Stevish. A programmer starts cubing.

stevish said:
Thanks for the encouragement, everyone.

I'm currently focused on F2L. I used the multi-phase option on csTimer to split my times into 4 phases, so I could look back at how long the cross, F2L, OLL and PLL each take me. It probably costs me a second or two to my total time to take a hand off the cube to hit the timer, but it's worth the insights it gives me. I ran through 6 solves that took between 0:56 and 1:20 and got these as my averages:
  • 13.31 seconds on the white cross
  • 35.95 seconds on F2L
  • 8.96 on OLL
  • 12.21 on PLL
So, it's pretty obvious where my biggest time cost is coming from. Can't hope to ever be sub-30 if your F2L takes 35!

As a proof of this, I just recorded a new PB of 46.28 (AND no skips!). It was because the F2L step went SO smoothly, where I recognized cases immediately and knew just what to do. I think there were even 2 perfectly matched pairs that only took a couple seconds to recognize and get inserted. Unfortunately, I wasn't recording split times, so I'm not sure how long each step took me, but I do remember that I froze up for a couple seconds on PLL as I tried to remember E-Perm, then carefully work through it (no matter how many times I do it in a row in practice, that thing still haunts me during solves). All that to say, while I was not at my best on OLL/PLL, I still crushed my PB by 4.5 seconds by nailing F2L.

So, in my next practice sessions, I will work the cross/F2L then rescramble and do it again. And I will do the F2L without rotating the cube at all no matter how long it takes. I've been doing really bad at the F and B turns, especially the B so... hopefully I get those figured out for use in F2L.
Click to expand...
Except for a very small amount of special cases, you shouldn't really use B moves in F2L. F moves are fine, and there are advanced tricks you can do with them in F* <RU> F*' types of solutions. For more basic things, you can consider R U' R' F' U' F vs R U' R' y' R' U' R. You might choose to use either of these solutions based on how that will affect the next pair. This is more advanced thinking and solutions stuff, but I thought I would mention this so you at least hear about this sort of thing so it's not as new of an idea when you get faster and learn more things.

For F move fingertricks, in home grip be able to do F and F' with the right and left index fingers respectively, with thumb on bottom right index push F', and learn to use your thumb to do F and F'. If you can do those finger tricks you should be fine for a very long time before you need to learn any other niche sort of finger tricks for F moves.

Going back to the B moves thing, on 3x3 you don't really need them.The only case I use B moves in is to insert an oriented edge into a back slot. You can convert B moves into wide F moves, which are more ergonomic usually. For example, instead of B U B' you can do f R f' if you don't want to rotate. Just be aware that lookahead may be more difficult with these kinds of solutions.

Minimizing rotations is good, but don't completely avoid them. They do have some benefits, because you can control where the open and solved slots are with smart rotations. If you are interested in optimizing your rotations, I would highly recommend you learn how to recognize EO (edge orientation). If you're interested in the theory behind EO and why it dictates when you have to use F/B moves or rotate let me know.
 
Welcome ! I am also a older cuber at age 47. There is a Facebook group for older cubers called : senoir cubers worldwide

i started with cfop and ended with roux which is even more intuitive solving method.
 
Time for an update! My times are slowly creeping down. I've been working a lot on cross and f2l.

For cross, I've been allowing myself unlimited inspection time and try to plan out the whole thing. Sometimes I do it blind, other times I watch. I still make mistakes in the planning, though, so that's frustrating.

For F2L I've just been cranking away. I tried about 10 solves with a metronome at 20 bpm, but I still sometimes have to skip a beat. I've also tried seeing a pair and then solving it blind, but so far that hasn't freed up my brain because I'm still just picturing the cube in my head while I do the turns. So even with my eyes closed I'm watching the pair I'm working on.

So, with all that happening, I recorded a new PB of 42.31 (half OLL skip and half PLL skip), and over my 10 timed solves yesterday, I averaged 1:00.76. When I sit down to do a competition-style Ao5, I usually score somewhere around 1:05, so that's what I'm calling my current level: 1:05. I want to get down to 0:55 before joining a competition because, looking at the last few comps in my area, that's what it would take to be fairly certain of not coming in last (which is what I'll be competing for).

I also took on a new goal: BLD! It seems so simple when you watch JPerm's video on it, and I thought it'd be a really cool and impressive thing to be able to do. But, so far, after 15-20 attempts at 15-30 minutes each, I have yet to complete one successfully. When I can, I video myself so I can go back and see where I went wrong, but even that is harder than it sounds. My biggest problem seems to be in the setup/unsetup moves. On my last attempt just now, I think I made only one mistake: On setup, I unnecessarily did l' instead of L, so when I reversed it, I did L instead of l. So, when I was done, everything was solved except the 4 centers and 4 edges that were in that M slice at the time. 1 move! 1! I did some rough calculations and I think a BLD solve using OP requires around 350 turns... that's a lot of opportunities for a mistake.
 
Last edited:
OH, HECK YES!!! First BLD Solve! In a funny stoke of luck, I spent 7:16 on memorization and 7:16 on the solve for a total of 14:32.65. The scramble was D' L2 D2 U2 F' D2 L2 R2 B F R2 U2 D' F' L B2 U' B R' D'.

Something funny happened, and I'm surprised I was able to get through it without a mistake. I'm not going to share my memo because it was embarrassingly vulgar, but part of it on edges was TAkes TIme, so I had TA TI. After the first T, I skipped to the I, which I finished before realizing it. So, then I had to undo it by doing I again. Then I did the A, then I did the I AGAIN! And undid it again. Then finally did the second T, and then the I. so TA TI became TI IA II TI. On the bright side, I feel like I'm pretty good at the setup moves for I now...

But yeah, I did it! Most comps I've looked up online (correct me if I'm wrong) do a Best of 3 and then have a cumulative time limit of 15 minutes for all three solves. So, if I did this as my first solve in a competition, then I wouldn't have DNF'd! Of course, I'd only have 27 and a half seconds for my next two attempts, but I would have finished 1!
 
In 3x3 news, I took off the training wheels for an ao5 attempt to see where I stood when following competition rules (which mostly means I stopped using unlimited inspection time to improve my cross). I started off with a 56.05, which was impressive for me, but not shockingly so. Then it only got better with 51.91, 47.98, 44.74 (only my second sub-45 ever), and 48.16. It gave me a new PB ao5 of 49.28! My first sub-50!

So, assuming I allow myself 5-10 warmup solves, it's looking like my global average could be sub-1:00. I'm still shooting for an average of 55, with no (or rare) a05's above 1:00 before I go to my first comp. My goal is to beat SOMEBODY at the competition (i.e. place not last). It feels like I'm on my way there.
 
100 timed solves later...

My Mo100 over the last week and a half is 57.91 (ao100 is 56.34). So, I think it's safe to classify myself as sub-1. I also recorded a new PB of 37.73! Full Step, too! The F2L just FLOWED, and I felt like I could see everything right away! It was a pretty easy F2L, but a week ago, that would not have resulted in a sub-40. My F2L is really starting to improve.

My 12yo son just started on the 3x3 in earnest. He did his first solve without instructions a few days ago, and is already recording PB's in the low 50's with the beginner's method. The kid is going to catch me in no time and I'm honestly pretty bummed about it (when I'm not being proud of him). This is something I've been working hard on and consider myself pretty good at... to have this kid catch up so quickly is a little demoralizing.
 
stevish said:
100 timed solves later...

My Mo100 over the last week and a half is 57.91 (ao100 is 56.34). So, I think it's safe to classify myself as sub-1. I also recorded a new PB of 37.73! Full Step, too! The F2L just FLOWED, and I felt like I could see everything right away! It was a pretty easy F2L, but a week ago, that would not have resulted in a sub-40. My F2L is really starting to improve.

My 12yo son just started on the 3x3 in earnest. He did his first solve without instructions a few days ago, and is already recording PB's in the low 50's with the beginner's method. The kid is going to catch me in no time and I'm honestly pretty bummed about it (when I'm not being proud of him). This is something I've been working hard on and consider myself pretty good at... to have this kid catch up so quickly is a little demoralizing.
Click to expand...
That’s just how it goes lol. Kids always pick up things and improve faster than us adults do. I wouldn’t really worry about making comparisons with your progress since you’re the only person in your own set of circumstances
 
Time for an update! I have recorded 1,000 solves, learned full PLL*, and improved my F2L case knowledge. My look ahead is nothing, and even on an easy cross I can't keep track of even 1 F2L pair. (*My Ab and Rb perms are just lefty Aa/Ra, and I'm using an atrocious Nb perm that's easy to remember but slow to execute)

My Ao5's are consistently between 35 and 45 with occasional outliers, especially above 45 if I don't do any warm up. I still get singles over 1:00 due to blown up algorithms, but it happens less than once in 15 solves, so I haven't had a counting 1:00+ in a long time. So, time-wise, I should be pretty solid on my first goal of joining a competition and getting not last place.

Speaking of competitions, there is finally one in my area! Assuming we can register before it fills up, we'll be able to compete in October. I'm looking to compete in 3x3, 2x2 and Skewb. I'm expecting it to take an average in the mid-to-high teens to make it to the second round in 3x3, so that goal still feels out of reach for me, since I don't have that much time for practice.

My son's progress is still going steadily. He's down to low 20's regularly and has recorded 1 or 2 sub-20 averages (yeah, I've completely given up on trying to keep up with him). We watched a lot of the World Championships on stream, and he is stoked about the next worlds being in the USA. We're not close to Seattle, but it's not entirely impossible for us to go. He's now working with the goal of getting into worlds, and wants to record a sub-7 average there. A lofty goal, but 2 years is definitely enough time if he puts in the work and has enough talent.
 
stevish said:
Time for an update! I have recorded 1,000 solves, learned full PLL*, and improved my F2L case knowledge. My look ahead is nothing, and even on an easy cross I can't keep track of even 1 F2L pair. (*My Ab and Rb perms are just lefty Aa/Ra, and I'm using an atrocious Nb perm that's easy to remember but slow to execute)

My Ao5's are consistently between 35 and 45 with occasional outliers, especially above 45 if I don't do any warm up. I still get singles over 1:00 due to blown up algorithms, but it happens less than once in 15 solves, so I haven't had a counting 1:00+ in a long time. So, time-wise, I should be pretty solid on my first goal of joining a competition and getting not last place.

Speaking of competitions, there is finally one in my area! Assuming we can register before it fills up, we'll be able to compete in October. I'm looking to compete in 3x3, 2x2 and Skewb. I'm expecting it to take an average in the mid-to-high teens to make it to the second round in 3x3, so that goal still feels out of reach for me, since I don't have that much time for practice.

My son's progress is still going steadily. He's down to low 20's regularly and has recorded 1 or 2 sub-20 averages (yeah, I've completely given up on trying to keep up with him). We watched a lot of the World Championships on stream, and he is stoked about the next worlds being in the USA. We're not close to Seattle, but it's not entirely impossible for us to go. He's now working with the goal of getting into worlds, and wants to record a sub-7 average there. A lofty goal, but 2 years is definitely enough time if he puts in the work and has enough talent.
Click to expand...
If your son practices regularly and effectively, he could reach sub 7 in 2 years, but he needs to work very hard! Thanks for the update, and what do you average in skewb?
 
stevish said:
Time for an update! I have recorded 1,000 solves, learned full PLL*, and improved my F2L case knowledge. My look ahead is nothing, and even on an easy cross I can't keep track of even 1 F2L pair. (*My Ab and Rb perms are just lefty Aa/Ra, and I'm using an atrocious Nb perm that's easy to remember but slow to execute)

My Ao5's are consistently between 35 and 45 with occasional outliers, especially above 45 if I don't do any warm up. I still get singles over 1:00 due to blown up algorithms, but it happens less than once in 15 solves, so I haven't had a counting 1:00+ in a long time. So, time-wise, I should be pretty solid on my first goal of joining a competition and getting not last place.

Speaking of competitions, there is finally one in my area! Assuming we can register before it fills up, we'll be able to compete in October. I'm looking to compete in 3x3, 2x2 and Skewb. I'm expecting it to take an average in the mid-to-high teens to make it to the second round in 3x3, so that goal still feels out of reach for me, since I don't have that much time for practice.

My son's progress is still going steadily. He's down to low 20's regularly and has recorded 1 or 2 sub-20 averages (yeah, I've completely given up on trying to keep up with him). We watched a lot of the World Championships on stream, and he is stoked about the next worlds being in the USA. We're not close to Seattle, but it's not entirely impossible for us to go. He's now working with the goal of getting into worlds, and wants to record a sub-7 average there. A lofty goal, but 2 years is definitely enough time if he puts in the work and has enough talent.
Click to expand...
stevish, welcome to the world of speedcubing. Glad to hear about your progress. Have you considered learning full OLL? What other events do you know?
 
stevish said:
Time for an update! I have recorded 1,000 solves, learned full PLL*, and improved my F2L case knowledge. My look ahead is nothing, and even on an easy cross I can't keep track of even 1 F2L pair. (*My Ab and Rb perms are just lefty Aa/Ra, and I'm using an atrocious Nb perm that's easy to remember but slow to execute)

My Ao5's are consistently between 35 and 45 with occasional outliers, especially above 45 if I don't do any warm up. I still get singles over 1:00 due to blown up algorithms, but it happens less than once in 15 solves, so I haven't had a counting 1:00+ in a long time. So, time-wise, I should be pretty solid on my first goal of joining a competition and getting not last place.

Speaking of competitions, there is finally one in my area! Assuming we can register before it fills up, we'll be able to compete in October. I'm looking to compete in 3x3, 2x2 and Skewb. I'm expecting it to take an average in the mid-to-high teens to make it to the second round in 3x3, so that goal still feels out of reach for me, since I don't have that much time for practice.

My son's progress is still going steadily. He's down to low 20's regularly and has recorded 1 or 2 sub-20 averages (yeah, I've completely given up on trying to keep up with him). We watched a lot of the World Championships on stream, and he is stoked about the next worlds being in the USA. We're not close to Seattle, but it's not entirely impossible for us to go. He's now working with the goal of getting into worlds, and wants to record a sub-7 average there. A lofty goal, but 2 years is definitely enough time if he puts in the work and has enough talent.
Click to expand...
I average sub 20. I use 2 look OLL and know almost all of PLL.

I feel like for you the best possible thing would be to improve your F2L (and keep grinding fast crosses - but that’s not so important in comparison)

Theres two ways you can do this:
1. If you love learning algorithms, then use this sheet made by essentially the GOAT of cubing to learn F2L Algs - they’re
easier than PLL Algs.
2. Otherwise, just practice F2L, learn a couple of the tricks from the alg sheet, and learn how to intuitively apply them.

Dont worry about OLL/PLL Atm. Also, could you share your splits?

https://www.cubeskills.com/uploads/pdf/tutorials/f2l.pdf - sheet
 
TheSpeedSkewber said:
If your son practices regularly and effectively, he could reach sub 7 in 2 years, but he needs to work very hard! Thanks for the update, and what do you average in skewb?
Click to expand...
I'm probably around 30 seconds on the skewb. I am purposefully not practicing on it because my youngest son is learning that and has been easily discouraged with other puzzles (he was working on 2x2, but when his big brother surpassed him, he gave up). So, I am trying to make sure that he will beat me at the competition to build his confidence. Once he gets a bit better, if he decides he likes it, he will probably keep working whether I'm faster than him or not. If he doesn't like it, though, he'll give up again and I won't push it anymore.

OtterCuber said:
stevish, welcome to the world of speedcubing. Glad to hear about your progress. Have you considered learning full OLL? What other events do you know?
Click to expand...
I can solve a megaminx in 6-8 minutes, pyra in 30 seconds, skewb in 30 seconds, 2x2 in 10-20. Those are all the puzzles we own right now. The only one I'm mildly serious about is 2x2, but I don't feel like I have the margin in my life to work hard on more than one puzzle. So, I will continue to focus almost all my cubing time on 3x3, with a little 2x2 practice from time to time. I only do megaminx for fun and to wrap my brain around color neutral F2L (so that I can transition to bi-color or color-neutral solving on 3x3, eventually)

CoderGuru said:
I average sub 20. I use 2 look OLL and know almost all of PLL.

I feel like for you the best possible thing would be to improve your F2L (and keep grinding fast crosses - but that’s not so important in comparison)

Theres two ways you can do this:
1. If you love learning algorithms, then use this sheet made by essentially the GOAT of cubing to learn F2L Algs - they’re
easier than PLL Algs.
2. Otherwise, just practice F2L, learn a couple of the tricks from the alg sheet, and learn how to intuitively apply them.

Dont worry about OLL/PLL Atm. Also, could you share your splits?

https://www.cubeskills.com/uploads/pdf/tutorials/f2l.pdf - sheet
Click to expand...
I haven't been tracking my splits, so I just did an ao12 with splits. My ao12 was 38.01, which is a little faster than my current average.
  • Cross: Fastest = 2.47, slowest = 8.57, mean = 5.65
  • F2L: Fastest = 12.59, slowest = 34.38, mean = 21.49. I had a streak of easy F2L's in this set. That 12.59 gave me a near PB of 26.97 total time and that included pulling my hand away to stop the timer at the splits. So that was definitely an outlier... 1 in 100. My second fastest F2L was 16.67, and I had a total of 5/12 under 20.
  • OLL: Fastest = 4.12, slowest = 7.2, mean = 5.62
  • PLL: Fastest = 3.72, slowest = 8.93, mean = 5.64. That slowest one was because I misread the case and had to do PLL twice. That happens maybe 1 out of 50 solves, usually, so that one's a bit of an outlier. Of course, that might be a normal time for my Nb. My second slowest was 7.38 and the rest were sub-7
So, in percentages that's 15% cross, 56% F2L, 15% OLL, and 15% PLL (yes, I know that's 101%, I rounded to the nearest percent and they all rounded up).

I am pretty confident that full OLL is not the way to go for me right now. Full PLL sped up my execution overall, but slows down my recognition of the PLL cases (since I have to identify between 21 instead of like 3). Basically, I don't have enough time to practice enough that I see all the cases every day. On a normal day I run through all the PLL algs twice, and do between 5 and 25 solves. Some days I do as many as 50 solves if I have spare time and whatever book I'm reading isn't very exciting. So, working on full OLL is likely to slow me down a lot since it would slow down the recognition of cases and I would blow up a lot of the algs because I wasn't able to practice them enough to remember them all.

I really think my best thing to do right now is practice what I already know. I watched a video from JPerm on older vs younger cubers and it really resonated with me and rang true. I, as an older cuber, tend to over-focus on study and knowledge, while younger cubers often over focus on practice. I think I need to slow down on learning new things and focus my time on repetition, seeing things over and over and over until I can recognize and do them more quickly. Especially F2L. Cross practice (and looking ahead to my first pair) would also be great because I have never been able to track a pair even on very easy crosses.
 
stevish said:
I really think my best thing to do right now is practice what I already know. I watched a video from JPerm on older vs younger cubers and it really resonated with me and rang true. I, as an older cuber, tend to over-focus on study and knowledge, while younger cubers often over focus on practice.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we definitely should practice more.
 
stevish said:
I'm probably around 30 seconds on the skewb. I am purposefully not practicing on it because my youngest son is learning that and has been easily discouraged with other puzzles (he was working on 2x2, but when his big brother surpassed him, he gave up). So, I am trying to make sure that he will beat me at the competition to build his confidence. Once he gets a bit better, if he decides he likes it, he will probably keep working whether I'm faster than him or not. If he doesn't like it, though, he'll give up again and I won't push it anymore.


I can solve a megaminx in 6-8 minutes, pyra in 30 seconds, skewb in 30 seconds, 2x2 in 10-20. Those are all the puzzles we own right now. The only one I'm mildly serious about is 2x2, but I don't feel like I have the margin in my life to work hard on more than one puzzle. So, I will continue to focus almost all my cubing time on 3x3, with a little 2x2 practice from time to time. I only do megaminx for fun and to wrap my brain around color neutral F2L (so that I can transition to bi-color or color-neutral solving on 3x3, eventually)


I haven't been tracking my splits, so I just did an ao12 with splits. My ao12 was 38.01, which is a little faster than my current average.
  • Cross: Fastest = 2.47, slowest = 8.57, mean = 5.65
  • F2L: Fastest = 12.59, slowest = 34.38, mean = 21.49. I had a streak of easy F2L's in this set. That 12.59 gave me a near PB of 26.97 total time and that included pulling my hand away to stop the timer at the splits. So that was definitely an outlier... 1 in 100. My second fastest F2L was 16.67, and I had a total of 5/12 under 20.
  • OLL: Fastest = 4.12, slowest = 7.2, mean = 5.62
  • PLL: Fastest = 3.72, slowest = 8.93, mean = 5.64. That slowest one was because I misread the case and had to do PLL twice. That happens maybe 1 out of 50 solves, usually, so that one's a bit of an outlier. Of course, that might be a normal time for my Nb. My second slowest was 7.38 and the rest were sub-7
So, in percentages that's 15% cross, 56% F2L, 15% OLL, and 15% PLL (yes, I know that's 101%, I rounded to the nearest percent and they all rounded up).

I am pretty confident that full OLL is not the way to go for me right now. Full PLL sped up my execution overall, but slows down my recognition of the PLL cases (since I have to identify between 21 instead of like 3). Basically, I don't have enough time to practice enough that I see all the cases every day. On a normal day I run through all the PLL algs twice, and do between 5 and 25 solves. Some days I do as many as 50 solves if I have spare time and whatever book I'm reading isn't very exciting. So, working on full OLL is likely to slow me down a lot since it would slow down the recognition of cases and I would blow up a lot of the algs because I wasn't able to practice them enough to remember them all.

I really think my best thing to do right now is practice what I already know. I watched a video from JPerm on older vs younger cubers and it really resonated with me and rang true. I, as an older cuber, tend to over-focus on study and knowledge, while younger cubers often over focus on practice. I think I need to slow down on learning new things and focus my time on repetition, seeing things over and over and over until I can recognize and do them more quickly. Especially F2L. Cross practice (and looking ahead to my first pair) would also be great because I have never been able to track a pair even on very easy crosses.
Click to expand...
Excellent analysis :). I find this thread really interesting to read. I think JPerm has some F2L videos as well, including a new advanced F2l one - that ones good
 
Well, it looks like my goal of finishing not-last in a competition will have to wait. Since 2 of my sons were also wanting to compete in the competition in Orlando, I had a whole system set up: 2 computers, 3 different browsers, everyone logged in, event preferences set, payment info in the auto-fill. I had even practiced by registering for a different competition when it opened and cancelling my registration. But after wrestling with very slow load times of the WCA site and Stripe payment form, my payment didn't make it through until 8:02:43 (according to my receipt), a mere 163 seconds after registration opened. It wasn't fast enough. My kids were paid up a little earlier (with the second payment going through at 8:02:32) and they made it into the 100 competitor limit, while I got waitlisted :(. It sounds like they got almost 200 registrations before they closed the registration at 8:24. For those counting, that's 200 registrations and payments in 24 minutes.

As I've said to others, the main event is 3x3, but the qualifying event was speed-registering, and 160 seconds or so was the qualifying time. I feel I was ripped off and that being a professional speed-register-er shouldn't be a requirement, but at the same time I get that the venue only holds 100 people and you have to make some sort of cutoff. Since competitions aren't allowed to make a profit, there's little motivation for organizers to see this under-tapped central Florida market and start filling the gap with more competitions. I'm pretty sure you could announce a 400-competitor event in Orlando and fill it up in less than 48 hours (remembering that this one just hooked 200 in 24 minutes).
 
stevish said:
Well, it looks like my goal of finishing not-last in a competition will have to wait. Since 2 of my sons were also wanting to compete in the competition in Orlando, I had a whole system set up: 2 computers, 3 different browsers, everyone logged in, event preferences set, payment info in the auto-fill. I had even practiced by registering for a different competition when it opened and cancelling my registration. But after wrestling with very slow load times of the WCA site and Stripe payment form, my payment didn't make it through until 8:02:43 (according to my receipt), a mere 163 seconds after registration opened. It wasn't fast enough. My kids were paid up a little earlier (with the second payment going through at 8:02:32) and they made it into the 100 competitor limit, while I got waitlisted :(. It sounds like they got almost 200 registrations before they closed the registration at 8:24. For those counting, that's 200 registrations and payments in 24 minutes.

As I've said to others, the main event is 3x3, but the qualifying event was speed-registering, and 160 seconds or so was the qualifying time. I feel I was ripped off and that being a professional speed-register-er shouldn't be a requirement, but at the same time I get that the venue only holds 100 people and you have to make some sort of cutoff. Since competitions aren't allowed to make a profit, there's little motivation for organizers to see this under-tapped central Florida market and start filling the gap with more competitions. I'm pretty sure you could announce a 400-competitor event in Orlando and fill it up in less than 48 hours (remembering that this one just hooked 200 in 24 minutes).
Click to expand...
What place are you on the waiting list? Top 5 normally get a chance, and i've heard in some cases people have emailed the delegate/organiser to see if they can make an exception.
 
So, there were lots of new developments on this competition, so I'm writing this comment for completeness. The waiting list came out and I was 95th out of 97 people on the list. Best we can tell is that while my payment went through at 8:02, the WCA site never made that connection. Later, when I looked at the registration page, it said I hadn't paid yet (even though I already had my receipt), and I clicked on "pay" again. Without charging me, the site immediately showed that I had paid. Unfortunately, it recorded my payment then (which was 9:01, almost an hour after my card was charged).

This created the situation for the organizers that they couldn't put me in to the competition because the site showed I was 95th in the order. But later, as they were working with the WCA Tech team, that team was able to prove when my payment came in, and they bumped me to the beginning of the waiting list. It also sounds like maybe they fixed something in the code to make it read the actual payment date/time rather than the date/time the WCA site received the payment info. That should help avoid this specific situation in the future.

A big issue was that around 250 people were all trying to register immediately, and the site couldn't handle it. Aside from migrating to a bigger/better server or using cloud computing to dynamically add more processors/memory to handle high traffic (both of which require time and money), I'm not sure what could be done to avoid the same crashing in the future.

Throughout the process, everyone worked very hard to make sure it was fair for everyone. They even raised the competitor limit to fix another error where 15 people who shouldn't have gotten in did. This way they could let in the people who should have made it, without having to take kick anybody out who was already in. Unfortunately, they did this before resolving my situation, so now I am just #1 on the waiting list, even though I was within the first 100 to register and pay.

Besides the prospective competitors who may not have had a fair chance to register in time, some more "victims" of this situation are all the organizers/delegates involved in the registration process. They had to deal with tons of emails, confusion, and probably a little hate while they tried to figure out how to deal with information coming in from a system that had broken down on them. From where I'm sitting, they all did a phenomenal job with what they had. Even the WCA team that runs the website did what they could with what they had. Budgets don't always allow for systems that are as robust as this one needed to be. Plus, all these competitions are done in such a way that minimizes costs to the competitors, which opens up the sport of cubing as a possibility for a lot more people. Can you imagine if the competitions were all run for profit and the prices were sometimes driven way up as a result? What if Max Park's parents had looked into it and had to decide that competitions were just too expensive, and they should try to get Max into a different hobby?

So, all that to say I have a good chance of competing at this event after all, and I'm thankful to the staff who made that possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
AI will make programmers lose their jobs!!
Replies
3
Views
639
Petro Leum
Petro Leum
W
Custom Programmable Smartcube
Replies
1
Views
436
SpeakCuba
SpeakCuba
B
programmers wanted for the Pyraminx, Megaminx and Square-1
Replies
2
Views
1,660
Lucas Garron
Lucas Garron
B
Programmers wanted for 2x2x2, 4x4x4 and 5x5x5 cubes
2
Replies
21
Views
7,442
bcube
B
B
Programmers wanted
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9,464
bcube
B
Back
Top