Looking for feedback on my video

[BlendTheRules]

I want to know the fastest time for solving a rubiks cube, I think inspection time is part of that. So many people disagree on youtube, seems to be split 3 ways: Long term cubers hate it, they pick up on a few errors I made in the video but don't really give good arguments against a no inspection event. New cubers are open to it and find it interesting. Non cubers pretty much 100% agree (this is why I made the video, my experiences talking with non cubers and them finding out about inspection time.

If this isn't the right place to post this my apologies.

 

[turtwig]

Long term cubers hate it, they pick up on a few errors I made in the video but don't really give good arguments against a no inspection event.

First of all, I'd like to sincerely say that I thought the video was very well made. Unfortunately, I do disagree with some points in the video, so I hope I can give some good faith arguments.

Obviously 15 second inspection time is arbitrary. From what I read in the comments of your video, it's a relic from the 1982 World Championship. In some sense, of course "no inspection time" and "unlimited inspection time" are the only non-arbitrary amounts of inspection time (obviously, in order to have a competition, you can't literally have unlimited inspection time, so I'm guessing they chose 15 seconds to essentially be unlimited, since people back then probably couldn't solve too much of the cube during inspection). I would probably have to agree that if we want to define how long it takes to solve the cube in the most "objective" way, it should start when you see the scramble, not when you make the first turn.

However, I don't think that no inspection should be added as an event. If this were to happen, there are basically 2 possibilities:

1. The "with inspection" 3x3 event is replaced with no inspection. This is obviously a complete non-starter. It doesn't make sense to suddenly introduce a rule change that essentially no cuber wants. And I don't think competition rules have to "make sense" and they certainly don't have to line up with what non-cubers feel is right. They should serve to make the competition more interesting to compete in and more interesting to watch. So much effort has been put into optimizing inspection time and tailoring methods to take advantage of this rule that it would definitely make the event less enjoyable to compete in for current cubers if inspection time were suddenly removed.

2. Have competitions in both variants. This is slightly more reasonable. However, the "no inspection" event would be redundant. First of all, the rankings would be virtually the same. The skills involved would be virtually the same. "3x3 with no inspection" already kind of exists because of the reduction method on big cubes, yet no one has put much effort into practicing it because basically the only difference is that you do the first cross you see instead of planning cross and F2L, which is not that hard of a transition. As a competitor, I don't really see what this event would add.
It's a hassle to hold different events at competitions and entirely not worth the effort for events as similar as these two would be. You point out that there are already many 3x3 events in the WCA, so adding one more isn't a problem, but objectively 3x3 with or without inspection are much more similar to each other than 3x3, 3x3 OH, 3x3 with feet, 3x3 blindfolded, 3x3 multiblind, and 3x3 FMC. The event that sticks out in that list is probably 3x3 OH (and feet, but that has been removed already), which is quite similar to 3x3, but I think that the only reason it's still an event is because there's not that much of a reason to remove it. If we didn't have the OH event, I would not be in favor of adding it, so I'm similarly against adding a "no inspection" event.

The merits of "no inspection" aside, I don't see how including this event would help the WCA or Red Bull become a bigger player in the speedcubing scene, as you said in your video. No one competes in an event or spectates an event because the rules are nice and logical and I don't think no inspection is any more exciting to compete in or spectate, so I fail to see why it would help either organization to introduce it.

Long term cubers hate it, they pick up on a few errors I made in the video but don't really give good arguments against a no inspection event. New cubers are open to it and find it interesting. Non cubers pretty much 100% agree (this is why I made the video, my experiences talking with non cubers and them finding out about inspection time.

To me this is a red flag for your argument. You're basically saying "the more someone knows about cubing, they more they disagree with me." I'm guessing you would argue that cubers are just stuck in their ways and not open to beneficial change, but to me it's just that non-cubers and new cubers don't understand the implications of the rule change or adding a new event.

 

[Thom S.]

When I started cubing still in school, most of my guys found inspection logical and I always say that when someone brings out the argument that Non-Cubers don't want inspection.

You wouldn't ask a person that has never seen metalwork if the machining community as a whole should have lathes or me, if I should use a Planer.
So why do you ask people who have never solved a Twisty Puzzle how a Twisty Puzzle should be solved.

Removing Inspection doesn't make cubing a much more spectator-friendly sport all of a sudden - it will make 3x3 much more Luck dependant, as you can't make sure every cuber hast the same orientation cube in front of them.

The whole point of getting faster is improving Look-ahead. How exactly do you look ahead if your solve starts with you not looking ahead?

 

[Silky]

Also agree that this is an amazingly well made video!! Great job!! Disagree with the vid/argument. A similar argument would be like Triple Jump isn't as impressive because they don't include the pre-jumps. Idk if that makes sense. But also I think inspection time makes the events more interesting. Inspection adds another component to a solve where its not just about how fast you can react. It allows for a balance for incorporating efficiency with advanced techniques such as psuedo. Also adding events is a complicated process although I agree we should add some. No inspection just doesn't offer any variety or nuance to 3x3 as an event. As you mentioned we already have FMC, OH, 3x3, 3BLD, etc. #FTO for WCA

 

[LBr]

3x3 no inspection has been done in the past, but it’s results have been deleted completely rather than archived like magic or feet. Feet is no longer an event, single and average are not separate events, and inspection in itself is a skill, and the wca achieves a good balance of inspection and lookahead, since those are equally important, rather than swinging to one side, whether that be inspecting for a ridiculously long amount of time, or none at all

 

[Mike Hughey]

Wow, very nice video!

I just wanted to chime in here because I'm one of the seemingly rare few cubers who totally agrees with your overall premise. If we're talking about who solved the cube fastest, your perspective is absolutely correct, in my opinion. I agree that solving the cube begins the instant you see the puzzle. That's how puzzle-solving works. I have said in other threads here that I wish no inspection had been the original rule - if it had, we could keep it that way and be measuring the amount of time to solve the cube. I wish we could go back in time and change the way the competition was first run so that inspection time always counted. Even if it is a little less fun, it makes the record more honest - it makes it so it's actually measuring the time to solve the cube.

But that being said, it wasn't done that way, and we have a huge history where it is solved with inspection time. And I admit that this approach seems to be the most fun for people actually solving the cube. So I understand why it is the way it is, and I agree with others that it doesn't make sense to change it. And there are always arguments against additional events, many of which make sense. If an unlimited number of tracked events were allowed, I would hope this would really be one of the events added. But for various reasons that is not practical, so I doubt it will happen.

As a niggling point, I do feel like you adding feet to the argument for more events was probably unwise, since it has not been an event for several years now - I feel like it weakened your overall argument. While I am one of those who wishes it had not been dropped, unfortunately it was dropped, which actually argues somewhat against there being room for plenty of additional events.

Another niggling point - I wonder if typing was a good example to give? In most typing tests I've seen, you actually get to see the text before you start. If it's that type of typing test, I would argue typing is just like speedcubing - it also has a non-counting inspection time - you are planning your typing in your head before you start, so it should count as part of the typing time (but admittedly for typing this gives less of an advantage than it does for cubing). The task of typing requires understanding the text to be typed as part of the task of typing, so the comprehension part really should count as part of the typing time. But I don't know - perhaps world-record-determining typing tests are administered where you don't get to see the text until the timer starts?

 

[xyzzy]

I just wanted to chime in here because I'm one of the seemingly rare few cubers who totally agrees with your overall premise. If we're talking about who solved the cube fastest, your perspective is absolutely correct, in my opinion.

Count me in; I'm another of those seemingly rare few.

 

[Tabe]

Count me in; I'm another of those seemingly rare few.

Add me to the group, too.

 

[Swagrid]

I've already left a comment on the video about a few reasons why I think inspection is healthy for speedcubing and why no inspection as an event wouldn't be too beneficial, so I'll quickly recap why I don't want no inspection as a new event, and then i'll make a more out-there argument.

No inspection as an event would largely consist of the skills and knowledge already used for 3x3 and other 3x3 events. People that dominate 3x3 will still dominate NI. It would also suck to see the long awaited new event be just another way to solve 3x3, when we already have 3x3, OH, BLD, FMC. Those last two points, the same solvers dominating and the event being the same puzzle, would be insulting to the communities for other non WCA events. People that solve other cubes such as the redi cube, or FTO. I'm sure they would absolutely love to be able to compete in their events officially, so to have the new event be "3x3 except y" again would be a great disappointment. Also, another events, diluting event pools, comp time restraints, etc.

Now, for a more unique counterpoint.

Repetition and pre-meditation. You mention two examples in your video, sprinting (100m) and typing. I'd also like to throw in speedrunning as that is something that often gets compared to cubing. Anyway, to talk about all of these, I'll start with typing. As Mike Hughey said,

In most typing tests I've seen, you actually get to see the text before you start. If it's that type of typing test, I would argue typing is just like speedcubing - it also has a non-counting inspection time - you are planning your typing in your head before you start

So in that essence, typing is similar to cubing. Both can be pre-meditated. But how about sprinting? You can't exactly get a running start, can you? Well this is my other point. Repetition. Any time you take a typing test, bar the gimmicky ones that use a set few quotes from literature, you'll be confronted with a string of words you have never typed in that particular order before. It is up to you to navigate this brand new sequence, with a little pre-meditation. Any time you solve a cube, you are faced with a scramble that nobody has ever seen before, and it is up to you to create a solution to this scramble, with a little pre-meditation. Sprinting is different, then? Yes, different, albeit similar. The difference is that sprinting is the same on every attempt. You run on a track of particular material, for a certain difference. The only random element could be the weather. Now, I am NOT saying that practicing sprinting is deceiving in the same way that some people might see inspection time as deceiving. I'm saying that for typing and cubing, you can practice the earlier part of the attempt in your head for a few seconds. For sprinting, you can practice/continuously repeat the sprint beforehand. In this way, I see repetition and pre-meditation as being related.

"but Swagrid, repeating/practicing a sprint is practice in the way that untimed solves and drilling algs is practicing, not like inspection time."
Arguably. Algs I will give to you, but this doesn't apply to the intuitive steps.

The same argument can be made in part with speedrunning, it uses the same route most runs, and you can usually know what to expect and what to do, with some randomness involved.

My overall point here is that most things cubing is compared to falls into one of two categories
1) you already know exactly what to do, and you have practiced the exact manoeuvres, and now must execute them.
2) you will not know exactly what to do, will be able to pre-meditate some of the attempt, and then must execute that and work through whatever is left.

That is my ambitious take of the day and I await being clowned on

EDIT: yo I kinda forgot to conclude this lmao. yeah so clearly cubing falls into category 2 and I see no reason in making cubing the outlier, alone in a 3rd category in which you do not know what to do and do not get to pre meditate