Eric79
Member
Future competitions and lucky scrambles or "Should luck be legit?"
This thread is NOT about 2x2x2 in specific or about the recent set 2x2x2 records in specific, but about lucky scrambles in general (mainly for puzzles like 2x2, Pyraminx, Clock,...). Mentioning the 2x2x2 records is only meant for leading you into the topic!
(Preface: ) At the Trentin Open 2011 last weekend a new world record for 2x2 was set (4 move solve, 0.69s). But not only that, also two more competitors, all averaging from 4.xx-5.xx seconds solved the 2x2x2 in less than a second and even faster than the former WR (0.96s) held by three people at once for a long time. So now those three participants from the Trentin Open 2011 are ranked places 1-3 in the WCA rankings for single 2x2 solves which led to new discussions regurding lucky scrambles.
(Main Topic: ) As the topic of "lucky scrambles" recently and every now and then before already arose here at speedsolving, at other forums as well as in cube related groups and chats elsewere (e.g. on Facebook) I thought about it for a while if I really should make this new thread and get the trolling or if the people actually care and are open minded for a productive discussion regarding lucky scrambles. As you see, I chose to start it...
This should not be about discrediting those people who got records by being lucky with scrambles, I just want to ask you to talk about the pros and cons, share your thinking and ideas reagarding what you think about lucky scrambles - simple "BS" and similar crappy comments don't help anyone. At least not the developing of cubing:
Should lucky scrambles (few move solutions) not be used in future competitions?
(or in other words: should luck be excluded from cubing competitions as much as possible for more compareable results?)
Here is something I want to start with - not necessarily my opinion, surely not planned right down to the last detail... just some thoughts hypothetical which I had:
In sports as well as in other disciplines there usually is no luck included. It's all on the competitors ability or on how good the competitors interact with/against each other. In sports it is all on how good competitors are trained and what their body is capable of or how good they play together as a team, in "mental" competitions like chess, it is on how good you attack and defend your king. In short: It is all about doing something better than someone else can.
In cubing it is quite different: There are different scrambles for every competition and every round, it's just part of it that scrambles have to be different every time to avoid cheating by previous training of a specific scramble. But thus luck gets involved. The quesiton of fairness and comparability rises as is the case in sports, where all that counts is proficiency, and lucky solves are like doping for cubers one could say.
Ok, people may get lucky and be able to solve their twisty puzzly with only few moves, while others don't recognize the easy solve and need longer to solve it. So of course getting good times with lucky scrambles also involves some abilities, but for the most part it's probably the easy scramble.
So, what could be done regarding "lucky" scrambles?
1) A limit could be set for the fewest move solution "legit" for each puzzle
2) All scrambles used in competition could be checked for the fewest move solution using software like e.g. cube explorer so even one who is not good enough to "see" the easy solution can check. (Or - to make it easier and not as time consuming - use a scrambler which excludes scrambles not nard enough.)
What about the records/rankings set so far?
Well, if there was a major change in how things as legit scramblings are done, there is only one solution:
1) Rules have to be changed to make all this possible
2) All previous set records are listed as "outdated", "pre 'lucky scramble rule'", or something similar and everything starts over from the beginning again. (Those people actually good enough get there records back anyway...)
Who does take care and eventually decides if a scramble is legit?
1) Well, as said before, software could be used but also
2) WCA delegates should not compete in a competition where they act as delegates at the same time - they only should be the controllers of everything happening at the competition and also have an eye on the judges
3) Also judges and organizers should not compete in a competition where they are involved
2) and 3) mainly should avoid cheating and things as happened at other competitions before
Why all this?
Well, we call it cubing "competitions". Doesn't that imply the real competition should be to be as fast as possible with what we do instead of "just" getting an easy scramble which allowes to have great times even if we are not as good in general at the single event? Achievements should be more compareable and not the outcome of luck.
This thread is NOT about 2x2x2 in specific or about the recent set 2x2x2 records in specific, but about lucky scrambles in general (mainly for puzzles like 2x2, Pyraminx, Clock,...). Mentioning the 2x2x2 records is only meant for leading you into the topic!
(Preface: ) At the Trentin Open 2011 last weekend a new world record for 2x2 was set (4 move solve, 0.69s). But not only that, also two more competitors, all averaging from 4.xx-5.xx seconds solved the 2x2x2 in less than a second and even faster than the former WR (0.96s) held by three people at once for a long time. So now those three participants from the Trentin Open 2011 are ranked places 1-3 in the WCA rankings for single 2x2 solves which led to new discussions regurding lucky scrambles.
(Main Topic: ) As the topic of "lucky scrambles" recently and every now and then before already arose here at speedsolving, at other forums as well as in cube related groups and chats elsewere (e.g. on Facebook) I thought about it for a while if I really should make this new thread and get the trolling or if the people actually care and are open minded for a productive discussion regarding lucky scrambles. As you see, I chose to start it...
This should not be about discrediting those people who got records by being lucky with scrambles, I just want to ask you to talk about the pros and cons, share your thinking and ideas reagarding what you think about lucky scrambles - simple "BS" and similar crappy comments don't help anyone. At least not the developing of cubing:
Should lucky scrambles (few move solutions) not be used in future competitions?
(or in other words: should luck be excluded from cubing competitions as much as possible for more compareable results?)
Here is something I want to start with - not necessarily my opinion, surely not planned right down to the last detail... just some thoughts hypothetical which I had:
In sports as well as in other disciplines there usually is no luck included. It's all on the competitors ability or on how good the competitors interact with/against each other. In sports it is all on how good competitors are trained and what their body is capable of or how good they play together as a team, in "mental" competitions like chess, it is on how good you attack and defend your king. In short: It is all about doing something better than someone else can.
In cubing it is quite different: There are different scrambles for every competition and every round, it's just part of it that scrambles have to be different every time to avoid cheating by previous training of a specific scramble. But thus luck gets involved. The quesiton of fairness and comparability rises as is the case in sports, where all that counts is proficiency, and lucky solves are like doping for cubers one could say.
Ok, people may get lucky and be able to solve their twisty puzzly with only few moves, while others don't recognize the easy solve and need longer to solve it. So of course getting good times with lucky scrambles also involves some abilities, but for the most part it's probably the easy scramble.
So, what could be done regarding "lucky" scrambles?
1) A limit could be set for the fewest move solution "legit" for each puzzle
2) All scrambles used in competition could be checked for the fewest move solution using software like e.g. cube explorer so even one who is not good enough to "see" the easy solution can check. (Or - to make it easier and not as time consuming - use a scrambler which excludes scrambles not nard enough.)
What about the records/rankings set so far?
Well, if there was a major change in how things as legit scramblings are done, there is only one solution:
1) Rules have to be changed to make all this possible
2) All previous set records are listed as "outdated", "pre 'lucky scramble rule'", or something similar and everything starts over from the beginning again. (Those people actually good enough get there records back anyway...)
Who does take care and eventually decides if a scramble is legit?
1) Well, as said before, software could be used but also
2) WCA delegates should not compete in a competition where they act as delegates at the same time - they only should be the controllers of everything happening at the competition and also have an eye on the judges
3) Also judges and organizers should not compete in a competition where they are involved
2) and 3) mainly should avoid cheating and things as happened at other competitions before
Why all this?
Well, we call it cubing "competitions". Doesn't that imply the real competition should be to be as fast as possible with what we do instead of "just" getting an easy scramble which allowes to have great times even if we are not as good in general at the single event? Achievements should be more compareable and not the outcome of luck.
Last edited: