# Should We have more events instead of two added for 2020 competitions?



## Sion (Dec 15, 2019)

As we all know, Mike Hughey wants to add two events for the 2020 season. However, looking upon the four candidates, I realized that the four candidates are all significantly different from each-other. 

15 puzzle would bring a non-twisty but competitive puzzle into the mix. It's also a very friendly event to get involved with for newer cubers. I would argue it's the new clock, in the sense it's a flat puzzle, if that makes sense. 

Curvy Copter would bring an exceptionally challenging but new experience into the mix, and would allow the community to experience the evolution of a puzzle and its solutions that we haven't had since the 1980s it seems. 

Speed FMC is fascinating, since in a way, it's like speedcubing, but with a pen and trying to be efficient, racing against the clock as you try to make an efficient solution. 

Mirror blocks are an unusual take on the most popular event of all: 3x3. While it is the least unique, for many newcomers, it could be a challenge worth getting into.

In this regard, I find it hard to really say that only adding two would give these candidates justice, though I do feel a choice should be made.

In this sense, I'm posting a poll to see if the community would want to see more than two events added. Please vote with what answer you feel justifies your opinions best. As of writing this thread, Speed FMC is overwhelmingly first and 15 Puzzle is a very firm second, Curvy Copter is at third with just one more vote than Mirror Blocks, which is in fourth.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 15, 2019)

I think it depends on how many votes are cast for each event. If more than two events are overwhelmingly over the 22 vote criteria, then I say add them. If a third/fourth event is barely over 22 votes, then don't add it.


----------



## 2018AMSB02 (Dec 15, 2019)

I think the main reason that we aren’t going to add more than two events is because it is a lot of work for Mike Hughey and his time is limited. I too would enjoy more than two being added, but I would not want to pressure Mike into doing any extra work than what he has already done / is doing.


----------



## Sion (Dec 15, 2019)

DarkSavage said:


> I think it depends on how many votes are cast for each event. If more than two events are overwhelmingly over the 22 vote criteria, then I say add them. If a third/fourth event is barely over 22 votes, then don't add it.



People could always start off as being skeptical, and start to warm up once an event is in effect.


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 15, 2019)

PingPongCuber said:


> I think the main reason that we aren’t going to add more than two events is because it is a lot of work for Mike Hughey and his time is limited. I too would enjoy more than two being added, but I would not want to pressure Mike into doing any extra work than what he has already done / is doing.



Came here to say the same thing.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 15, 2019)

PingPongCuber said:


> I think the main reason that we aren’t going to add more than two events is because it is a lot of work for Mike Hughey and his time is limited. I too would enjoy more than two being added, but I would not want to pressure Mike into doing any extra work than what he has already done / is doing.



The hardest part of adding an event would be something that has weird rules. For example, team events would require Mike to figure out how the event would work, make a list of guidelines, and most importantly, do a bunch of coding to implement it. Not all events have those problems. For example:

*Mirror Blocks *- Same scrambler + rules as 3x3
*15 Puzzle *- Scramblers exist, he'd have to implement one and make a(likely short) list of guidelines
*Curvy Copter *- He'd have to figure out how jumbling would work, although I believe scramblers exist
*Speed FMC *- Although not that hard overall, this would be the most difficult to add. Mike would have to code in a function that automatically determines the person's score(since time matters, in addition to score). Scrambles would be the same as FMC, and most rules would also come from FMC, with the addition of a few more.

(@Mike Hughey Correct me if I'm wrong on anything I said)


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 15, 2019)

DarkSavage said:


> The hardest part of adding an event would be something that has weird rules. For example, team events would require Mike to figure out how the event would work, make a list of guidelines, and most importantly, do a bunch of coding to implement it. Not all events have those problems. For example:
> 
> *Mirror Blocks *- Same scrambler + rules as 3x3
> *15 Puzzle *- Scramblers exist, he'd have to implement one and make a(likely short) list of guidelines
> ...



Even if a scrambler already exists elsewhere, implementing it into the competition website is non-trivial. The language that the scrambler is written in and the language that the SS comp uses is likely to differ. Mirror Blocks is the only event of the four that adds nothing to Mike's time as it just requires copying a scrambler that is already implemented into the competition.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 15, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> Even if a scrambler already exists elsewhere, implementing it into the competition website is non-trivial. The language that the scrambler is written in and the language that the SS comp uses is likely to differ.



That's true. He could probably use another event as a template and replace it with the notation for the new event though. 

I'm not 100% on that, as I've never done programming involving that type of thing.


----------



## Sion (Dec 15, 2019)

We already have the equipment for Curvy Copter (It was worked on extensively during the 3rd quarter of this year.) 

The only really tough one is SpeedFMC.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 15, 2019)

Sion said:


> We already have the equipment for Curvy Copter (It was worked on extensively during the 3rd quarter of this year.)
> 
> The only really tough one is SpeedFMC.



Mike himself said that Speed FMC wouldn't be _that _hard, but definitely the hardest of the four nominees.

"3. Speed FMC is pushing it on difficulty to add. Certainly not as difficult to add as team events, but might still involve a lot more coding than some other events. But it does seem like a fun idea, and i should be able to reuse a lot of the current FMC code, *so if it passes, I will probably try*."


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 16, 2019)

DarkSavage said:


> That's true. He could probably use another event as a template and replace it with the notation for the new event though.
> 
> I'm not 100% on that, as I've never done programming involving that type of thing.



Coding a scrambler isn't about creating a random set of notation. It's about generating a state randomly and then finding the set of notation that generates that state. That's far more complicated than you're making it out to be.


----------



## Sion (Dec 16, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> Coding a scrambler isn't about creating a random set of notation. It's about generating a state randomly and then finding the set of notation that generates that state. That's far more complicated than you're making it out to be.



That should be easy for Curvy copter, especially since tons of work has already went into it in 3rd quarter 2019, courtesy of whatshisbucket.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 16, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> Coding a scrambler isn't about creating a random set of notation. It's about generating a state randomly and then finding the set of notation that generates that state. That's far more complicated than you're making it out to be.



Sorry, I don't know much about that type of programming. What you're saying makes sense though, it's not just random moves.


----------



## GAN 356 X (Dec 16, 2019)

I think 2 events is fine. my top 3 so far are mirror blocks, 15 puzzle, and curvy copter


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 16, 2019)

Mike has done a great job running the competition, if he wants to add four events that’s great. If he decides that adding anything is just too much work this year, that’s great too. Personally I would love to see about a dozen different events added, but I know that’s not going to happen this year.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 16, 2019)

Sion said:


> That should be easy for Curvy copter, especially since tons of work has already went into it in 3rd quarter 2019, courtesy of whatshisbucket.


Somewhat true. The scrambler is random-state and has already been written (and all the notation has already been worked out - it might be able to be improved, but it certainly is sufficient for implementation today as-is), and I have essentially been given permission to use it. But it will require integrating into the website, which will require some rework of the code since it is in a different langauge.

As mentioned earlier, mirror blocks is very easy to add, requiring only the work necessary to add a new event - I get to use the same 3x3x3 scrambler with no changes.

15 puzzle will require me to find a random-state scrambler I can use, or else write one myself. I know cstimer has something, and the nature of cstimer is such that I should be able to "steal" the code for it, but I probably wouldn't take the code like that without permission. So since it's looking likely 15 puzzle might make it through, anyone who can point me to a public-domain scrambler for 15 puzzle would be greatly appreciated!

I do suspect that the hardest part of adding speed FMC is actually the statistics. I might try to find a way to half-implement it the first week so as to buy me some time - I might need to do some statistics post-processing the first few weeks to properly handle it. But I will need to at least figure out a method of storing the results that I'm happy with before the competition starts, and that may be the trickiest part to be sure I'm getting right.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 16, 2019)

Sorry for the double post, but I'd like people to see this because I want to see a discussion about it. I'm not really opposed to adding more than 2 events (assuming I can find the time the week after Christmas to make all the changes). But I kind of dislike removing events. (It complicates the statistics, and invariably disappoints at least a few people who were enjoying the event, and also leaves some events around, like 4x4x4 FMC, which many people would like to compete in someday, but are unable because it has been removed.) So if we do add all 4 events, I'd like to have some comfort with the idea they will probably remain indefinitely. We don't really have most of the problems here that are present in WCA competitions with too many events - there's no real reason not to have a bunch of events here. But there is definitely some opposition to the addition of some events, and I'd like to have some comfort that I'm not adding too many events that might someday be scrapped. That's why I was proposing a maximum of two events.


----------



## Kit Clement (Dec 16, 2019)

If there was a choice for "I'm okay with up to 4 events being added if Mike can handle the work" in the poll, I'd choose that option. I'm voting for the "all four" option though with a clear intent of not putting pressure for Mike to do more work. 

I've seen some say that they like the weekly comp being something that you can feasibly do in a week, but I don't see it that way. I personally already don't have enough time to complete all of the non-6/7BLD events currently within a week without drastically reducing effort on some (especially FMC), and would rather have the SS comp be a place where you can compete in cool events that don't necessarily have a home anywhere else.


----------



## Sion (Dec 16, 2019)

Kit Clement said:


> If there was a choice for "I'm okay with up to 4 events being added if Mike can handle the work" in the poll, I'd choose that option. I'm voting for the "all four" option though with a clear intent of not putting pressure for Mike to do more work.
> 
> I've seen some say that they like the weekly comp being something that you can feasibly do in a week, but I don't see it that way. I personally already don't have enough time to complete all of the events currently within a week without drastically reducing effort on some (especially FMC), and would rather have the SS comp be a place where you can compete in cool events that don't necessarily have a home anywhere else.


Added!


----------



## xyzzy (Dec 16, 2019)

Mike Hughey said:


> I know cstimer has something, and the nature of cstimer is such that I should be able to "steal" the code for it, but I probably wouldn't take the code like that without permission. So since it's looking likely 15 puzzle might make it through, anyone who can point me to a public-domain scrambler for 15 puzzle would be greatly appreciated!


Hm, I thought csTimer had a random-state scrambler, but the one there seems to be random-move. qqTimer does have one, though. Maybe contact qqwref or Ben about this?

One thing to note re: curvy copter and 15 puzzle is that the random-state scrambles are going to be relatively long. A 15 puzzle solver that optimises for single-tile metric (like the one in qqTimer, I think) will have average move counts around 40-50 (god's number for multi-tile metric is only 43, so it probably wouldn't be as bad with an MTM-based solver). The curvy copter solver/scrambler that whatshisbucket wrote seems to take over a hundred moves on average, although that's counting all of the orbit-swapping moves; with the shorthand notation, it takes around 70 moves.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 16, 2019)

One of the things I like about the idea of adding curvy copter is to see what the scrambles wind up being like to use, and seeing if any developments might happen to help them. I think of megaminx. Of course, megaminx scrambles have never been random state. Originally the megaminx scrambles were long and complex enough that they were able to allow most or perhaps all possible scrambles to be generated, but those proved to be impractical to use in competition because they were so hard to apply. Now we use scrambles that can only reach a small fraction of possible states, because they are actually practical to apply and are "good enough". I wonder what might happen with curvy copter after a few weeks/months of use.


----------



## ImmolatedMarmoset (Dec 16, 2019)

Mike Hughey said:


> One of the things I like about the idea of adding curvy copter is to see what the scrambles wind up being like to use, and seeing if any developments might happen to help them. I think of megaminx. Of course, megaminx scrambles have never been random state. Originally the megaminx scrambles were long and complex enough that they were able to allow most or perhaps all possible scrambles to be generated, but those proved to be impractical to use in competition because they were so hard to apply. Now we use scrambles that can only reach a small fraction of possible states, because they are actually practical to apply and are "good enough". I wonder what might happen with curvy copter after a few weeks/months of use.


Do you know how many mega scrambles are theoretically in use?


----------



## ichcubegerne (Dec 16, 2019)

I dont wanna be to selfish here, but I wanna mention that imo the weekly comp should be easily doable in a day. This would not make a difference on the events that are in the polls, but I am against eg. 4x4 FMC because of this. Also I would really like the relays to be reduced, but I guess I lost the poll^^


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 16, 2019)

ImmolatedMarmoset said:


> Do you know how many mega scrambles are theoretically in use?


My math may be wrong, but the way Megaminx scrambles are done there are 2 possibilities for every move, and 70 moves. Thus 2^70 or 1.18e21. 1.18 Septillion?


----------



## ichcubegerne (Dec 16, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> My math may be wrong, but the way Megaminx scrambles are done there are 2 possibilities for every move, and 70 moves. Thus 2^70 or 1.18e21. 1.18 Septillion?


Thats just an upper bound tho


----------



## ImmolatedMarmoset (Dec 16, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> My math may be wrong, but the way Megaminx scrambles are done there are 2 possibilities for every move, and 70 moves. Thus 2^70 or 1.18e21. 1.18 Septillion?





ichcubegerne said:


> Thats just an upper bound tho


epic thanks


----------



## xyzzy (Dec 16, 2019)

One Wheel said:


> My math may be wrong, but the way Megaminx scrambles are done there are 2 possibilities for every move, and 70 moves. Thus 2^70 or 1.18e21. 1.18 Septillion?


The calculation is right, but the word to use is "sextillion". The short scale numbering system is weird and uses 10^(3n+3). The long scale numbering system, which is no longer in common use in English, uses 10^(6n) instead (e.g. "*bi*llion" would be 10^12 in long scale, as opposed to the very etymologically unnatural 10^9 in short scale).



ichcubegerne said:


> Thats just an upper bound tho


Sure, but the number of scrambles that can be attained by multiple distinct move sequences (of length at most 70) is comparatively tiny, if there are any at all, so 2^70 would be a very good estimate.


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 16, 2019)

xyzzy said:


> Sure, but the number of scrambles that can be attained by multiple distinct move sequences (of length at most 70) is comparatively tiny, if there are any at all, so 2^70 would be a very good estimate.



I recall seeing a discussion about how the programming language limits the scrambles that can be generated more. I’ll see if I can find it.


----------



## BenChristman1 (Dec 16, 2019)

I wish all four could be added (even though I only know how to do Mirror Blocks), just so a lot of people get what they want, but I also understand how much work is put into the weekly comp, and how much more work it is to add new events. At some point, though, adding 2 events every year will get very tedious, won't it? And eventually (in the very faraway future), it will get to the point where you are just adding a bunch of weird non-WCA events, like 4x7x8 or something.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 17, 2019)

My hope is that we would never add things that were just silly to add, like 4x7x8 (LOL), because it couldn't make the minimum 10% yes vote cutoff. But if that isn't true, maybe I should require greater than 10% in the future?

Really, all 4 of the events being considered this year bring something significantly new; I think they are all somewhat reasonable choices.


----------



## ProStar (Dec 17, 2019)

Mike Hughey said:


> My hope is that we would never add things that were just silly to add, like 4x7x8 (LOL), because it couldn't make the minimum 10% yes vote cutoff. But if that isn't true, maybe I should require greater than 10% in the future?
> 
> Really, all 4 of the events being considered this year bring something significantly new; I think they are all somewhat reasonable choices.



Just don't add stupid events. In the end, you're the one running the weekly comp. If at some point we have multiple cuboids and you think that 4x7x8(  ) brings nothing new to the comp and is useless, then don't add it. It's kinda like the WCA on a smaller scale, imo: you ask us what we want to be added, we vote on what we want, and you decide which of the popular events is added. If you think something is completely stupid, then don't add it.

(But don't get puffed up or anything, just cause you're in control doesn't mean you're allowed to get a big head lol)


----------



## GAN 356 X (Dec 17, 2019)

Could we make it so a few people ca help Mike do the work, just to make adding 4 events easier? For example Mike might do every third week whilst other people do the other weeks. Or maybe even make him in charge of a few events, and others be in charge of other events


----------



## ProStar (Dec 17, 2019)

GAN 356 X said:


> Could we make it so a few people ca help Mike do the work, just to make adding 4 events easier? For example Mike might do every third week whilst other people do the other weeks. Or maybe even make him in charge of a few events, and others be in charge of other events



You mean like add more staff members that specifically work on the weekly comp?


----------



## GAN 356 X (Dec 17, 2019)

DarkSavage said:


> You mean like add more staff members that specifically work on the weekly comp?


Basically. I don't know how well it would work (they would have to work well as a team). Its just an idea


----------



## ProStar (Dec 17, 2019)

GAN 356 X said:


> Basically. I don't know how well it would work (they would have to work well as a team). Its just an idea



Currently there are only 5 staff members, and as far as I know, only Mike is involved in the weekly comp.

Staff:

Brest - Super Reconstructor
cubizh - Super Moderator
mark49152 - Super Moderator
Mike Hughey - Super Moderator
pjk - Administrator

Also, side question, is pjk the owner of the site? He's the highest ranking listed staff member.


----------



## GAN 356 X (Dec 17, 2019)

DarkSavage said:


> Also, side question, is pjk the owner of the site? He's the highest ranking listed staff member.


I wonder the same thing. I believe so.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 17, 2019)

Yes, pjk owns the site, and has owned it since it started, I believe in 2006.


----------



## Sion (Dec 18, 2019)

Felt like this should be bumped due to the fact it could be considered


----------

