• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Ideas

Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
982
Likes
293
Location
P(r)oland
WCA
2012SZEW01
YouTube
SajwoPL
Thread starter #1
I came up with some ideas that could be (and should be..) potentially implemented in future.

● Feet format should be changed from mo3 to ao5, because there is actually no reason for using mo3. It is also extremaly easy in this event to get a (rolling) pop and kill the mean right away.
● Averages and means should take into account 3rd decimal. In my opinion this is the biggest nonsense in the WCA regulations. Someone who has faster average can lose a championship with someone who has worse average. And the second person can be rewarden in WR, which is clearly unfair.
Example:
Lucas Etter's: (10.54), 6.77, (5.85), 8.25, 6.38 = 7.13(3)
Michał Pleskowicz: 6.41, (9.00), 7.56, 7.41, (6.08) = 7.12(6)

If they would compete in the same tournament, for example World Championship, Lucas would won the title, because he has better single. Michał has better average, but he would lost. It is the difference of 0.00(6) seconds which should be rounded in favor of Michał.

If someone has average of 12.000 and the other person has the average of 12.00(6), then according to regulations the second person's average is rounded to 12.01. But it's still the difference of 0.00(6) seconds like before. Where is the consequence?
This was just an example, if their averages would be replaced, I would still recall this situation.

In my opinion the 3rd decimals should not be shown in the person's average, it would look kinda ugly. The avarages should be simply in the right order in the WCA rankings.. if someone is faster, then he should have higher rank. It's logical.

● Making 4BLD and 5BLD mo3 recognised in official WCA rankings. It can be done, it was done many times and I still don't see a reason why it's not official yet.

● This is just an interesting idea. It would be nice to have competition like FMC Europe every year, but with all the events. It would be much more prestigious than Euro since almost everyone would attend a competition like this. Maybe even on the world scale? "World Rubik's Cube day", held in several dozen of countries accros the world in one day. Just imagine :)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 26, 2014
Messages
405
Likes
204
Location
U.K
#2
I had pondered whether AO6 would be more appropriate for events with double parity like 4x4x4. I didn't think too hard about it, it's probably little different to AO5.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
259
Likes
2
Location
Czech Republic
WCA
2013MUAT01
YouTube
matejmuzatko
#3
The 3rd decimal is very interesting idea and it would be nice to have that... :)
For the feet, I think mo3 is good... It's also pretty easy to kill your mean in 6x6x6 but it would be pretty bad to expand that event by 66%... it would require more time and more organisers would stop having these events
Even now they don't want to do hold WF... Changing the format to ao5 and letting some organisers do mo3, while mo3 would be only to rank the competition results may solve the problem, but it's probably better the way it is
4BLD and 5BLD means? No problem, I agree... That would make no big change (as well as 3BLD mean few years ago)
And the last idea is very nice :) Maybe there would be organizing problems with schedule, as some people would have to wait while other (bigger) country finishes the round... but it sounds promising :)
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
328
Likes
4
Location
Poland :(
#5
Agree, last idea is that best. Not only 'standard events', just make one round of each event every comps. It would be awesome for ppl how solve BLD, squan, big cubes etc
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
1,754
Likes
22
Location
Maryland
WCA
2012ELLI01
YouTube
crazyninja300
#8
The biggest argument against having 3rd decimal places is that there would be inconsistency in the calculation of rankings, because older times only were as precise as two digits. What would be done about that?

EDIT:

Also, sigfigs. If you have two decimal places in your calculation to begin with, you end with two decimal places in your calculation, and round accordingly.
 
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
1,710
Likes
108
Location
San Diego, California
WCA
2014TANG03
YouTube
franktangtartharakul
#10
The biggest argument against having 3rd decimal places is that there would be inconsistency in the calculation of rankings, because older times only were as precise as two digits. What would be done about that?

EDIT:

Also, sigfigs. If you have two decimal places in your calculation to begin with, you end with two decimal places in your calculation, and round accordingly.
I don't think the third decimal place would be "official" since the times were only to 2 decimals, they are just a better tiebreaker than fastest time.
 
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
2,400
Likes
889
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2014SCHO02
YouTube
mathtornado7
#11
I agree that there should be 4BLD/5BLD means because I would have a WR :D and other reasons

The 3rd digit rounding thing seems reasonable to me, especially with the argument you gave about the .67 difference. I think changing feet means to avg5 would also require changing 6x6/7x7 and that would take way too much time (basically what Matej said). The last idea would be cool, but events other than FMC are difficult to organize and keep fair.
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,830
Likes
34
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
qqwref2
#12
I agree with using the third digit in averages for tiebreakers, but yeah, don't display it. That said, it would be nice to start tracking 3-digit times, and maybe once 3-digit timers are prevalent enough, to start displaying them on the official site. Times with only 2 known digits after the decimal point would be ranked as if they were .xx9.

4BLD mean of 3 is dumb and 5BLD mean of 3 is extremely dumb, but they should be official as a ranking. It should be understood that single is the more important category and competitions are still Best of 3, like with 3BLD.

A global all-events competition would be awesome, but have fun organizing it. It's hard enough to get some events done at all over here :p
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2011
Messages
1,574
Likes
24
Location
Sheffield, UK
WCA
2012JONE03
YouTube
forty3quintillion
#13
on the topic of averages, here's something that i hope is at least a little bit interesting:

you assert that in your example that michał had the better average. of course this is only true if we take the times as writ, without any error.

the reality is that times are only recorded to a precision of 0.01s, the averages therefore carry some of the imprecision in measurement.
for an average of 5, we need three times, each with an error of 0.01 - propagating the errors gives the error on an average as about 0.006 - hopefully a familiar number!

now, let's apply this analysis to your example - whilst michał's average is lower, both averages are 'within error' of each other! So to me, it is illogical to say 'michał's average was faster' as we don't know that for sure, lucas' average might have actually been faster but we didn't measure it well enough :p
 

Sa967St

Not A Moderator
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
3,795
Likes
29
Location
Waterloo, ON, Canada
WCA
2007STRO01
YouTube
Sa967St
#14
● Feet format should be changed from mo3 to ao5, because there is actually no reason for using mo3. It is also extremaly easy in this event to get a (rolling) pop and kill the mean right away.
https://github.com/cubing/wca-regulations/issues/299

● Averages and means should take into account 3rd decimal. In my opinion this is the biggest nonsense in the WCA regulations. Someone who has faster average can lose a championship with someone who has worse average. And the second person can be rewarden in WR, which is clearly unfair.
https://github.com/cubing/wca-regulations/issues/198
 
Top