• 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

strakerak

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
938
Location
Houston, TX
YouTube
CubingBattles
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.
Ah. I didn't understand that in the first place.

If you are talking about competition being m3, then definite no. But if it is only a rank in the WCA for kinks, then yeah.
 

KiwiCuber

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
179
Location
New Zealand
WCA
2013ASBE01
Ah. I didn't understand that in the first place.

If you are talking about competition being m3, then definite no. But if it is only a rank in the WCA for kinks, then yeah.
How many times can noah possibly say this.

He is proposing the way competition 3bld is determined remains unchanged (fastest single wins), BUT there will be a WCA official ranking of 3bld Mo3
I dont know why people are having such a hard time understanding such a simple concept here
 

elrog

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
514
Location
U.S.A.
YouTube
elrog3
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 understand that it is easy to DNF, but DNFing more than half of your solves is a bit extreme. Also, If my idea were taken, it wouldn't keep people from trying to go as fast as they could unless they already DNF'd once. I'll bet that there would also be some people who would try going for the single (if they were close to the WR) if they saw they had a good scramble weather it risked the average anyway despite the average winning the competition.
 
Last edited:

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
more than half of your solves is a bit extreme
Not in BLD, especially for beginners. Any situation where you HAVE to get a success should be avoided. No BLDer can 100% guarantee a success on any one solve. There are just too many factors that come into play.
 

elrog

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
514
Location
U.S.A.
YouTube
elrog3
I think you could probably guarantee 100% success if you didn't go as fast as you could, and I know that me making this statement kind of proves your point. But I still stand where I'm at.
 

uvafan

Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
995
WCA
2012LIFL01
YouTube
uvafan173
I think you could probably guarantee 100% success if you didn't go as fast as you could, and I know that me making this statement kind of proves your point. But I still stand where I'm at.
That is just not true. May I ask how much experience you have with blindsolving?

Even so, you admit that you may need go slightly slower to raise success rate. Why would you ever want to encourage competitors to not perform to their best ability?
 
Last edited:

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
No BLDer can 100% guarantee a success on any one solve.
I think you could probably guarantee 100% success if you didn't go as fast as you could
No BLDer can 100% guarantee a success on any one solve.


EDIT: Often going slower hurts your accuracy ;)

EDIT2: ninja'd. I'd also like to know what BLD experience you are drawing this information from, since all of my past experience says otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Sebastien

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
800
WCA
2008AURO01
While I'd like to see more recognition going to great 3BLD-Means, there is one big thing bothering me:

The proposal includes providing official records for a format, that we do not officially offer for that event. I'm afraid of this being a precedent followed by the demand of recognizing other arbitrary records to be recognized.
 

Torch

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
1,441
Location
Austell, GA, USA
WCA
2014GOSL01
YouTube
channel/UC9uTb1qyRStw1KjP832V_Tw
While I'd like to see more recognition going to great 3BLD-Means, there is one big thing bothering me:

The proposal includes providing official records for a format, that we do not officially offer for that event. I'm afraid of this being a precedent followed by the demand of recognizing other arbitrary records to be recognized.
This is exactly what I was saying in my last post, for anyone who was confused.
 

cubizh

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
602
Location
Portugal
WCA
2014GOME07
YouTube
cubizh
I think a Mean of 3 is an obvious way to go here.
It all depends on who you want to win your competitions: the person who is skillful/lucky/fast on only one solve, regardless of the other two or someone who is a better blind solver and is consistent and completes all attempts in the fastest way.
It's not an easy decision, but some of the 1/2 mbld reasoning can be applied here: how many of the actual DNFs people have in 3BLD are a result of "meh, this scramble is too hard, can never beat my previous one. Sorry for the scrambling time wasting. Let's see if the next one is better. DNF"
I believe the same is currently being thought out for FMC. With the implementation of mean of 3, it will make people actually bother to check that they have a valid solution written down.

It's worth to note that adding "Mean of 3" doesn't necessarily result in "Best of X" being abandoned at all.
Noah can still go and enjoy "Best of X" 3BLD competitions, but there's the possibility to have official ranking for Mean of 3 3BLD, for competition organizers that choose to have it implemented.
For additional information, a note regarding the evolution of Best of X 3BLD events according to the adopted format:


tl;dr
I think "3x3 blindfolded" should be added to 9b2).
Question: Is ao5 too far fetched?
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
While I'd like to see more recognition going to great 3BLD-Means, there is one big thing bothering me:

The proposal includes providing official records for a format, that we do not officially offer for that event. I'm afraid of this being a precedent followed by the demand of recognizing other arbitrary records to be recognized.
While this would break the precedent of "Best of X" events only having single rankings, I don't think that a slippery slope argument works, because it does not break the larger precedent of only ranking singles, averages of 5 and means of 3. Because of that, the only demand that this could possibly be followed by is a demand for means in 4BLD, 5BLD, MBLD and FMC to be ranked. I'm not going to touch FMC, but for the other three events, single is a much better representation of skill than it is in 3BLD. If 4BLD started having the same problems that 3BLD has right now, I would definitely argue for 4BLD means to be ranked.


I think a Mean of 3 is an obvious way to go here.
It all depends on who you want to win your competitions: the person who is skillful/lucky/fast on only one solve, regardless of the other two or someone who is a better blind solver and is consistent and completes all attempts in the fastest way.
It's not an easy decision, but some of the 1/2 mbld reasoning can be applied here: how many of the actual DNFs people have in 3BLD are a result of "meh, this scramble is too hard, can never beat my previous one. Sorry for the scrambling time wasting. Let's see if the next one is better. DNF"
I believe the same is currently being thought out for FMC. With the implementation of mean of 3, it will make people actually bother to check that they have a valid solution written down.

It's worth to note that adding "Mean of 3" doesn't necessarily result in "Best of X" being abandoned at all.
Noah can still go and enjoy "Best of X" 3BLD competitions, but there's the possibility to have official ranking for Mean of 3 3BLD, for competition organizers that choose to have it implemented.
For additional information, a note regarding the evolution of Best of X 3BLD events according to the adopted format:


tl;dr
I think "3x3 blindfolded" should be added to 9b2).
Question: Is ao5 too far fetched?
I think we want the person with the fastest time to win. As I said earlier in this thread, I think it would be a mistake to put BLDers in a position where they would have to get a success. It just won't happen a lot of the time.
 

sneze2r

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
162
Location
Rumia, Poland
WCA
2012JALO01
YouTube
sneze2r
I agree that mo3 should be officialy ranked, but there is one point argument it i dont get:
1. The WR single has basically gotten to the point that anyone who wants to beat it would need a fairly lucky scramble (Marcell included).
I disagree. At this moment WR is weak, even Zalewski says it can be easilly improved. And i wouldn't say that fairy lucky scramble is nessesary to beat it. I think that even 12/8 with good algs would be enough to beat it.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
NoahCubes
I agree that mo3 should be officialy ranked, but there is one point argument it i dont get:

I disagree. At this moment WR is weak, even Zalewski says it can be easilly improved. And i wouldn't say that fairy lucky scramble is nessesary to beat it. I think that even 12/8 with good algs would be enough to beat it.
12/8 with or without good algs is fairly lucky in my opinion. If what you say is true though, then I did overestimate the speed of the WR a bit.
 

cubizh

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
602
Location
Portugal
WCA
2014GOME07
YouTube
cubizh
That's not the point. The point is to make BLD better for BLDers, and to have another degree of accuracy in rankings.
I don't see anything wrong with promoting accuracy in the outcome of certain blindsolving events. The added pressure can be an interesting difficulty added to that event, but not all.
Again, adding Mo3 official DOES NOT imply Best of X is going to dissapear at all. It doesn't change the current way things are done.
It just adds another degree of freedom for organizers to choose what they want to implement.
I leave here some other facts about 3BLD Best of 3 in competitions:

Year/Solved cubes

0 solved

1 solved

2 solved

All 3 solved

2004

2

1

4

0

2005

10

13

9

3

2006

40

35

24

11

2007

121

111

62

16

2008

386

358

150

59

2009

579

446

230

55

2010

1061

855

385

111

2011

1312

1192

542

161

2012

1340

1294

663

167

2013

1580

1538

827

294

TOTAL

6431

5843

2896

877

# of Competitors

# of Competitions

0

667

1

319

2

117

3

51

4

23

5

6

6

2

7

1

8

1

9

1

10

0

11

0

12

0

13

1


So this reads: in 667 competitions, no one solved all three attempts; in 1 competition, 13 competitors solved all 3 attempts.
 

Marcell

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
294
WCA
2007ENDR01
I voted yes. Accuracy must be recognised in BLD. I agree with Noah and support his arguments.

[off]And I'm also pretty sure it would be better if we changed the way we rank competitions to something like "mean of the best 2 of 3 attempts". We need to change the way we think about BLD - "I can solve the cube blindfolded... sometimes" means you can't really.[/off]
 

szalejot

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
247
Location
Warsaw, Poland
WCA
2015HERM01
I voted yes. Accuracy must be recognised in BLD. I agree with Noah and support his arguments.

[off]And I'm also pretty sure it would be better if we changed the way we rank competitions to something like "mean of the best 2 of 3 attempts". We need to change the way we think about BLD - "I can solve the cube blindfolded... sometimes" means you can't really.[/off]
This. +1, Like, whatever...
 
Top