# Should shorter events singles be not counted for records (NR/CR/WR)?

#### Klaudiusz Szyprocinski

##### Member
Funny how some of you consider getting rid of 2x2 single rankings but totally forget that we still have Rubik's Clock as official event.
2x2 single is probably the most scramble dependant event out there, but you still need a fine skill to execute the solution fast and to find the solution as well. I'm pretty sure Zayn could get it on 6-8 mover easily. Also you should take note that 3x3 single may be in similar situation in a few years. Are you going to bring the classic cube into the discussion as well?

#### oneshot

##### Member
I agree with this statement completely. Singles are a measure of performance in one stretch, and to judge a better competitor, it is always better to have a statistical measure like average or median score to find the fastest person.
I’m not so sure. If we compare it to another sport, like the 100 meters in track and field, it would be strange to make the important record the average of someone’s last five races. The goal of the cube is to take it from scrambled to solved in the shortest time. Just a thought for discussion.

#### xyzzy

##### Member
I’m not so sure. If we compare it to another sport, like the 100 meters in track and field, it would be strange to make the important record the average of someone’s last five races. The goal of the cube is to take it from scrambled to solved in the shortest time. Just a thought for discussion.
The difference is that in cubing, the individual results depend on RNG, a factor entirely out of the competitors' control. We're not being given a standard set of scrambles at every competition that we can practise to perfection.

I imagine there are still some variations in 100-metre sprints (like track material? is that standardised? idk) but I don't expect that that makes as much of a difference as scrambles do in cubing.

but you still need a fine skill to execute the solution fast and to find the solution as well.
An interesting sentiment from someone who only a few days ago claimed it didn't need any skill.

Are you going to bring the classic cube into the discussion as well?

3×3×3 squarely falls in the category of "shorter events" to me. Anything where the solve is faster than inspection surely should count as "short".

#### Timona

##### Member
3×3×3 squarely falls in the category of "shorter events" to me. Anything where the solve is faster than inspection surely should count as "short".
I really like this take. But in future, when the 4x4 WR becomes sub-15 (because I don't think we've reached the human limit yet, factoring luck too) would 4x4 be considered "shorter events"?

#### qwr

##### Member
I imagine there are still some variations in 100-metre sprints (like track material? is that standardised? idk)
Older records had less strict regulation (a couple of British guys running on a straight dirt path) but nowadays there are much tighter to count as official.

I think the most famous case is FloJo's 10.49 women's WR (set in 1988 and STILL the record) which was pretty significant for being likely wind-assisted.
It is widely believed that the anemometer was faulty for the race in which Griffith Joyner set this record.[68] A 1995 report commissioned by the IAAF estimated the true wind speed was between +5.0 m/s and +7.0 m/s, rather than the 0.0 recorded.[68] If this time, recorded in the quarter-final of the 1988 U.S. Olympic trials, were excluded, the world record (until the 10.54 recorded by Elaine Thompson-Herah on August 21, 2021) would have been 10.61 s, also by Griffith Joyner, recorded the next day at the same venue in the final.[68][69]

But I'm not a track and field expert so this maybe there are other examples