which is probably not much but if I put my mind to it I could at least try...). The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.



I kinda agree with this. I will not prevent it from becoming official, But I certainly don't want it to be an event


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jul 31, 2013)

Dene said:


> The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.



Skewb would be considered fun by many people for those reasons.


----------



## cubecraze1 (Jul 31, 2013)

Username said:


> I kinda agree with this. I will not prevent it from becoming official, But I certainly don't want it to be an event



Dene's reasons are because he is an organiser and delegate thus has reasoning to think this. Why do you think this?


----------



## tx789 (Jul 31, 2013)

Dene said:


> I'm going to just throw it out there... I will do everything I can to prevent skewb from becoming an official event (which is probably not much but if I put my mind to it I could at least try...). The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.



Those I'm sure nearly everyone will say nothing is worst than magics.


----------



## Username (Jul 31, 2013)

cubecraze1 said:


> Dene's reasons are because he is an organiser and delegate thus has reasoning to think this. Why do you think this?



I know that. I just agree with the part that skewb is silly and shouldn't be an official event. Personally I think we have enough events, and no events should be added/taken away.


----------



## AvGalen (Jul 31, 2013)

Dene said:


> I'm going to just throw it out there... I will do everything I can to prevent skewb from becoming an official event (which is probably not much but if I put my mind to it I could at least try...). The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.


So 222 should go and skewb ultimate is okay for you?

I vote for "more official events, and just don't put them in your competition if you don't like them"


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 31, 2013)

Dene said:


> I'm going to just throw it out there... I will do everything I can to prevent skewb from becoming an official event (which is probably not much but if I put my mind to it I could at least try...). The last thing we need is another silly, quick event which is heavily influenced by luck.



It's not lucky if you don't know the case! If an easy peasy scramble shows up in competition, I still would never peg someone who isn't at LEAST sub-8 to get the record potentially. It's the turning style. You can see people getting ridiculous tps and times on 2x2 and pyra because the turning is easier, but skewb's a monster to grip efficiently. And looking ahead for a 1-look solve is nearly impossible.

This said, getting lucky isn't a crime! =)


----------



## Pedro (Jul 31, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> So 222 should go and skewb ultimate is okay for you?
> 
> I vote for "more official events, and just don't put them in your competition if you don't like them"



But people are gonna complain a lot if you don't include them...

"Why not, it's so fast...people are gonna take like 10s to solve, it's not a problem...please, please, please"


----------



## DuffyEdge (Jul 31, 2013)

Pedro said:


> "Why not, it's so fast...people are gonna take like 10s to solve, it's not a problem...please, please, please"



I don't know if many people behave in this way?


----------



## kunparekh18 (Jul 31, 2013)

Instead of adding new puzzles as official events, I think adding things like relays, MTS, and such would be more fun.


----------



## Michael Womack (Jul 31, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> So 222 should go and skewb ultimate is okay for you?
> 
> I vote for "more official events, and just don't put them in your competition if you don't like them"



Don't you remember the removal of magic and skewb will take its place. I do not see why 2x2x2 would get removed.


----------



## cubizh (Jul 31, 2013)

I have to agree with Arnaud. More events is better than less. Organizers are free to pick what events they want. I don't think there's a redundancy issue. I don't see any issues in currently having 6 events that use the exact same puzzle. They all have a purpose and involve very different techniques altogether.

There are certain things that should be taken into consideration before adding anything.
There needs to exist some sort of tangible criteria to add/remove events as official events other than "it feels like it should be" or "I like/dislike it, so...".

I think it's appropriate to quote WCA's mission:


> The World Cube Association governs competitions for all puzzles labelled as Rubik puzzles, and all other puzzles that are played by twisting the sides, so-called 'twisty puzzles'. Most famous of these puzzles is the Rubik's Cube, invented by professor Rubik from Hungary. A selection of these puzzles are chosen as official events of WCA.



That criteria to select which twisty puzzles should be chosen is something that can be extremely hard to do in a fair and unbiased way, and I think that's one of the main problems. 
Also, it needs to be clarified a bit more what exactly is involved in making an event official, other than the obligation of adding it to the WCA database and webpage, having extra columns in spreadsheets and having it at Worlds. What does it mean? Can sponsorships be involved?

It's a good discussion.


----------



## AvGalen (Jul 31, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> Don't you remember the removal of magic and skewb will take its place. I do not see why 2x2x2 would get removed.


I was not being serious. I was just pointing out something to Dene.
Also Skewb is not "taking the place of Magic". Magic was just removed because it had nothing to do with solving (and many other reasons). Skewb requires solving skills


----------



## ben1996123 (Jul 31, 2013)

kunparekh18 said:


> Instead of adding new puzzles as official events, I think adding things like relays, MTS, and such would be more fun.



relays add nothing new


----------



## kunparekh18 (Jul 31, 2013)

ben1996123 said:


> relays add nothing new



Exactly


----------



## ben1996123 (Jul 31, 2013)

kunparekh18 said:


> Exactly



thats a bad thing


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 1, 2013)

So if Skewb officially becomes a WCA event that means I will have to resticker mine. Before I get stickers for my Skewb I want to know if the standard size or skewb is 57mm.


----------



## EMI (Aug 1, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> So if Skewb officially becomes a WCA event that means I will have to resticker mine. Before I get stickers for my Skewb I want to know if the standard size or skewb is 57mm.



yes


----------



## Dene (Aug 1, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> So if Skewb officially becomes a WCA event that means I will have to resticker mine. Before I get stickers for my Skewb I want to know if the standard size or skewb is 57mm.



You make it sound as if there is a very good chance of skewb becoming an official event in the near future. As far as I'm aware you are greatly misguided. As such, if you only want to buy stickers if it is certain to become an official event, I suggest you wait.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 1, 2013)

Dene said:


> You make it sound as if there is a very good chance of skewb becoming an official event in the near future. As far as I'm aware you are greatly misguided. As such, if you only want to buy stickers if it is certain to become an official event, I suggest you wait.



I never made it sound like that it is true. Any ways I really need to resticker my skewb the stickers are peeling like crazy.



EMI said:


> yes



Thank you for the info.


----------



## Dene (Aug 1, 2013)

You actually did, because you said "I will re-sticker if it becomes official" then followed that up with "before I get stickers for my skewb...", sounding very much as if this was a project in the making. Perhaps you should work on your tense if that wasn't your intention. No better way to learn how to write than doing it in practise.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 1, 2013)

Dene said:


> You actually did, because you said "I will re-sticker if it becomes official" then followed that up with "before I get stickers for my skewb...", sounding very much as if this was a project in the making. Perhaps you should work on your tense if that wasn't your intention. No better way to learn how to write than doing it in practise.



Ether way I'm going to resticker it at some point.


----------



## Dene (Aug 1, 2013)

XD Well I guess that solves that problem


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Aug 3, 2013)

If skewb solving is considered lucky, then the 3x3 should be too. The skips you get are lucky, luck in the right situations is what speeds things up along with being able to knock out pre-learned algorithms as fast as you can.


----------



## Yoheicube (Aug 3, 2013)

I think Skewb should not be official events because this is easy. 
easy case, 3 or 4 moves. so WR is 0.xx. 
WR depends on scrambles.

if added new event, i reccomend events that WR(single or average) will become 30~40s.


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Aug 3, 2013)

I would love to see a video of someone solving a properly scrambled skewb (so also without pre-knowledge like that 4.41 solve) make a 0.xx solve.

Maybe I am stupidly slow, but still.. a <1 sec solve I find really hard to believe.


----------



## tx789 (Aug 3, 2013)

You know if we shouldn't add SKewb since it's "heavily" influenced by luck then why not remove all events influenced by luck. So that would be everything. 6x6 and 7x7 aren't affected by as everything else. But still.



Spoiler



the order of events by influence of luck would be. Something like this
2x2
pyraminx
3x3(and OH and Feet) 
clock
3x3 BLD
Square 1
4x4 BLD
5x5 BLD
megaminx'
multi BLD
6x6 
7x7


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 3, 2013)

I'd move square-1 up that list a bit (probably right after pyraminx). And I'd maybe move clock up too.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 3, 2013)

Yoheicube said:


> I think Skewb should not be official events because this is easy.
> easy case, 3 or 4 moves. so WR is 0.xx.
> WR depends on scrambles.



1-looking a 4-move scramble would still most usually be difficult because of the puzzle's deep-cut quality. Even Stackmatting the "4-mover" is really rather difficult to get under 1.00 simply because of the time involved picking up the puzzle.

After looking into it, assuming that Skewb will be held about as frequently as Pyraminx, here's what I find:
In 2012, 218 competitions held Pyraminx as an event. Thus, there were at least 1090 scrambles generated, but a safer bet (due to multiple rounds and utilised extra scrambles) would probably be about 1600.
The probability of receiving a Skewb which can be optimally solved in four twists or fewer is 0.06579%, or 1 in every 1520 states. (Thanks Jaap).
One scramble a year, statistically, would be solvable in 4 twists or fewer, like 2x2, but the turning style prohibits the time from timer start to timer stop from being anything like sub-1, not to mention that a scramble like L U' R L' is nearly impossible to 1-look from inspection. I have _never_ gotten sub-1 single, even with the very rare 3-move cases I have come across.

tl;dr Statistics; hardware and lookahead difficulty prohibits sub-1s


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 3, 2013)

This whole "Single WR will be lucky" argument is always baffling to me. The vast, vast, vast majority of cubers out there won't even have a remote chance at the single WR, even one as lucky as this. Is this reason to not hold an event, just so that it's "fair" to the very few who are capable of this? I think most people realize how silly 2x2 single WR is anyway, why can't we just hold an event for the fun of everyone and just take every quick event with a single WR with a grain of salt? Quick and easy events like this are what draw new people into competitions, and will allow the WCA to grow more. More of these kinds of events means more ways for new competitors to get more official solves, which means more fun for them.


----------



## Sebastien (Aug 3, 2013)

As there is already a min_length for 2x2x2 and Pyraminx, there would surely be one for Skewb as well.

The only thing I dislike about adding new events is, that it will have to be held at lots of competitions. The "simply don't hold it" argument that is brought up over and over again is ******** as every mayor competition simply has to host every official event. Magics left a very comfortable gap for the concerned organisers. 

If there is an event out there that deserves to become official, than this is definitely Skewb. But adding it might lead to a situation with fewer rounds per event at mayor competitions and/or event in parallel without opportunity for competitors to participate at everything. But we might find ourselves in such a siatuation as well without adding Skewb.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 3, 2013)

Sebastien said:


> The only thing I dislike about adding new events is, that it will have to be held at lots of competitions. The "simply don't hold it" argument that is brought up over and over again is ******** as every mayor competition simply has to host every official event. Magics left a very comfortable gap for the concerned organisers.



What if we officially declare certain events as "second-class" or "semi-official" events with the express purpose/meaning that they're less important and don't have to be held?

Or if that's enough for people who want to do it, we could more actively use a database of semi-official results like this.


----------



## uberCuber (Aug 3, 2013)

Stefan said:


> What if we officially declare certain events as "second-class" or "semi-official" events with the express purpose/meaning that they're less important and don't have to be held?



Oooh, let's do this with feet!


Sorry, couldn't help myself


----------



## Kit Clement (Aug 3, 2013)

Stefan said:


> What if we officially declare certain events as "second-class" or "semi-official" events with the express purpose/meaning that they're less important and don't have to be held?
> 
> Or if that's enough for people who want to do it, we could more actively use a database of semi-official results like this.



This was the suggestion I gave at the WRC meeting at Worlds. I don't think a separate database is necessary, I think people like to see all of their results on their WCA profile, whether it be a primary or secondary event. 

But maybe we could still run all events at major competitions, but either limit their rounds or force competitors to make choices between pairs of secondary events, and run those pairs simultaneously.


----------



## DrKorbin (Aug 3, 2013)

Sebastien said:


> every mayor competition simply has to host every official event





uberCuber said:


> Oooh, let's do this with feet!



Lets remove feet and add skewb! Two problems with one shot.


----------



## antoineccantin (Aug 4, 2013)

DrKorbin said:


> Lets remove feet and add skewb! Two problems with one shot.



No.


----------



## Coolster01 (Aug 4, 2013)

DrKorbin said:


> Lets remove feet and add skewb! Two problems with one shot.



Let's not. Feet actually is an important event in different places. People need to not just care about these countries in the forum. Yes, the USA, UK, Canada, etc. aren't fans of the event. But if you've ever looked at Brazil, you'll see that nearly every, if not every, Brazilian comp hold the event. We should be fair to countries that can't talk on this forum because they don't know English. Honestly, the semi class idea sounds fine with me, because then it will not have to be held at big comps. Just getting removed is not a good idea.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 4, 2013)

Can someone say what it would bean for Skewb to be a second class event? Would it be represented differently on the WCA sight? If it's just a label, everyone's going to ignore it, and big competitions will still have it.


----------



## Coolster01 (Aug 4, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> Can someone say what it would bean for Skewb to be a second class event? Would it be represented differently on the WCA sight? If it's just a label, everyone's going to ignore it, and big competitions will still have it.



I think skewb should not be second class or whatever. Tbh only feet should be second class. Basically, bigger comps wouldn't have to hold the event if they don't want to. So nationals wouldn't need to have feet. But I guess they really aren't fully obligated to hold every event, as Australian nats never have feet. So honestly this second class thing is not really useful.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 4, 2013)

Coolster01 said:


> I think skewb should not be second class or whatever. Tbh only feet should be second class. Basically, bigger comps wouldn't have to hold the event if they don't want to. So nationals wouldn't need to have feet. But I guess they really aren't fully obligated to hold every event, as Australian nays never have feet. So honestly this second class thing is not really useful.



You're basically saying that what makes an event second class is that "bigger comps wouldn't have to hold the event". That is not a real distinction. The whole point of a big comp is that it holds all events. They would still have skewb at big comps even if some sort of higher authority said that. It's a ridiculous idea.


----------



## Coolster01 (Aug 4, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> You're basically saying that what makes an event second class is that "bigger comps wouldn't have to hold the event". That is not a real distinction. The whole point of a big comp is that it holds all events. They would still have skewb at big comps even if some sort of higher authority said that. It's a ridiculous idea.



Hold on, let me clear up that I'm not on any side of this argument, I was just adding to what stefan said about the class thing. 

I see what you are saying, but I think you didn't read the last part of my post where I said that it's not useful. It really isn't a good idea. Just saying that Australian big comps don't have all events so it isn't against regulations or anything to not hold all events at big comps.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 4, 2013)

Coolster01 said:


> Hold on, let me clear up that I'm not on any side of this argument, I was just adding to what stefan said about the class thing.
> 
> I see what you are saying, but I think you didn't read the last part of my post where I said that it's not useful. It really isn't a good idea. Just saying that Australian big comps don't have all events so it isn't against regulations or anything to not hold all events at *big comps*.



Obviously, since you can't have regulations about something not defined by the regulations.


----------



## Coolster01 (Aug 4, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> Obviously, since you can't have regulations about something not defined by the regulations.



Exactly. There you go.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 4, 2013)

Coolster01 said:


> Exactly. There you go.



...

I said that because you used faulty logic to explain why "big comps" don't need to have every event.

Faulty logic: There was once a big comp where they didn't have every event.

Correct logic: There is no such thing as a big comp according to the regulations.


----------



## Coolster01 (Aug 4, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> ...
> 
> I said that because you used faulty logic to explain why "big comps" don't need to have every event.
> 
> ...



Alright, alright. OK, Ok. I agree. I really meant that as an agreement but I guess I should've said it differently.


----------



## cubizh (Aug 4, 2013)

I think Sebastien is referring to Worlds and major international/continental championships like Euro, Asian championships, sudamericano and us nationals(?)


----------



## tx789 (Aug 4, 2013)

tx789 said:


> You know if we shouldn't add SKewb since it's "heavily" influenced by luck then why not remove all events influenced by luck. So that would be everything. 6x6 and 7x7 aren't affected by as everything else. But still.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I forgot FMC it would be at the top


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 4, 2013)

cubizh said:


> I think Sebastien is referring to Worlds and major international/continental championships like Euro, Asian championships, sudamericano and us nationals(?)



I suspect that if there were a secondary class of events, and feet were in that secondary class, the organizers of US Nationals would probably have no trouble at all deciding not to hold that event. At least not until we have more turnover among organizers than we've had so far.

I'd love to have a secondary class of events. And then I'd love to add square-1 BLD, megaminx BLD, 6x6x6 BLD as secondary events. As primary events, I know it will never happen. But as secondary events, at least I can dream.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 4, 2013)

Skewb honestly won't be as chore to run as other currently existing events. Consider that most times will be similar and faster than 3x3, with about the popularity of pyraminx. Also, scrambling is fast and intuitive (and consistent with pyraminx if B is used instead of D).

And the whole thing with the possibility of fewer rounds of events at a major comp may be solvable with a larger staff of equal overall competence/efficiency.

Mike's idea really piqued my interest at the regs meeting, but that belongs in another thread.


----------



## Owen (Aug 4, 2013)

I think in the past couple years the WCA has realized that scheduling problems competitions have are getting out of hand.
They could solve this is a couple different ways.

1. Remove events
2. Add 3x3 cutoffs

So far, they are removing events (magic). I suspect they will continue removing events. Thus, it seems unlikely that Skewb, or any new event for that matter will be added. I'm not happy about this, but it's better than the alternative, adding 3x3 cutoffs (borderline evil, though it has been proposed by people like Frank Morris).

I wouldn't expect any new events, especially with the community growing this fast. We just had a competition with over 500 attendants.


----------



## ottozing (Aug 4, 2013)

Owen said:


> I think in the past couple years the WCA has realized that scheduling problems competitions have are getting out of hand.



lolno. The reason they removed Magic and Master magic was because they were stupid events to have in the first place and they were absurdly hard to regulate (NOT because they took up too much time, because they were undeniably the fastest events to run at comps).


----------



## Stefan (Aug 4, 2013)

Coolster01 said:


> if you've ever looked at Brazil, you'll see that nearly every, if not every, Brazilian comp hold the event.




```
+------------------------+------+-------+----------+
| countryId              | feet | comps | percent  |
+------------------------+------+-------+----------+
| Slovakia               |    1 |     1 | 100.0000 |
| Latvia                 |    1 |     1 | 100.0000 |
| Lithuania              |    1 |     1 | 100.0000 |
| Brazil                 |   32 |    35 |  91.4286 |
| Norway                 |   10 |    13 |  76.9231 |
| Hungary                |    7 |    10 |  70.0000 |
| Slovenia               |    2 |     3 |  66.6667 |
| Korea                  |   11 |    17 |  64.7059 |
| Czech Republic         |    5 |     8 |  62.5000 |
| Finland                |   11 |    18 |  61.1111 |
| Iran                   |    2 |     4 |  50.0000 |
| Ukraine                |    4 |     8 |  50.0000 |
| Sweden                 |   15 |    30 |  50.0000 |
| Denmark                |   12 |    25 |  48.0000 |
| Indonesia              |   19 |    48 |  39.5833 |
| Poland                 |   20 |    53 |  37.7358 |
| Thailand               |    6 |    17 |  35.2941 |
| Malaysia               |    4 |    12 |  33.3333 |
| Taiwan                 |    8 |    26 |  30.7692 |
| Vietnam                |    3 |    10 |  30.0000 |
| Estonia                |    3 |    10 |  30.0000 |
| Colombia               |    3 |    11 |  27.2727 |
| Spain                  |   12 |    44 |  27.2727 |
| United Kingdom         |    5 |    19 |  26.3158 |
| Japan                  |   17 |    78 |  21.7949 |
| Netherlands            |    7 |    33 |  21.2121 |
| France                 |   15 |    71 |  21.1268 |
| Hong Kong              |    1 |     5 |  20.0000 |
| Germany                |   10 |    55 |  18.1818 |
| China                  |   24 |   149 |  16.1074 |
| Philippines            |    5 |    32 |  15.6250 |
| Russia                 |    2 |    13 |  15.3846 |
| Italy                  |    6 |    42 |  14.2857 |
| Belgium                |    2 |    15 |  13.3333 |
| New Zealand            |    1 |     8 |  12.5000 |
| Canada                 |    4 |    41 |   9.7561 |
| Mexico                 |    1 |    14 |   7.1429 |
| USA                    |   19 |   309 |   6.1489 |
| India                  |    2 |    43 |   4.6512 |
| Chile                  |    1 |    24 |   4.1667 |
| Macau                  |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Iceland                |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Ireland                |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Greece                 |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Croatia                |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Jordan                 |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Turkey                 |    0 |     1 |   0.0000 |
| Israel                 |    0 |     2 |   0.0000 |
| Switzerland            |    0 |     2 |   0.0000 |
| Serbia                 |    0 |     2 |   0.0000 |
| United Arab Emirates   |    0 |     2 |   0.0000 |
| Portugal               |    0 |     2 |   0.0000 |
| Argentina              |    0 |     5 |   0.0000 |
| Singapore              |    0 |     5 |   0.0000 |
| Austria                |    0 |     6 |   0.0000 |
| Romania                |    0 |    10 |   0.0000 |
| Peru                   |    0 |    14 |   0.0000 |
| Australia              |    0 |    20 |   0.0000 |
+------------------------+------+-------+----------+

SELECT countryId, feet, comps, feet/comps*100 percent FROM 
(SELECT countryId, count(distinct competitionId) comps, sum(if(eventId='333ft',1,0)) feet FROM
(SELECT DISTINCT competitionId, eventId, Competitions.countryId
FROM Results, Competitions
WHERE Competitions.id = competitionId) helper
GROUP BY countryId) helper2
ORDER BY feet/comps DESC, comps
```


----------



## Stefan (Aug 4, 2013)

Coolster01 said:


> bigger comps [...] Australian nats never have feet



AustralianNationals2010 - 39 competitors
AustralianNationals2011 - 35 competitors
AustralianNationals2012 - 41 competitors

Aww... you so cute!

(all competitons so far have averaged 48.8 competitors, btw)


----------



## tx789 (Aug 4, 2013)

Stefan said:


> ```
> +------------------------+------+-------+----------+
> | countryId              | feet | comps | percent  |
> +------------------------+------+-------+----------+
> ...


OcR for feet must be the oldest Continental record it's 4 years old and held by Dene only one other person has completed a feet from Oceania and that was at worlds.


----------



## Dene (Aug 4, 2013)

Stefan said:


> AustralianNationals2010 - 39 competitors
> AustralianNationals2011 - 35 competitors
> AustralianNationals2012 - 41 competitors
> 
> ...



Lol Australia represent. I'd like to take this opportunity to reassure everyone that Tim and myself have no intention of holding feet in a competition here. And if anyone even dares to suggest this has anything to do with me holding the continental record, you obviously do not know me, and have absolutely no idea what I think about feet...



tx789 said:


> OcR for feet must be the oldest Continental record it's 4 years old and held by Dene only one other person has completed a feet from Oceania and that was at worlds.



Lol Jayden missed his chance to beat me damn it XD . Maybe in two years


----------



## tx789 (Aug 4, 2013)

Dene said:


> Lol Jayden missed his chance to beat me damn it XD . Maybe in two years



I like to try and beat it maybe (at least complete in it) at the next NZ comp. I want to complete in every official event. I very rarely practice feet. I average like 4:00 or something and my times range from 3:00-5:00


----------



## Stefan (Aug 4, 2013)

Dene said:


> Lol Jayden missed his chance to beat me damn it XD



Right, you two are the only ones. Still more than Africa, though. Number of feet competitors per continent:


```
Asia           343
Europe         299
North America  104
South America   58
Oceania          2
Africa           1

SELECT continentId, count(distinct personId)
FROM Results, Countries
WHERE Countries.id = countryId
AND eventId='333ft'
GROUP BY continentId
ORDER BY 2 desc
```


----------



## Sebastien (Aug 4, 2013)

cubizh said:


> I think Sebastien is referring to Worlds and major international/continental championships like Euro, Asian championships, sudamericano and us nationals(?)



This and every National Championship competition. In my opinion the point of every competition giving out regional titles should be to crown world/continental/national champions in every official category.


----------



## cubizh (Aug 4, 2013)

Sebastien said:


> This and every National Championship competition. In my opinion the point of every competition giving out regional titles should be to crown world/continental/national champions in every official category.



I completely agree with this statement.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 5, 2013)

If you all think that we should remove an event to make room for skewb there have been some Comps in the past which had all the events and Skewb be an Unofficial extra side event.


----------



## tx789 (Aug 5, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> If you all think that we should remove an event to make room for skewb there have been some Comps in the past which had all the events and Skewb be an Unofficial extra side event.



Not all comps have the time


----------



## Deleted member 19792 (Aug 5, 2013)

Since competition organizers can decide which events they want to include in their competition. I believe that no events should be removed and Skewb should be added. Since [insert contry] Nats and Worlds are the biggest events to some cubers, all events can be included. It is a matter of time though, where some rounds would need to be shortened and such. In Worlds, with the amount of people registering, cutoffs were released. If we add Skewb to all majour competitions, we should then give shorter cutoff times to events that are not as popular to some cubers. So should Skewb be added? Yes. But, for the time sake, there should be extra consideration on cutoff times and such.

Relooking at some posts. You don't have to put all events in one competition every time.


----------



## Mikel (Aug 5, 2013)

Brandon Harnish brought to my attention that there is no WCA procedure for adding an event to the official event list. What was the reasoning for adding events in the past? (e.g. 6x6 and 7x7) Should we create a procedure for adding an event to the list and what should it entail? 

It would have to have a scrambler, if not already covered by the current scrambler. (E.g, if 3x3 OH BLD were added, you could just use 3x3 BLD scrambles, nothing new to be added.) 

Would there be a restriction to the first competition allowed to host the event? Would there have to be a minimum amount of people, a national championship, or even the next World Championship to give more people an opportunity to nab the first WR or does that matter? 

What approval would it have to go through? A certain percentage of a vote from the delegates, or just the board members? 

I think adding a procedure for adding events would be a _very _ good thing. I would like to leave the bias out of it. An event should become an event if it is widely wanted, and feasible to hold within the WCA regulations. It shouldn't be limited from becoming an event because a few people are passionately biased and against adding it.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 5, 2013)

strakerak said:


> Since competition organizers can decide which events they want to include in their competition. I believe that no events should be removed and Skewb should be added. Since [insert contry] Nats and Worlds are the biggest events to some cubers, all events can be included. It is a matter of time though, where some rounds would need to be shortened and such. In Worlds, with the amount of people registering, cutoffs were released. If we add Skewb to all majour competitions, we should then give shorter cutoff times to events that are not as popular to some cubers. So should Skewb be added? Yes. But, for the time sake, there should be extra consideration on cutoff times and such.
> 
> Relooking at some posts. You don't have to put all events in one competition every time.



I agree with you that no other event should be removed. Most of the comps other then Nats an Worlds would have not have all 17 WCA events.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 5, 2013)

Mikel said:


> Would there be a restriction to the first competition allowed to host the event? Would there have to be a minimum amount of people, a national championship, or even the next World Championship to give more people an opportunity to nab the first WR or does that matter?



We do sort of have a precedent for this - the rules change in multiBLD. There was no minimum amount of people, etc., to get the WR; the first competition to hold the event after the rules change got the new WR. However, that was changed after the fact when we decided later to allow previous results that fit the new rules to be counted. So I assume some of the early historical WRs for the new multiBLD got eliminated once that happened, although I don't know what actually happened in the database.


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 5, 2013)

Sebastien said:


> ...The only thing I dislike about adding new events is, that it will have to be held at lots of competitions. The "simply don't hold it" argument that is brought up over and over again is ******** as every mayor competition simply has to host every official event....


The "simply don't hold it" argument isn't bulls*** at all. 95% of competitions aren't a "mayor competition" so this argument is perfectly valid.

I organised my first competition this year and actually managed to have every event except the really long ones (FMC, bigblind, multiblind) in a 1 day competition. For 2-5 I had 2nd rounds that allowed the maximum of 75% competitors to continue. I also had an unofficial event to lighten up the competition and give noobs-and-experts a chance to meet. This time could easily have been used for Skewb. However, I choose NOT to organise Feet (even though Henrik and Erik were both there) simply because I personally don't like it. If this isn't enough prove for the "simply don't hold it" argument than I don't know how to convince you.

And would major competitions really suffer from adding an extra event like Skewb? We added 6 and 7 which require a whole lot more time to scramble/solve and cost much more for competitors to buy.

Add Skewb and don't organise it if you don't want to


----------



## Dene (Aug 5, 2013)

Mikel said:


> I think adding a procedure for adding events would be a _very _ good thing. I would like to leave the bias out of it. An event should become an event if it is widely wanted, and feasible to hold within the WCA regulations.



It would be absolutely horrible if any event could be added if there was enough popularity. The events available should be, in my opinion, an exclusive group. If anything could be an official event, then we may as well just make everything available officially. But if we do that you'll find the cubing community splitting into cliques, where people really only care about one or two events, while the major events (such as 3x3 and BLD) will lose significance. Your suggestion makes me think of the Olympics, which is now so overloaded with so many insignificant "sports"... the vast majority of people couldn't give a damn about most of the stuff at the Olympics, and this takes away from the significance of each and every event. Nowadays it's basically like "show up and play your sport then go home", rather than "if you win this you will be the top of the world amongst an exceptional and exclusive group of people".


Having a procedure for adding events might be helpful, but it would need to be a strict procedure, and it would have to be applied to current events as well to filter out the ones falling behind.


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 9, 2013)

Dene said:


> It would be absolutely horrible if any event could be added if there was enough popularity. The events available should be, in my opinion, an exclusive group. If anything could be an official event, then we may as well just make everything available officially. But if we do that you'll find the cubing community splitting into cliques, where people really only care about one or two events, while the major events (such as 3x3 and BLD) will lose significance. Your suggestion makes me think of the Olympics, which is now so overloaded with so many insignificant "sports"... the vast majority of people couldn't give a damn about most of the stuff at the Olympics, and this takes away from the significance of each and every event. Nowadays it's basically like "show up and play your sport then go home", rather than "if you win this you will be the top of the world amongst an exceptional and exclusive group of people".
> 
> 
> Having a procedure for adding events might be helpful, but it would need to be a strict procedure, and it would have to be applied to current events as well to filter out the ones falling behind.



Why do you compare the WCA with the Olympics? Don't they have entirely different goals?
WCA has competitions every weekend that are accessible for all and the motto is "more fun for more people"
Olympics is not about fun but about "who is the absolute best of the best and this 4 year timeframe" (although officialy their motto is something like "participating is more important than winning" if I remember correctly)


----------



## Dene (Aug 9, 2013)

I dunno, it was just a thought that occurred to me. Ignore that part if you like. My main point still stands I feel; if we allow anything and everything to be an official event, the WCA loses its significance as a twisty puzzle solving authority. WCA events would become more like informal cube meetups, and so what's the point of the WCA then? The number of events should remain limited to provide an elite competitive environment (and I don't mean elite people, I mean elite events).


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 9, 2013)

Dene said:


> if we allow anything and everything to be an official event



I don't really see why you're arguing against this - no one is making this case.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Aug 9, 2013)

Dene said:


> I dunno, it was just a thought that occurred to me. Ignore that part if you like. My main point still stands I feel; if we allow anything and everything to be an official event, the WCA loses its significance as a twisty puzzle solving authority. WCA events would become more like informal cube meetups, and so what's the point of the WCA then? The number of events should remain limited to provide an elite competitive environment (and I don't mean elite people, I mean elite events).



And this ladies and gentlemen, is a perfect example of the slippery slope fallacy.

Adding a couple of events isn't going to ruin the integrity of the WCA, since if we always add events properly and only add those which fit with the aims of the WCA and are significantly worth adding, then I see no problem. I mean we probably won't be adding 2x2BLD or 4OH any time soon, because even though they fit, they don't really add much to the WCA.

TL;DR: Skewb is an original puzzle which would be awesome to add, and it won't lead to every single possible event being added.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 9, 2013)

It seems like there's at least the outline of a process for adding events that doesn't just include popularity. I don't think we'll have to worry about any such slippery slope.


----------



## Michael Womack (Aug 9, 2013)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> TL;DR: Skewb is an original puzzle which would be awesome to add, and it won't lead to every single possible event being added.



define "Original" If you say what I think your saying than every NON-WCA puzzle is Original.


----------



## Username (Aug 9, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> define "Original" If you say what I think your saying than every NON-WCA puzzle is Original.



Then he isn't saying what you think


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Aug 9, 2013)

Michael Womack said:


> define "Original" If you say what I think your saying than every NON-WCA puzzle is Original.



In this case I mean Original to be "A puzzle that isn't already used in a WCA competition, that's fairly different from other puzzles already included but doesn't take too long or too much skill to solve"
So although puzzles like gigaminx would be quite different, they take too long to solve.
Another case is cuboids, although they aren't currently held, I think they're too similar to solving cube sizes to be original puzzles and probably shouldn't be added.


----------



## DrKorbin (Aug 9, 2013)

Partly I agree with Dene. If there is some adding events procedure that doesn't involve WRC moderation then at some moment there can appear a large bunch of new events that cannot be handled in a competition all together (and they should be, at least at WC/EC/nationals).


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 9, 2013)

DrKorbin said:


> Partly I agree with Dene. If there is some adding events procedure that doesn't involve WRC moderation then at some moment there can appear a large bunch of new events that cannot be handled in a competition all together (and they should be, at least at WC/EC/nationals).



I find it hard to believe that the WCA board will suddenly accidently add loads of new events.


----------



## DrKorbin (Aug 9, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> I find it hard to believe that the WCA board will suddenly accidently add loads of new events.



I said "doesn't involve WRC moderation" (or WCA Board moderation, if you like). If you require Board moderation then you get just what we already have right now.


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 9, 2013)

why would they make a procedure that doesn't involve moderation >_>


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Aug 9, 2013)

DrKorbin said:


> Partly I agree with Dene. If there is some adding events procedure that doesn't involve WRC moderation then at some moment there can appear a large bunch of new events that cannot be handled in a competition all together (and they should be, at least at WC/EC/nationals).



Umm, of course the WRC will have the final say on adding any event, since adding an event counts as a regulation change (9b)
And I would imagine it would add a maximum of 1 event a year up to the point where it's decided that adding more would be too many.


----------



## DrKorbin (Aug 9, 2013)

Then we already have such a procedure for adding events: an event is added if WCA Board think it is fine to add this event -_-
What another "procedure" did you wanted?


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Aug 9, 2013)

DrKorbin said:


> Then we already have such a procedure for adding events: an event is added if WCA Board think it is fine to add this event -_-
> What another "procedure" did you wanted?



I don't?
I was responding to what you said about a procedure not needing moderation. I think it's fairly obvious that no matter what happens, the WRC and the WCA board will have the final say in adding events, so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.


----------



## Dene (Aug 10, 2013)

Thanks DrKorbin; I think the others all missed the part I originally quoted:



Mikel said:


> I think adding a procedure for adding events would be a _very _ good thing. I would like to leave the bias out of it. An event should become an event if it is widely wanted, and feasible to hold within the WCA regulations.


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 10, 2013)

I agree with Dene's idea very strongly, but it begs the question: what makes an event worthy of being official? And what are the legitimate reasons not to sanction skewb exclusively?


----------

