TimMc
Premium Member
If megaminx is shown and is thought to be a lot more interesting to the general public than FMC, is it automatically bad for the image of cubing?
What is the image of cubing?
Tim.
If megaminx is shown and is thought to be a lot more interesting to the general public than FMC, is it automatically bad for the image of cubing?
How could there be any truly objective arguments for removing or keeping an event?
No, I'm serious. What's the criterion for whether something's an event? Why solving with feet and not solving with elbows? Why 4BLD and not 4OH? Why Rubik's Clock and not Rubik's Fifteen? The truth is, there's no objective standard. There is nothing you can prove about an event (with statistics or mathematics) that will give the WCA no choice but to add or remove the event. We have added and removed events over the years by more or less following the community's feelings, and the set of events we have now is certainly somewhat arbitrary. It's certainly not the most interesting or mathematically pure or difficult puzzles, and it's probably not even the most popular either, if you discount the huge popularity boost that an event gets just by being official. So if you want to add or remove an event, you can't argue that it does or does not match the requirements an event needs to have, because there is no such concept.
If the number of competitions with an event steadily decline over the course of over a year up to the point where no one actually competes or wants to organize a competition with that event anymore, seems somewhat an objective argument to remove an event.
How could there be any truly objective arguments for removing or keeping an event?
I think there has been a truly objective argument for removing events: Magic and Master Magic. In those cases, the objective argument was that the events were too challenging to judge properly - it was probably possible to judge them properly, but it was too challenging to enforce at all our competitions. For that reason, the events were removed.
That to me is an objective argument for removing an event.
And as for my subjective opinion, I would prefer that we never remove an event unless we have an objective reason to remove the event, so I would prefer that we not remove any of the current events. But I admit that is purely my subjective opinion.
But H perm is a special case, isn't it? There are a lot of pretty good algs for H with different move sets. In your list, I have seen people use the third one for OH (albeit executed differently) and I myself use it for sim.
As you mentioned, the difference between RFLB and RULD is just a rotation. So I would be surprised to hear that for feetsolvers most of OLL/PLL had to be replaced with new algs, or that F2L was done totally differently than in OH. The biggest difference is that turns have to be done even more slowly than in OH, which certainly does affect what turns a good solver would want to do, but it doesn't seem like a big enough change to have people develop entirely new ideas and techniques, like we have seen for OH.
What is the image of cubing?
Tim.
Even though a lot of people don't like it, a lot of people do like it. How will competitions be improved if it is removed?
His underlying reasoning is sound, he just omitted certain salient parts from his expression of it. Allow me to rephrase it into a clearer expression of what I believe he meant: "Even though a lot of people don't like it, MORE people DO like it, as evinced by the current poll results." At the time of this writing, 42.52% voted to retain the event, whereas only 37.54% voted to eliminate it. You've lost the election, Dene.Seeing as you've gone and bumped this dead thread, you asked for it...
Your reasoning is horrible. Therefore any conclusions you come to based on your reasoning are unjustified.
Even though a lot of people don't like it, a lot of people do like it. How will competitions be improved if it is removed?
Short competitions are certainly easier to organize and run (and help out in) without feet. You don't have to move the timers and tables and stuff around, clean and deodorize things so people who don't love feet aren't disgusted, etc. while still keeping to the fixed number of hours you have the venue for.
Of course, bigBLD/multiBLD/FMC also make competitions harder to run, but at least (IMO) those have a lot of additional technique and skill above and beyond normal speedsolving, whereas feet doesn't.
He's just stating his oppinion. Other people may argue that bigBLD is basically regular BLD with a lot more memorization, there's not a lot of technique involved.This really bugs me. How can you say feet doesn't require skill? You saying Gabriel Pereira Campanha broke WR without skill and technique?
by that logic we should also remove OH since its so similar to normal speed solving.Of course, bigBLD/multiBLD/FMC also make competitions harder to run, but at least (IMO) those have a lot of additional technique and skill above and beyond normal speedsolving, whereas feet doesn't.
by that logic we should also remove OH since its so similar to normal speed solving.
by that logic we should also remove OH since its so similar to normal speed solving.
Many adept OH solvers learn alternative algorithm sets specifically for OH solving. I don't believe this is the case with feetsolving. (If it is the case, feel free to correct me.)