Remove 2x2 from official event

[ProStar]

Too many people have worked really hard memorizing probably near a thousand algorithms. I do not believe that should be put to waste.

Most people know EG and that's it, which is <150. Still a lot, but not close to a thousand. There are some people though who have learned a ridiculous amount of algs

 

[napstablook22]

2x2 is one of the simpler events.it focuses a lot on efficiency. I don’t see any reason to get rid of it. Solving it is fun and it is easier for beginners. Ya know, the wca shouldn’t be limited to complex puzzles. Plus, if y’all wanna remove 2x2, I got two things to say to y’all . 1. The hell is wrong with you. And 2. Skewb and pyraminx are waaaaaaay easier than 2x2 but no one wants to get rid of those.And clock doesn’t even have algs?(I think) . So why y’all being cruel to 2x2. The hardware is good and it is easy to solve but learning algs can get you way above. The mgc 2x2 is around 10$ , which ain’t expensive much. And that is really good. So, no reason to get rid of 2x2

 

[ProStar]

2x2 is one of the simpler events.it focuses a lot on efficiency. I don’t see any reason to get rid of it. Solving it is fun and it is easier for beginners. Ya know, the wca shouldn’t be limited to complex puzzles. Plus, if y’all wanna remove 2x2, I got two things to say to y’all . 1. The hell is wrong with you. And 2. Skewb and pyraminx are waaaaaaay easier than 2x2 but no one wants to get rid of those.And clock doesn’t even have algs?(I think) . So why y’all being cruel to 2x2. The hardware is good and it is easy to solve but learning algs can get you way above. The mgc 2x2 is around 10$ , which ain’t expensive much. And that is really good. So, no reason to get rid of 2x2

Literally 1 guy wants 2x2 removed, I don't know why you are including everyone

 

[carcass]

Most people know EG and that's it, which is <150. Still a lot, but not close to a thousand. There are some people though who have learned a ridiculous amount of algs

I mean all the other sets like cll, eg 2, leg, tcll -, tcll +, and the new LS method by will callan. But you probably are still right, not really quite a thousand, lol

 

[Etotheipi]

And clock doesn’t even have algs?(I think) .

Is there something wrong with an event not having algs? Im confused why you brought this up.

 

[Owen Morrison]

Literally 1 guy wants 2x2 removed, I don't know why you are including everyone

I mean, 13 people voted for it to be removed.

 

[Matt11111]

4 people voted yes and no on this poll

Not sure what to do with this information

 

[Ayce]

My best event is clock so I may be slightly biased

 

[brododragon]

Was does the poll close at such a random time?

 

[KingCanyon]

Was does the poll close at such a random time?

It is the devil's hour on pi day. This is no random hour, this is the hour for an evil mathematical genius (2x2 solvers).

 

[brododragon]

It is the devil's hour on pi day. This is no random hour, this is the hour for an evil mathematical genius (2x2 solvers).

Hate to burst your bubble, but everyone's timezone it's different.

 

[dodecicosidodecahedron]

This, but for every event other than MBLD.

3x3 Single is one of the most iconic, if not the most iconic world record to have in cubing.

 

[xyzzy]

3x3 Single is one of the most iconic, if not the most iconic world record to have in cubing.

Yes, and it shouldn't be. It's a no-brainer that being good (which shows you've put in work) is more praiseworthy than being lucky (which doesn't require work); while getting a record single still requires some skill, it also has an unnecessarily large component of luck.

To elaborate: What do I mean by "unnecessarily large" here? The fact that we also track average records, which are less luck-influenced. Just for the sake of argument, suppose single records were 95% skill + 5% luck and average records were 99% skill + 1% luck (*); even if 5% already seems like a small proportion, the fact is that we could reduce it even further to 1%. Hell, for most events, we don't even rank the results by best single for competition placement purposes.

(Just to be clear, I'm not saying this out of prejudice against Yusheng or out of fanboyism over Feliks.)

(*) I have no idea how accurate or inaccurate this is; this statement by itself makes no sense without a sensible way of quantifying the split between "skill-based" and "luck-based", and I have never seen any reasonable proposal of such before, just vague accusations that puzzles like 222 and skewb are too "luck-based".

 

[kubesolver]

Yes, and it shouldn't be.

Then simply personally stop caring about this record.

Maybe cubing should go in dirtection like ski-jumping where the "longest-jump" records are more curiosity stats rather than accepted measure of acoomplishment. What matters is world cup, world championships and olympics.

If we want to shift the attention of public from single records we should stop putting attention to those records ourselves. Maybe the solution is to stop showing personal records as the most prominent stat on the WCA website but instead create some kind of ELO rating based on the competition results. And put focus on doing better than others in competitions rather than making one good single or average.

 

[Cuberstache]

Then simply personally stop caring about this record.

Maybe cubing should go in dirtection like ski-jumping where the "longest-jump" records are more curiosity stats rather than accepted measure of acoomplishment. What matters is world cup, world championships and olympics.

If we want to shift the attention of public from single records we should stop putting attention to those records ourselves. Maybe the solution is to stop showing personal records as the most prominent stat on the WCA website but instead create some kind of ELO rating based on the competition results. And put focus on doing better than others in competitions rather than making one good single or average.

I think the fact that you compete against yourself is one of the things that makes cubing interesting. I think if it were based more on competition rankings, it would be much more unfriendly to new competitors. The way it is now, people can be ecstatic over a 29-second solve because it's their PR; they beat themselves and finally got that sub-30. I personally really enjoy that aspect of cubing. If PRs were replaced by some sort of competition ranking, I would stop practicing and competing in many events, probably only keeping 3x3, megaminx, and 3BLD. It works for other sports, but cubing should stay the way it is in terms of PRs vs competition results.