The CubeCast 2.0 - Montage Released!

We've been thinking about how we should go about reporting records that are set, and what we've noticed is there are a outrageous amount of national records set each week. At Singapore Open alone, there were 42 national records set by competitors representing Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Korea. Since recording the Noah episode, there have been hundreds and hundreds of national records set, and it doubt anyone would like to hear all of them.

We intend to report on all continental and world records. However, our main concern is reporting national records due to the sheer amount of time it will take us to research, and the time that such a report would occupy per episode.

Thus, we've had the following ideas as potential practices:

1. Report all national records.
This is what we have tried to do, our "current policy". I'm not sure why we missed so many for the Kit episode, but we did, and I feel very uneasy about it.
Reporting all national records ensures that every listener is aware of the improvement in results and the growth of cubing worldwide. Reporting all national records also allows the national record holders to be in the spotlight, from Wojciech Knott's Clock NRs for Poland (which are unbelievably close to the WR times) to the first Clock results for Bosnia and Herzegovina by Renato Stopic. Every NR breaker gets the chance to be recognised for getting the best official results in their country.

2. Report all national records that are within the top x% of the world's results.
Some would argue that reporting certain national records, like Leandro Vindu Kalemba's 24.27 3x3 NR single for Angola, would not demonstrate the global improvement in results and would not necessarily shine the best light on competitors from certain countries. By only reporting national records from people who rank in a top predetermined percentage of the world's solvers, we give credit to the people who have worked to achieve at a highly competitive level when compared to the rest of the world. Others would argue such a system would fail to reflect the growth of cubing worldwide.

3. Report only national records suggested by listeners.
With this system, if a national record is broken and no one submits it for report, we will not report on it. When making the show notes for each episode, we could include all or only some of the records submitted after being reviewed. If you want it on the show, you have to submit it. The problems with this system include the potential failure to showcase fast solvers not only in their own countries, but with respect to the world, as well as the potential failure to demonstrate cubing's growth worldwide.

4. Report no national records.
Rid ourselves of the national record problem entirely by never reporting them.

We would like listener input on this issue. Discussion can start here or in emails to us at [email protected].

Thanks, and we'll be recording soon,

Ranzha
 
Last edited:
I like to learn about new national records, but also would rather not have the first portion of the show dedicated to listing off hundreds of them. Personally, I feel that it would be nice to get input from national record holders/breakers (so obviously not me). I would be in favor of not having them in the show, but listed in the show notes, but then again, that is a lot of research for you three for a range of people who care about every national record set in a certain window, which might be very large or very small. I guess what I'm trying to say is that removing them from the show might be the best fix, and just having people who care about them looking them up for themselves.
 
Ross The Boss said:
report all national records for only 3x3 and oh and bld. or only nxnxn records. whatever, the point of the suggestion is: dont report records for all events
Click to expand...

I wouldn't consider this to be fair.
Consider Wojciech Knott's Clock national records. His 5.34 single, now 4th in the world, is only 0.09 slower than the WR. In the same round, he also got a 5.39 single. If the last attempt of that average had been a 6.04 instead of a DNF(8.39), he would have gotten a WR average. That is something I find to be very impressive. Of course, it's not my decision alone, but using a system like yours would never allow results like these to be recognised for how insanely good they are.
 
Ranzha said:
I wouldn't consider this to be fair.
Consider Wojciech Knott's Clock national records. His 5.34 single, now 4th in the world, is only 0.09 slower than the WR. In the same round, he also got a 5.39 single. If the last attempt of that average had been a 6.04 instead of a DNF(8.39), he would have gotten a WR average. That is something I find to be very impressive. Of course, it's not my decision alone, but using a system like yours would never allow results like these to be recognised for how insanely good they are.
Click to expand...

seems to me like you are personally leaning more toward option 2. i dont so that doesn't really matter to me (also clock has my full contempt... its just so lol)

in order to truly be "fair" (according to a definition which says that fairness=equality) you would have to go with solution 1 or 4. or you could be unfair.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ross The Boss said:
seems to me like you are personally leaning more toward option 2. i dont so that doesn't really matter to me (also clock has my full contempt... its just so lol)

in order to truly be "fair" (according to a definition which says that fairness=equality) you would have to go with solution 1 or 4. or you could be unfair.
Click to expand...

Personally, I would hate to do 1, wouldn't mind if we did 2, think 3 is very unfair, and think 4 is the best option in the interest of covering other stories.

Or we could get rid of the records section entirely and consider discussion about records to be bunched together with pre-guest news.
 
Ranzha said:
Personally, I would hate to do 1, wouldn't mind if we did 2, think 3 is very unfair, and think 4 is the best option in the interest of covering other stories.

Or we could get rid of the records section entirely and consider discussion about records to be bunched together with pre-guest news.
Click to expand...

i think it would be best to just bunch them in with later discussion. that way the interesting/controversial/ground-breaking records are acknowledged and you have no obligations which could be broken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CubesOfTheWorld
CubeCast podcast (circa 2010), first 19 episodes (excepting #5)
Replies
0
Views
449
CubesOfTheWorld
CubesOfTheWorld
C
Cubecast - Episode 6 with Rowe Hessler!
2
Replies
23
Views
4,513
Mastermind2368
Mastermind2368
krnballerzzz
CubeCast Podcast E34 w/ Lucas Garron released!
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
29,705
Anthony
Anthony
MaeLSTRoM
  • Poll Poll
Live Cubecast And/Or Video Feed at Worlds 2013
2 3
Replies
59
Views
10,810
BillyRain
BillyRain
Veerexx
Cubecast podcast going down (veeraid.com)
Replies
4
Views
1,298
Veerexx
Veerexx
Back
Top