• 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

elrog

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
514
Location
U.S.A.
YouTube
elrog3
I disagree with the single being what wins the competition. I think that your first priority should be to actually solve the cube whereas speed comes afterwards. So yes, a person with a "2 minute mean of 3" should be placed ahead of someone with a sub 40 single and 2 DNFs. I would not go so far as to say one DNF automatically ruins your place, because mistakes can happen. So I think having a single DNF should average your 2 times you completed and add some portion of time (kind of like the +2 rule).
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
I disagree with the single being what wins the competition. I think that your first priority should be to actually solve the cube whereas speed comes afterwards. So yes, a person with a "2 minute mean of 3" should be placed ahead of someone with a sub 40 single and 2 DNFs. I would not go so far as to say one DNF automatically ruins your place, because mistakes can happen. So I think having a single DNF should average your 2 times you completed and add some portion of time (kind of like the +2 rule).
That would be a very extreme change to the regulations, and also a system that could be taken advantage of pretty easily. For example, if you're going to get a bad time on your third solve after getting two good solves, you could DNF on purpose, and that would be counterproductive. It is also very easy to DNF, especially if you're going for your fastest times, so it would basically punish people for trying to get good times.
 

uvafan

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
995
WCA
2012LIFL01
YouTube
uvafan173
That would be a very extreme change to the regulations, and also a system that could be taken advantage of pretty easily. For example, if you're going to get a bad time on your third solve after getting two good solves, you could DNF on purpose, and that would be counterproductive. It is also very easy to DNF, especially if you're going for your fastest times, so it would basically punish people for trying to get good times.
I'm anticipating that the rebuttal to this would be that you should be able to get really fast times without DNFing after lots of practice - however, no matter what level you are at, if you are pushing yourself in an event like 3BLD as far as you can go, you will DNF a fair amount. Elrog's proposal would discourage people from pushing themselves as hard as they could, which would lead to slower times being achieved.

I agree with your proposal, Noah.
 

Kit Clement

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,320
Location
Portland, OR
WCA
2008CLEM01
YouTube
KitClement
I initially voted no, tried writing down a reason to match my first intuition, and have now changed my mind. As long as the competitions are ranked by singles, I don't see why we cannot add the "missing" means to profiles.
 

Tim Major

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
5,381
Location
Melbourne, Australia
WCA
2010MAJO01
BLD mo3 is already ranked on the WCA site, so basically what this thread is proposing it to make the rankings more accessible by putting it in the "Rankings" section along with the other official rankings?

(https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/misc/missing_averages/)
BLD is probably the event I practise most apart from Pyra/Skewb. I suck at it, sure, but I generally try to do a few solves each day, so I actually care from a personal point of view, not just an outside view. I average about 2:10 with a PB of 1:18.

I think rankings and competition wins should still be single based. Are you suggesting adding means to the rankings sites exactly like.... 6x6/7x7? So extra records are added? If so, as long as it doesn't effect competition standings or replace single in the rankings I think that's fine. But I definitely feel single should be the way a podium is decided at competitions.

Edit: I voted no before posting this, but now I'd vote "I support this" or "I think this is reasonable". I DEFINITELY think no to "Yes, and I *also* think competitions should be able to rank BLD using mean of 3."
 
Last edited:

Akiro

Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
187
Location
Montreal, Canada
WCA
2012GABO01
I totally agree with Noah, and I think that this proposition would only bring benefits.

Also, 2032 different competitors have competed in 3BLD, while only 1515 have competed in 7x7 and 1597 in 6x6 (and I could go on, feet, ...) but there are Mo3 for 7x7 and 6x6 but not for 3BLD...
And since it takes even less time for world class cubers to solve 3BLD than 7x7 and 6x6, I think that this is another argument that should be taken in consideration for why 3BLD should have its Mo3.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
BLD is probably the event I practise most apart from Pyra/Skewb. I suck at it, sure, but I generally try to do a few solves each day.

I think rankings and competition wins should still be single based. Are you suggesting adding means to the rankings sites exactly like.... 6x6/7x7? So extra records are added? If so, as long as it doesn't effect competition standings or replace single in the rankings I think that's fine. But I definitely feel single should be the way a podium is decided at competitions.
Omg... people need to read the proposal before voting! I say more than once that competitions would still be based on single. I don't know how I could be more clear about that.



This would ONLY add one official ranking. This would not change how competitions are won.


Maybe that will help.
 

Tim Major

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
5,381
Location
Melbourne, Australia
WCA
2010MAJO01
Omg... people need to read the proposal before voting! I say more than once that competitions would still be based on single. I don't know how I could be more clear about that.



This would ONLY add one official ranking. This would not change how competitions are won.


Maybe that will help.
Sorry Noah, did you edit in the bold text in the original post when you edited your post? I opened this thread about an hour ago so maybe I missed that. Sorry for skimming if you didn't make that change.
 

Ollie

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
2,851
Location
London, UK
WCA
2012FROS01
YouTube
OliverFrostBLD
If this has been raised already, then I'm only <10% sorry. But 3BLD is becoming much more scramble dependent, as interest in the event increased. Plus Mo3 adds an extra element of accuracy and consistency. I'm all for it.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
Sorry Noah, did you edit in the bold text in the original post when you edited your post? I opened this thread about an hour ago so maybe I missed that. Sorry for skimming if you didn't make that change.
The bold text has been there since a few days after I first made the thread. I understand why there is so much confusion. It just frustrates me because I worry that it will affect the outcome of the situation :/
 

A Leman

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
631
Location
New Jersey
I think this should be done. A lot of people would be happy to scale back the pressure/stress of NEEDING to go all out all the time and just hope that you get a good scramble, especially if they are competing for podium against very close competition.

This will also be a better measure of who the better BLD solver is and will take some of the luck out of the world rankings list.

Also, all of the data from previous competitions is already available so the WCA can easily acknowledge previous means.
 

Sa967St

Not A Moderator
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
3,795
Location
Waterloo, ON, Canada
WCA
2007STRO01
YouTube
Sa967St
I initially voted no, tried writing down a reason to match my first intuition, and have now changed my mind. As long as the competitions are ranked by singles, I don't see why we cannot add the "missing" means to profiles.
Edit: I voted no before posting this, but now I'd vote "I support this" or "I think this is reasonable". I DEFINITELY think no to "Yes, and I *also* think competitions should be able to rank BLD using mean of 3."
As far as I know, your votes cannot be changed -- poll settings are weird here.

Both your names will still appear under "No", but I decreased "No" by 2 votes and increased "I think this is reasonable" by 2 votes to compensate for both of you changing your mind.
 

uvafan

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
995
WCA
2012LIFL01
YouTube
uvafan173
Currently, if a Mean of 3 event is run as Best of 3, there is no official average, even though the times for a mean are there (e.g. here).

Why should BLD be an exception to the current standard?
The proposal isn't to make it a mo3 event, for reasons already stated by many people in this thread... There will be rankings, but competitions will not be able to rank by mo3.

A summary of the reasons for this is that someone who DNFs one of his/her three solves but is much faster than someone who gets three successes but is much slower should not be ranked behind him/her.

Please read the posts above you.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
uvafan, you have misunderstood Torch.

Currently, if a Mean of 3 event is run as Best of 3, there is no official average, even though the times for a mean are there (e.g. here).

Why should BLD be an exception to the current standard?
For the reasons I listed in the original post.
 

uberCuber

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
3,921
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
WCA
2011THOM01
As far as I know, your votes cannot be changed -- poll settings are weird here.

Both your names will still appear under "No", but I decreased "No" by 2 votes and increased "I think this is reasonable" by 2 votes to compensate for both of you changing your mind.
So it lets you arbitrarily change the number of votes in the poll but won't let you move the names? That's kinda dumb


Anyway, I voted yes, because I like rankings, and adding this one to the profiles can't hurt if we aren't changing how individual competitions are ranked.
 

strakerak

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
938
Location
Houston, TX
YouTube
CubingBattles
I think it is reasonable, BUT there are several people that can destroy averages. 2DNF or even 3. Also, what if you have a really really good time, (29 seconds) then get a 58 and a 42. Then someone gets a 32,33,34. Why not rank the best time instead of the average?
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
I think it is reasonable, BUT there are several people that can destroy averages. 2DNF or even 3. Also, what if you have a really really good time, (29 seconds) then get a 58 and a 42. Then someone gets a 32,33,34. Why not rank the best time instead of the average?
The idea is to rank both, of course. Competitions would still be decided by single, but there would be a mean of 3 ranking as well.
 
Top