All-Round Rankings (KinchRanks)

[Coolster01]

Spoiler: Side puzzles

[table="width: 800, class: grid, align: left"]
[tr][td]Rank[/td] [td]Name[/td] [td]Score[/td] [td]minx[/td] [td]pyram[/td] [td]sq1[/td] [td]clock[/td] [td]skewb[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]1[/td] [td]Jayden McNeill[/td] [td]3.513[/td] [td]0.621[/td] [td]0.707[/td] [td]0.634[/td] [td]0.550[/td] [td]1.000[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]2[/td] [td]Rami Sbahi[/td] [td]3.280[/td] [td]0.657[/td] [td]0.681[/td] [td]0.546[/td] [td]0.508[/td] [td]0.888[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]3[/td] [td]Evan Liu[/td] [td]3.269[/td] [td]0.583[/td] [td]0.524[/td] [td]0.472[/td] [td]1.000[/td] [td]0.690[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]4[/td] [td]Daniel Wallin[/td] [td]3.263[/td] [td]0.479[/td] [td]0.541[/td] [td]0.529[/td] [td]0.905[/td] [td]0.807[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]5[/td] [td]Robert Yau[/td] [td]3.248[/td] [td]0.780[/td] [td]0.648[/td] [td]0.654[/td] [td]0.581[/td] [td]0.585[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]6[/td] [td]Yu Nakajima (中島悠)[/td] [td]3.222[/td] [td]0.742[/td] [td]0.580[/td] [td]0.645[/td] [td]0.715[/td] [td]0.539[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]7[/td] [td]Louis Cormier[/td] [td]3.191[/td] [td]0.937[/td] [td]0.650[/td] [td]0.463[/td] [td]0.648[/td] [td]0.492[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]8[/td] [td]Antoine Cantin[/td] [td]3.189[/td] [td]0.648[/td] [td]0.643[/td] [td]0.471[/td] [td]0.744[/td] [td]0.683[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]9[/td] [td]Vincent Hartanto Utomo[/td] [td]3.172[/td] [td]0.637[/td] [td]0.815[/td] [td]0.528[/td] [td]0.656[/td] [td]0.535[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]10[/td] [td]Daniel Sheppard[/td] [td]3.123[/td] [td]0.589[/td] [td]0.594[/td] [td]0.544[/td] [td]0.820[/td] [td]0.575[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]11[/td] [td]Feliks Zemdegs[/td] [td]3.010[/td] [td]0.841[/td] [td]0.565[/td] [td]0.550[/td] [td]0.503[/td] [td]0.551[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]12[/td] [td]Lucas Wesche[/td] [td]2.956[/td] [td]0.837[/td] [td]0.421[/td] [td]0.654[/td] [td]0.513[/td] [td]0.531[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]13[/td] [td]Wojciech Knott[/td] [td]2.945[/td] [td]0.570[/td] [td]0.546[/td] [td]0.410[/td] [td]0.905[/td] [td]0.514[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]14[/td] [td]Nathaniel Berg[/td] [td]2.939[/td] [td]0.459[/td] [td]0.580[/td] [td]0.298[/td] [td]0.957[/td] [td]0.646[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]15[/td] [td]Nathan Dwyer[/td] [td]2.929[/td] [td]0.598[/td] [td]0.461[/td] [td]0.693[/td] [td]0.661[/td] [td]0.516[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]16[/td] [td]Jan Bentlage[/td] [td]2.905[/td] [td]0.601[/td] [td]0.528[/td] [td]0.515[/td] [td]0.598[/td] [td]0.662[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]17[/td] [td]Ainesh Sevellaraja[/td] [td]2.901[/td] [td]0.591[/td] [td]0.688[/td] [td]0.535[/td] [td]0.661[/td] [td]0.426[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]18[/td] [td]Simon Westlund[/td] [td]2.867[/td] [td]0.892[/td] [td]0.551[/td] [td]0.485[/td] [td]0.616[/td] [td]0.323[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]19[/td] [td]Mitchell Lane[/td] [td]2.845[/td] [td]0.614[/td] [td]0.555[/td] [td]0.423[/td] [td]0.584[/td] [td]0.668[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]20[/td] [td]John Brechon[/td] [td]2.843[/td] [td]0.687[/td] [td]0.604[/td] [td]0.508[/td] [td]0.581[/td] [td]0.463[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]21[/td] [td]Ivan Zabrodin[/td] [td]2.817[/td] [td]0.556[/td] [td]0.443[/td] [td]0.353[/td] [td]0.765[/td] [td]0.700[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]22[/td] [td]Lee Chiang (蔣礪)[/td] [td]2.759[/td] [td]0.503[/td] [td]0.626[/td] [td]0.262[/td] [td]0.703[/td] [td]0.665[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]23[/td] [td]Maarten Smit[/td] [td]2.740[/td] [td]0.603[/td] [td]0.524[/td] [td]0.520[/td] [td]0.820[/td] [td]0.273[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]24[/td] [td]Walker Welch[/td] [td]2.738[/td] [td]0.536[/td] [td]0.477[/td] [td]0.400[/td] [td]0.717[/td] [td]0.608[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]25[/td] [td]Chris Wall[/td] [td]2.735[/td] [td]0.803[/td] [td]0.380[/td] [td]0.388[/td] [td]0.588[/td] [td]0.576[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]26[/td] [td]Dmitry Kryuzban[/td] [td]2.731[/td] [td]0.615[/td] [td]0.690[/td] [td]0.517[/td] [td]0.690[/td] [td]0.220[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]27[/td] [td]Chia-Liang Tai (戴嘉良)[/td] [td]2.724[/td] [td]0.342[/td] [td]0.674[/td] [td]0.513[/td] [td]0.664[/td] [td]0.532[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]28[/td] [td]Dan Cohen[/td] [td]2.710[/td] [td]0.585[/td] [td]0.524[/td] [td]0.702[/td] [td]0.621[/td] [td]0.279[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]29[/td] [td]Oscar Roth Andersen[/td] [td]2.705[/td] [td]0.848[/td] [td]0.865[/td] [td]0.307[/td] [td]0.139[/td] [td]0.545[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]30[/td] [td]Albin Xhemajlaj[/td] [td]2.701[/td] [td]0.414[/td] [td]0.808[/td] [td]0.295[/td] [td]0.573[/td] [td]0.611[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]31[/td] [td]Rok Glinšek[/td] [td]2.684[/td] [td]0.478[/td] [td]0.427[/td] [td]0.482[/td] [td]0.515[/td] [td]0.783[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]32[/td] [td]Bence Barát[/td] [td]2.618[/td] [td]0.630[/td] [td]0.438[/td] [td]0.629[/td] [td]0.439[/td] [td]0.481[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]33[/td] [td]Jules Desjardin[/td] [td]2.608[/td] [td]0.381[/td] [td]0.955[/td] [td]0.516[/td] [td]0.431[/td] [td]0.325[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]34[/td] [td]Brian Johnson[/td] [td]2.599[/td] [td]0.463[/td] [td]0.548[/td] [td]0.559[/td] [td]0.475[/td] [td]0.554[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]35[/td] [td]Joshua Feran[/td] [td]2.585[/td] [td]0.497[/td] [td]0.525[/td] [td]0.210[/td] [td]0.796[/td] [td]0.557[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]36[/td] [td]Emanuel Rheinert[/td] [td]2.568[/td] [td]0.395[/td] [td]0.440[/td] [td]0.848[/td] [td]0.427[/td] [td]0.458[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]37[/td] [td]Justin Thomas[/td] [td]2.566[/td] [td]0.633[/td] [td]0.415[/td] [td]0.610[/td] [td]0.585[/td] [td]0.324[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]38[/td] [td]Wilhelm Kilders[/td] [td]2.562[/td] [td]0.442[/td] [td]0.412[/td] [td]0.500[/td] [td]0.609[/td] [td]0.598[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]39[/td] [td]Kim Jokinen[/td] [td]2.551[/td] [td]0.442[/td] [td]0.651[/td] [td]0.284[/td] [td]0.660[/td] [td]0.513[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]40[/td] [td]AJ Blair[/td] [td]2.551[/td] [td]0.556[/td] [td]0.382[/td] [td]0.550[/td] [td]0.637[/td] [td]0.426[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]41[/td] [td]Sébastien Auroux[/td] [td]2.550[/td] [td]0.369[/td] [td]0.557[/td] [td]0.367[/td] [td]0.767[/td] [td]0.490[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]42[/td] [td]Carlos Méndez García-Barroso[/td] [td]2.533[/td] [td]0.504[/td] [td]0.526[/td] [td]0.451[/td] [td]0.682[/td] [td]0.370[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]43[/td] [td]Paweł Kowol[/td] [td]2.523[/td] [td]0.398[/td] [td]0.626[/td] [td]0.537[/td] [td]0.538[/td] [td]0.425[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]44[/td] [td]Jorge Castillo Matas[/td] [td]2.516[/td] [td]0.584[/td] [td]0.558[/td] [td]0.418[/td] [td]0.487[/td] [td]0.469[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]45[/td] [td]Niko Ronkainen[/td] [td]2.503[/td] [td]0.350[/td] [td]0.482[/td] [td]0.235[/td] [td]0.820[/td] [td]0.615[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]46[/td] [td]Anthony Lafourcade[/td] [td]2.501[/td] [td]0.290[/td] [td]0.663[/td] [td]0.172[/td] [td]0.578[/td] [td]0.797[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]47[/td] [td]Michael Young[/td] [td]2.480[/td] [td]0.497[/td] [td]0.380[/td] [td]0.687[/td] [td]0.407[/td] [td]0.509[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]48[/td] [td]Corey Sakowski[/td] [td]2.467[/td] [td]0.502[/td] [td]0.541[/td] [td]0.421[/td] [td]0.376[/td] [td]0.626[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]49[/td] [td]Erik Akkersdijk[/td] [td]2.451[/td] [td]0.667[/td] [td]0.531[/td] [td]0.386[/td] [td]0.549[/td] [td]0.318[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]50[/td] [td]Zijia Feng (冯子甲)[/td] [td]2.444[/td] [td]0.303[/td] [td]0.373[/td] [td]0.539[/td] [td]0.814[/td] [td]0.416[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]51[/td] [td]Michał Halczuk[/td] [td]2.443[/td] [td]0.590[/td] [td]0.264[/td] [td]0.769[/td] [td]0.454[/td] [td]0.366[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]52[/td] [td]Tim Major[/td] [td]2.441[/td] [td]0.363[/td] [td]0.684[/td] [td]0.326[/td] [td]0.389[/td] [td]0.678[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]53[/td] [td]Wataru Hashimura (端村航)[/td] [td]2.435[/td] [td]0.591[/td] [td]0.408[/td] [td]0.292[/td] [td]0.623[/td] [td]0.521[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]54[/td] [td]SeungBeom Cho (조승범)[/td] [td]2.432[/td] [td]0.574[/td] [td]0.648[/td] [td]0.488[/td] [td]0.000[/td] [td]0.723[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]55[/td] [td]Matic Omulec[/td] [td]2.431[/td] [td]0.850[/td] [td]0.480[/td] [td]0.454[/td] [td]0.355[/td] [td]0.291[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]56[/td] [td]Hunor Bózsing[/td] [td]2.427[/td] [td]0.517[/td] [td]0.416[/td] [td]0.371[/td] [td]0.436[/td] [td]0.687[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]57[/td] [td]Ryan Jones[/td] [td]2.425[/td] [td]0.455[/td] [td]0.427[/td] [td]0.285[/td] [td]0.780[/td] [td]0.478[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]58[/td] [td]Callum Hales-Jepp[/td] [td]2.422[/td] [td]0.642[/td] [td]0.393[/td] [td]0.353[/td] [td]0.679[/td] [td]0.356[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]59[/td] [td]Kevin Costello III[/td] [td]2.420[/td] [td]0.674[/td] [td]0.448[/td] [td]0.324[/td] [td]0.438[/td] [td]0.536[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]60[/td] [td]Alexandra Daryl Ariawan[/td] [td]2.402[/td] [td]0.432[/td] [td]0.409[/td] [td]0.495[/td] [td]0.522[/td] [td]0.544[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]61[/td] [td]Kit Clement[/td] [td]2.399[/td] [td]0.313[/td] [td]0.368[/td] [td]0.320[/td] [td]0.823[/td] [td]0.575[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]62[/td] [td]Rui-Jun Liu (劉睿鈞)[/td] [td]2.391[/td] [td]0.410[/td] [td]0.467[/td] [td]0.759[/td] [td]0.360[/td] [td]0.394[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]63[/td] [td]Viktor Ejlertsson[/td] [td]2.385[/td] [td]0.499[/td] [td]0.437[/td] [td]0.279[/td] [td]0.576[/td] [td]0.594[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]64[/td] [td]Christopher Olson[/td] [td]2.380[/td] [td]0.423[/td] [td]0.429[/td] [td]0.372[/td] [td]0.616[/td] [td]0.539[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]65[/td] [td]Yinghao Wang (王鹰豪)[/td] [td]2.375[/td] [td]0.477[/td] [td]0.492[/td] [td]0.280[/td] [td]0.637[/td] [td]0.489[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]66[/td] [td]Henri Gerber[/td] [td]2.364[/td] [td]0.721[/td] [td]0.459[/td] [td]0.272[/td] [td]0.351[/td] [td]0.561[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]67[/td] [td]Michael Röhrer[/td] [td]2.359[/td] [td]0.642[/td] [td]0.336[/td] [td]0.547[/td] [td]0.576[/td] [td]0.259[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]68[/td] [td]Jong-Ho Jeong (정종호)[/td] [td]2.357[/td] [td]0.789[/td] [td]0.442[/td] [td]0.443[/td] [td]0.229[/td] [td]0.453[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]69[/td] [td]Mason Langenderfer[/td] [td]2.355[/td] [td]0.377[/td] [td]0.419[/td] [td]0.298[/td] [td]0.502[/td] [td]0.760[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]70[/td] [td]Dmitry Aniskin[/td] [td]2.351[/td] [td]0.643[/td] [td]0.402[/td] [td]0.323[/td] [td]0.506[/td] [td]0.478[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]71[/td] [td]Henry Savich[/td] [td]2.329[/td] [td]0.378[/td] [td]0.773[/td] [td]0.271[/td] [td]0.472[/td] [td]0.435[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]72[/td] [td]Daniel Gracia Ortiz[/td] [td]2.320[/td] [td]0.428[/td] [td]0.472[/td] [td]0.544[/td] [td]0.354[/td] [td]0.522[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]73[/td] [td]Michael Gottlieb[/td] [td]2.316[/td] [td]0.574[/td] [td]0.379[/td] [td]0.438[/td] [td]0.540[/td] [td]0.386[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]74[/td] [td]Shao-Heng Hung (洪紹恆)[/td] [td]2.306[/td] [td]0.360[/td] [td]0.465[/td] [td]0.306[/td] [td]0.680[/td] [td]0.495[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]75[/td] [td]Mats Valk[/td] [td]2.305[/td] [td]0.468[/td] [td]0.447[/td] [td]0.568[/td] [td]0.435[/td] [td]0.387[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]76[/td] [td]Logan McGraw[/td] [td]2.299[/td] [td]0.387[/td] [td]0.276[/td] [td]0.267[/td] [td]0.765[/td] [td]0.603[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]77[/td] [td]Drew Brads[/td] [td]2.298[/td] [td]0.435[/td] [td]1.000[/td] [td]0.209[/td] [td]0.000[/td] [td]0.654[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]78[/td] [td]Daniel Cano Salgado[/td] [td]2.287[/td] [td]0.573[/td] [td]0.399[/td] [td]0.307[/td] [td]0.637[/td] [td]0.371[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]79[/td] [td]Marcin Jakubowski[/td] [td]2.282[/td] [td]0.360[/td] [td]0.444[/td] [td]0.241[/td] [td]0.769[/td] [td]0.467[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]80[/td] [td]Nikita Loyko[/td] [td]2.280[/td] [td]0.368[/td] [td]0.424[/td] [td]0.321[/td] [td]0.735[/td] [td]0.432[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]81[/td] [td]Thomas Schmidt[/td] [td]2.266[/td] [td]0.340[/td] [td]0.605[/td] [td]0.229[/td] [td]0.478[/td] [td]0.614[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]82[/td] [td]Yu Sajima (佐島優)[/td] [td]2.263[/td] [td]0.514[/td] [td]0.427[/td] [td]0.256[/td] [td]0.789[/td] [td]0.278[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]83[/td] [td]Laura Ohrndorf[/td] [td]2.247[/td] [td]0.318[/td] [td]0.431[/td] [td]0.363[/td] [td]0.776[/td] [td]0.359[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]84[/td] [td]Mattia Furlan[/td] [td]2.247[/td] [td]0.573[/td] [td]0.467[/td] [td]0.000[/td] [td]0.708[/td] [td]0.498[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]85[/td] [td]Jure Gregorc[/td] [td]2.246[/td] [td]0.603[/td] [td]0.381[/td] [td]0.269[/td] [td]0.567[/td] [td]0.426[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]86[/td] [td]Sungho Hong (홍성호)[/td] [td]2.245[/td] [td]0.445[/td] [td]0.347[/td] [td]0.390[/td] [td]0.711[/td] [td]0.353[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]87[/td] [td]Filip Pasławski[/td] [td]2.238[/td] [td]0.449[/td] [td]0.637[/td] [td]0.229[/td] [td]0.196[/td] [td]0.728[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]88[/td] [td]Alex Thielemier[/td] [td]2.236[/td] [td]0.312[/td] [td]0.681[/td] [td]0.440[/td] [td]0.577[/td] [td]0.226[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]89[/td] [td]Chunyu Zhang 2 (张春雨)[/td] [td]2.229[/td] [td]0.436[/td] [td]0.536[/td] [td]0.496[/td] [td]0.361[/td] [td]0.399[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]90[/td] [td]Artem Melikian (Артем Мелікян)[/td] [td]2.220[/td] [td]0.469[/td] [td]0.524[/td] [td]0.248[/td] [td]0.351[/td] [td]0.629[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]91[/td] [td]Andy Denney[/td] [td]2.213[/td] [td]0.561[/td] [td]0.360[/td] [td]0.312[/td] [td]0.366[/td] [td]0.615[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]92[/td] [td]Mharr Justhinne Ampong[/td] [td]2.211[/td] [td]0.605[/td] [td]0.558[/td] [td]0.263[/td] [td]0.164[/td] [td]0.621[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]93[/td] [td]Hippolyte Moreau[/td] [td]2.207[/td] [td]0.563[/td] [td]0.455[/td] [td]0.236[/td] [td]0.526[/td] [td]0.428[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]94[/td] [td]Brandon Lin[/td] [td]2.203[/td] [td]0.452[/td] [td]0.324[/td] [td]0.796[/td] [td]0.360[/td] [td]0.271[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]95[/td] [td]Luke Hubbard[/td] [td]2.203[/td] [td]0.319[/td] [td]0.675[/td] [td]0.369[/td] [td]0.540[/td] [td]0.300[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]96[/td] [td]Brady Metherall[/td] [td]2.201[/td] [td]0.422[/td] [td]0.391[/td] [td]0.667[/td] [td]0.426[/td] [td]0.295[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]97[/td] [td]Nathan Azaria[/td] [td]2.198[/td] [td]0.285[/td] [td]0.307[/td] [td]0.570[/td] [td]0.771[/td] [td]0.264[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]98[/td] [td]Blake Thompson[/td] [td]2.196[/td] [td]0.424[/td] [td]0.429[/td] [td]0.451[/td] [td]0.379[/td] [td]0.513[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]99[/td] [td]Xiao Hu (胡霄)[/td] [td]2.184[/td] [td]0.431[/td] [td]0.377[/td] [td]0.401[/td] [td]0.442[/td] [td]0.533[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]100[/td] [td]Evan Brown[/td] [td]2.183[/td] [td]0.412[/td] [td]0.328[/td] [td]0.361[/td] [td]0.752[/td] [td]0.330[/td][/tr][/table]

After my last comp: 2.56/3.28 = 0.780 for pyraminx, 42.89 / 64.63 = .664 for mega, 5.94 / 11.28 = .527 for clock now.
.78+.664+.527+.546+.888 = 3.405 now. Yay, I'm getting closer to Jay.

 

[Antonie faz fan]

wuuut i am not even top 300 P

 

[kinch2002]

Rob and I briefly discussed changing the magnitude of the scoring system. Describing your scores as 0.xxx is a bit weird and cumbersome.
How about if we multiply everything by 100? It seems more obvious what it all means, and everyone will start speaking to the same level of accuracy (i.e. 2 sig figs)
The final all-round score would be an average of all the scores (sum them and divide by 18). This gives it a more comprehensible score than the current way.

Instead of
Feliks has a score of 12.2 (out of possible 18), with a score of 0.86 in 5x5, 0.21 in multibld and 1 in 3x3
It would be
Feliks has a score of 67, with a score of 86 in 5x5, 21 in multi, and 100 in 3x3.
I think the latter may be better. Any thoughts?

Further thoughts on the system generally:
- Over time, the depth in events will increase, and I think this will result in higher Sum of Ranks scores in the future. However, I think the best KinchRanks scores should not get worse, as they do not depend on the depth of the event. This is a positive imo.
- In KinchRanks, a second gained when you're near the WR is worth a lot, while a second gained when you're not near the WR is not worth so much.
In Sum of Ranks it's generally the opposite way round. You gain a lot from improving your not-so-good events a tiny bit and aren't rewarded for the super difficult improvements at the top end of the event.
Again, a big positive for KinchRanks imo.

 

[cashis]

Nice.

 

[Kit Clement]

- In KinchRanks, a second gained when you're near the WR is worth a lot, while a second gained when you're not near the WR is not worth so much.
In Sum of Ranks it's generally the opposite way round. You gain a lot from improving your not-so-good events a tiny bit and aren't rewarded for the super difficult improvements at the top end of the event.
Again, a big positive for KinchRanks imo.

I was just thinking about this myself -- and while it's great for those among the top, it makes it very difficult to distinguish middle-of-the-pack cubers, especially for events like 2x2 where the WR time is so small. Maybe some form of log transformation would be interesting to apply.

 

[not_kevin]

I really like this system - many props for formalizing your thoughts like this, Daniel!

Rob and I briefly discussed changing the magnitude of the scoring system. Describing your scores as 0.xxx is a bit weird and cumbersome.
How about if we multiply everything by 100? It seems more obvious what it all means, and everyone will start speaking to the same level of accuracy (i.e. 2 sig figs)
The final all-round score would be an average of all the scores (sum them and divide by 18). This gives it a more comprehensible score than the current way.

Instead of
Feliks has a score of 12.2 (out of possible 18), with a score of 0.86 in 5x5, 0.21 in multibld and 1 in 3x3
It would be
Feliks has a score of 67, with a score of 86 in 5x5, 21 in multi, and 100 in 3x3.
I think the latter may be better. Any thoughts?

I also like this modification, because as you said, it's easier to visualise the output. In particular, I like the averaging of the overall score, because it's easier to compare across some of the other modifications proposed so far (such as the ones limiting events (side events only, BLD only, etc.)).

 

[kinch2002]

I was just thinking about this myself -- and while it's great for those among the top, it makes it very difficult to distinguish middle-of-the-pack cubers, especially for events like 2x2 where the WR time is so small. Maybe some form of log transformation would be interesting to apply.

I don't see why 2x2 would be any different to other events. In fact, it should appear to separate people who are close in shorter events more than in longer events.
The system reflects the fact that it's easier to improve from e.g. 8.1 to 8.0 at 2x2 than it is to go from 2.1 to 2.0. That's why the top people appear to have larger separation - their skill difference is much bigger imo. It's perfectly natural for there to be a spacing out at the top of any ranking (cubing or not).
The logarithm, while interesting perhaps, would go against the basic idea of the system. Not many people can interpret logarithmic scores - pretty sure we all work best in linear.
Sorry, that was the same thing explained many times badly

 

[kinch2002]

I also like this modification, because as you said, it's easier to visualise the output. In particular, I like the averaging of the overall score, because it's easier to compare across some of the other modifications proposed so far (such as the ones limiting events (side events only, BLD only, etc.)).

Thanks - you make a good point about subset rankings.

I thought of a downside - it's not as easy to figure out how your overall score will change when you improve at something.
But I still think I'll change it anyway.

ANOTHER IDEA:
I mentioned that KinchRanks uses FM single and 3bld Single because overall they reflect abilities better than their respective Means still. However, I think we can improve on this by using the better score of a person's Single and Mean. Given that in the ideal world we'd use Means for these events, I think a good Mean should be rewarded with the option to use it, as it is a truer reflection of ability.
In the future I'd like to fully shift to Means only, but that is still over a year away imo.

 

[JustinTimeCuber]

Someone should make a program for this so you can tell what your score is without waiting for it to load (it can take FOREVER)

 

[Keroma12]

I like this. Is it possible for this to be on the WCA page along with sum of ranks? If not, it would be really nice if it were hosted on the web somewhere. I would also like to be able to see ranks within each country (with respect to NRs instead of WRs).

Edit: http://hem.bredband.net/_zlv_/rubiks/stats/kinch_ranks.html (thanks Kit) (still waiting on by country though!)

 

[Kit Clement]

I don't see why 2x2 would be any different to other events. In fact, it should appear to separate people who are close in shorter events more than in longer events.
The system reflects the fact that it's easier to improve from e.g. 8.1 to 8.0 at 2x2 than it is to go from 2.1 to 2.0. That's why the top people appear to have larger separation - their skill difference is much bigger imo. It's perfectly natural for there to be a spacing out at the top of any ranking (cubing or not).
The logarithm, while interesting perhaps, would go against the basic idea of the system. Not many people can interpret logarithmic scores - pretty sure we all work best in linear.
Sorry, that was the same thing explained many times badly

Consider this simple example -- to get a 50% score in 2x2, you need to have a 3.20 average. That takes quite a bit of skill, and likely takes knowing some EG, at the very least CLL. To get the same score in 5x5, you need to have a 1:48.40 average. That's a considerably easier level to attain -- and it's just because the numerator for 2x2 is so small. It's even sillier for FMC -- getting that score takes a solve of 40, or a mean of 50, which someone can do having never tried an FMC attempt, assuming basic 3x3 knowledge.

I do agree though -- It is rather desirable that the score function for an event is convex, but I'm just arguing that it may be a bit too convex. I do see the appeal for ease of interpretability though, and I'm starting to see how applying logs is just getting arbitrary.

 

[tseitsei]

ANOTHER IDEA:
I mentioned that KinchRanks uses FM single and 3bld Single because overall they reflect abilities better than their respective Means still. However, I think we can improve on this by using the better score of a person's Single and Mean. Given that in the ideal world we'd use Means for these events, I think a good Mean should be rewarded with the option to use it, as it is a truer reflection of ability.
In the future I'd like to fully shift to Means only, but that is still over a year away imo.

3bld mean really just means how safely you want to play it... if I get "good enough" single on first solve then I will rush the remaining two attempts probably leading to DNF. But if I get reasonably bad times on 1st and 2nd attempts I'll probably just attempt to get asome kind of a good time without rushing it on the final attempt. After all winner is decided by the single and not mo3..

So mo3 3bld doesnt reqlly represent skill. So pls don't use that in your ranks...

 

[not_kevin]

3bld mean really just means how safely you want to play it... if I get "good enough" single on first solve then I will rush the remaining two attempts probably leading to DNF. But if I get reasonably bad times on 1st and 2nd attempts I'll probably just attempt to get asome kind of a good time without rushing it on the final attempt. After all winner is decided by the single and not mo3..

So mo3 3bld doesnt reqlly represent skill. So pls don't use that in your ranks...

Yeah, I kinda agree with this - in particular, as long as competitions continue to use bo3 instead of mo3 for BLD, I don't think we should switch to using it, because the current times aren't optimized for it.

I think that we can eventually switch to FMC means, 'tho, since it's getting increasingly popular to hold mo3 competitions rather than best-of competitions.

 

[Genius4Jesus]

Edit: http://hem.bredband.net/_zlv_/rubiks/stats/kinch_ranks.html (thanks Kit) (still waiting on by country though!)

Cool site. I'm 181 for Kinch-rankings as opposed to 92 for normal sum of single ranks.

Also, could we have average Kinch-rankings?

 

[Tim Major]

KinchRank 261 vs 181 and 251 for single and average ranks.

Whose rank (within the top 300, or whatever...) increased the most? Decreased the most?

 

[obelisk477]

Sorry if I missed this, but why wouldn't you divide everyone's total score by the first place holder's total score (and then multiply by 100, if you wanted it to look nicer)? So its more obvious where you are and who is at the top. So Feliks would score 100, Yu Nakajima 99.7, etc.

EDIT: I of course mean this for the sum of the kinch ranks only, and not the individual events themselves

 

[Tim Major]

Sorry if I missed this, but why wouldn't you divide everyone's total score by the first place holder's total score (and then multiply by 100, if you wanted it to look nicer)? So its more obvious where you are and who is at the top. So Feliks would score 100, Yu Nakajima 99.7, etc.

This should tighten up the graph a lot, so if you've missed something I've missed something too

 

[kinch2002]

3bld mean really just means how safely you want to play it... if I get "good enough" single on first solve then I will rush the remaining two attempts probably leading to DNF. But if I get reasonably bad times on 1st and 2nd attempts I'll probably just attempt to get asome kind of a good time without rushing it on the final attempt. After all winner is decided by the single and not mo3..

So mo3 3bld doesnt reqlly represent skill. So pls don't use that in your ranks...

Yeah, I kinda agree with this - in particular, as long as competitions continue to use bo3 instead of mo3 for BLD, I don't think we should switch to using it, because the current times aren't optimized for it.

I think that we can eventually switch to FMC means, 'tho, since it's getting increasingly popular to hold mo3 competitions rather than best-of competitions.

Thanks for the input. I've changed it for now so that you use your average if it gives you a better score than your single - I think that's still fair right? Will help those who haven't had a lucky single yet but have demonstrated their skill with an average.

Cool site. I'm 181 for Kinch-rankings as opposed to 92 for normal sum of single ranks.
Also, could we have average Kinch-rankings?

KinchRanks uses mostly averages already, apart from 4bld, 5bld, multibld. 3bld and 3fm uses whichever is better for you.

Sorry if I missed this, but why wouldn't you divide everyone's total score by the first place holder's total score (and then multiply by 100, if you wanted it to look nicer)? So its more obvious where you are and who is at the top. So Feliks would score 100, Yu Nakajima 99.7, etc.

EDIT: I of course mean this for the sum of the kinch ranks only, and not the individual events themselves

The reasons not to do this are
- The final score would no longer be an objective measure of how good you are overall
- Your final score would depend on the top person's overall score, which means that you can't track your own improvement properly.

 

[not_kevin]

Thanks for the update on the main post - cool to see how the countries compare to each other. All the more confirmation that Poland is a huge cubing powerhouse - even the huge populations and competitive depth of the United States and China can't overcome Polish talent

Mostly as a personal request (getting something like this set up would take quite a few more resources, I'd imagine), but I'd love to see how people compare within their regions (like how sum of ranks is set up on the WCA site). We now know how strong the regions are compared to each other - but how strong am I within my region? I can calculate my own regional KinchRanks without too much difficulty (not including the 3bld and 3fm mean change, my score is 45.38 in NA), but how does that rank against the rest of NA?

 

[Iggy]

Wat I'm 13th now, sub Jay O.o