MIT Spring 2010

March 6 isn't spring...

Oh yeah, before someone else points this out:
It's not actually in the spring. It's in the winter. But it's the spring semester, so as far as we're concerned, it's our spring competition.

Also of note, Caltech Winter 2010 is in the Spring.
Oh. At least Tim has a good reason. But my point was really that the competition being in winter means snow it is not that unlikely.
 
hmm my first out-of-country competition? the two rounds of pyraminx and three rounds of 2x2 is so tempting...
 
Why hold BLD if the majority of people don't really want to do it?

Exactly. Last competition at MIT, there were 25 BLD competitors, out of 78. It's a fairly time-consuming event for its popularity.

Why do we need to hold BLD at every competition we run? It's not like we're never going to hold BLD again. We'll probably hold it at our fall competition.

If you don't like the events we're holding, then don't go. Otherwise, does it really matter to you?
 
Why hold BLD if the majority of people don't really want to do it?

Exactly. Last competition at MIT, there were 25 BLD competitors, out of 78. It's a fairly time-consuming event for its popularity.

Why do we need to hold BLD at every competition we run? It's not like we're never going to hold BLD again. We'll probably hold it at our fall competition.

If you don't like the events we're holding, then don't go. Otherwise, does it really matter to you?

There's never a good way to please everyone. Some people would like competitions where you don't need to be sub-15 in order to make it to the second round. Some people would want to have all the events and cut anyone who isn't in the top 5% of all competitors in the first two solves.

But people need to realize that adding "just this one event" isn't always simple. And people need to just be glad there are competitions.
 
We're getting where there really are a lot of competitions in the USA. We should consider ourselves lucky to have so many options. I think that, since we are having so many, we should start thinking in terms of that. It makes sense now to create more "custom competitions", where you can have specializations. Dan's big cube competition was a good example last year, I thought - I really regretted not being able to make it there! If Tim wants a competition with no BLD, that's perfectly fine. If I want to hold a competition with nothing but BLD, that should be fine too! :D

Tim Reynolds said:
If you don't like the events we're holding, then don't go. Otherwise, does it really matter to you?
This.
 
Why do we need to hold BLD at every competition we run? It's not like we're never going to hold BLD again. We'll probably hold it at our fall competition.

If you don't like the events we're holding, then don't go. Otherwise, does it really matter to you?
Well, it's certainly your choice.
But BLD is a really traditional event, along with OH and speed.

Also note that by setting yourself a precedent of not doing it, you're telling people that it's not as important, and incidentally encouraging them not to learn/practice BLD.
And I think a lot of people at MIT could eventually get fast at it.
(How did I learn BLD? I was allowed to do it at Nationals. And the first Berkeley Fall. Then the first Berkeley Spring... Then....)

I wouldn't say this about other events like Megaminx. I just don't understand why you'd subordinate BLD that much.
 
I don't know that anything is a "traditional" event besides 3x3 speed. Even 4x4 has been held at more competitions than 3x3 BLD, but I wouldn't actually consider 4x4 "traditional". At the Dutch Open they called us the "strange people who do this thing blindfolded" at the awards ceremony :p

I think it only seems that way now because Caltech, the birthplace of modern competitive cubing in the US, had a lot of BLD enthusiasts early on. There's nothing wrong with not holding BLD. You and I would be much less likely to attend a competition without it, but that's because we specialize in it. Not everyone does.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top