• 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!

Should official 3BLD mo3s be ranked? (Read the first post)

Do you support adding a "Mean of 3" ranking to the WCA website for BLD?


  • Total voters
    135
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
5,472
Location
near Ottawa, Canada
WCA
2010CANT02
YouTube
antoineccantin
People are still gonna rank if they get say 2 DNFs, just not in the mo3 ranking. (on an unrelated note: I have never had all successes in a BLD round :p)
As for competitions, the format wouldn't have to change, it could still remain best of 3. The only difference would be that you could break official mo3 records, which imo is not that bad of an idea because consistence (success-wise) would get acknowledged.

On the other hand, the focus of many competitors might get drawn away from the idea of winning the competition (by getting a good single) to the want to get a better mean of 3, regardless of the ranking in the competition itself. Not sure if that's "in the spirit" of the WCA.
Wrong. Berlin Open 2012.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
Should official 3BLD mo3s be ranked?

Some people (Ben Whitmore) Really need to learn how to read (it's kinda frustrating). Anyway, I made the OP a little more comprehensive.
 

TMOY

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
1,802
WCA
2008COUR01
On the other hand, the focus of many competitors might get drawn away from the idea of winning the competition (by getting a good single) to the want to get a better mean of 3, regardless of the ranking in the competition itself. Not sure if that's "in the spirit" of the WCA.
IMHO the spirit of the WCA is to have fun. You are allowed to do whatever you want with your official attempts, as long as it complies with the rules and you don't disturb or slow down too much the competition. And look at Clément and Tim: they clearly already focus more on accuracy than on speed (both could be faster if they took more risks).

And there's also a situation I always find a little annoying: when you get a really good time on your first or second attempt, and then, well, what am I gonna do now ? I probably won't beat that, so my remaining attempts are useless. The possibility to get a good mo3 would at least give an interest to these solves.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
Hello everyone!

I have talked to Lucas about this issue, and he told me that there needed to be more of a response from the community about it.

For that reason a poll has been added to the top of this thread, so please use it to express your opinion on this issue.

I have updated the first post in this thread with more detailed arguments about why 3BLD mo3 rankings should be added to the WCA site. Just so that everyone knows, the proposed regulation would not change BLD to a mo3 event. It would simply add rankings for 3BLD means of 3, and maybe add mo3 as a format for 3BLD.

Please also make a post explaining why you are voting for the option you have chosen, especially if you take part in blindfolded solving. I have discussed this issue with quite a few people, and I have not heard a good argument against adding this ranking, so I am especially interested in what you have to say if you vote "no".
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes

tseitsei

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
1,361
Location
Tampere, Finland
WCA
2012LEHT01
I think this is a good idea, because if I get a scramble with 3+ edge cycles in competition I would probably give up during the memo because I know my time would suck anyway.

But if mo3 was a thing I would definitely try to get a success, even if I knew it would be slightly slower one in hopes of getting two more good solves and a good mo3.
It also wouldn't add any extra work for organizers or anyone. You could just change that unofficial mo3 list to official. Easy...

I still think that singles should be the ones that determine the winner of the competitions for obvious reason...
Even for very good/fast BLDers mo3 wouldn't be easy to get if they tried to maintain their speed and DNFing is still a part of BLD.
 

Angel Lim

Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2013
Messages
35
WCA
2013LIMA01
So far I've competed in 10 competitions, all of them with 3BLD as my primary focus. I currently have a 32.19 single, so I think I have some experience on this matter. I believe that mo3s should be officially ranked. Noah is completely right about getting a fast single at this level is at least partly luck: At home I have gotten a single like 26.xx followed by a 40.xx. Why? Because scrambles can really affect my times by that much.

Recognition should be awarded to people who can 1. consistently get successes under pressure 2. fast times under all different "types" of scrambles. People with some experience in BLD would know what I'm talking about when I say "types". Pushing yourself to get a fast single in comp and staying clear-minded enough to get a mo3 are two different skills in themselves, and by making mo3s official, it helps to differentiate the two.

Of course singles should be still what win competitions
, because a 2 minute mean of 3 should not win against someone who got, say, a sub-40 single follwed by two DNFs. Just some of my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

Mikel

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
1,323
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2011MIKE01
YouTube
rayquazapwn88
I do BLD.

Mean of 3's are hard.

So I voted No.

Edit:

I also feel that it would drastically change the event game play to try to slow me down in order to achieve better accuracy. I don't really think this is a good idea, unless Mo3 becomes a format for 333bf, 444bf, 555bf, and 333mbf. If you argue against 333mbf mo3, the time limit is an hour, which should not be a problem since FMC is also looking at mo3.
 
Last edited:

Mollerz

Swag Overlord
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
1,204
Location
Surrey, England
WCA
2011MOLL01
YouTube
CalciumIRL
So far I've competed in 10 competitions, all of them with 3BLD as my primary focus. I currently have a 32.19 single, so I think I have some experience on this matter. I believe that mo3s should be officially ranked. Noah is completely right about getting a fast single at this level is at least partly luck: At home I have gotten a single like 26.xx followed by a 40.xx. Why? Because scrambles can really affect my times by that much.

Recognition should be awarded to people who can 1. consistently get successes under pressure 2. fast times under all different "types" of scrambles. People with some experience in BLD would know what I'm talking about when I say "types". Pushing yourself to get a fast single in comp and staying clear-minded enough to get a mo3 are two different skills in themselves, and by making mo3s official, it helps to differentiate the two.

Of course singles should be still what win competitions
, because a 2 minute mean of 3 should not win against someone who got, say, a sub-40 second single. Just some of my thoughts.
This follows my point of view as well, 3BLD can have ranked official times for the mean of 3, however, the single should be what competitions are ranked by.
 

Tim Wong

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
7
Location
Los Angeles, CA
WCA
2007WONG02
YouTube
TimothyWong24
I agree with Noah and Angel. As a cuber who focuses on BLD events, adding an official MO3 is very reasonable. I've been competing in BLD for a little bit less than a year now and have a 32.44 Single and 39.xx MO3 within that round. It is fair to determine the winners of the competition based on the single, since everyone in that competition gets the same scrambles. However, the single is not very representative of the cuber's overall ability in blind solving. For elite blind solvers, the time is very dependent on the scramble. I had 12 edge targets and 6 corner targets and a corner twist in my 32 official single which is a pretty decent scramble. If I had parity and more twists/flips, it would have taken me 5-10 seconds longer to solve it. This is why a MO3 would be a more accurate representation of a cuber's ability in blind solving. An average of 5 would take too long and that would change the whole format of the BLD event. Although some would argue that it is difficult to achieve a MO3 officially in BLD, I would say that it encourages cubers to work harder in the BLD event.
 
Top