So I’m thinking that we need to come up with a concrete set of rules that stays consistent between all of our threads. I think that there is a little bit of a difference between all of them right now.
(Mods, please don't move this thread) "Race to Sub-X" threads are unofficial competitions held on the forums. The point is for you set a goal to try to beat for a specific puzzle, and if you surpass your goal for three consecutive rounds(a new round is held every week, format is usually Ao12)...
www.speedsolving.com
Once a concrete rule set is added I'll add it there
So I’m thinking that we need to come up with a concrete set of rules that stays consistent between all of our threads. I think that there is a little bit of a difference between all of them right now.
I like this idea, I am up for changing my thread as agreed here. Not that you asked, but just to clarify for everyone here, I currently run the OH thread and am happy to take on more, but preferably not skewb lol.
I personally think that those events could be 25, and megaminx, 6x6, and 7x7 (because those are the events the WCA deems most challenging), should only have 5. I think that the 2x2, pyra, and skewb people need to have the same number, and the mega, 6x6, and 7x7 people have to have the same number.
EDIT: Maybe 5x5 should be with mega, 6, and 7, but I'm not sure. @Ordway Persyn runs 5-7, so I guess he can decide if he wants to include 5x5.
I personally think that those events could be 25, and megaminx, 6x6, and 7x7 (because those are the events the WCA deems most challenging), should only have 5. I think that the 2x2, pyra, and skewb people need to have the same number, and the mega, 6x6, and 7x7 people have to have the same number.
EDIT: Maybe 5x5 should be with mega, 6, and 7, but I'm not sure. @Ordway Persyn runs 5-7, so I guess he can decide if he wants to include 5x5.
I personally think that more than 12 is a bit much, just because ao12 and ao5 are pretty much the most common and competed for averages.
As for less, I agree that 6x6 and 7x7 should be ao5, and megaminx or 5x5 could go either way (The WCA only allows misscrambles on megaminx because it is more common to misscramble, not because it is harder). Also, 4BLD, 5BLD, and MBLD (We dont have them all yet but if we ever do) should maybe be best of 3 attempts? And maybe we make it OK to only do one attempt if you dont feel like doing 3 5BLD attempts. 3BLD could also follow a similar format, but maybe you have 5 attempts?
I like what @Ciparo is doing with the Graudates and the Tryhards section in his results, maybe we set a format of how organizers should publish results?
Honestly mega and 5x5 strike a weird in-between in terms of length. 5 seems like too little but 12 seems like too much. However if we are for sure having mega be 5 solves then 5x5 basically has to be 5 solves as well for consistency's sake, I mean it is technically a longer event. Also this is just my opinion, but I don't like being called a tryhard just cause I haven't graduated yet.
Honestly mega and 5x5 strike a weird in-between in terms of length. 5 seems like too little but 12 seems like too much. However if we are for sure having mega be 5 solves then 5x5 basically has to be 5 solves as well for consistency's sake, I mean it is technically a longer event. Also this is just my opinion, but I don't like being called a tryhard just cause I haven't graduated yet.
Another thing, for 2-5 relay (Micah runs it) I think it should be ao5 instead of mo3 since 6 and 7 are ao5. I average 2:15 on 6x6 and 2:10 on 2-5, so it makes sense.
I agree that 5 and mega should be the same, and that 2-5 should be ao5. Like this post if you want 5x5 and mega to be ao12, and a love reaction if you want them to be ao5...
...and like this post if you want 2-5 to be ao5, and a love if you want it to be mo3.
Most of these are pretty straightforward, but I'd like to explain a couple:
MBLD & FMC - We could potentially do Bo1 for both, since each attempt takes an hour and 3 hours is a looong time to spend on a Sub-X thread every week. Graham practices MBLD an insane amount and last I heard he'll do no more than 5 attempts a week. I definitely think it should become the standard to post your 1st result then edit the rest in by the end of the week if it's Bo3/Mo3
3BLD - This is a really weird proposition, but when Kit and Andrew were talking about new 3BLD result methods, I really liked the ideas. I especially like this for Race to Sub-X, since it's based on improving your global average. I feel that Bo3 is based a lot on luck and less your average, yet Mo3 or Ao5 is too harsh because it requires so high consistency. So I like MoB2o4: Mean of Best 2 of 4. You do 4 solves, take the best 2 results, and take the mean of those. I know this is weird, but I think it makes it so that your result is based on your average, but doesn't require so good consistency that you have to slow down
Entry Format
I agree there should be a standard format, and I like Ben's idea:
I also like Ciparo's format. Instead of making a new post for each round's results, maybe we could just start new threads for each race, that way we can just edit the post like Ciparo does?
General Rules
A list of some of the rules I think there should be:
Use the scrambles provided for your solves, then enter your results with the official format
If you reach your goal 3 rounds in a row, you graduate from that time
If you miss your goal for a round, then your goal goes from X/3 to 0/3, as the 3 rounds you complete your goal in must be consecutive
If you skip a week(don't do the scrambles), then your goal's completions does not reset(i.e: if you were 2/3, skipped a week, then beat your goal next week, then you are at 3/3)
Random Proposition That's Probably Too Elaborate (But I Mean I'm Talking To The People Who Did The Whole Cult Thing So You Never Know)
What if we create like a board of directors of everyone who runs one of the Sub-X threads, and if we want to change any of the official rules then we have to vote on it? Then if someone wants to make a new Sub-X thread they have to propose it to the board and they have to decide whether or not it should be a thing(for example, they may say no to 12x12 WF because they don't think anyone will do it and it will just die). And if someone has to step down(like me stepping down from Pyraminx and no one immediately volunteering to take over), then the board can make a post saying that there's no one running Pyra anymore and someone could take it over. This would help threads from dying, because there would be an organization to make sure it never dies
I'll wait until tomorrow, and I'll look at the results of the mini-polls. Then, I'll write up the final rules, and if there are any objections, we can change something.
I run the megaminx thread and I strongly believe it should be ao12. An ao5 is too short and relies too much on luck imo. For speedsolving events at least, the averages should be longer than the number of official solves because the whole point is measuring improving global averages, not keeping competitions to a reasonable length. Overall, I agree with what @ProStar posted above about formats, although I wouldn't object to making 3BLD a less unusual format.
As for the Ciparo format of editing the original post rather than making a new one, I think I'm slightly against that because the way we have it now shows history better. For example, I've been stuck on sub-38 for megaminx for months now and I'd like that to be recognized, rather than just being under the "graduated" section once I graduate, just like someone who beat their goal on the first three weeks.
