# Results are in! Method Development Competition August 2021 - Create the best 4x4 method! - $10 gift card prize! - Sponsored by SpeedCubeShop.com



## Athefre (Aug 1, 2021)

*View Results Here!*

The votes are in and the winner has been decided. Click the link above to view the results.

*View each method below:*

*TSSH*
*Triforce
Bar4E
SCR*
*234*



Spoiler: Competition Details



Welcome everyone to the second method development competition of 2021! The theme this time will be to create the best 4x4 speedsolving method. At the end of the competition, the community will vote on which method they think is the best. Previous competitions were a team-based event. Starting this time, individuals can compete. So you don’t have to join or create a team if you don’t want to. The winner will receive a $10 gift card from the competition sponsor, SpeedCubeShop.com. If the winner is a team, each individual within the team will receive a $10 gift card.

To sign up, click the link below and input your username. If you have trouble signing up, post here to let me know and I'll add you. Also join the Method Debate and Development Discord server. The Discord server is where most of the competition discussion will occur.

*Sign Up Sheet*









Join the Method Debate and Development Discord Server!


Check out the Method Debate and Development community on Discord - hang out with 107 other members and enjoy free voice and text chat.




discord.gg





*Competition Start: Monday, August 9 at 10 P.M. GMT

Competition End: Monday, August 30 at 10 P.M. GMT

Rules:*


The method must be intended for speedsolving. The goal should be to create a method that is equal to or faster than the most popular methods right now.
Try to be original. There aren’t many 4x4 methods, so this should be easy. Many 4x4 methods do edge pairing at the start or very soon after the start of the solve. Is this the right way to go for a 4x4 method? You get to decide this when creating your method. Avoid making something that many would view as a variant of another method. That could be disrespectful to the work of the original creator and your method would be less likely to be unique. Don't use a method that you've posted in the "New Method" thread or anywhere else. If you aren’t sure if what you are creating already exists, ask me. You don’t want to put work into developing a method, submit it, then find out that it has already been created before.
Send everything in a document to me at the end of the competition. In the past, competitors have typically used Google Docs and that has worked well. You can send the document to me in a private message on Discord, Reddit, or here on SS. About this document:
Provide a summary of the steps to help with making it clear what the steps are.
It must contain accurate numbers. If your method has a step that requires an algorithm, you must provide the exact number of cases for that step. Generating the algorithms for these steps would also go a long way toward showing the move count and ergonomics. It would also be appreciated by the community that is voting for one of the methods.
You must provide at least two example solves. These example solves must be clearly separated with the scramble and each step defined. You can provide this through text or by using alg.cubing.net or Twizzle.
Provide a list of positives and negatives.
Create a name for the method.
Don’t put your name in the document that is sent. However, send your speedsolving.com username to me separately in a private message.
Try to make your document easy to understand. If readers don’t know what is happening in the method, they aren’t likely to vote for it.

You will not be allowed to see what the other competitors are developing. For questions and discussion about the competition, we use the main competition channel in the Discord server.
At the end of the competition, submit all documents or messages directly to me. Please don't post your finished products to this thread. Also avoid including real names or usernames in any products. In the voting poll, the competitors that created the method will be anonymous. The link to the poll will be shared both here and on Discord. A list of useful resources is provided below Good luck!

Useful Resources:

SpeedSolving Wiki (to research what already exists)
Method and States Map (same purpose as above)
Google Docs
Google Sheets
VisualCube
CubeExplorer
Algorithm Translator
alg.cubing.net
Twizzle
AlgDb
SpeedCubeDB
https://speedcubedb.com/


----------



## Cubing Forever (Aug 1, 2021)

I signed up as an individual and I have a few ideas already!!


----------



## Cubing Forever (Aug 1, 2021)

@Athefre do we need to provide accurate movecounts?


----------



## abunickabhi (Aug 1, 2021)

Wow 4x4 Methods competition. Really good idea Athefre.


----------



## Athefre (Aug 1, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> @Athefre do we need to provide accurate movecounts?


It's not necessary for this 4x4 competition. Though if competitors want to analyze existing 4x4 methods to find their average move-count then make a comparison to their own competition method, they can.


----------



## ruffleduck (Aug 1, 2021)

Cool, I'll participate! I do have an idea for a 4x4 method


----------



## LBr (Aug 1, 2021)

I started a random team. If anyone is gonna join just pm me to discuss. I'm too dumb to come up with and solidify a good method on my own so I need a team to help.


----------



## V Achyuthan (Aug 2, 2021)

I am going to sign up with a team member soon. What is the average movecount of the current 4x4 methods?


----------



## Filipe Teixeira (Aug 2, 2021)

Great initiative!
I'll be following this thread


----------



## BlobinatiCentral (Aug 2, 2021)

Can’t wait for this to begin ) Good luck everyone…


----------



## Athefre (Aug 6, 2021)

The competition starts in a few days. Be sure to sign up!


----------



## LBr (Aug 6, 2021)

I have an idea and switched to an individual.

Are we allowed to do recorded example solves?


----------



## Athefre (Aug 6, 2021)

LBr said:


> I have an idea and switched to an individual.
> 
> Are we allowed to do recorded example solves?


Sure. As long as the viewer can easily see what is happening in each step, then a video is good too.


----------



## Athefre (Aug 8, 2021)

The competition starts a little over 24 hours from now. So sign up now if you want to compete!


----------



## Athefre (Aug 10, 2021)

The competition has officially started! Everyone now has three weeks to develop their methods. I'm excited to see the various methods. 4x4 speedsolving is an under-developed event, so it will be nice to have some new good ideas.


----------



## Athefre (Aug 22, 2021)

There is around a week left. How is everyone doing? Do you have all of your steps determined? What about your final document?


----------



## V Achyuthan (Aug 22, 2021)

Athefre said:


> There is around a week left. How is everyone doing? Do you have all of your steps determined? What about your final document?


Almost done.


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 27, 2021)

Time to start developing a method


----------



## TipsterTrickster (Aug 31, 2021)

Athefre said:


> The development part of the competition has finished! Four methods have been submitted. Click the link below to view the poll where you can learn about the methods and vote on the one you think is best. There are three categories - Best Overall Method for Speedsolving, Most Original, and Most Ergonomic. Carefully study the steps of each method to understand how they work.
> 
> *Vote Here!*


Did you not get the pm I sent you earlier today through the forum? I do not see my method listed.


----------



## Athefre (Aug 31, 2021)

TipsterTrickster said:


> Did you not get the pm I sent you earlier today through the forum? I do not see my method listed.


Wow, I didn't even get a notification for that. I deleted the poll post and will add that in now. Sorry about that.


----------



## Athefre (Aug 31, 2021)

The development part of the competition has finished! Five methods have been submitted. Click the link below to view the poll where you can learn about the methods and vote on the one you think is best. There are three categories - Best Overall Method for Speedsolving, Most Original, and Most Ergonomic. Carefully study the steps of each method to understand how they work.

*Vote Here!*


----------



## Athefre (Sep 1, 2021)

I will be keeping the poll open until we get a good number of votes. So if you haven't yet voted, vote now!


----------



## GodCubing (Sep 1, 2021)

How many votes are there?


----------



## LukasCubes (Sep 1, 2021)

Who wanna be on my team?

Edit: The comp just ended lol I forgot


----------



## Athefre (Sep 2, 2021)

GodCubing said:


> How many votes are there?


A little over 20 right now.


----------



## LukasCubes (Sep 2, 2021)

Hey athptuiaye


----------



## Athefre (Sep 2, 2021)

Thanks!


----------



## Athefre (Sep 3, 2021)

Let's get a few more votes! If you haven't yet voted, vote now!


----------



## GenTheThief (Sep 3, 2021)

The reconstruction for the 234 method on alg.cubing.net doesn't provide a full or an incorrect solve. There are a bunch of centers that are just not solved.


----------



## LBr (Sep 3, 2021)

yeah, its missing the l2c comm


----------



## Athefre (Sep 4, 2021)

GenTheThief said:


> The reconstruction for the 234 method on alg.cubing.net doesn't provide a full or an incorrect solve. There are a bunch of centers that are just not solved.


Yeah, I talked to the competitor about that before creating the poll. They said that it was intentional. It is supposed to be showing that the user then does whatever comms they want for the centers. Versus inputting the comms in the example.


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 4, 2021)

How many votes are there?


----------



## Athefre (Sep 4, 2021)

I turned on email collection in the poll because I had a feeling that something was going on. There was an initial string of five very similar votes all occurring within 40 minutes. Each one put the same method as number 1 in all three categories. I thought "Fine, this could just be the people on the team." Then 6 hours later another string of very similar votes all within 5 minutes. Again each vote had the same method as number 1 in all three categories.



Spoiler: Initial string









Maybe the last one at 13:57 is just a coincidence, but it is very similar to the four above it.





Spoiler: Second string











Then an hour after post number 22 in this topic where I reminded people to vote, there was another vote cast that looked the same as the strings of votes described above. This time email collection was turned on. The email was cuberfast*2007*@gmail.com.



Spoiler: cuberfast2007 screenshots











Then around an hour ago from now there was another set of votes. This time from lolcuber*2007*@gmail.com and lmaocuber*2007*@gmail.com. Again, very similar votes. The votes were around 2 minutes apart. 9:38 P.M. to 9:41 P.M. my time.



Spoiler: lolcuber2007 and lmaocuber2007 screenshots











Just 2 minutes after the above two votes there was a post by xtreme cuber*2007* asking about the number of votes. 9:42 P.M. my time.



Spoiler: xtreme cuber2007 time screenshot







So we have:

cuberfast*2007*
lolcuber*2007*
lmaocuber*2007*
xtreme cuber*2007*

All end in 2007. One name submitted a method for the competition (the one that received all of the number 1 votes mentioned above) and the others look like quickly made up emails and all had similar votes occurring within a series of very close timeframes and each ranked the same method number 1 in all three categories.

Should I completely disqualify you and remove your method from the results? Did you not think that I was going to look at the individual votes and the email addresses? Or am I simply seeing something that isn't there?


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 4, 2021)

xtremecuber is my account
cuberfast I made it for my bro
lmaocuber my dad's account
lolcuber my mom's account

I asked them to vote
and then I asked to check if you have recieved the vote.

And also i didn't vote from there accounts, they shared their thoughts and they voted by themselves. I think they all voted the same things.


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 4, 2021)

xtreme cuber2007 said:


> xtremecuber is my account
> cuberfast I made it for my bro
> lmaocuber my dad's account
> lolcuber my mom's account
> ...


confirmed with my mom and she told they all discussed and put the same vote after going through all docs. And yeah I didn't tell them to vote for us, and I still don't know what they voted. So I think you can trust me.


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 4, 2021)

xtreme cuber2007 said:


> confirmed with my mom and she told they all discussed and put the same vote after going through all docs. And yeah I didn't tell them to vote for us, and I still don't know what they voted. So I think you can trust me.


and also our time zones differ. so if you post a message don't expect me to reply right at the instant. I might reply after some hours. so yeah, and again you can trust me, me and my friend have a deal that we wont ask anyone to vote specifically for us. Any doubts dm me here, in speedsolving.com. 
thank you


----------



## Athefre (Sep 4, 2021)

xtreme cuber2007 said:


> xtremecuber is my account
> cuberfast I made it for my bro
> lmaocuber my dad's account
> lolcuber my mom's account
> ...



How do you explain the other strings of votes that look the same? The first string of 4-5 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? Then the second string of 3 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? For the lolcuber2007 and lmaocuber2007 votes, your mom and dad are deep enough into cubing that they understand the nuances of big cube solving well enough to vote? It's kind of an advanced subject within method development.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 4, 2021)

xtreme cuber2007 said:


> xtremecuber is my account
> cuberfast I made it for my bro
> lmaocuber my dad's account
> lolcuber my mom's account
> ...


Your family all have an email with cubing in it and ending with 2007? 

Do you have any proof other than that your mom told you? You also sound pretty nervous, posting three times in a row and saying "you can trust me" multiple times. You said "I *think *they all voted the same things" is not a very good point to bring up when you can obviously see that everyone voted the same thing in Athefre's post. You should also sound more professional when defending yourself when being accused of something pretty serious.


----------



## LukasCubes (Sep 4, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Your family all have an email with cubing in it and ending with 2007?
> 
> Do you have any proof other than that your mom told you? You also sound pretty nervous, posting three times in a row and saying "you can trust me" multiple times. You said "I *think *they all voted the same things" is not a very good point to bring up when you can obviously see that everyone voted the same thing in Athefre's post. You should also sound more professional when defending yourself when being accused of something pretty serious.





Athefre said:


> How do you explain the other strings of votes that look the same? The first string of 4-5 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? Then the second string of 3 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? For the lolcuber2007 and lmaocuber2007 votes, your mom and dad are deep enough into cubing that they understand the nuances of big cube solving well enough to vote? It's kind of an advanced subject within method development.


You know what ,i agree with @xtreme cuber2007 here I feel like he is correct and his family did vote. It's fine just deal with it, it's not a big deal. He may just have a family of cubers, who knows its not your business. You can just deal with it, it's not the end of the world. Apparently to yall if something happens less than 95% of the time, its fake. I do see yalls argument but I think the defendant here wins. Just don't accuse people of crap like this. It just happens.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 4, 2021)

LukasCubes said:


> You know what ,i agree with @xtreme cuber2007 here I feel like he is correct and his family did vote. It's fine just deal with it, it's not a big deal. He may just have a family of cubers, who knows its not your business. You can just deal with it, it's not the end of the world. Apparently to yall if something happens less than 95% of the time, its fake. I do see yalls argument but I think the defendant here wins. Just don't accuse people of crap like this. It just happens.


Just when I was starting to change my opinion on you...

This is quite literally the single worst argument I have ever heard on the forums and in real life. (@BenChristman1 if you're working on forum awards this year I'd like to nominate this for *Worst Arguing *and *Dumbest Post of the Year. *No offence Lukas). You start off in a way that suggests you wrote this spontaneously. "You know what" is a horrible to start a post, you also didn't capitalize the first "i" but did for the second. You than say you "feel" that he is correct which is fine. But it makes sense to be skeptical given that he didn't provide good evidence or a confident tone.

Let's assume he has a family of cubers like you said, the chances of that are extremely low but let's just pretend. If his family were all cubers are we also assuming they have a very good understanding of big cubes, theory, ergonomics, lookahead, and so on? If so can we also agree that they all discussed each method in great detail not knowing which was there relatives method as to prevent possible bias? And what are the chances of agreeing that the one was best in terms of all three categories? On top of that how was it that it was also xtreme cuber2007's method? It does not even make sense for all to put his method as most original since that is very, very debatable.

How do you explain the the second string of votes like @Athefre pointed out. Now that we mentioned Athefre let's discuss your next point. You quote his post replying that it's "fine" if he even *did* cheat and that it is "not a big deal". You then go on to tell this whiny Athefre fellow who's been creating methods since before you were even born that he needs to "deal with it" I mean c'mon Athefre it's not the "end of the world" for crying out loud.

You seem to contradict yourself when you go from saying that he did not cheat to even if he did it's not a big deal to it's none of our business if he cheats to stuff like this "just happens". Whether this is purposeful, the fault of bad writing and grammar, or just a poor understanding of arguments I don't know. But what I do know is that it is everyone's business on the forums, especially Atherfre and xtreme cuber2007's fellow competitors who, if I may add, seemed to put a lot more thought and time into this than xtreme. This isn't some card game your playing with your chums, this is a contest that is requiring hard work and thought. Not just anyone could enter. You needed to know what you're doing and how to win. Not only is this a contest that can contribute greatly to the cubing community, but, there is a prize at stake. To cheat someone out of an otherwise rightful prize is extremely dirty and does not belong anywhere, especially in a small community like this.

You act as though your decision is the deciding factor of determining quite possibly the winner of this important event. Excuse me if I sound rude but you aren't exactly the best decision maker on this forum. You tend to create lazy posts that don't really make a point and you never use a professional tone of voice no matter the topic or length. You've been known to not think things through into detail such as your 5x5 method which you cling to despite multiple experienced cubers and method creators telling you it's no good.

Moving on. You give no reason on why you think the defendant wins. You simply say we shouldn't accuse people of "crap" (real mature btw). This kind of stuff doesn't "just happen". @xtreme cuber2007 decided (unless he can provide some stone hard evidence) to make that decision. It was not by chance. A couple posts is not a big deal everybody has actually been surprisingly quiet about this. The things we "accuse" of not being happen much less than 95% of the time. Having a whole family cube is much greater than a 95% chance, same with when we questioned you about your PB. It was very suspicious and you did not even have the scramble again, something that happens less than 95% of the time.


In summary: 1. Telling the creator of the contest it's not a big deal is ridicules. 2. We have all the right to be suspicious. 3. You can have opinions but don't expect us to agree especially if you sound like a toxic inept internet kid.

Edit: That last bit was a little harsh. I'm sure you aren't this bad in real life but a lot of your posts give that impression. Sorry if I sounded like a jerk.


----------



## ruffleduck (Sep 4, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Just when I was starting to change my opinion on you...
> 
> This is quite literally the single worst argument I have ever heard on the forums and in real life. (@BenChristman1 if you're working on forum awards this year I'd like to nominate this for *Worst Arguing *and *Dumbest Post of the Year. *No offence Lukas). You start off in a way that suggests you wrote this spontaneously. "You know what" is a horrible as to start a post, you also didn't capitalize the first "i" but did for the second. You than say you "feel" that he is correct which is fine. But it makes sense to be skeptical given that he didn't provide good evidence or a confident tone.
> 
> ...


----------



## cuberswoop (Sep 4, 2021)

LukasCubes said:


> You know what ,i agree with @xtreme cuber2007 here I feel like he is correct and his family did vote. It's fine just deal with it, it's not a big deal. He may just have a family of cubers, who knows its not your business. You can just deal with it, it's not the end of the world. Apparently to yall if something happens less than 95% of the time, its fake. I do see yalls argument but I think the defendant here wins. Just don't accuse people of crap like this. It just happens.


I second this.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 4, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> View attachment 16909


Thanks for the new profile picture!


----------



## LukasCubes (Sep 4, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> (@BenChristman1 if you're working on forum awards this year I'd like to nominate this for *Worst Arguing *and *Dumbest Post of the Year. *No offence Lukas).


I would like to nominate myself for this award too.


----------



## EvanCuber (Sep 4, 2021)

Look, typically you can rely on the parents to be trustworthy, so just have ExtremeCuber2007 set up a video call between Athefre and ExtremeCuber 2007. Athefre can interrogate his mother and see if she really did vote. If ExtremeCuber2007 refuses, he is likely guilty. I think it suspicious that all the emails end in 2007 when I can guarantee the rest of his family was not born in 2007


----------



## ruffleduck (Sep 5, 2021)

MJbaka said:


> If ExtremeCuber2007 refuses, he is likely guilty.


There could be many other reasons to refuse, besides being guilty. (He almost certainly is, but putting the social pressure on him probably isn't a great idea.)


----------



## LukasCubes (Sep 5, 2021)

he dont need to prove anything, yall just dont trust anyone


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 5, 2021)

Athefre said:


> How do you explain the other strings of votes that look the same? The first string of 4-5 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? Then the second string of 3 people all discussed together and agreed upon almost exactly the same thing? For the lolcuber2007 and lmaocuber2007 votes, your mom and dad are deep enough into cubing that they understand the nuances of big cube solving well enough to vote? It's kind of an advanced subject within method development.


My parents have a good understanding of cube theory even talk they are not involved in cubing. They know what ergonomics, original method etc. mean. I don't know the first string of 5 people. Maybe they were my friends. I will confirm and tell you. Also a note, my dad and mom knows a lot about events upto 4x4. And yes I made their accounts because they didn't want to vote from their personal account. Can you give the e-mail of the first string of votes for checking, they maybe my uncle, aunt and my cousin's vote and yeah they also know some things about cubing, but I have no idea what they voted, so please give their email for confirmation. 

Thank you


----------



## Athefre (Sep 5, 2021)

LukasCubes said:


> You know what ,i agree with @xtreme cuber2007 here I feel like he is correct and his family did vote. It's fine just deal with it, it's not a big deal. He may just have a family of cubers, who knows its not your business. You can just deal with it, it's not the end of the world. Apparently to yall if something happens less than 95% of the time, its fake. I do see yalls argument but I think the defendant here wins. Just don't accuse people of crap like this. It just happens.


You know I have been very nice to you. We have talked about how I used to live very close to where you live. I have ignored the many times that you have purposefully misspelled my username because I know you aren't serious. I'm not the type to immediately choose a side because unexpected things happen. But if you look at my post, all of the evidence lines up. That would be such a ridiculous coincidence for 8 people to have voted almost exactly the same. For these votes to have occurred in a series of strings just minutes apart in a competition that typically gets few votes. And for these 8 votes to also be the same as the last three that I brought up which currently have the claim of being by the method creator's mom, dad, and brother.


----------



## xyzzy (Sep 5, 2021)

(I haven't voted yet; will vote after reading through all five methods and understanding how they work. Meanwhile, here's some blogging about my thoughts on the methods. If you intend to vote, you probably shouldn't be reading this first. If you're one of the method designers, please don't reply until voting has closed, unless you think something I said is egregiously wrong and must be corrected.)

Side note: good lord, is Google Docs stripping out %0A from links in their redirector or something; all the a.c.n and CubeDB links don't work if directly clicked.


Spoiler: TSSH



Seems just like a rearranged Yau.

There's little actual blockbuilding, and efficiency-wise it's worse(?) than Yau, since post-centres, there are four dedges that are formed one at a time, rather than two (or more) at a time. In contrast, Yau only has one dedge that's paired by itself post-centres, namely, the last cross dedge. This is an easily fixable flaw, but without fixing it, it adds like 5-10 moves to the average move count.

The example solves given don't have especially good move count; just for context, I have Yau (slow but linear) solves in the range of 120-140 moves, including parities.

Pairing the last layer edges separately is original, I guess, but it's also a pretty awkward step. Also, even worse efficiency.





Spoiler: Triforce



This seems really cool. (And weird.)

5e5x looks kinda gross. I used to do something like [M' U2 M, 2U] back when I maining sandwich (or rather, [S R2 S', 2R]), so I'm familiar with the concept, but it just doesn't seem fast. At the same time, it also seems possible to combine solving the 5 edges with influencing the centres to get better cases.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 5, 2021)

xyzzy said:


> (I haven't voted yet; will vote after reading through all five methods and understanding how they work. Meanwhile, here's some blogging about my thoughts on the methods. If you intend to vote, you probably shouldn't be reading this first. If you're one of the method designers, please don't reply until voting has closed, unless you think something I said is egregiously wrong and must be corrected.)
> 
> Side note: good lord, is Google Docs stripping out %0A from links in their redirector or something; all the a.c.n and CubeDB links don't work if directly clicked.
> 
> ...


Send me your votes in a private message instead. I have closed the poll to prevent anything else like what happened before.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 5, 2021)

xtreme cuber2007 said:


> My parents have a good understanding of cube theory even talk they are not involved in cubing. They know what ergonomics, original method etc. mean. I don't know the first string of 5 people. Maybe they were my friends. I will confirm and tell you. Also a note, my dad and mom knows a lot about events upto 4x4. And yes I made their accounts because they didn't want to vote from their personal account. Can you give the e-mail of the first string of votes for checking, they maybe my uncle, aunt and my cousin's vote and yeah they also know some things about cubing, but I have no idea what they voted, so please give their email for confirmation.
> 
> Thank you


I would like to see the development conversations among you and your friends. Their usernames and the start of development up until the document being finished.


----------



## Cubing Forever (Sep 5, 2021)

xyzzy said:


> Seems just like a rearranged Yau.


More like Yau but you force an xcross(or Yau5 but you only solve 1 pair)


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 5, 2021)

Athefre said:


> I would like to see the development conversations among you and your friends. Their usernames and the start of development up until the document being finished.







__





Discord - A New Way to Chat with Friends & Communities


Discord is the easiest way to communicate over voice, video, and text. Chat, hang out, and stay close with your friends and communities.




discord.gg




please join this link quick. the invite ends in 24 hours. this is where me and my friends had conversations about the method (and some other stuff).
And for the doc I individually wrote it. nobody else did.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 5, 2021)

The results are in! The winner is...

*Triforce!*

This method was created by trangium. Congratulations trangium! I will inform SpeedCubeShop and they will send you your gift card.



Spoiler: Details



Round #1:

5 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 11
Triforce: 11
Bar4E: 1
SCR: 5
234: 2

2 candidates have the highest number of votes with 11 votes (36.67%)
Bar4E has the lowest number of votes with 1 votes (3.33%)

Round #2:

4 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 11
Triforce: 12
SCR: 5
234: 2

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 12 votes (40.00%)
234 has the lowest number of votes with 2 votes (6.67%)

Round #3:

3 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 11
Triforce: 13
SCR: 6

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 13 votes (43.33%)
SCR has the lowest number of votes with 6 votes (20.00%)

Round #4:

2 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 13
Triforce: 17

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 17 votes (56.67%)
TSSH has the lowest number of votes with 13 votes (43.33%)

Triforce won!






The winner of most original is Triforce.



Spoiler: Details



Round #1:

5 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 11
Triforce: 14
Bar4E: 1
SCR: 1
234: 3

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 14 votes (46.67%)
2 candidates have the lowest number of votes with 1 votes (3.33%)

Tiebreaker: SCR was randomly selected as the loser of the round.

Round #2:

4 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 11
Triforce: 15
Bar4E: 1
234: 3

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 15 votes (50.00%)
Bar4E has the lowest number of votes with 1 votes (3.33%)

Round #3:

3 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 12
Triforce: 15
234: 3

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 15 votes (50.00%)
234 has the lowest number of votes with 3 votes (10.00%)

Round #4:

2 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 12
Triforce: 18

Triforce has the highest number of votes with 18 votes (60.00%)
TSSH has the lowest number of votes with 12 votes (40.00%)

Triforce won!





The winner of Most Ergonomic is TSSH.



Spoiler: Details



Round #1:

5 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 12
Triforce: 8
Bar4E: 5
SCR: 5
234: 0

TSSH has the highest number of votes with 12 votes (40.00%)
234 has the lowest number of votes with 0 votes (0.00%)

Round #2:

4 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 12
Triforce: 8
Bar4E: 5
SCR: 5

TSSH has the highest number of votes with 12 votes (40.00%)
2 candidates have the lowest number of votes with 5 votes (16.67%)

Tiebreaker: SCR was randomly selected as the loser of the round.

Round #3:

3 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 14
Triforce: 10
Bar4E: 6

TSSH has the highest number of votes with 14 votes (46.67%)
Bar4E has the lowest number of votes with 6 votes (20.00%)

Round #4:

2 candidates and 30 ballots.

Number of first votes per candidate:
TSSH: 17
Triforce: 13

TSSH has the highest number of votes with 17 votes (56.67%)
Triforce has the lowest number of votes with 13 votes (43.33%)

TSSH won!





As with the last competition, instant-runoff voting was used. So while there was a "tie" for the number of votes for best overall method, the other votes for Triforce pushed it above the rest.

*Click to view individual votes* (Emails removed for privacy)


----------



## V Achyuthan (Sep 5, 2021)

Athefre said:


> The results are in! The winner is...
> 
> *Triforce!*
> 
> ...


everyone or single who invented triforce congrats


----------



## xyzzy (Sep 5, 2021)

Athefre said:


> Send me your votes in a private message instead. I have closed the poll to prevent anything else like what happened before.


Ah, shame I didn't get the chance to read all five entries before voting. Oh well. Guess I'll update the post above with my other thoughts on the remaining three methods in a couple of hours.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 5, 2021)

xyzzy said:


> Ah, shame I didn't get the chance to read all five entries before voting. Oh well. Guess I'll update the post above with my other thoughts on the remaining three methods in a couple of hours.


Sorry about that. It had been a couple of hours without your vote. So I decided to just go ahead and release the votes. The whole voting situation this time was frustrating.

I'm sure the competitors would like to see your comments about each method.


----------



## xyzzy (Sep 5, 2021)

Athefre said:


> Sorry about that. It had been a couple of hours without your vote. So I decided to just go ahead and release the votes. The whole voting situation this time was frustrating.
> 
> I'm sure the competitors would like to see your comments about each method.


It's all cool; I was just afk for a bit longer than I'd expected to be. Appreciate that the contest was held at all (despite the voting anomalies) and spawned some interesting new methods!


----------



## StrategySam (Sep 5, 2021)

Hm there must be some mistake here, the purple bar is really high on 234 all 3 times.


----------



## StrategySam (Sep 5, 2021)

Developing a method was really fun, thanks so much hosting.


----------

