World Record Predictions for Year 2025

[CarterK]

You know, why not

3x3 - 3.16/4.46
2x2 - .36/1.03
4x4 - 16.94/19.11
5x5 - 30.96/35.67 (yau5)
6x6 - 1:08.64/1:12.90
7x7 - 1:47.89/1:55.43
3BLD - 14.56/16.89
FMC - 18/20.33
OH - 5.66/8.97
Feet - 15.89/18.98
Clock - 2.98/3.99
Mega - 26.78/29.28
Pyra - 1.00/1.89
Skewb - .89/1.78
Sq-1 - 4.01/6.89
4BLD - 1:09.39
5BLD - 2:35.45
MBLD - 59/60 59:58

It will be exciting to see how wrong I am, although I'm not quite sure which direction yet. Tried to make them look crazy to us now.

I had a discussion with Stanley about how far bigBLD could go (with major TPS) and this is getting pretty close to it.

 

[Mastermind2368]

There's already a method called NoFlip where I think you can do this, but not that many people use it I think.

That method can work, but isn't as good as normal No-flip. With his method, you memo numbers and stuff and cancel them into corners. With that corner planing is harder. With the No-flip I'm talking about is just like doing normal clock, but solving one cross from the back. Also I'm thinking of maybe just doing piece matching instead of cross corners for the second side.

 

[Ordway Persyn]

2x2 - 0.37/1.03
3x3 - 3.70/4.89
4x4 - 13.95/18.62
5x5 - 29.88/33.83
6x6 - 1:01.52/1:10.63
7x7 - 1:34.54/1:43.19
OH - 6.05/8.92
3BLD - 11.11/15.65
FMC - 18/20.33
Feet - 15.10/18.73
Mega - 20.03/24.46
Pyra - 1.04/1.75
Skewb - 1.01/1.82
SQ-1 - 4.18/6.25
4BLD - 1:03.88
5BLD - 2:20.49
MBLD - 58/61 (60:02)

I'm going to make this my only prediction for this thread

 

[Prabal Baishya]

What i

here's mine: (single, average)
2x2: 0.35, 0.88
3x3: 3.32, 4.75
4x4: 16.97, 18.76
5x5: 32.56, 39.64
6x6: 59.67, 1:05.16
7x7: 1:35.51, 1:49.48
3x3 BLD: 14.98, 18.96
3x3 FMC: 17, 21.33
3x3 OH: 5.26, 7.98
3x3 WF: 16.98, 19.98
Clock: 3.00 (lol), 3.99
Megaminx: 26.16, 29.87
Pyraminx: 0.61, 1.31
Skewb: 0.79, 1.51
Square-one: 4.1, 7.02
4x4 BLD: 59.87
5x5 BLD: 2:59.61
3x3 Multi BLD: 55/55

This will probably be too slow

What is 3x3 WF?

 

[Sajwo]

Megaminx: 26.16, 29.87

This may happen even this year

 

[cuber314159]

What i

What is 3x3 WF?

3x3 with feet

 

[applezfall]

2x2:0.32 ;0.89
3x3:2.99;4.32
4x4:15.98;18.93
5x5:29.98;34.31
pyra:0.79;1.58
skewb:0.98;1.47
squan:3.98;5.87
megaminx:21.98;27.34
rest idc

 

[One Wheel]

2025 isn't that far away. Official records for 2030 instead:
2x2: 0.31, 0.97
3x3: 3.59, 4.24
4x4: 16.68, 17.59
5x5: 29.45, 36.22
6x6: 59.74, 1:02.63
7x7: 1:45.88, 1:59.31
3BLD: 12.91, 16.52
3x3 FMC: 16, 19.33
3x3 OH: 5.12, 7.04
3x3 w/feet: 12.40, 14.67
Clock: no longer an official event
Megaminx: 23.24, 27.11
Pyraminx: no longer an official event
Skewb: no longer an official event
Square-1: 3.73, 5.04
4BLD: 1:02.75
5BLD: 2:59.86
Gigaminx: 3:59.86, 4:04.22
MBLD: 62/63 59:58
6BLD: 6:56.82
Megaminx BLD: 5:13.02

 

[abunickabhi]

3x3 - 3.50(Roux)/4.25(Roux)
2x2 - 0.47/0.98
4x4 - 17.50/19.60
5x5 - 29.00/33.66
6x6 - 1:04.00/1:12.00 (ao5)
7x7 - 1:40.00/1:45.00 (ao5)
3BLD - 8.50/12.00
FMC - 17/19
OH - 5.55/7.50
Feet - 13.00/15.00
Mega - 20.99/24.50
4BLD - 58.00
5BLD - 1:57.00
MBLD - 72/75 in 1:00.00

 

[CarterK]

Pyraminx: no longer an official event
Skewb: no longer an official event

wait what

 

[One Wheel]

wait what

I forgot to mention that I predict that out of the 3 events I said would not be official events, 1 will still be an official event. I just don't know which one.

 

[CarterK]

I forgot to mention that I predict that out of the 3 events I said would not be official events, 1 will still be an official event. I just don't know which one.

But why would those events be taken out? I'm just kinda curious on your perspective to them.

 

[One Wheel]

But why would those events be taken out? I'm just kinda curious on your perspective to them.

Clock and pyraminx, particularly, just seem like pretty trivial puzzles to me. The difference between world class and merely competent has more to do with dexterity than any actual puzzle solving ability. Skewb, at least the way I know to solve it, is highly algorithmic, which amounts to much the same thing. The same could be said of 2x2, but I suspect that's a little too deeply ingrained to go anywhere.

 

[Hazel]

2025 isn't that far away. Official records for 2030 instead:
2x2: 0.31, 0.97
3x3: 3.59, 4.24
4x4: 16.68, 17.59
5x5: 29.45, 36.22
6x6: 59.74, 1:02.63
7x7: 1:45.88, 1:59.31
3BLD: 12.91, 16.52
3x3 FMC: 16, 19.33
3x3 OH: 5.12, 7.04
3x3 w/feet: 12.40, 14.67
Clock: no longer an official event
Megaminx: 23.24, 27.11
Pyraminx: no longer an official event
Skewb: no longer an official event
Square-1: 3.73, 5.04
4BLD: 1:02.75
5BLD: 2:59.86
Gigaminx: 3:59.86, 4:04.22
MBLD: 62/63 59:58
6BLD: 6:56.82
Megaminx BLD: 5:13.02

I personally think that 4x4, 5x5, 6x6, 7x7, and OH will be faster than you put here, we've already seen a mid/high 4 from Max in OH with a misscramble, and 2030 is a long ways away. Just look at the first few predictions on the 2020 thread, they were guessing a sub-8/9 3x3 average and now it's sub-6.

 

[Bertus]

I am giving a prediction on only 3x3
Single: 3.306
Avg: 3.724

But why this specific. Well, that is because with some unreliable calculations, taking the average time drop of the single and average wr since 2012, we get-
Single -.214
avg -.346

I took this information into excel and subtracted that from the current wr. Then I took that time and subtracted again. Assuming a wr is broken at least yearly. By 2025 we will have 3.306single and 3.724avg.

So according to this unreliable data that probably is wrong, here is the timeline
(year - single wr - average wr)
19 4.59 5.8
20 4.376 5.454
21 4.162 5.108
22 3.948 4.762
23 3.734 4.416
24 3.52 4.07
25 3.306 3.724
26 3.092 3.378
27 2.878 3.032
28 2.664 2.686
29 2.45 2.34
30 2.236 1.994
31 2.022 1.648
32 1.808 1.302
33 1.594 0.956
34 1.38 0.61
35 1.166 0.264
36 0.952 -0.082
37 0.738 -0.428
38 0.524 -0.774
39 0.31 -1.12
40 0.096 -1.466
41 -0.118 -1.812
42 -0.332 -2.158
43 -0.546 -2.504
44 -0.76 -2.85
45 -0.974 -3.196
46 -1.188 -3.542
47 -1.402 -3.888
48 -1.616 -4.234
49 -1.83 -4.58
50 -2.044 -4.926

I think predicting the WRs by looking at current improvement is a very good ideal, but you nee to consider that this development is not a linear growth. It will ne er fall below zero. But nevertheless it's an interesting idea that will be quite accurate if there is no special new thing developed or a huge jump in any event.

 

[turtwig]

Clock and pyraminx, particularly, just seem like pretty trivial puzzles to me. The difference between world class and merely competent has more to do with dexterity than any actual puzzle solving ability. Skewb, at least the way I know to solve it, is highly algorithmic, which amounts to much the same thing. The same could be said of 2x2, but I suspect that's a little too deeply ingrained to go anywhere.

I don't see why they will be removed just for being "easy". Maybe clock will be removed, although even that I find unlikely. Even if the solving methods are different from other larger puzzles, I see no reason to remove it and disappoint everyone that was good at the event. Besides, if being highly algorithmic was a measure, then wouldn't Square-1 also count? And BLD events are almost all about algorithms during execution, and I wouldn't consider memorization "puzzle solving ability" in the traditional sense. We also have one-handed and with feet, which are mostly to measure one's ability to turn the puzzle with a handicap.

 

[CarterK]

Clock and pyraminx, particularly, just seem like pretty trivial puzzles to me. The difference between world class and merely competent has more to do with dexterity than any actual puzzle solving ability. Skewb, at least the way I know to solve it, is highly algorithmic, which amounts to much the same thing. The same could be said of 2x2, but I suspect that's a little too deeply ingrained to go anywhere.

There is actually much more to it than algs (for skewb at least). You have to decide which layer is the best, see if you can one look it, find what angle to do the layer, etc.

 

[One Wheel]

I don't see why they will be removed just for being "easy". Maybe clock will be removed, although even that I find unlikely. Even if the solving methods are different from other larger puzzles, I see no reason to remove it and disappoint everyone that was good at the event. Besides, if being highly algorithmic was a measure, then wouldn't Square-1 also count? And BLD events are almost all about algorithms during execution, and I wouldn't consider memorization "puzzle solving ability" in the traditional sense. We also have one-handed and with feet, which are mostly to measure one's ability to turn the puzzle with a handicap.

OH and Feet are interesting from a puzzle standpoint because they reward move efficiency. IMO OH is similar enough to 2H that it's not really all that interesting, but I digress.

BLD execution is mostly algs, but tracing and memo are very much puzzle solving, albeit in a slightly different form than standard speedsolving.

Regarding trivial/easy/algorithmic, I don't know anything for sure other than that I don't particularly enjoy those puzzles. It's probably just as well that I'm not making the call on that. Magic was eliminated because it was trivial to the point of not being a real puzzle, as I understand it. If people are routinely one-looking solves then the recorded time is not really the time to solve the puzzle but the time it takes to execute a solution. It would be basically the same as only timing execution for blind solves. It obviously takes skill and practice to one-look a solve, but if more than a few people can do it the competition aspect becomes trivial.

 

[JustAnotherGenericCuber]

Magic was literally just dexterity, it had the same solution every time

 

[Mike Hughey]

Actually the primary reason Magic was removed was that it was too hard to judge consistently.