The Great Cubing Debate

No, it's lost its popularity.

Do you think Redi Cube should be in comps?
No, only a few months after its release people have gotten very very fast, with a sub-5 UWR, so it would probably become another event that nobody cares after the single/average WR comes down to luck.

Is there any use for cube manufacturers to continue making more 3x3's?
 
No, as it was definitely against the regulations.

What is the max number of algs a human could actively use for a puzzle? For example, 493 (zbll), over 1000, 2000?
 
Depends on how you define an alg and how much you're willing to practice. Assuming stuff like comms aren't algs and the person is dedicating his life to this algset, I'd say 10k+.

Why do half of the questions here suck so much ("Should FMC expand to every puzzle?") and why do the good questions get answered with yes/no/idk instead of expanding on the topic?
 
No, because RedBull didn’t carry on with the WCA, so why should the WCA recognise solves, especially for events that a) aren’t official and b) aren’t regulated by WCA regulations.

Yes, because the cubers are solving a cube in a competition, although I would only say that this should be for the basic speedsolve, not fastest hand or the match the scramble weird thing.

What are the human limits on nxn puzzles other than 2x2 and 3x3? Is sub 15 on 4x4 possible, sub 30 5x5 etc.
 
It's hard to say at this point in time, but I'd say given enough time, sub-15 4x4 averages (for example) are definitely possible, but probably many many years from now. And that's if there's still any interest in cubing in the world. Sub-35 5x5 averages might be possible if an amazingly revolutionary new method is created and hardware becomes incredibly better.

Will there be a new 3x3 single WR at some point that is so fast it will take 5+ years to beat, and if so what do you think it'll be?
 
If you're talking about 3x3, I think no. My guess is somebody will think of an idea to advance 3x3 hardware more, like what Chris did with magnets. It won't be enough to significantly drop people's times, but it'll be something.

Is there any point in trying to think of new 2x2 expert/advanced methods?
 
No, we are already getting under a second with our current methods, and I don't think they can be perfected much more (unless someone's up to learn 3,000,000 algorithms for full optimal one-look :))

Other than Chris Tran, are there any "cube scientists" who work with chemistry and physics to improve hardware?
 
None that I know of. I'm sure there are/will be more though.

Should the WCA drop any of the current events?
 
Maybe clock if no new ones continue to come out for a while longer, or if interest continues to drop.

If the WCA was to add five new events, what should they be?
 
Back
Top