# [Google Survey] What is your opinion on current WCA-related topics?



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 10, 2016)

I don't think anyone's done one of these (recently), so yeah here's the thing:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfMdjqx40uqum_W7ukJN5ioVSTWO9MI9DV16z1QeVnLEAJWrQ/viewform
Please submit only one response. If you would like, you can talk about your responses in this thread. Every so often I'll post the results so far.


----------



## TheCoolMinxer (Sep 11, 2016)

Official average of 5 for 3x3 WF, so it's equal and treatet the same way as with all the other events


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 11, 2016)

TheCoolMinxer said:


> Official average of 5 for 3x3 WF, so it's equal and treatet the same way as with all the other events


Interesting idea, but I feel like that would make 3x3 with feet even less attractive for organizers, since that would be 2x as many solves for people who don't make the soft cutoff and 1.67x as many solves for those who do. Maybe a "median of 3" format should be added, but that creates a lot of questions.


----------



## tx789 (Sep 11, 2016)

TheCoolMinxer said:


> Official average of 5 for 3x3 WF, so it's equal and treatet the same way as with all the other events



I doubt it'll make a difference if any negative. Look at Clock, it has average of 5 and isn't thought of highly however in this case scrambling is a factor to hosting it.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 11, 2016)

*Should Kilominx be made an event?*
Yes - 3 (14.3%)
No - 4 (19.0%)
I'm open to it, but I want to wait a while to make sure it remains popular - 13 (61.9%)

*What should we do with misalignment penalties?*
Add misalignment penalties for Clock in some form. - 1 (4.8%)
Make misalignment penalties proportional in some way, either by event or by time. - 1 (4.8%)
Remove them, i.e. all future misalignment penalties are DNF. - 2 (9.5%)
Keep them how they are. - 16 (76.2%)

*In general, which of these things do you believe should be prioritized in the organization of competitions?*
High competitor limit. Competitions should be open to absolutely as many people as possible, regardless of whether there need be fewer rounds or events. - 3 (15.0%)
Easier soft and hard cutoffs. If the 6x6 cutoff is 3 minutes every time, competitors have to give way more devotion than seems fair to a single event to even get a mean. - 4 (20.0%)
More events and/or rounds.Let's give people the chance to have official experience in more events easily. - 13 (65.0%)

*Should we recognize 4BLD and 5BLD mean WRs?*
No - 5 (23.8%)
Yes - 16 (76.2%)

*Should Feet and/or Clock be removed as official events?*
Feet should be removed but not clock - 2 (9.5%)
Clock should be removed but not feet - 3 (14.3%)
Clock and feet should both be removed. - 3 (14.3%)
Both events should remain in the WCA. - 13 (61.9%)

*Was making stickerless cubes competition legal the right decision?*
Yes - 20 (100.0%)

*Should a single-event ranking system not based on best times or averages be implemented on the WCA page?*
Yes - 8 (40.0%)
No - 12 (60.0%)

*Should KinchRanks or a similar all-round ranking system be implemented on the WCA page?*
No - 5 (25.0%)
Yes - 15 (75.0%)

*Should an incorrectly interpreted, "ambiguous" scorecard, when such an interpretation negatively impacts the actual time, be final in all circumstances?*
Yes - 8 (40.0%)
No - 12 (60.0%)

What might be interesting is if the WCA does a vote on some of these (I'm looking at the Kilominx one right now) online. It wouldn't even have to be a binding vote, but to get the opinion of people.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Sep 11, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> What might be interesting is if the WCA does a vote on some of these (I'm looking at the Kilominx one right now) online. It wouldn't even have to be a binding vote, but to get the opinion of people.



There is a voting system for Delegates now. The WRC did a trial of three votes last year, but it remains to be seen if we will use it more heavily.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 11, 2016)

Lucas Garron said:


> There is a voting system for Delegates now. The WRC did a trial of three votes last year, but it remains to be seen if we will use it more heavily.


I think that the opinion of delegates is definitely important, especially on things involving the regulations directly, like misalignment penalties and stickerless cubes, but I think things like whether Kilominx should be an event should be up to competitors (including delegates, ofc), who would be competing in Kilominx, at least in significant part. That's because what makes a good event is people approving of it as an event, and people being interested in the event. There is the idea that some people would want a dumb thing like 1x2x2 to be an event (not really but just using that as an example) so ideally I think there would first be a delegate vote on whether the event could contribute to the WCA and then if the majority of delegates think that it's a good possibility then they could do an online survey using the newish accounts feature on the site.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Interesting idea, but I feel like that would make 3x3 with feet even less attractive for organizers, since that would be 2x as many solves for people who don't make the soft cutoff and 1.67x as many solves for those who do. Maybe a "median of 3" format should be added, but that creates a lot of questions.



I another thread somebody pointed out that often when feet is currently offered it is done with very generous time limits. Switching to an Ao5 could be combined with using more strict cutoffs, probably something between 3:00/5:00 and 2:00/4:00 instead of 10:00. I was arguing that switching to Ao5 would make it harder to schedule, and I would like to see feet offered at more competitions, but I think that whoever pointed out the time limit thing was probably correct.

Edit: it was @Torch who pointed out the time limits with feet.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 12, 2016)

6x6 and 7x7 don't use average of 5, why does feet need to?


----------



## TheCoolMinxer (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> 6x6 and 7x7 don't use average of 5, why does feet need to?


Because feet is WAY faster than 6 and 7, and also other events like sq1 or mega have been adapted to an avg5 in the past, so there's literally no reason why feet shouldn't have an avg5. Also, 5x5 or mega WR's are slower than Feet WR's, yet they still have an avg5


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> 6x6 and 7x7 don't use average of 5, why does feet need to?



Because for a typical solver feet doesn't take nearly as long as 6x6 and 7x7. I've done probably a couple hundred 6x6 solves and run 7:00-8:00 minutes, and maybe 75-100 foot solves and run 2:30-4:00.


----------



## Roman (Sep 12, 2016)

I always vote for removing existing side-events and not adding new ones. Even when there was a poll "should we remove at least one of BLD events?", I voted for removing 5BLD. Less events is better than more. I would rather be happy with the WCA having 6 events (2x2-4x4, OH, BLD, FMC) than with thirty, with all kind of minxes, master skewbs and pyras, 6x6+BLD and so on.
That's just my humble opinion though.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 12, 2016)

Roman said:


> I always vote for removing existing side-events and not adding new ones. Even when there was a poll "should we remove at least one of BLD events?", I voted for removing 5BLD. Less events is better than more. I would rather be happy with the WCA having 6 events (2x2-4x4, OH, BLD, FMC) than with thirty, with all kind of minxes, master skewbs and pyras, 6x6+BLD and so on.
> That's just my humble opinion though.


I find this slightly ironic coming from the guy who has the 5BLD world record but ok
I honestly don't see why we should remove events. Is there a convincing argument to do so?


One Wheel said:


> Because for a typical solver feet doesn't take nearly as long as 6x6 and 7x7. I've done probably a couple hundred 6x6 solves and run 7:00-8:00 minutes, and maybe 75-100 foot solves and run 2:30-4:00.


I see your point, but when (atm) 32.7% of people say to remove x event I don't think trying to get organizers to hold more feet solves will help you, and although I think feet should stay an event, I think more people would say to completely remove it if it's taking up even more time. US Nats anI mean cats yes Daniel 2I watched that video kbye c2016 didn't even have feet as an event, and there's no way that having an average of 5 will make it faster. Your cutoffs idea is better though.


----------



## gateway cuber (Sep 12, 2016)

I agree w/Roman to some degree, big BLD and Multi BLD aren't done by very many cubers and hardly any comps have them, clock isn't even a twisty puzzle how did it even become an event? (to me adding clock is like adding egg...) And While I think feet seems like a viable event it does take time and it isn't popular. 6x6 and 7x7 are some very fun events but they take too much time. yet at the same time, there's events that should be added to the WCA (given some time) like Kilo or Mirror Blocks... to me the WCA event list should look something like this.

2x2, 3x3, 4x4, 5x5, Pyra, Skewb, Squan, OH, BLD, and Mega
Maybe Kilo, Maybe MultiBLD, and Maybe Mirror Blocks...

Does anybody agree with this?


----------



## turtwig (Sep 12, 2016)

I don't think there needs to be any more events, but I'm also against removing events unless there's a problem with it (like Magic).


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 12, 2016)

This seems to be turning into a discussion on adding/removing events. Here's my two cents on that:
1. Few competitions offer all events anyway, so too many events isn't a problem. 
2. The smaller and simpler the puzzle, the more likely that a solve or average will be influenced (positively or negatively) by blind luck. 
Therefore, whenever possible add more, more difficult events. 6BLD, 7BLD, 4 and 5 MBLD, and gigaminx. Who cares that few people compete: only offer those events tentatively, and announce ahead of time if enough people have signed up for an event to hold it.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 12, 2016)

If you're going to remove events, I think it shouldn't go farther than Feet, Clock, MBLD, 4BLD, 5BLD. 7x7 and 6x6 should not be removed, they aren't insanely hard and aren't even ao5 events.


----------



## sqAree (Sep 12, 2016)

I don't see the benefit in removing any event (if I can remove an event it would be clock because it's trivial though). More events don't harm anyone. You can organize comps with only the main events. And, honestly, if those comps are not interesting enough to make many people come, it implies the side events are less "side" events than you thought!

Furthermore it's great to have the possibility to get official results for many puzzles in a way, data / record processing is much easier, contrary to that UWR culture in some events.


----------



## turtwig (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> If you're going to remove events, I think it shouldn't go farther than Feet, Clock, MBLD, 4BLD, 5BLD. 7x7 and 6x6 should not be removed, they aren't insanely hard and aren't even ao5 events.



MBLD and 4BLD aren't hard or ao5 events either. I might be a bit bias, as I practice more blind than most, but I don't think that removing the few BLD events we have and only leaving 3BLD would be a good idea.


----------



## Kit Clement (Sep 12, 2016)

turtwig said:


> MBLD and 4BLD aren't hard or ao5 events either. I might be a bit bias, as I practice more blind than most, but I don't think that removing the few BLD events we have and only leaving 3BLD would be a good idea.



I agree, whether big BLD or big cubes is harder is a matter of subjectivity. Many people have 5BLD as the last event they need to complete their profile, as it is obviously a difficult event, but lots of people are stuck without 6/7 means because they can't meet the cutoffs. For example, Brandon Mikel's last event before gold member status was 7x7 because he struggled to meet cutoff times for the event, especially with only one chance to do so. Matthew Dickman is another case of this: he has every WCA result completed except for 6x6 and 7x7 means, and he is also finding it hard to meet typical cutoffs at competitions.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 12, 2016)

*people try to convince me that solving a 4x4 rubik's cube blindfolded is not hard*
Stop.
If you can solve a 4x4, then you can pretty much solve a 5x5, 6x6, and 7x7, so they are only slightly harder than 4x4 (last 2 centers comes to mind as being trickier on bigger cubes) but at least in those you get to look. Success rates in 4BLD are low (if someone knows the exact rate then that would be nice). I'm not saying to remove events. I think Clock is an odd event and Feet isn't necessarily the cleanest event, and I wouldn't be sad if they were removed, but I think in general we should be expanding the events list, not reducing it, but I'll repeat if 1 event had to be removed it should be Clock. As I'm sure many of you know, I support the addition of Kilominx as an event, as long as it remains popular for a while as an unofficial event.


Kit Clement said:


> I agree, whether big BLD or big cubes is harder is a matter of subjectivity. Many people have 5BLD as the last event they need to complete their profile, as it is obviously a difficult event, but lots of people are stuck without 6/7 means because they can't meet the cutoffs. For example, Brandon Mikel's last event before gold member status was 7x7 because he struggled to meet cutoff times for the event, especially with only one chance to do so. Matthew Dickman is another case of this: he has every WCA result completed except for 6x6 and 7x7 means, and he is also finding it hard to meet typical cutoffs at competitions.


As for the cutoff times thing, [bias warning: I'm bad at everything but 3x3 and 2x2] I think that there should be competitions that hold 3x3, 2x2, and 3 weird events, but have an easy cutoff for the weird events. I kinda want to organize one myself but I never get around to finding a delegate :3


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> As for the cutoff times thing, [bias warning: I'm bad at everything but 3x3 and 2x2] I think that there should be competitions that hold 3x3, 2x2, and 3 weird events, but have an easy cutoff for the weird events. I kinda want to organize one myself but I never get around to finding a delegate :3



I'd love to do a comp with 3 rounds of FMC and one MBLD alternating with easy cuts on 4, 5, 6, 7, and maybe 4 and 5BLD. The speedsolving rounds would be in one room with regular timers, and could run over schedule if necessary, while the other events took place in another site with just stopwatches. People competing in both could be scheduled at the beginning or end of the speedsolving rounds as appropriate to allow both.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 12, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> I'd love to do a comp with 3 rounds of FMC and one MBLD alternating with easy cuts on 4, 5, 6, 7, and maybe 4 and 5BLD. The speedsolving rounds would be in one room with regular timers, and could run over schedule if necessary, while the other events took place in another site with just stopwatches. People competing in both could be scheduled at the beginning or end of the speedsolving rounds as appropriate to allow both.


Sounds good except there has to be 2 rounds of 2x2 and 3x3 or I no likey.


----------



## GenTheThief (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> If you're going to remove events, I think it shouldn't go farther than Feet, Clock, MBLD, 4BLD, 5BLD. 7x7 and 6x6 should not be removed, they aren't insanely hard and aren't even ao5 events.


I think if we're removing events, it would be Clock, 4BLD, 5BLD, 7x7 and 6x6; not MBLD or Feet.
Clock is just kinda weird, 4/5BLD don't really bring that much new and 6x6 7x7 arent that much different from 4x4 and 5x5.
[Bias warning:I love Feet and kinda suck at big cubes]
Feet is different enough from OH and 2H to remain an event, and MBLD also brings something different-er that BigBLD to stay.
I think Feet should get Ao5 as it is way faster than 5x5 and Megaminx. I can even solve a 3x3 with my feet about 10s faster than a 4x4 with my hands [1:05/1:15]. We definitely should get Ao5 for Feet. Time clearly isn't an issue.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 12, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Sounds good except there has to be 2 rounds of 2x2 and 3x3 or I no likey.


2x2 is trivial, and 3x3 isn't much better ;-) More importantly, I'm relatively better at bigger cubes, but still not good enough to make cutoffs.


----------



## turtwig (Sep 13, 2016)

GenTheThief said:


> I think if we're removing events, it would be Clock, 4BLD, 5BLD, 7x7 and 6x6; not MBLD or Feet.
> Clock is just kinda weird, 4/5BLD don't really bring that much new and 6x6 7x7 arent that much different from 4x4 and 5x5.
> [Bias warning:I love Feet and kinda suck at big cubes]
> Feet is different enough from OH and 2H to remain an event, and MBLD also brings something different-er that BigBLD to stay.
> I think Feet should get Ao5 as it is way faster than 5x5 and Megaminx. I can even solve a 3x3 with my feet about 10s faster than a 4x4 with my hands [1:05/1:15]. We definitely should get Ao5 for Feet. Time clearly isn't an issue.



I think that at least 4BLD and 6x6 are different enough to be kept. 4BLD to 3BLD is like 4x4 to 3x3, I guess you could argue that it is more similar, but 4BLD being a big BLD is very different from 3BLD. It has centers and wings and is _much_ less short term than 3BLD.
6x6 is pretty similar to 5x5 on paper, but I think that when solving a 6x6, it feels much more like a big cube. Maybe it's just because I practice more 5x5, but 5x5 feels more fast paced like a small cube where TPS and lookahead are very important while on 6x6, there are much more to reduction, especially centers, and in general you turn slower and can make more mistakes and still get a fast solve.
But I do agree that 5BLD and 7x7 are much more similar.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 13, 2016)

There are significant differences w/r to parity and also color scheme between odd layered and even layered cubes. I've never attempted anything larger than 3x3 blind, so I can't speak to the difference between 4BLD and 5BLD, but for regular speedsolving there is significant difference.


----------



## sqAree (Sep 13, 2016)

Not saying there is NO difference between 6x6 and smaller cubes, but everyone who can solve a 5x5/4x4 pretty much knows everything about how to solve bigger cubes. The issue with color scheme is already present for 4x4. Parity is just exactly the same.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 13, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> 2x2 is trivial, and 3x3 isn't much better ;-) More importantly, I'm relatively better at bigger cubes, but still not good enough to make cutoffs.


yes but not only are those my personal main events, but they are the most popular events and are fun me likey.
But I would still consider coming if there were only one round of 2x2 and 3x3 though


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 13, 2016)

sqAree said:


> Not saying there is NO difference between 6x6 and smaller cubes, but everyone who can solve a 5x5/4x4 pretty much knows everything about how to solve bigger cubes. The issue with color scheme is already present for 4x4. Parity is just exactly the same.



Pretty much. I could solve through 5x5, and had to look stuff up to figure out 6x6. And it's totally different dealing with 16 center pieces on 6x6 versus 4 on 4x4.



JustinTimeCuber said:


> yes but not only are those my personal main events, but they are the most popular events and are fun me likey.
> But I would still consider coming if there were only one round of 2x2 and 3x3 though



If I ever organize a competition the only events that I would be less likely to include than 2x2 are pyraminx and clock.


----------



## Kit Clement (Sep 13, 2016)

GenTheThief said:


> 4/5BLD don't really bring that much new



Most people that think this don't know how to do 4BLD or 5BLD themselves. 

I would agree that one of those events doesn't bring much to the table over the other one, but 4BLD and 5BLD absolutely take a different skill set than 3BLD. As you improve in those events, memo starts to look less like a multi attempt and more like a 3BLD, but it still takes a great deal of skill to memorize that much information (far more than a 3BLD) using a non-loci technique. Maybe one of 4BLD/5BLD is worthy of leaving, but I still think they're more different than many of the speedsolving events (6x6 vs 7x7, for example). 

Still, I'm quite happy with the events list that the WCA has. It's not perfect, but I think that any removal of events would be a less perfect scenario, simply due to the fact that we will be taking away the favorite event of many competitors. I'm open to the addition of events, but of course it is getting harder to fit every event into a championship-type event. I've always thought a tiered events system with the WCA would be ideal for allowing more ways to compete at competitions without pressuring major competitions, but I'm skeptical of such a system ever getting implemented.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 13, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> Most people that think this don't know how to do 4BLD or 5BLD themselves.
> 
> I would agree that one of those events doesn't bring much to the table over the other one, but 4BLD and 5BLD absolutely take a different skill set than 3BLD. As you improve in those events, memo starts to look less like a multi attempt and more like a 3BLD, but it still takes a great deal of skill to memorize that much information (far more than a 3BLD) using a non-loci technique. Maybe one of 4BLD/5BLD is worthy of leaving, but I still think they're more different than many of the speedsolving events (6x6 vs 7x7, for example).
> 
> Still, I'm quite happy with the events list that the WCA has. It's not perfect, but I think that any removal of events would be a less perfect scenario, simply due to the fact that we will be taking away the favorite event of many competitors. I'm open to the addition of events, but of course it is getting harder to fit every event into a championship-type event. I've always thought a tiered events system with the WCA would be ideal for allowing more ways to compete at competitions without pressuring major competitions, but I'm skeptical of such a system ever getting implemented.



What exactly do you mean by a tiered events system?


----------



## Kit Clement (Sep 13, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> What exactly do you mean by a tiered events system?



Have a set of events that are essentially more official than the other set of events. Years ago, we used to keep track of events done unofficially at official competitions, and these are still online at speedcubing.com:

http://www.speedcubing.com/results/ (It even looks like the old WCA site!)

I think that having an unofficial profile/section on the WCA page would be a cool thing to recognize unofficial events in some way and track their popularity, but don't put them on WCA official profiles or recognize/track records for the events so we don't have to worry about affirming the validity of these results.


----------



## GenTheThief (Sep 13, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> Most people that think this don't know how to do 4BLD or 5BLD themselves.



I do understand how 4BLD works and watched noahs tutorial on r2 and u2 but yes, I don't know how to do/practice BigBLD.
But at least I theoretically know how to do it, which is more than most Feet haters know.


----------



## ender9994 (Sep 13, 2016)

GenTheThief said:


> I do understand how 4BLD works and watched noahs tutorial on r2 and u2 but yes, I don't know how to do/practice BigBLD.
> But at least I theoretically know how to do it, which is more than most Feet haters know.



I have nothing against foot solving, but I don't agree with this logic. Technically, almost anyone who knows how to solve a 3x3 will also know how to solve it with their feet (Aka, its the exact same method). You can not say the same thing about 4x4 blind. Without you specifically searching out additional information, you would have no idea how to do it.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 13, 2016)

Kit Clement said:


> Have a set of events that are essentially more official than the other set of events.



You can count me as a big fan of this idea, and also of @turtwig 's now-deleted explanation of having entry qualifications for some tournaments. Both seem like great ideas to me. I doubt I would ever meet any qualifications set for any but a local tournament, but I would love to be able to know, for example, that I rank in the top 250 gigaminxers, rather than just knowing that I'm nowhere near an UWR.


----------



## GenTheThief (Sep 13, 2016)

ender9994 said:


> I have nothing against foot solving, but I don't agree with this logic. Technically, almost anyone who knows how to solve a 3x3 will also know how to solve it with their feet (Aka, its the exact same method). You can not say the same thing about 4x4 blind. Without you specifically searching out additional information, you would have no idea how to do it.


Well, as long as you know what a commutator is, theoretically you could do a 4BLD right? Well yes, but that's not very practical and basically impossible.
While Feet isn't comparable in the ability to solve, I think a certain level of competence is required, such as being able to solve it were you don't leave it 2+ because that's faster.
Then you should have more reasons than its gross and unpleasant to watch.
It's like if a cuber who used LBL and averaged 2 minutes told everyone to stop 3x3, I don't think that person wouldn't be able to give very accurate reasons because they have virtually no experience in solving.
If a ten second cuber said the same thing, they should be able to back up their reason for not wanting 3x3 because they have practical experience.
Clearly, I'm not that ten second solver who can declare that 5BLD is no more different that 4BLD and therefore should be removed, but I don't think I'm that 2 minute cuber either, as I actually have an idea of what I'm talking about.
Hows this? To anyone who can do BLD:
I know 4BLD is quite a shift from 3BLD, but how different is 5BLD after 4BLD?
Is 5BLD, once you get used to it, as different a transition from 3BLD->4BLD, or is it more like starting OH and you have to get used to some new things, but its not totally different?


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 13, 2016)

GenTheThief said:


> Well, as long as you know what a commutator is, theoretically you could do a 4BLD right? Well yes, but that's not very practical and basically impossible.
> While Feet isn't comparable in the ability to solve, I think a certain level of competence is required, such as being able to solve it were you don't leave it 2+ because that's faster.
> Then you should have more reasons than its gross and unpleasant to watch.
> It's like if a cuber who used LBL and averaged 2 minutes told everyone to stop 3x3, I don't think that person wouldn't be able to give very accurate reasons because they have virtually no experience in solving.
> ...



For me not leaving a foot solve +2 is a matter of, for lack of a better term, honor. In most cases it would be faster for me to leave it, but I don't just for the principle of the matter. If I get a +2 it's an accident.


----------



## GenTheThief (Sep 13, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> For me not leaving a foot solve +2 is a matter of, for lack of a better term, honor. In most cases it would be faster for me to leave it, but I don't just for the principle of the matter. If I get a +2 it's an accident.


Principle? Rectitude? Integrity? Moral standards? I did that to when I started. I realized that my tps was so bad that a 2+ would probably be better, but that just seemed wrong.


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 13, 2016)

GenTheThief said:


> Hows this? To anyone who can do BLD:
> I know 4BLD is quite a shift from 3BLD, but how different is 5BLD after 4BLD?
> Is 5BLD, once you get used to it, as different a transition from 3BLD->4BLD, or is it more like starting OH and you have to get used to some new things, but its not totally different?


It adds T-centres which are solved very similarly to X-centres, and midges which are basically from 3x3. Parity becomes slightly more complicated, depending how you solve it. But the main difference is the amount of information and the difficulty of executing it right. It's about equivalent to a 4-cube multi but 5BLD is more unforgiving. It's more fiddly to execute and one slip means DNF. To me, a fast 5BLD solve is one of the most impressive cubing achievements to watch.


----------



## Berd (Sep 13, 2016)

I still go by my view that 3x3 OH is THE event that has 3x3 with restrictions, however another one (feet) is not necessary.


----------



## YouCubing (Sep 13, 2016)

imo we shouldn't remove any events. there's really no point, if you don't do/like the event, just don't do/like it, don't try getting it off the WCA. I know people whose favorite events are Clock and Feet, and removing those events would just make the really disappointed and it wouldn't really do much for the people who don't like the events.


----------



## DTCuber (Sep 13, 2016)

1. +2s should be removed
2. Add ball and cup: it requires skill, it requires luck, and it is fun to watch


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 13, 2016)

DTCuber said:


> 2. Add ball and cup: it requires skill, it requires luck, and it is fun to watch


While we're at it, let's add a chess tournament, cup stacking, and a 100-meter sprint to the WCA.


----------



## Yetiowin (Sep 13, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> While we're at it, let's add a chess tournament, cup stacking, and a 100-meter sprint to the WCA.


Technically, those have no luck involved. But cubing technically doesn't either.


----------



## Daniel Lin (Sep 14, 2016)

YouCubing said:


> imo we shouldn't remove any events. there's really no point, if you don't do/like the event, just don't do/like it, don't try getting it off the WCA. I know people whose favorite events are Clock and Feet, and removing those events would just make the really disappointed and it wouldn't really do much for the people who don't like the events.


If we remove clock or feet, then there would be more time in comps to hold other events. And they aren't that popular anyway. Personally I think clock should be eliminated because it's not really a twisty puzzle and just looks weird. And feet is unsanitary and weird (sorry thecoolminxer).

Also, I've changed my mind about kilominx. I think it would be a good idea to add it if lots of people like it


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 14, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> If we remove clock or feet, then there would be more time in comps to hold other events.


Comps are not compelled to hold clock and feet if the organisers want that time for something else.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 14, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> Personally I think clock should be eliminated because it's not really a twisty puzzle and just looks weird. And feet is unsanitary and weird (sorry thecoolminxer).



I'm with you on clock, but can somebody explain why feet is unsanitary? I know it's a generally accepted fact, but really our hands are touching all sorts of different dirty things all the time, while for most people their feet are wrapped up in shoes and socks all the time, usually with clean socks. Compared to what is on your hands, bacteriologically your feet may have more bacteria, but it will be a smaller variety of bacteria and what is there will be more picky about environment and therefore not as dangerous.


----------



## DGCubes (Sep 14, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> I'm with you on clock, but can somebody explain why feet is unsanitary? I know it's a generally accepted fact, but really our hands are touching all sorts of different dirty things all the time, while for most people their feet are wrapped up in shoes and socks all the time, usually with clean socks. Compared to what is on your hands, bacteriologically your feet may have more bacteria, but it will be a smaller variety of bacteria and what is there will be more picky about environment and therefore not as dangerous.



Honestly the only problem I can think of is if people have some sort of foot fungus, although it's not like there aren't sanitary ways to hold feet at a comp even with this issue. Oftentimes they put plastic covers over the timers, and I think it would be a good idea for anyone worried about being unsanitary to just wear latex gloves while scrambling/transporting cubes. Sure, it's an extra step, but it's pretty much undeniably clean.

I like to take the stance that there's no reason to remove events unless there's something particularly wrong with them. All it does is makes the people who are serious about it upset.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 14, 2016)

This is slightly off topic, but I'm curious to see if there will ever be a generational shift in cubing. These are obviously broad generalizations, but in my observation younger cubers, both in terms of age and how long they've been cubing obviously start with 3x3, and then move on toward smaller puzzles like 2x2, pyraminx, and skewb. As time goes on it seems that people either specialize or start to focus more on either big cubes or more commonly on blind events. There are enough young people coming in to skew the focus toward smaller "simpler" events. It will be interesting to see if that changes 5-10 years down the road.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 14, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> This is slightly off topic, but I'm curious to see if there will ever be a generational shift in cubing. These are obviously broad generalizations, but in my observation younger cubers, both in terms of age and how long they've been cubing obviously start with 3x3, and then move on toward smaller puzzles like 2x2, pyraminx, and skewb. As time goes on it seems that people either specialize or start to focus more on either big cubes or more commonly on blind events. There are enough young people coming in to skew the focus toward smaller "simpler" events. It will be interesting to see if that changes 5-10 years down the road.


Interesting ideas. I personally think that upwards of 2/3 of young cubers will not become very serious because of competitions getting "harder". If I were a few years younger and my first comp was last weekend I would never have gotten kinda good before everyone else is better.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 14, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Interesting ideas. I personally think that upwards of 2/3 of young cubers will not become very serious because of competitions getting "harder". If I were a few years younger and my first comp was last weekend I would never have gotten kinda good before everyone else is better.



The kind of shift I'm talking about would only happen if there is a significant reduction (on a percentage basis) of the number of young cubers coming in.


----------



## Ollie (Sep 14, 2016)

Just for the record, I'm also very much for removing 5BLD and I think a number of high profile BLDers are too.

I'm also keen to remove multi BLD.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 14, 2016)

Ollie said:


> Just for the record, I'm also very much for removing 5BLD and I think a number of high profile BLDers are too.
> 
> I'm also keen to remove multi BLD.


 Multi BLD, as a fixed - time event, is relatively easy to schedule. It also requires massive amounts of work, so the people who enjoy it would arguably have much more reason to be upset about its elimination than would the people who enjoy, say, clock.


----------



## Ollie (Sep 14, 2016)

One Wheel said:


> Multi BLD, as a fixed - time event, is relatively easy to schedule. It also requires massive amounts of work, so the people who enjoy it would arguably have much more reason to be upset about its elimination than would the people who enjoy, say, clock.



Some people put a lot of effort into Magic and Master Magic, and the removal of those events affected a lot more people than would affect Multi. 

My main purpose for it's removal is that as a blind event it adds virtually nothing on what 3BLD brings. You're testing sheer memory capacity, but so does 4BLD and 5BLD. 5BLD barely adds anything new to 4BLD in terms of solving or memorization either.

The puzzle being solved and the methods used do not change - it's just an hour of continuous 3BLD. It's more of a memory sport in that regard.


----------



## One Wheel (Sep 14, 2016)

Ollie said:


> Some people put a lot of effort into Magic and Master Magic, and the removal of those events affected a lot more people than would affect Multi.
> 
> My main purpose for it's removal is that as a blind event it adds virtually nothing on what 3BLD brings. You're testing sheer memory capacity, but so does 4BLD and 5BLD. 5BLD barely adds anything new to 4BLD in terms of solving or memorization either.
> 
> The puzzle being solved and the methods used do not change - it's just an hour of continuous 3BLD. It's more of a memory sport in that regard.



My understanding is that magic and master magic were removed because they had turned into pure dexterity contests rather than puzzles. As to MBLD adding anything, 2x2 doesn't add anything because you have to solve the corners on every other cube. Sure, MBLD is similar to 3BLD, but it's a whole other scale of amazing, especially the really big MBLD attempts. Plus the issue that it's easy to schedule around stands.


----------



## Matt11111 (Sep 14, 2016)

Yetiowin said:


> Technically, those have no luck involved. But cubing technically doesn't either.


3 words: 2x2 four movers.



One Wheel said:


> My understanding is that magic and master magic were removed because they had turned into pure dexterity contests rather than puzzles. As to MBLD adding anything, 2x2 doesn't add anything because you have to solve the corners on every other cube. Sure, MBLD is similar to 3BLD, but it's a whole other scale of amazing, especially the really big MBLD attempts. Plus the issue that it's easy to schedule around stands.


2x2 is a bit more than just the corners of any NxN cube, because since there are no other pieces, you have more freedom and more algs can be developed.


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 14, 2016)

Ollie said:


> My main purpose for it's removal is that as a blind event it adds virtually nothing on what 3BLD brings. You're testing sheer memory capacity, but so does 4BLD and 5BLD. 5BLD barely adds anything new to 4BLD in terms of solving or memorization either.
> 
> The puzzle being solved and the methods used do not change - it's just an hour of continuous 3BLD. It's more of a memory sport in that regard.


All of that's true to a point, but you could make similar points about the similarity of other events, like 5x5-7x7. It doesn't make them any less legitimate.

If the discussion were about whether these become new events, maybe these are good arguments against; but I think that once an event is established, there's a history of competition, and there are people who have committed serious effort to it, it should require much stronger and more practical objections to justify removing it. Especially when organisers already have the option of simply not holding the events.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Sep 14, 2016)

Ollie said:


> Just for the record, I'm also very much for removing 5BLD and I think a number of high profile BLDers are too.
> 
> I'm also keen to remove multi BLD.


I wouldn't be too upset if 5BLD were to be removed, and it's my best ranking. 4BLD should definitely stay though.

I remember a discussion about whether MBLD should be changed to have a much smaller time limit, possibly 30 mins? I would be in favour of that: less boring and fewer cubes to heave around in my backpack - I'm making the most of not having practised MBLD for a long time and not having loads 3x3s in my rucksack at a comp, though I will get back to it eventually. Practicing at home wasn't too bad.


----------



## Chree (Sep 14, 2016)

I wanna shift gears here a bit and bring up one of the survey questions that I was curious about. The very last one about ambiguous scorecard results. As a person with terrible handwriting, it's a worry I often have: being responsible for clearly writing results. And since most volunteers are young kids with equally terrible handwriting, I frequently ask my judges to rewrite my times.

As it stands, the WCA Regulations around this, I feel, are a practical necessity. Scorechecking is also practical necessity, and usually doesn't take place until well after the competition is over. So by the time such ambiguity is given proper attention, it's far too late to ask the judge or competitor what really happened. I mean, it's usually hard enough to find who the judge was DURING the competition.

The solution may not come until we can migrate to a digital replacement to the current scorecard system. And the practicality of such a system, with the current WCA, makes it basically infeasible. So I'm curious to know if anyone else has ideas about how to improve this.


----------



## WACWCA (Sep 14, 2016)

Chree said:


> I wanna shift gears here a bit and bring up one of the survey questions that I was curious about. The very last one about ambiguous scorecard results. As a person with terrible handwriting, it's a worry I often have: being responsible for clearly writing results. And since most volunteers are young kids with equally terrible handwriting, I frequently ask my judges to rewrite my times.
> 
> As it stands, the WCA Regulations around this, I feel, are a practical necessity. Scorechecking is also practical necessity, and usually doesn't take place until well after the competition is over. So by the time such ambiguity is given proper attention, it's far too late to ask the judge or competitor what really happened. I mean, it's usually hard enough to find who the judge was DURING the competition.
> 
> The solution may not come until we can migrate to a digital replacement to the current scorecard system. And the practicality of such a system, with the current WCA, makes it basically infeasible. So I'm curious to know if anyone else has ideas about how to improve this.


Since all the results are entered into cubecomps anyway, there could be be an app or something that allowed judges to put in the competitors times on the app instead of a scorecard, still needing confirmation by both people, then when done all solves in the average it could be confirmed and input to cubecomps. Bad handwriting wouldn't be a factor and as long as the competitor checked, there shouldn't be any large typos.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Sep 14, 2016)

WACWCA said:


> Since all the results are entered into cubecomps anyway, there could be be an app or something that allowed judges to put in the competitors times on the app instead of a scorecard, still needing confirmation by both people, then when done all solves in the average it could be confirmed and input to cubecomps. Bad handwriting wouldn't be a factor and as long as the competitor checked, there shouldn't be any large typos.


Interesting idea, but there are a few reasons that could be problematic. For one, who pays for the phones/tablets/whatever the apps are on? Do organizers/delegates have to do it? If so, that adds up to potentially $1000 in competition costs. Do competitors use their own devices? If so, that bars some people from judging, if they don't have a device. Besides, that opens the door to a lot of ways to hack the program and send faulty times to cubecomps and then to the WCA database.


----------



## Cale S (Sep 14, 2016)

WACWCA said:


> Since all the results are entered into cubecomps anyway, there could be be an app or something that allowed judges to put in the competitors times on the app instead of a scorecard, still needing confirmation by both people, then when done all solves in the average it could be confirmed and input to cubecomps. Bad handwriting wouldn't be a factor and as long as the competitor checked, there shouldn't be any large typos.


Wasn't there a thing that put results directly from the stackmat to cubecomps?
I think it was used for a fast single by Michał Pleskowicz


----------



## h2f (Sep 14, 2016)

Cale S said:


> Wasn't there a thing that put results directly from the stackmat to cubecomps?
> I think it was used for a fast single by Michał Pleskowicz



Yes, during finals results are often put to cubecomps directly from a stackmat during comps in Poland. But it's only during finals - of cours it would be to hard during round when there are 80 or more people.


----------



## Ranzha (Sep 14, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> If we remove clock or feet, then there would be more time in comps to hold other events. And they aren't that popular anyway. Personally I think clock should be eliminated because it's not really a twisty puzzle and just looks weird. And feet is unsanitary and weird (sorry thecoolminxer).


Hi, I've organised your comps.
Most competitions have fixed timeslots to operate in. Removing events doesn't change these timeslots.
"Clock looks weird" is an _*awful*_ argument.
"Feet is unsanitary and weird" is *more awful* of an argument. Hands have direct contact with all sorts of disgusting gunk at competitions, especially timers that every competitor uses and cubes that other people have solved/scrambled. Also, for the times we've held feet in the Bay Area, we've had gloves for scramblers/judges, separate mats/timers, and bottles of Purell to counteract the spread of germs. If anything, feet becomes the second-most sanitary event, to FMC.



WACWCA said:


> Since all the results are entered into cubecomps anyway


FALSE

--

Regarding writing legibly:

If you're a judge, *take the extra time* to write absolutely clearly, and better yet know how to account for penalties on the scorecard. It might take extra effort, but it is a HUGE help to data-enterers and delegates everywhere.

If you're a competitor, PLEASE ensure the time written down is as close to objectively legible as can be. Else, *complain*.

I've had an incorrect result entered in the db (i.e. an actual time) and asked the results team to remedy it (with a DNF) in the past because the judge didn't know to DNF, and I didn't check what they wrote.


----------



## biscuit (Sep 14, 2016)

For electronic timing, enter the amazing Jfly

https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/threads/of-stackmats-and-smartphones.49357/

Yep. I'd assume the reason we haven't seen more of this is because of him not having a lot of time. I'd love to see it be pushed forward in the future!


----------



## Ranzha (Sep 14, 2016)

biscuit said:


> For electronic timing, enter the amazing Jfly
> 
> https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/threads/of-stackmats-and-smartphones.49357/
> 
> Yep. I'd assume the reason we haven't seen more of this is because of him not having a lot of time. I'd love to see it be pushed forward in the future!


Yeah, in an interview with him on Cubecast, he mentioned that this project (among many others) have taken the backseat to more pressing issues for the WCA Software Team.


----------



## Daniel Lin (Sep 15, 2016)

mark49152 said:


> Comps are not compelled to hold clock and feet if the organisers want that time for something else.


Why don't we add mirror cube, void cube, master skewb, floppy cube, 3*4*5, 6BLD, 7BLD, multi2BLD, 3x3 MTS, square 1 FMC, pyraminx OH and 3x3 one foot? Comps wouldn't be compelled to hold them. If they want to hold other events they can.



Ranzha said:


> "Clock looks weird" is an _*awful*_ argument.
> "Feet is unsanitary and weird" is *more awful* of an argument.


i wasn't arguing that we should remove clock and feet because they look weird. I just meant that i personally i don't like them as much as other events so i would remove them if i had the choice. If everybody likes feetsolving except for me, then i shouldn't complain if it stays.



YouCubing said:


> I know people whose favorite events are Clock and Feet, and removing those events would just make the really disappointed



If we remove events people will definitely be upset, but that's always going to happen. People were sad about removing the magics



Ollie said:


> My main purpose for it's removal is that as a blind event it adds virtually nothing on what 3BLD brings. You're testing sheer memory capacity, but so does 4BLD and 5BLD. 5BLD barely adds anything new to 4BLD in terms of solving or memorization either.
> 
> The puzzle being solved and the methods used do not change - it's just an hour of continuous 3BLD. It's more of a memory sport in that regard.


I agree, 345 and multi are all basically the same thing-memory sports
I don't have an opinion on 5BLD, but I wouldn't be sad if they removed it. very few comps hold 4BLD/5BLD anyway, which is annoying because you don't get many chances to get good times


----------



## sqAree (Sep 15, 2016)

I don't have a lot of experience in BLD events (let alone multi) but imho multi is something more than normal 3BLD.

1. 3BLD is pretty instant memo and recall, mbld can quickly reach the less short-term memory levels (I'm quite sure I've heard people saying they still remember their multi memos from many weeks ago).
2. Each MBLD attempt can be different in the sense that you can choose the number of cubes.
3. There is a whole new strategical aspect regarding this choice (see 2.) that starts even before the start of the attempt.
4. The total time is almost never of importance, as opposed to 3BLD. It is more important to have a correct memo (and clean execution ofc). In 3BLD the competitors are ranked by best single, so rushing makes sense.
5. There are additional factors like time management, organization of cubes on the table etc.


----------



## Chree (Sep 15, 2016)

What about instead of removing/adding events, we simply incentivize holding unofficial events at comps. I know people love their stats. So one possibility is to revive or replace the website @Kit Clement showed, www.speedcubing.com (http://www.speedcubing.com/results).

It may be possible to give some authority to Delegates/Organizers to add their stats to this page. Or simply have them submit results to a webmaster, much the same way they submit results to the WCA Results Team today. This would give competitors some incentive to practice weird events (Kilominx, mirror cube, etc) without forcing the WCA to make any drastic changes. And it gives everyone a shot as seeing where they rank in the weird events.

There is, of course, an unfairness factor. Some regions may not have Organizers that like to hold unofficial events. They're an extreme rarity these days anyway. So it's possible the only people that would ever get "ranked" would be the competitors within driving distance of a zealot like Chris Tran.


----------



## genericcuber666 (Sep 16, 2016)

i think the cutoffs are to harsh not many people ever makes 5x5+ when they can comfortably make 4x4 in england


----------



## AlphaSheep (Sep 16, 2016)

genericcuber666 said:


> i think the cutoffs are to harsh not many people ever makes 5x5+ when they can comfortably make 4x4 in england


Cutoffs are only harsh in some places. No South African competition has ever had a cutoff


----------



## Ollie (Sep 16, 2016)

sqAree said:


> I don't have a lot of experience in BLD events (let alone multi) but imho multi is something more than normal 3BLD.
> 
> 1. 3BLD is pretty instant memo and recall, mbld can quickly reach the less short-term memory levels (I'm quite sure I've heard people saying they still remember their multi memos from many weeks ago).
> 2. Each MBLD attempt can be different in the sense that you can choose the number of cubes.
> ...



1. You mean intermediate or long term, and I'm not sure why this is an argument for multi. 4BLD is long term or short term depending how fast you are.

2. Not sure why this is an argument for multi either. All solves in any event are different, and this point is not true if your comp has one attempt only.

3. This is true for memo only. These strategies exist for all BLD events, and to an extent all events. But it doesn't take away from the fact that it just doesn't add anything different on 3BLD, apart from different memory strategies, which exists in 4BLD.

4. I have no idea what your point is. 3BLD has ranked averages.

5. Time management exists in every event, technically. And positioning cubes on a table has nothing to do with the actual solvin aspect. If anything, that's an argument against multi.


----------



## sqAree (Sep 16, 2016)

Ollie said:


> 1. You mean intermediate or long term, and I'm not sure why this is an argument for multi. 4BLD is long term or short term depending how fast you are.
> 
> 2. Not sure why this is an argument for multi either. All solves in any event are different, and this point is not true if your comp has one attempt only.
> 
> ...



Put like this I don't know what my point was. xD
I think I had the "feeling" multi would be "quite" different to 3BLD, and tried to find reasons to back that up. Now, while I agree all my points on their own are not very solid, I want to try a bit more.

Let's look at point 4. What I mean is that small delays (during memo or execution) usually don't have a negative impact on the final result, because the result depends on the number of solved cubes (yes, and on the number of attempted cubes, but as pointed out in 2. I view this as an argument for multi), not on the time. Sure, this isn't true in case of tied points, but that doesn't happen often anyway. In that regard, multi is quite different to 3BLD (or the other blind events) as rushing is not necessary.

I hope it makes sense.


----------



## HRcubed (Dec 6, 2016)

who thinks an M move should count as a dnf


----------



## guysensei1 (Dec 6, 2016)

HRcubed said:


> who thinks an M move should count as a dnf


me


----------



## Cale S (Dec 6, 2016)

HRcubed said:


> who thinks an M move should count as a dnf



the WCA regulations

and most cubers


----------



## shadowslice e (Dec 7, 2016)

HRcubed said:


> who thinks an M move should count as a dnf


Thing is, I'm actually against even +2 existing


----------



## Elo13 (Dec 8, 2016)

sqAree said:


> Let's look at point 4. What I mean is that small delays (during memo or execution) usually don't have a negative impact on the final result, because the result depends on the number of solved cubes (yes, and on the number of attempted cubes, but as pointed out in 2. I view this as an argument for multi), not on the time. Sure, this isn't true in case of tied points, but that doesn't happen often anyway. In that regard, multi is quite different to 3BLD (or the other blind events) as rushing is not necessary.



I know this is late but what I've read and heard is that for top MBLDers time is a big factor. It's not enough to be accurate, you have to be really fast to do it in an hour. AFAIK improvement for them isn't being able to do more cubes, it's being able to more in an hour.


----------



## Douf (Dec 8, 2016)

This final question is worded in a confusing way. 

Someone could read the whole question and example and at the end is faced with "should the competitor be able to prove that the 4 was indeed a 4'? 

Maybe it's just how our brain works (or maybe just mine). But I had to re-read the whole question to make sure I answered the question at the top and not the one asked in the example right before my yes or no answer.


----------



## DhruvA (Dec 23, 2016)

I've heard a lot of people saying to remove feet and everyone has their own opinions.
But what I think is like feet is developed by now. We have 20 sec wr single. At this point removing feet would be discouraging for some including me considering it's the only event I am good at and have good recognition among cubers of my region.


----------



## Elo13 (Dec 23, 2016)

DhruvA said:


> I've heard a lot of people saying to remove feet and everyone has their own opinions.
> But what I think is like feet is developed by now. We have 20 sec wr single. At this point removing feet would be discouraging for some including me considering it's the only event I am good at and have good recognition among cubers of my region.



I agree. If anything, feet should be changed to Ao5 instead of Mo3.


----------



## Rcuber123 (Dec 23, 2016)

Elo13 said:


> I agree. If anything, feet should be changed to Ao5 instead of Mo3.


Yes


----------

