Do You Have to be Smart to be Good at the Rubiks Cube?

[pipkiksass]

True, but my original point was that academically successful =/= good at cubing. In fact, it might make it worse.

An anecdote, if I may?

My best friend at uni was a genius. I mean proper genius, not IQ-rated, or what-have-you. He was from Northern Ireland, and was top of the national results for all of his A-Level subjects (Maths, Further Maths, Physics and Chemistry). This means first, not top 5% or anything, actually first. He also played football at national schools level, was grade 8 piano, and spent about 5-8 hours a day playing online poker.

In their maths tutorials, they were given a question sheet to answer. These sheets have around 6 questions on, and they have a week until the next tutorial. Most students are expected to attempt around 4 questions. Credit is given for working, even if you don't arrive at an answer. My flat was 10 minutes walk from the maths faculty. Without fail, he'd have completed all 6 questions on the walk back!

At the other end of the spectrum, you will find a lot of people at any university who are holding on by the skin of their teeth. These people have to put in e.g. 10+ hours a day in order to keep up with the crowd, who might be putting in e.g. 5 hours work, with the 'gifted' few only needing to put in a token amount of effort.

When it came to finals, my friend walked out with over 98% average across all of his exams. One of the 'teeth-skinners' at my college walked out with 94%.

So what can we conclude from this? Both achieved a top 1st class honours degree from a good university with 90+% average in finals. Both are clearly 'smart', if you judge intelligence purely by results. But while one had enough spare time to hang out, play pool, watch movies, drink, smoke, etc., the other probably struggled to find enough time to eat and drink in the day, after catching up on work!

Whilst I think being above a certain threshold level of intelligence is helpful for cubing (you have to have the propensity to think in a certain way, and a reasonable memory), I don't think that there is any requirement to be 'smart'. At least not 'results' smart.

Other than the fact that it results in you having a lot more 'free' time, I also don't think being intellectually gifted is a necessary prerequisite.

In my most humble opinion anyone (perhaps below a certain age threshold, c.25-30) could probably be sub-12 if they had no significant restraints on the time available to them for cubing.

In other news, BS is BSc in the UK. BS means... well, B.S.!!!!

In other other news, all degrees from my university, including sciences, are awarded as arts degrees. My friend got an MA (as did I).

Good luck in the Olympiad, Kong - it's fun! (mostly because there's less pressure on this than on true public exams or entry papers, I suppose!)

 

[KongShou]

An anecdote, if I may?

My best friend at uni was a genius. I mean proper genius, not IQ-rated, or what-have-you. He was from Northern Ireland, and was top of the national results for all of his A-Level subjects (Maths, Further Maths, Physics and Chemistry). This means first, not top 5% or anything, actually first. He also played football at national schools level, was grade 8 piano, and spent about 5-8 hours a day playing online poker.

In their maths tutorials, they were given a question sheet to answer. These sheets have around 6 questions on, and they have a week until the next tutorial. Most students are expected to attempt around 4 questions. Credit is given for working, even if you don't arrive at an answer. My flat was 10 minutes walk from the maths faculty. Without fail, he'd have completed all 6 questions on the walk back!

At the other end of the spectrum, you will find a lot of people at any university who are holding on by the skin of their teeth. These people have to put in e.g. 10+ hours a day in order to keep up with the crowd, who might be putting in e.g. 5 hours work, with the 'gifted' few only needing to put in a token amount of effort.

When it came to finals, my friend walked out with over 98% average across all of his exams. One of the 'teeth-skinners' at my college walked out with 94%.

So what can we conclude from this? Both achieved a top 1st class honours degree from a good university with 90+% average in finals. Both are clearly 'smart', if you judge intelligence purely by results. But while one had enough spare time to hang out, play pool, watch movies, drink, smoke, etc., the other probably struggled to find enough time to eat and drink in the day, after catching up on work!

Whilst I think being above a certain threshold level of intelligence is helpful for cubing (you have to have the propensity to think in a certain way, and a reasonable memory), I don't think that there is any requirement to be 'smart'. At least not 'results' smart.

Other than the fact that it results in you having a lot more 'free' time, I also don't think being intellectually gifted is a necessary prerequisite.

In my most humble opinion anyone (perhaps below a certain age threshold, c.25-30) could probably be sub-12 if they had no significant restraints on the time available to them for cubing.

In other news, BS is BSc in the UK. BS means... well, B.S.!!!!

In other other news, all degrees from my university, including sciences, are awarded as arts degrees. My friend got an MA (as did I).

Good luck at the Olympiad, Kong - it's fun!

Wow. Nice! An actual genius I see. Did he study maths? Lol

I do actually believe that he can answer the question in the walk back. I personally also know people like that. People who get gold medals in the IMO. The horrible horrible stuff id do to just get into IMO.

Got a distinction in BMO2. Thats top 25% out of the top 100 people in the country. In fact the cut off was 19/40. I got 23/40. Should have been 29, but I made the biggest facepalm mistake ever. Oh well. Missed the IMO team selection camp by 2 marks. Better luck next year!

Also props off at being so modest. Oxford is more than just a good university. Its one of the best in the world!

 

[DeeDubb]

Being a top level competitor in any field takes a combination of ability (in cubing "intelligence" and just dexterity with fingers) and work ethic. The amount of work ethic required is inversely proportional to natural ability.

 

[Tim Major]

I've been reading this thread without really commenting, but people saying if you're going to be academically successful you can't be good at cubing.

Feliks got an ATAR 99.90 (the 2nd highest possible result) in our state, so the top 0.1 percentile last year, yet it didn't stop him from getting at least 5+ WRs, and being world champion in a few events.

This isn't saying you need to be smart to be fast, it's saying that you can still get amazing grades whilst being fast, so people should stop using it as an excuse. I'm pretty sure you could fine at least 20 mins a day to practise even if you're in a "no life allowed" course like Engineering, let alone high school...

Practise is a chore (unless you really enjoy it) so you fill your free time by being on the forums, watching TV shows/facebook/going out.

In fact there are very few things that you could actually use as an excuse. Examples;
-you don't want to practise: sure
-you have some medical condition

Also similar in the age vs cubing thread where people argued "older cubers are slower because they don't have time to practise" which again is BS.

Maybe if you want to practise 5 hours a day like some people seem to, but my honest opinion is that daily practise (even 10-20 minutes) is just as effective as doing several hours.

 

[MarcelP]

BA Degree? Don't you know a BS is required to be considered smart?






(just kidding, I'm also a BA)

LOL.. I might go for a Master some what later. I just finished my Ba last year (at age 43 )

Oh goody, then I'm smart!

What did you study? I always knew you where smart

 

[KongShou]

I've been reading this thread without really commenting, but people saying if you're going to be academically successful you can't be good at cubing.

Feliks got an ATAR 99.90 (the 2nd highest possible result) in our state, so the top 0.1 percentile last year, yet it didn't stop him from getting at least 5+ WRs, and being world champion in a few events.

This isn't saying you need to be smart to be fast, it's saying that you can still get amazing grades whilst being fast, so people should stop using it as an excuse. I'm pretty sure you could fine at least 20 mins a day to practise even if you're in a "no life allowed" course like Engineering, let alone high school...

Practise is a chore (unless you really enjoy it) so you fill your free time by being on the forums, watching TV shows/facebook/going out.

In fact there are very few things that you could actually use as an excuse. Examples;
-you don't want to practise: sure
-you have some medical condition

Also similar in the age vs cubing thread where people argued "older cubers are slower because they don't have time to practise" which again is BS.

Maybe if you want to practise 5 hours a day like some people seem to, but my honest opinion is that daily practise (even 10-20 minutes) is just as effective as doing several hours.

I disagree. Feliks was already world champion for a few years before taking his exams. Even tho I didn't improve, I didnt regress at all either. We all know that feliks had the ability he has now a year ago. He simply proved it in competition. I seriously doubt he can get from, say, sub 9 to sub7 whilst taking exams and performing amazingly in them.

 

[brian724080]

Maybe if you want to practise 5 hours a day like some people seem to, but my honest opinion is that daily practise (even 10-20 minutes) is just as effective as doing several hours.

That's very true -- nobody cares and knows how long you practice, because the point of practice is to focus on one's shortcomings and improve.

 

[pipkiksass]

...in the age vs cubing thread where people argued "older cubers are slower because they don't have time to practise" which again is BS.

Tim, I agreed with almost 100% of what you said... and then you said this!

Firstly, this is not the point of the 'age vs cubing' thread. The point of that thread is to identify trends in times against age. The most interesting part of that analysis is actually between the ages of 11 and 21, but that's another matter. With regards to this discussion: from the age of 21, people just get slower. There are a few exceptions, but that's the trend.

Is this because they don't have time to practise? No. Everybody has SOME time to practice.

Is it because they have less 'free' time? In many cases, and in part, yes. I say in part because this can only be one element of what makes a cuber "slower"; however to say that older cubers not having time to practise is "BS" is dismissive, naive, and false.

Maybe if you want to practise 5 hours a day like some people seem to, but my honest opinion is that daily practise (even 10-20 minutes) is just as effective as doing several hours.

I cube for around 30 minutes a day, 4/5 days a week. I'd like to have more time to practise.

I'll use Noah's terminology: "deliberate" practice, to avoid confusion. By and large, I lack the discipline to spend my 30 minutes doing any kind of deliberate practice. Every time I pick up a cube I think "I'll practise BLD crosses", or "I'll work on my lookahead"... although I start out doing that, I just enjoy solving too much!

What if, for one month, I spent all of my cubing time doing deliberate practice. That's maybe 8-10 hours. I'd expect to see a pretty good improvement in my times.

Let's consider for a moment how this compares to a 15 year old who cubes for 4/5 hours a day. In the same month they'd spend between 120 and 150 hours practising. If they spent just 10% of this time doing deliberate practice, they would still be doing more deliberate practice than me. If you subscribe to Noah's 'mountain' theory (and I do), the 15 year old would also have cemented the new skills learnt during their 15 hours of deliberate practice with a further 135 hours of non-deliberate practice.

How, therefore, can daily practice of 10-20 minutes be just as effective as doing several hours?

I can only agree with your assertion if you were to add the following caveats:

10-20 minutes deliberate practice is just as effective as several hours where only 10-20 minutes of those several hours are spend doing deliberate practice.

Because time = time.

I'd like to think I'll be sub-15, or maybe a little faster, someday. I'm in no rush - I'll get there in my own time. Could I practise more? Maybe. Could I practise smarter/better? Definitely. If I practised either more, or better, I'd certainly improve faster.

I don't use my age as an excuse, either in relation to my dexterity or demands on my time. I do have time to practice. However the fact that I have less available time to practise than a school age child is an incontrovertible truth.

Back on-topic: the same is true of a school-age cuber. While one 'smart' child may achieve effortless exam results, leaving them abundant 'free' time to cube, etc., another child may work very hard to achieve the same results. Achieving the same results leads many to consider this child equally 'smart'.

As a result, you can't conclude anything from 'results' smart, or relate the amount of time a young person has to spare to their exam results. As there's no other realistic and reliable measure for 'intelligence', I don't think there's any conclusions that can be drawn here whatsoever.

Do you HAVE to be smart to be a good cuber? No, certainly not. Especially not 'exam' smart.

Does being 'smart' help? Even if we could define 'smart', there's no way to know for sure.

I'd argue that an understanding of the mechanics of the cube requires a little of that ephemeral quality known as 'intelligence'. I'd also argue that someone could fail all of their school exams, while still being intelligent.

 

[DeeDubb]

LOL.. I might go for a Master some what later. I just finished my Ba last year (at age 43 )

Congratulations Marcel! I just graduated last year also, at 29 years old. Still older than average. I think at an older age, we have more of an appreciation for college than someone right out of high school. I definitely feel like I was much more diligent than when I was 19 or 20 years old, and that led to me being more successful and gaining a lot more from my education. After I finish teaching for a couple years in Korea, I also plan to get my MA in Language Teaching (my BA was Linguistics).

 

[jeff081692]

I think everything comes down to time management. When I was younger I had all the time in the world to practice so time management didn't matter I was even the best on the chess team and was a part of a math team then and still became valedictorian in 8th grade and highschool and people thought I was a genius but I promise you I'm not. When I got a lot of responsibilities there was always something important I could be doing at all times and I had to make time to continue improving at the level I would like. The fewer activities you do the easier it is to become good at multiple of them so it's very possible to score top grades while also becoming a good cuber at the same time as long as you do not take on too many extra activities beyond that. I would guess that when a lot of people became adults they found that it's much easier on their schedule to either practice less per day or not practice everyday and the second one in particular stalls progress while the first slows it down. 8 hours a day on school work and 1-2 hours on cubing is not hard if you make cubing a priority. For me it meant watching less tv at the end of the day and not playing video games and chess like I used to.

 

[1LastSolve]

I've been reading this thread without really commenting, but people saying if you're going to be academically successful you can't be good at cubing.

Feliks got an ATAR 99.90 (the 2nd highest possible result) in our state, so the top 0.1 percentile last year, yet it didn't stop him from getting at least 5+ WRs, and being world champion in a few events.

This isn't saying you need to be smart to be fast, it's saying that you can still get amazing grades whilst being fast, so people should stop using it as an excuse. I'm pretty sure you could fine at least 20 mins a day to practise even if you're in a "no life allowed" course like Engineering, let alone high school...

Practise is a chore (unless you really enjoy it) so you fill your free time by being on the forums, watching TV shows/facebook/going out.

In fact there are very few things that you could actually use as an excuse. Examples;
-you don't want to practise: sure
-you have some medical condition

Also similar in the age vs cubing thread where people argued "older cubers are slower because they don't have time to practise" which again is BS.

Maybe if you want to practise 5 hours a day like some people seem to, but my honest opinion is that daily practise (even 10-20 minutes) is just as effective as doing several hours.

I thought Feliks would have like, D's in every subject. Is this what they call...
Hope? *-*

/practicesallnight

 

[n00bCube]

I've always been totally crap at maths, but I can solve several different twisty puzzles, from the 2x2 to things like 4x4 shape mods, I've not attempted anything more complicated than something like a 4x4 shape mod yet, basically because I don't have any puzzle that's more complicated than that yet.

 

[Cubewerkz]

I would say you need to be focused to be good at something like cubing. Like the Forest Gump character who ends up good in ping pong, distance running, you can be good in something if you are very focused on doing it well. Practice can get you better at something but being smart is different. At some point, you can't get better(point of diminishing return) and you need at different way of doing things. Like what Einstein said to get different results, you have to do something different. Being smart will look at the same problem from a different angle and different perspective and coming out with even better solution to an old problem.

 

[qqwref]

I think you have to be smart to be really good with cube theory, but as far as just solving the thing fast, you don't need anything but quick fingers and a lot of good practice.

 

[ilikecubing]

I don't see any relation between being fast on the Rubiks cube and being smart. I know quite a few people who are fast at the cube but they ain't that smart and practical from what I observe. But I also know people who are smart and have decent times, but surprisingly not faster than the non smart and non practical ones I know.

As when it comes to comparing with grades. I feel that getting good grades requires not only knowledge and memory but also the willingness to do planned study. So, if it is safe to assume that people who top in academics are people who like to plan out their study schedule, then maybe they do the same for cubing. They plan how they improve. Example - A CFOP solver plans and sets a deadline for learning advanced F2L algs to add to his trick bank, or similarly a cuber decides to get a sub1 ao12 for all his PLLs and he accordingly plans on how he will achieve that( 2 PLLs a day for so and so time) etc. Not saying that it is true for everyone. Ofcourse it is not necessary that very fast cubers are good at studies, they maybe bad too, and vice versa.

I think you have to be smart to be really good with cube theory, but as far as just solving the thing fast, you don't need anything but quick fingers and a lot of good practice.

I second that

 

[CubezUBR]

Well i don't know if what i'm about to say has already been said, but...
If you gave a cube to a person who finds it hard to concentrate, cant read, count, add, visualise,focus, think and learn. Then you will have a very hard time teaching them
similarly, if you gave a cube to a person with dementia or amnesia or strong dyslexia etc etc then you wont be able to teach them (my mum is an example)

But saying that; lots of cubers are young, and cant do proper maths, haven't developed their brains fully yet, are childish in the way they think, and are not smart. They are still good cubers. A lot of the good cubers are young cubers, for many reasons: finger speed, ease to learn, free time, motivation etc.

So although it probably helps if your logic of thinking, your concentration, your visualisation is good;
But no. You don't have to be smart to be good at the Rubik's cube