Competition Methodology

[Tyson]

So, I did some thinking over the last few weeks, and I think I came up with a way to make competitions much more efficient. And by much more efficient, you can take a look at the Caltech Fall 2008 competition, you'll see that we had 75 competitors. I think we were basically able to finish about two hours early. In other words, we had enough time left over that we added in a second round of Square-1, a second round of 3x3x3 OH, and a third round of 3x3x3 speed solve. We even had time for fantasy cubing. Anyway, the story goes like this.

I was at Drexel Open 2008 and I noticed something. I guess I had always known about this issue, but at Drexel it was so blatant that I thought it would be good to address. Right now how most competitions are set up is that there's a scrambling table off to the side. On the main stage, there are perhaps four tables with two timers set up at each table for eight timing stations. What happens is the following:

1. Competitor is called and brings up their cube
2. Scrambler scrambles the cube
3. Judge picks up the cube and calls the competitor
4. Judge and competitor walk to the timer
5. Solve is done
6. Judge returns the cube to the competitor

At Drexel, the tables farthest from the scrambling table were hardly used. It actually takes a good 5 to 7 seconds for the judge and the competitor to walk to the timer. If the area in back of the stage is crowded, it might take even longer.

This seems insignificant, but there are a number of issues that arise:

1. 5 to 7 seconds of walking translates to an increase of 15 to 30 seconds per competitor
2. Laziness of the judges to walk across the stage contribute to more lost time on the timers
3. Judges spend time looking for competitors
4. Judges get tired walking back and forth

The solution I came up with is the following. Instead of having the scrambling table off to the side, you put it in the middle of the stage. There are various setups, but this is the basic idea. This way, the scramblers are not very far from one set of timers.

Yes, you need to take care to make sure the scramblers can scramble without being seen. You can do this by putting up an obstruction around the table.

Anyway, instead of having the judges walk back and forth, you keep the judges stationary at the timers. They can even sit if they like.

A 'runner' takes the cubes from the scrambling table and feeds each timer with their judge the scrambled cubes. The judge then always has one competitor solving, and one or two cubes in the queue.

Even more efficient is if you can keep competitors at the same timer throughout the process. Then the judge has a very easy time of finding the competitor.

When a cube is solved, the runner brings the solved cube and time sheet back to the scrambling table. When the competitor is finished, the runner brings the score sheet back to the scrambling table. (the sheets can then be delivered to the computer, which we kept in a separate area)

The runners can run on the front of the stage. Yes, they do occasionally step in front of a competitor, but it is not distracting as they are not close, and for the people filming it is only momentary.

Anyway, I really thought this system made our competitor last Saturday very efficient. A more carefully planned version can yield tremendous results. I would recommend it. For some reason, being a runner isn't as tired as the old transient judge. Perhaps moving around continuously is better than moving, stopping, moving, stopping, etc.

[Jai]

The thing is, now with runners and judges, you would need double the number of volunteers. Some competitions barely have enough judges, let alone runners.
Also, the layout of some venues might be difficult, and would make things more squished. Overall, though, it seems like a good idea.

[Mike Hughey]

The nice thing about runners is that they're pretty easy to recruit. A judge requires a certain amount of knowledge and training; a runner can be trained in just a few minutes. I really like this idea!

[Jai]

That's true; you could recruit a kid, but the thing is, how many people would you find that would want to continually do this?

[Pedro]

that looks like a good idea

could you give me some more details about Caltech Fall 2008? How many timers? how many people did you have exclusively to judge/scramble?

[brunson]

You don't need one runner per judge. I think a single runner could keep up in all but the fastest of events. You'd need to mark on the timesheet which station the cube goes to, or simply feed the shortest queue and the judge can call the competitor. Keeping the competitors near their timer is a good idea if you have a large stage area, but both competitions I've been to had pretty cramped quarters on stage.

[MTGjumper]

I think in some cases, people would rather be a runner than a judge. A runner would have less pressure on them, and might welcome the chance to walk/run around when they might not have the chance to normally in such a claustrophobic environment.

I know I would be happy to do this anyway

[Dave Campbell]

This is quite an interesting idea, Tyson. I have tried to figure out better ways to streamline the process myself, but i had not thought of this. So i am clear, the judge, who is sitting at the station, has a few scrambled cubes on the table for their next competitors? How do you cover them all, if you have 8 stations times 3 cubes, that is 24 covers required. I only have 11 at the current time.

I can see there be potential for the runner and judge to accidentally distract the competitor during this exchange, but with solid choreography, i think it could be minimized. I assume it is entirely the runner's responsibility, and the judge just finds the cubes waiting upon the completion of the current competitor's solve?

Where do the competitors themselves stand to wait for their turn? How does the judge find the competitor? We have a few competitors who are notorious for disappearing during their average in spite of my requests for them to stay in the waiting area. That often is where time is lost because judges are trying to find them. What is a possible solution to this issue in the aforementioned scenario, especially if one station has all 3 queued competitors MIA?

When you say you can keep the competitor at the same timer, does that mean you have to have a list of which competitors go to which timer, or did you write that on the score card for the runner? I can see it being difficult to time it so you don't have Station-1 done immediately because all the fast guys are there, and Station-5 is only on solve 2 because they are all slow. Did you plan that out before hand, or just made decisions on the fly?

[shelley]

The thing is, now with runners and judges, you would need double the number of volunteers. Some competitions barely have enough judges, let alone runners.

You just need enough judges to cover every timer. There only needs to be one or two additional people as runners; they can switch off with judges/scramblers (as few people want to do that all day). And as Mike pointed out, the runner's job is simpler than that of the judge/scrambler; you can easily recruit someone from the audience if you're short on personnel.

When you say you can keep the competitor at the same timer, does that mean you have to have a list of which competitors go to which timer, or did you write that on the score card for the runner? I can see it being difficult to time it so you don't have Station-1 done immediately because all the fast guys are there, and Station-5 is only on solve 2 because they are all slow. Did you plan that out before hand, or just made decisions on the fly?

It doesn't have to be that involved. Our original plan was just to keep them at the same set of timers (the timers on one side or the other of the scrambling table). This could be coordinated by having each side of the scrambling table only scrambling cubes for their side of the stage. Competitors then just have to wait on one side of the stage. In practice this didn't actually happen, especially with the more busy rounds, but this was the first time we tried this method; it can still use some fine tuning.

[blade740]

Caltech Fall was run VERY smoothly. We added 3 extra rounds, stretched the 3x3 final round to over an hour (only one timer being used, plus fantasy cubing), and still finished on time. We weren't even rushing. Being a judge was a lot less painful than it used to be. You have a covered cube on the edge of your table. Once the timer is free, you call up that person. Actually, tyson was calling out who was "on deck" when he delivered scrambled cubes, so we rarely even had to find people. Anyway, you get the cuber, they do their solve, and you set the solved cube on top of the score sheet back at the front of the table. You pull the next cube up, and time them. All the while, the runner is picking up solved cubes and delivering scrambled ones.

Another thing: if you have a raised stage (as long as it's not TOO high) you can have the runner on the ground to avoid blocking filming at all. Push the tables all the way to the front edge of the stage, and clear the spectators back a few feet for a walkway.