# WRC wants to remove rotations and wide moves as legal moves for FMC



## Underwatercuber (Oct 14, 2019)

Discussion on it can be found here, be sure to raise your voice!
https://github.com/thewca/wca-regulations/issues/757


----------



## Cubinwitdapizza (Oct 15, 2019)

I think this is a horrible idea and it shouldn’t happen.
but then there are 43 quintillion possibilities on a 3x3. And 1 rotation counts as a different possibility. I can see where they could possibly come from but i still think they should not be removed. As for wide moves, I feel the same way. They are technically doing a normal move and rotation but if you have ever tried to do a wide move alg without the wide moves it’s really hard to translate. I completely disagree with this.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 15, 2019)

Cubinwitdapizza said:


> I think this is a horrible idea and it shouldn’t happen.
> but then there are 43 quintillion possibilities on a 3x3. And 1 rotation counts as a different possibility. I can see where they could possibly come from but i still think they should not be removed. As for wide moves, I feel the same way. They are technically doing a normal move and rotation but if you have ever tried to do a wide move alg without the wide moves it’s really hard to translate. I completely disagree with this.


Rotations don’t count for how many permutations a cube has  definitely agree on wide moves though!


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 15, 2019)

Cubinwitdapizza said:


> if you have ever tried to do a wide move alg without the wide moves it’s really hard to translate.


It's not tho. Just look at what the color of the face you're turning is.


----------



## tx789 (Oct 15, 2019)

Cubinwitdapizza said:


> They are technically doing a normal move and rotation but if you have ever tried to do a wide move alg without the wide moves it’s really hard to translate. I completely disagree with this.



You don't have much experience with FMC, you don't really use algs. One reason the WRC wants to do this is for beginners. 


There is an advanced technique made slower by removing these moves since you need to convert your skeleton multiple times.


----------



## GAN 356 X (Oct 15, 2019)

I highly disagree that they should remove fmc rotations as it makes it funner and you can have more creative solutions


----------



## Ronxu (Oct 15, 2019)

GAN 356 X said:


> I highly disagree that they should remove fmc rotations as it makes it funner and you can have more creative solutions


hahaha


----------



## stoic (Oct 15, 2019)

I honestly had no idea you were allowed wide moves or rotations in FMC. 
I don't recall noticing them posted in solutions on here.
I always assumed it was part of the skillset required to transcribe them into single face turns for the submitted solution...


----------



## Cubinwitdapizza (Oct 15, 2019)

tx789 said:


> You don't have much experience with FMC, you don't really use algs. One reason the WRC wants to do this is for beginners.
> 
> 
> There is an advanced technique made slower by removing these moves since you need to convert your skeleton multiple times.


Wow I’ve been burned And attacked.
also I know you don’t use algs MOST OF THE TIME you still use algs occasionally.


----------



## u Cube (Oct 15, 2019)

idc tbh I didn't know rotations and wide moves are legal XD I've always used just standard notation and it works fine.


----------



## Karwan (Oct 15, 2019)

they shouldn't be. sometimes they're crucial.


----------



## SenorJuan (Oct 15, 2019)

tx789 said:


> You don't have much experience with FMC, you don't really use algs. One reason the WRC wants to do this is for beginners.


But it's beginners in particular that WILL use algorithms, some of which will inevitably use wide moves and rotations. Having to re-write an algorithm so it has no wide turns isn't trivial if you're a beginner, it would use up time, require double-checking, any errors you make might result in you having to solve+rescramble etc.
And I like [ R ], [ U ] or [ r ], [ f ] etc notation for cube rotations, they're far more intuitive than the more mathematical x,y,z. And if you're not familiar with them, they are trivial to learn. So both these should be kept.
I think the existing rules and allowances are fine as they are. What seems to be the problem is lack of knowledge/experience of the rules. All competitors should be issued with a guidance/rule sheet showing what is acceptable, describing [ f ] , z , r etc, before the hour starts. And all judges should, obviously be familiar with them too.


----------



## xyzzy (Oct 15, 2019)

Cubinwitdapizza said:


> also I know you don’t use algs MOST OF THE TIME you still use algs occasionally.


I use ZBLL in like a third of my FMC attempts, but then again, I also suck at FMC now, so…



SenorJuan said:


> But it's beginners in particular that WILL use algorithms, some of which will inevitably use wide moves and rotations. Having to re-write an algorithm so it has no wide turns isn't trivial if you're a beginner, it would use up time, require double-checking, any errors you make might result in you having to solve+rescramble etc.


There's a huge gap between these two kinds of "beginners":
(i) (apparently the majority of people who try FMC officially?) people who write down a mediocre CFOP solution that's 55+ moves long with a zillion rotations and DNF like half of their attempts due to notation mistakes or whatever;
(ii) people who have read the FMC tutorial (or e.g. watched J Perm's videos) and have done maybe 5-20 serious practice attempts.

It's not _trivial_ to translate algs, yes, but it's also not very difficult and one can pick it up after doing it a couple of times. In other words, this might be a problem for former type of beginners, but almost certainly not the latter, and I honestly can't bring myself to care a lot about the former. But that said, leaving rotations/wide moves in does lower the barrier to entry and beginners of the first kind might eventually become beginners of the second kind, and it doesn't seem like rotations or wide moves make grading much harder anyway.

(maybe I'll submit a solution using only wide moves…)



SenorJuan said:


> And I like [ R ], [ U ] or [ r ], [ f ] etc notation for cube rotations, they're far more intuitive than the more mathematical x,y,z. And if you're not familiar with them, they are trivial to learn. So both these should be kept.


I actually like the square bracket notation too. x/y/z is kind of arbitrary—while the standard is to have them in counterclockwise order (right hand rule or whatever it's called), that alone doesn't uniquely define which direction should have which label. In fact, it makes more sense to me that x/y/z should be R/B/U rather than R/U/F.


----------



## PugCuber (Oct 21, 2019)

I’m perfectly fine if wide moves go, but rotations? NO! That’s just going to discourage new FMC solvers from competing!


----------



## Sion (Oct 21, 2019)

If anything, I'm probably the only one who doesn't see this as major. 

Wide moves can still be used as part of the solution, just not the written one. It probably will be tricky, but it would still be possible to transcribe a solution with wide moves into one without, given you compensate for adjusting the orientation of the cube and try to mitigate the use of rotations which have no major impact on the final state if you shift everything to the perception of one orientation.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Oct 21, 2019)

PugCuber said:


> I’m perfectly fine if wide moves go, but rotations? NO! That’s just going to discourage new FMC solvers from competing!


It’s a more advanced event and you have an entire hour to get a solution so the WRC doesn’t really care


----------



## PugCuber (Oct 21, 2019)

Underwatercuber said:


> It’s a more advanced event and you have an entire hour to get a solution so the WRC doesn’t really care


True


----------



## asacuber (Oct 23, 2019)

Removing wide moves will definitely cause a lot of trouble for anyone who wants to insert edges (slicey shenanigans to be specific)


----------

