Better WCA averages?

[KubikPanda]

A while back, I saw someone (it MAY have been TheCubicle) interviewing Tymon (on YouTube, of course) and they asked him "If you would make any changes to the WCA, what would you do?" And he said that, for the pros, he would make the averaging system to an ao12 or maybe even ao25. I totally agree with him, (for the ao12; ao25 might be a bit overkill) and would probably make it for the intermediate solvers, too. (for that I would definitely want ao12 instead of ao25) Am I the only one who agrees?

-While I was writing this, I thought maybe there could be some way to make there be WR averages in different types of averages (ao5, ao12, ao25, etc.) so please tell me if you think that would be a good idea, too.

 

[AhsanDaCuber125]

of course @Averageof12 chose average of 12

 

[siwoo]

It sounds cool but it's not feasible in the current state of competitions where no one actually wants to judge or scramble that amount of cubes. It would take too much time per round and most competitions already run overtime in the current ao5 format.

 

[KubikPanda]

It sounds cool but it's not feasible in the current state of competitions where no one actually wants to judge or scramble that amount of cubes. It would take too much time per round and most competitions already run overtime in the current ao5 format.

yes, that's very true, but that's why it would probably have to be only in the finals of a major comp

 

[bldcuber314]

yes, that's very true, but that's why it would probably have to be only in the finals of a major comp

That would probably make it less exciting, and also too long if done head to head.

 

[Pyjam]

Average of 7 maybe?

 

[Fred]

With ao5, the better cuber is likely to win, but an underdog could also win. With ao12, that becomes less likely. I think ao5 is better from a spectator's point of view, but I can see why Tymon would want ao12.

 

[Isaiah Scott]

I think that doing anything above ao5 would take too much time, especially for longer events. That would leave less time for extra rounds and we have done ao5 for 20 years and it has worked great. Of course, 5 solves has tons of room for error (Stanley winning skewb at worlds) and can highly vary depending on nerves and other factors

 

[OreKehStrah]

I think that doing anything above ao5 would take too much time, especially for longer events. That would leave less time for extra rounds and we have done ao5 for 20 years and it has worked great. Of course, 5 solves has tons of room for error (Stanley winning skewb at worlds) and can highly vary depending on nerves and other factors

Well the argument is only for the shorter events, like 2 3 pyra skewb clock, so that way these super short competitive events aren't as heavily affected by variance from such a small set of solves.

 

[Spencer131]

doing an ao12 for top cubers could be interesting to watch if they were required to have 2 cubes

scramble and run while they are inspecting and solving, then swap out. otherwise it would get too slow

when doing a head to head finals with just twelve people, I've typically seen it takes about an hour. so to do ao12 you need a more efficient way of doing it

 

[Filipe Teixeira]

average of 42

 

[AhsanDaCuber125]

average of 42

bro, that not funny

 

[Puzzle Maniac]

I personally think that the ao5 is just fine, but the ao12 could pulled out for the top solvers in faster events.
and yep, it was TheCubicle's interview.

 

[Pyjam]

The best is 7 of 9, of course. Resistance is futile.

 

[Filipe Teixeira]

bro, that not funny

I accidentaly hit the number 4 instead of number 1 in the keyboard.

I meant average of 12, I'm sorry forum

 

[AhsanDaCuber125]

People tryna being productive be like:
“You know, an average of 6 would be good…”