Ninja Storm
Veteran
No, we don't. We have covers that differ from competition to competition or delegate to delegate.
No, we don't. We have covers that differ from competition to competition or delegate to delegate.
Kirjava
Colourful
That is horrific
CheesecakeCuber
Veteran
Then WR will be way too hard to break becuz it does take some time to lift the cover...you could be off by .xx
rj
Veteran
True. We're talking 3x3 w/o inspection, though.
I agree that it seems cumbersome.
Since 3x3 with inspection is still the main event, and no-inspection is only a side event, maybe we can have it open only for 3x3 (with inspection) final round qualifiers. And only a single round.
Sort of an "attraction" type of thing at first, which will (hopefully) make people gain interest.
I think removing the cover yourself would be too slow for a 3x3 speedsolve event, if we want it to have comparable results to the with-inspection records.
What I would suggest would be, with the competitor's hands on the stackmat, to have the judge remove the cover, and start a stopwatch at the same time.
- The competitor must start the timer within 3 seconds, or a +2 penalty will be given.
- The competitor must start the timer within 5 seconds, or the solve will be considered a DNF.
Also, the judge might give a verbal signal, or a verbal 3-2-1 countdown before removing the cover so that it won't be too surprising.
One can argue that this still provides a (reduced) 3 second inspection, but given how short that time is, plus adding the time needed by the judge to get his arm (and the cover) out of the way, since the stopwatch is already running then, I don't think anyone would risk the +2 for a 3 second rotationless inspection.
Ah, are you referring to the 2010 regulation idea about reducing inspection to 10 seconds?
Thanks for making me look that up, that was a good read, provided me with a lot more insight to this.
I also learned a new word from Chris, ambivalent
Personally, I think reduced inspection is an unacceptable "compromise". It does not properly address the issue of there being a part of the solving process (a thinking step) being outside of the recorded solve time. At the same time, it introduces issues with existing records' validity and whatnot.
IMO it should be all-or-nothing.
Also, could you explain what you mean by the no-inspection attempts failing? Do you mean they failed to gain any traction or support, and the idea was soon abandoned?
Or do you mean the event failed because of complaints or problems? Like not having a consistent process, or inconsistencies with initial cube orientation, or whatnot?
I would really appreciate knowing the details on how these events fared.
-----
Personally, I think promoting no-inspection as a new standard over with-inspection, is comparable to promoting Roux as the new mainstream method over CFOP.
In that, one is already way too established, both as the standard, and in people's minds, that nothing short of a total upheaval will change it. But I feel that we should give it a chance (besides the ones linked above).
Of course, people gave Roux a chance, and now, it is actually not a total impossibility, being away only by a WR by 5BLD. Perhaps all no-inspection also needs is a chance. Maybe the increased credibility of such solves to noncubers might be so much more appealing that it attracts media attention, who knows?
But I also think they should remain separate events.
Just like how CFOP seemingly has some merits over Roux (big cubes, OHITA), oh I just know I'll get heat from Kir for this line lol
I believe 15 second inspection also has its merits, like allowing methods like ZZ and every-solve-xcross to exist.
I at least believe that just like Roux over CFOP, no-inspection won't be the new standard, but it has the potential to be just as well-established and recognized as with-inspection.
Last edited:
Stefan
Legend
That's one of the times inspection was discussed, yes. I'm sure we talked several times both about reduced-inspection and about no-inspection, though.
Yep, that. Maybe there are still some people doing it so it's not completely abandoned, but I don't know about it.
qqwref
Legend
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 7,834
- Location
- a <script> tag near you
- WCA ID
- 2006GOTT01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
[L' D2 L, R U R']
TDM
Legend
[L' U2 L, R U R'] = R U2 R'
kannabie
Member
maybe offtopic, but i just needed to share this with someone:
I just applied fullbright (w/black) cubicle.us stickers to my stickerless colored dayan and now i wonder why it didn't come to my mind before...
bright stickers over dull and bleak dayan original colors have produced a very interesting effect and the cube now looks a lot better than before )))
I just applied fullbright (w/black) cubicle.us stickers to my stickerless colored dayan and now i wonder why it didn't come to my mind before...
bright stickers over dull and bleak dayan original colors have produced a very interesting effect and the cube now looks a lot better than before )))
Last edited:
pipkiksass
Veteran
CubeSurfer
Regular
Yes that would be very interesting to see!Pic pls!
kannabie
Member
pictures time!
all pics taken without flash. stickered cube is dayan zhanchi 50mm, stickers - thecubicle.us full bright with black instead of white.
the effect is: it seems like the sides of the cube are made of colored transparent plastic and painted white on the inside (except white/black side). i think that it's a lot better than original stickerless version : ))
1. original dayan colors. the cube is panshi 57, not zhanchi. it depicts only color scheme which is similar to that of stickerless zhanchi.
2. "stickered" stickerless zhanchi 50
3. checkered pattern
4. scrambled
2. "stickered" stickerless zhanchi 50
3. checkered pattern
4. scrambled
Last edited by a moderator:
jdbryant
Regular
That's pretty cool... but I'm pretty sure my recognition would be really awful.
kannabie
Member
it shouldn't be once you get used to black instead of white. all other colors are the same.
Lchu613
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,148
- Location
- Ashburn, Virginia, USA
- WCA ID
- 2014CHUL01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
That's smexy.
Wish even more that they didn't /outlaw/ stickerless cubes. Just because it looks awesome.
Wish even more that they didn't /outlaw/ stickerless cubes. Just because it looks awesome.
Joël
Veteran
Hey guys, just a random announcement, for those who didn't know:
There is going to be an unofficial competition at a Dutch radiostation tonight!
https://www.3fm.nl/nieuws/detail/357315/1-november:-Ball-Park-Music-in-de-Freaknacht
If you are a Dutch cuber, you might want to join me and a few others.
There is going to be an unofficial competition at a Dutch radiostation tonight!
https://www.3fm.nl/nieuws/detail/357315/1-november:-Ball-Park-Music-in-de-Freaknacht
If you are a Dutch cuber, you might want to join me and a few others.
rj
Veteran
pictures time!
all pics taken without flash. stickered cube is dayan zhanchi 50mm, stickers - thecubicle.us full bright with black instead of white.
the effect is: it seems like the sides of the cube are made of colored transparent plastic and painted white on the inside (except white/black side). i think that it's a lot better than original stickerless version : ))
1. original dayan colors. the cube is panshi 57, not zhanchi. it depicts only color scheme which is similar to that of stickerless zhanchi.
2. "stickered" stickerless zhanchi 50
3. checkered pattern
4. scrambled
That looks really fun.
Cubenovice
Forever Slow
kannabie
Member
thanks everyone for appreciation)
first i thought - what's the point in stickering already COLORED cube?", but when i found spare unused stickers, i was, like, - "what the hell, i should try this" : ))
now i think of applying stickers of exact opposite color (yellow side - purple stickers, green- red, etc.) to another stickerless colored dayan. i think that should be amusing, although paifully hard for recognition.
Kirjava
Colourful
Fun to watch mod discussion appear then predictably get removed.
Similar threads
