Should stickerless cubes be allowed in WCA competition?

[qqwref]

Why the preference for the stickerless?

People like the look and feel of the cube, I think. Same reason some people prefer white plastic or have a particular favorite brand. I assume your main cube isn't stickerless, but what if it was? I guess it would be kind of annoying to not be able to use your best speedcube in competition.

 

[Stefan]

Well, if tiled cubes cause an advantage, they should be banned too.

Ah, so now you changed from "lets you see new things" to "causes an advantage". Has it been proven that stickerless cubes cause an advantage?

 

[JohanAR]

Ah, so now you changed from "lets you see new things" to "causes an advantage". Has it been proven that stickerless cubes cause an advantage?

Proof: Take stickerless cube and turn U layer a few degrees. You can now see the colors of all second layer edges. Take a normal cube and do the same thing - you have to turn the whole cube to get the same information.

Has anyone proved that this can be used to get better times? I don't think so.

 

[Emily Wang]

Proof: Take stickerless cube and turn U layer a few degrees. You can now see the colors of all second layer edges. Take a normal cube and do the same thing - you have to turn the whole cube to get the same information.

Has anyone proved that this can be used to get better times? I don't think so.

So are you saying that seeing additional colours 'causes an advantage' or not? bc idk what you're trying to argue here

 

[JohanAR]

So are you saying that seeing additional colours 'causes an advantage' or not? bc idk what you're trying to argue here

I'm saying that a stickerless cube will let you look at the back of the puzzle without turning it, and IMO that's an advantage by definition. However, just because the advantage is there doesn't mean that everybody will automatically use it. I think that to actually get a better time using this advantage would require a significant amount of practice, and I'm not going to do it just to win an internet argument because it would be a waste of time.

Imagine if some player wanted to solve the cube in front of a mirror at competitions. This would allow him/her to see the complete back side of the cube (similar to how a stickerless cube allows you to see part of the back side), information which is not as easily available to everybody else who will have to turn their puzzle in some way. Would this not clearly be an advantage? Is it a good idea to allow mirrors even if proponents claim that they're not getting better times because of it? Is "we like freedom" really an argument for anything?

 

[qqwref]

Getting an "advantage" isn't much of an argument either. Having a good cube gives you an advantage (over all the people with bad cubes). Having nice new stickers gives you an advantage (over people with messy stickers). Having a mini cube gives you an advantage (you can see L and R at the same time). Having a normal-sized cube gives you an advantage (M slices are easier). It's not like the advantage in this case is unfair - there are several types and sizes of stickerless cubes out there, and anyone can buy one.

So you can see more pieces. So what? Does that make you faster? Can anyone actually use that during a solve? Is it any worse than having tiles or a mini cube?

 

[Kirjava]

Imagine if some player wanted to solve the cube in front of a mirror at competitions. This would allow him/her to see the complete back side of the cube (similar to how a stickerless cube allows you to see part of the back side), information which is not as easily available to everybody else who will have to turn their puzzle in some way. Would this not clearly be an advantage? Is it a good idea to allow mirrors even if proponents claim that they're not getting better times because of it? Is "we like freedom" really an argument for anything?

A5b

 

[bobthegiraffemonkey]

Imagine if some player wanted to solve the cube in front of a mirror at competitions. This would allow him/her to see the complete back side of the cube (similar to how a stickerless cube allows you to see part of the back side), information which is not as easily available to everybody else who will have to turn their puzzle in some way. Would this not clearly be an advantage? Is it a good idea to allow mirrors even if proponents claim that they're not getting better times because of it? Is "we like freedom" really an argument for anything?

The mirror would be an advantage, but since the solves are only meant to involve the competitor, the cube, the surface and the timer, its a different issue from stickerless cubes.

I just tested and found that the timer display as a little reflective, so you can look at your cube's reflection to get info about the D face. Clearly extra information which gives an unfair advantage, we must clearly ban looking at the timer during a solve [/sarcasm].

 

[JohanAR]

So you can see more pieces. So what? Does that make you faster? Can anyone actually use that during a solve? Is it any worse than having tiles or a mini cube?

The mirror would be an advantage, but since the solves are only meant to involve the competitor, the cube, the surface and the timer, its a different issue from stickerless cubes.

On the tiles issue, I think it's very inconsistent that they allow thick tiles.. And how small does the cube have to be for you to see two sides at one time? 2 cm? You know that pillowed cubes are banned for exactly this reason?

I'll follow with a counter-counter-question; Do you think any kind of stickers should also be allowed? Currently all stickers on one side must have a uniform color, logos have to be placed in the center and even heavily worn stickers are banned. But if these rules were changed, I could use stickers that show all the cubie's colors on each sticker (like this supercube, except the centers would still be solid colors). Then I could also know the colors of part of the back face.. According to qqwref seeing more pieces shouldn't be a problem, right? And bobthe.., this doesn't involve any external tools, so is it not the same issue as stickerless cubes?

Speedcubing has its origins in solving the Rubik's Cube as fast as possible, so IMHO cubes should be limited to what you can do with and see on a standard Rubik's Cube. A Zhanchi might be better at turning than an original cube, but it can't do any new kinds of moves. Half-bright stickers might be easier to recognize for some people, but they don't give any extra information that you don't get with a Rubik's brand cube. Additionally, you can look at the reflection in the timer display with any kind of cube so this is not an advantage for anyone.

 

[Emily Wang]

I'm saying that a stickerless cube will let you look at the back of the puzzle without turning it, and IMO that's an advantage by definition. However, just because the advantage is there doesn't mean that everybody will automatically use it. I think that to actually get a better time using this advantage would require a significant amount of practice, and I'm not going to do it just to win an internet argument because it would be a waste of time.

Imagine if some player wanted to solve the cube in front of a mirror at competitions. This would allow him/her to see the complete back side of the cube (similar to how a stickerless cube allows you to see part of the back side), information which is not as easily available to everybody else who will have to turn their puzzle in some way. Would this not clearly be an advantage? Is it a good idea to allow mirrors even if proponents claim that they're not getting better times because of it? Is "we like freedom" really an argument for anything?

okay what does the mirror analogy actually have to do with anything. also you said this earlier:

Has anyone proved that this can be used to get better times? I don't think so.

which means basically that everything you've said about any advantages is just conjecture. also what michael said

 

[Kirjava]

Additionally, you can look at the reflection in the timer display with any kind of cube so this is not an advantage for anyone.

So if you were allowed to start with the cube in your hands, that's something you could do with any cube and everyone could do it - so is that not an advantage for anyone?

 

[Stefan]

a stickerless cube will let you look at the back of the puzzle without turning it, and IMO that's an advantage by definition.

a stickered cube will hide the otherwise distracting back of the puzzle, and IMO that's an advantage by definition.

 

[JohanAR]

okay what does the mirror analogy actually have to do with anything. also you said this earlier:

I wanted you to admit that being able to see the back pieces of the puzzle is an advantage. As far as I know nobody has spent (wasted?) time getting faster solves using a mirror either. Can we agree that allowing tools that allows you to see the back of the puzzle should stay banned, without anyone having to prove that they can give you better times?

So if you were allowed to start with the cube in your hands, that's something you could do with any cube and everyone could do it - so is that not an advantage for anyone?

I have honestly no idea what you're talking about, but if everybody does the same thing then nobody has an advantage.

a stickered cube will hide the otherwise distracting back of the puzzle, and IMO that's an advantage by definition.

Feel free to ban them in your competition for stickerless speed solving if you think so.


Love how everybody ignored my question about sticker mods.. Could it be that you feel marked stickers would provide an unfair advantage (without anyone actually having proved that this is the case) but there are no solid arguments why stickerless cubes should be allowed while keeping sticker mods banned?

 

[qqwref]

And how small does the cube have to be for you to see two sides at one time? 2 cm?

Anything smaller than the distance between your eyes. You may have to bring the cube near your face or cross your eyes a little.

But if these rules were changed, I could use stickers that show all the cubie's colors on each sticker (like this supercube, except the centers would still be solid colors). Then I could also know the colors of part of the back face..

I dunno. I'm not completely sure this would provide a benefit, due to the color confusion. But if the benefit is really obvious, then considering it's not at all a popular type of stickering, we should forbid it so everyone doesn't have to switch in order to have a chance. The advantages of stickerless cubes are nowhere near as clear, and they are very popular, so forbidding them may essentially do more harm than good by preventing many people from using their best cube in competition.

Feel free to ban them in your competition for stickerless speed solving if you think so.

Well that's not a very helpful response, now, is it? We're trying to get a community consensus through debate, not trying to form splinter groups. It's in everyone's best interest to stick with WCA.

 

[Maskow]

I can tell you why they should be allowed:
changing stickers in 37 cubes for multiblindfold before competition is a terrible thing.

 

[Lchu613]

I can tell you why they should be allowed:
changing stickers in 37 cubes for multiblindfold before competition is a terrible thing.

This should be someone's sig

 

[Noahaha]

I think the problem here is that it is not about benefit, but potential benefit. Same reason we don't allow people to listen to music or judge before they have done the solves themselves: we don't actually think anyone would abuse these things, but we also don't want to give them the chance. You can argue all you want about whether the advantage of a stickerless cube should or should not be allowed in competitions, but objectively speaking there is a benefit that could potentially be taken advantage of.

I'm also inclined (pun intended) to use the slippery slope argument here. Once you allow stickerless cubes, people are going to start making it so that the stickerlessness can more easily be taken advantage of (unless they are properly regulated of course).

For the sake of consistency, I think the width for tiles needs to be smaller. I see a lot of megaminxes where you can see sides you shouldn't be able to because of the sides of the tiles. I can see this being taken advantage of (subconsciously or consciously) especially on a puzzle where lookahead is so difficult.

 

[Kirjava]

If you truncate the edges of a stickerless cube (even if only a little) you can see the other sides amazingly easily.

This would def. be a huge advantage. Esp. in step 4c of Roux - a recognition system I spent months working on and incorporating into my solving technique would become redundant and I can ignore having to use it - this only requires looking at one extra back sticker that can be easily seen with the stated modification.

Anyone putting forward the idea that it doesn't offer any kind of major enhancement is incorrect. Please stop doing that now.

However, this idea by itself doesn't have any bearing on if they should be allowed or not - it's just relevant point for the discussion.

 

[uniacto]

It's not as if these rules for advantages will actually make a huge difference in time.

but on the other hand, I don't understand what's the big deal here. Rules are rules. Deal with it.

 

[LarryLunchmeat]

This is actually the main reason I want no part of a WCA event. I'm a stickerless cube user and until they allow stickerless cubes into WCA events, they won't get a dime from me. I know this makes me sound like a butthurt Nancy, but it's more of a principle thing. Especially since they fail to recognize things like tile thickness or my favourite, the fact that you can see the reflection of a fluorescent sticker on your fingers when it's on the backside of a cube, which to me, is the exact same thing as peeking over a cube to see a fragment of colour on the backside.:fp