Older cubers discussions

[Jlvs2run]

Maybe so, but that's a different question than how to handle age boundaries.

Yes, that is a different suggestion, which I already made two years ago, and you said just to scroll down the 40's list to find them, as there are not enough to have their own groups.

 

[mark49152]

Yes, that is a different suggestion, which I already made two years ago, and you said just to scroll down the 40's list to find them, as there are not enough to have their own groups.

I don't recall saying that two years ago, but if I did, my opinion hasn't changed .

 

[pglewis]

3BLD PB for me. 5:23. Breaking 5 minutes should come soon.

Well done, and so much for our friendly race to 5:30 .

...and allow some of the youngsters on this thread (e.g @pglewis) to appear slightly earlier...

Yeah, I think you misread which decade I'm hitting come January

 

[Jlvs2run]

I don't recall saying that two years ago, but if I did, my opinion hasn't changed .

Of course not, because you already have your own division.

 

[mark49152]

Of course not, because you already have your own division.

Because I think it's pointless. Ages are already listed for each result. If you want to see who's the fastest over-50 or over-60, the information is already there. Looking at 3x3 single, I count 10 out of 60 results achieved at >=50, five of which are >=60, which is hardly enough to warrant creating additional "divisions".

This is only for fun, not an official ranking, and not necessarily complete either. There are no official age divisions, so all you're really asking for is an extra search filter on Mike's page.

 

[pglewis]

My $.02 on the method of age determination: I think a reasonable approach is to use actual DOB if provided and the old method if only YOB is available. I personally consider DOB to be public information in today's world, I'm sure it's not difficult to discover with minimal digging and I would certainly never use that as a primary security measure if it's within my control. Others may prefer to keep it as private as possible, regardless.

A couple weeks ago I would have said it's not a big enough deal to sweat it... but the singular case of Gilles' 13.03 is a great argument, if for no other reason than to make @Selkie work harder .

For accuracy and credibility purposes, the exact birth dates should be used.

I think the credibility of the list is de facto. As far as I know there is no other over-40s list, up to date or otherwise. It's entirely unofficial and for our own fun and friendly bragging rights.

Of course not, because you already have your own division.

Regarding further older divisions: as Mark says, there just aren't that many in the list and I'm sure even fewer active. The first generation cubers are reaching the 50 milestone now-ish. I'll be there soon and there are several active guys here in their upper 40s... but I don't see the over-50 group growing much for a while, otherwise. Behind us was the 15-20 year "dark period".

I think expanding to include an over-30 category makes a lot of sense in a sport where 25 is considered old, however. A lot of folks from the first renaissance period have reached 30 and that's the edge of a wave.

 

[One Wheel]

I thought I heard that WCA stopped tracking age categories because parents were pushing kids to perform early, or people were concerned that would happen. I don't suppose there's any chance WCA could track 20-year blocks, so 0-19, 20-39, 40-59, 60-79, and 80+? Or even stop at 60+, so just 4 categories.

 

[Jason Green]

I spoke to Jeremy Fleischman last year in Portland, and they would like to add back age rankings to the WCA website on an opt in basis. But yes basically they removed it due to the age of baby competitors.

I like the rankings as they are, partly just because I'm not a fan of moving targets. If anyone wants there own variations remember the code is on GitHub.

 

[muchacho]

5x5 PB Single 1:40.69

I miss the washing machine, I almost think I can still hear it in the background. Am I right, crazy, or both?

 

[JohnnyReggae]

I miss the washing machine, I almost think I can still hear it in the background. Am I right, crazy, or both?

 

[Selkie]

I certainly think the unofficial over 40's rankings are a very valuable resource. I don't think I will ever get into a 3x3 or 5x5 final, however small the comp as I just cannot compete on that level but the friendly competition that the rankings give are great.

@muchacho , @JohnnyReggae - Haha, we rearranged the study on Saturday which does have the washing machine and tumble dryer in it. You certainly can hear the tumble dryer during the solve

 

[newtonbase]

Had a little go at 4BLD. Was meant to be a memo test but went for the solve on a whim. How on earth do you track edges? I need twice as many fingers.
I checked the cube after centres (at 32 mins!) and about half were wrong but the edges appeared unaffected so I'm doing something wrong there. Probably because I used U2 where I've only practiced with comms. Need to watch a video or 2.
Part way through edges I realised I'd used a wrong word. I tried to back track but screwed up.
Corners were a doddle.
I'd have tried it again but I lost the scramble.
I don't think it will be as hard as I thought to get this right but doing it at speed is a long way off.

 

[h2f]

How on earth do you track edges?

It's only matter of practice. 1 or 2 cycle breaks are common in 4bld. So the first thing I count the targets in my memo. It's easy because I group them in 4 - 4 words makes one bigger image. If I have 3 images with 4 words I know all is fine. If theres no cycle breaks I should have 23 targets. One cycle breaks means 24 targets, two 25 etc. If I have lower than 23 targets I just look for the ones on its places. If I cant find them I just watch on every side of cube which have 2 wings and I go through my memo if they are in it. I think Mark, @mark49152 , can have his tricsk for it.

I have comp next weekend with 4bld and 5bld and I do few solves every day.

 

[newtonbase]

It's only matter of practice. 1 or 2 cycle breaks are common in 4bld. So the first thing I count the targets in my memo. It's easy because I group them in 4 - 4 words makes one bigger image. If I have 3 images with 4 words I know all is fine. If theres no cycle breaks I should have 23 targets. One cycle breaks means 24 targets, two 25 etc. If I have lower than 23 targets I just look for the ones on its places. If I cant find them I just watch on every side of cube which have 2 wings and I go through my memo if they are in it. I think Mark, @mark49152 , can have his tricsk for it.

I have comp next weekend with 4bld and 5bld and I do few solves every day.

Thanks. The formula is ok. I knew when I was finished as I had 25 letters with 2 breaks. No flipped edges helps. It was just working out the unsolved pieces when starting a new cycle that's difficult. My last cycle was for just 2 pieces which took me ages to find.
Centres are much easier as you only have to mark one piece per side.
Good luck in your comp.

 

[JanW]

After a few days of solving with all 6 crosses, I went back to try an Ao100 with white cross only. Seems the change of pace has paid off, new Ao50 and Ao100. Sub-19 Ao50 is very close now!

My most important goal for the year was getting running Ao1000 to sub-20. Currently at 20.02. I don't dare solve anymore in fear of messing it up... I've done the CN solves in a separate session, this Ao1000 only counts white cross solving.

Edit: Continued the session with 50 more solves and I'm not sure what's going on here. Somehow a few hundred CN solves have turned me into a cubing genius when it comes to the white cross. The last 100 solves felt like nothing can go wrong. Running Ao12 did not once go above 20. Ao50 down to 18.75, Ao100 to 19.03 and running Ao1000 now at 19.96! And a 12.54 full-step single.

 

[h2f]

I knew when I was finished as I had 25 letters with 2 breaks. No flipped edges helps. It was just working out the unsolved pieces when starting a new cycle that's difficult.

I know the pain. Few days ago I was fine after 2 minutes and the I've realized I need 2 targets. I've finished my memo 5 minutes later. Guess why?

 

[newtonbase]

I know the pain. Few days ago I was fine after 2 minutes and the I've realized I need 2 targets. I've finished my memo 5 minutes later. Guess why?

Ha ha.
I think I'll need to do a lot of edges only practice.

 

[moralsh]

@newtonbase Forget U2 and just watch Daniel Sheppard videos on centre comms, do some sighted solves and you're good to go. If you don't want to go to the easiest comms you have on any cube, at least go directly with advanced U2 (setting up the hardest centre to UFL and execute the resulting comm with U2 as interchange and the other centre set up as insertion.

About tracking remaining edges, I usually go face by face checking if I've used the letter, the first times it takes some time, but with some practice it's almost immediate.

 

[Logiqx]

If someone is unhappy that their results when just turned 40 are excluded, maybe they could voluntarily provide a date at which their times should start being counted? That could be DOB (their choice whether to disclose it) or it could be the date of the first comp they attended aged 40.

@mark49152 @Jlvs2run @gogozerg

Ok. I've updated the SQL scripts to support an actual DOB... if disclosed or freely available in the public domain.

Everyone now has a virtual birthday of 31st December which means their results are unchanged.

Gilles however has a proper DOB - freely available on Wikipedia + Speedsolving Wiki.

Net result... Gilles is now harder to catch in the oldies rankings!

I certainly think the unofficial over 40's rankings are a very valuable resource. I don't think I will ever get into a 3x3 or 5x5 final, however small the comp as I just cannot compete on that level but the friendly competition that the rankings give are great.

You have some catching up to do...

 

[mark49152]

I think Mark, @mark49152 , can have his tricsk for it.

As Grzegorz said, it's just practice. My approach is as follows: I don't count wing targets up front because that wastes time. I start tracing straight away, and mentally keep an eye on the pieces I like to start new cycles on (A, L, R, J, T). If I hit a break and one or more of those pieces hasn't yet been covered, I start a new cycle there immediately. That is usually enough to get me to a point where there are only a few pieces left, maybe 5 or less. For example if I hit the second break after 20 targets, I know there are 4 pieces left. Then I look for solved pieces and deduct those. So let's say I find two pieces solved, I know there are two remaining, which must be swapped. Finding those final pieces is just practice.

Note that the nice thing about wings is that they can never be flipped .

For centres I use mostly advanced U2 with a handful of comms. Some people say start with comms, which is fair enough, as they are not difficult, but my philosophy is the same as M2 for edges - advanced U2 is a kind of restricted comms, which are almost as move efficient as unrestricted comms, and a good stepping stone for incrementally adding other comms. But, unlike comms, U2 is brainless and easier to plough through without pausing. I guess it depends how much patience you have - your accuracy will improve faster and times will drop faster with U2 but comms will pay off better in the long run.