Time Limit For Multi!!!

[Swordsman Kirby]

You will never see a multi-BLD event take place on the stage of most, if not all, competitions. Logistically, it's too noisy, inconvenient, not the best eye-catcher for the public, and it takes too bloody long.

Beijing Spring Open 2008... Really, the main announcer just told everyone to shut up for about 20min... Then again out of all the Chinese, none are above two cubes yet...

 

[Mike Hughey]

You will never see a multi-BLD event take place on the stage of most, if not all, competitions. Logistically, it's too noisy, inconvenient, not the best eye-catcher for the public, and it takes too bloody long.

Beijing Spring Open 2008... Really, the main announcer just told everyone to shut up for about 20min... Then again out of all the Chinese, none are above two cubes yet...

Rowe did multi-BLD on the back end of the stage at the 2007 US Open. It was kind of nice having him up there on top so you could look up occasionally and see how he was doing. (The back table was elevated higher than the front tables, so you could see what was going on up there easily.)

 

[Derrick Eide17]

Dan is right. We can learn a lot from the memory sports competitions/events, which seem to be well organized.

And Derrick: I don't care, if you see things in my posts i never said. Read more carefully! I never talked about world records.

Okay well sorry if i got something wrong here but thats what this really is all about, we dont need to argue about a time limit really for all those people trying less cubes such as 2, 3 or 4 cube MultiBLD really this time limit would only apply for the people going FOR the WR and for that attempt i think they should be given as much as needed (whole competition) from the amount of dedication put in i dont they should just be Shi**ed on and left with no chance after all the work they put in... ESPECIALLY for something like 50, 60 or even 100 cubes. why when we are JUST reaching the limits of MultiBLD and seeing GREAT potential do we put a LIMIT on it NOW?

 

[AvGalen]

We are nowhere near seeing the limit Derrick. Tim simply raised the limit from 10 to 24 and did it very fast according to current standards. But even Tim thinks that he is still pretty bad at it. 100 cubes in 10 hours seems possible to me (not for me, yet), especially without needing 100% perfection. But I don't expect this to happen because not many people will ever put in the effort to try this. Maybe someone could offer a 1 Euro per Cube price? (or simply sponsor the top-mbf-ers by actually giving them 100 cubes)

 

[Mike Hughey]

We are nowhere near seeing the limit Derrick. Tim simply raised the limit from 10 to 24 and did it very fast according to current standards. But even Tim thinks that he is still pretty bad at it. 100 cubes in 10 hours seems possible to me (not for me, yet), especially without needing 100% perfection. But I don't expect this to happen because not many people will ever put in the effort to try this. Maybe someone could offer a 1 Euro per Cube price? (or simply sponsor the top-mbf-ers by actually giving them 100 cubes)

If someone will truly give me 100 cubes, I'll try it! That would be a lot of money saved! (I'll probably eventually want to own 100 cubes anyway, so might as well get them for free if I can.) Note that they would have to be my weird color scheme, though! And decent cubes.

Oh, and while I think Tim can indeed get somewhat faster, I don't know how much I trust his assessment that he's still pretty bad at it.

 

[qqwref]

Most of the people who are against this time limit are looking at multi BLD with a very narrow mind. You guys have preconceived notions of what you take "3x3 multiple blindfold" to mean.

Even if we are going to have a time limit, 2:30 is completely arbitrary (it isn't a limit in any other memorization sport/event that I know of) and seems to be based just towards giving Tim the WR for as long as possible. Don't think I believe that Tim doesn't deserve to hold the WR, but placing the time limit so little above the current WR's time suggests that someone wants the WR to stay what it is for as long as possible and to discourage attempts with larger numbers of cubes. I might support an hour or something like that, but there is no reason to choose 2:30. Besides, if we move to a "most cubes in a certain amount of time" format we cannot transfer the old records through, so it's basically a new event entirely.
Incidentally, it's not like preconceived notions are always a bad thing, and there is definitely a difference between being stubborn about change and having a term defined in a specific way. For example I suppose you have a "preconceived notion" of what the "5x5x5 speedsolve" event means, and if I suggested we should replace it with "solve five 5x5 sliding puzzles as fast as you can" you'd be against it (and for good reason). Similarly, for many people "3x3x3 multiple blindfold" means a specific event with a specific goal, not just any blindfold event involving multiple 3x3x3s. If you want to create a totally new bld event, why not even bother to give it a new name?

This is a new sport, and multi BLD is an even newer event.

It's older than you think: this site gives the first date as 1998, so you'd be changing the event (or rather creating a new, similar one) after ten years. Few WCA events have been kept track of for that long, and there are several official and legitimate memory sports that are significantly younger than this (this link is a subpage in the "Memory and Mental Calculation World Records", so you can check that out). It's also interesting to note that one of their rules is that "For a record, all cubes must be fixed". If outside observers consider multibld a memory event, with the goal being to do as many cubes as possible with perfect accuracy, we should only change it if there is a very good reason why this doesn't work.
By the way, note that multibld must have started out as something outside of competitions, since their first four records were before Worlds '03. I still think we should go back to this. It might be cool to watch Rowe or Tim do huge numbers of cubes, but it's silly to make them miss hours of practice and events.

We as a community need to be open to some change, as we realize past mistakes and try to fix them (as we did with the score changes)

As we did with the score changes? I'd be interested to know, out of people who have done 5+ cubes multi in practice, how many believe the new points system is for the better. It might be more convenient now, and less stressful for the competitors, but I think few of us would call the past scoring a "mistake". Or maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Derrick Eide17]

We are nowhere near seeing the limit Derrick. Tim simply raised the limit from 10 to 24 and did it very fast according to current standards. But even Tim thinks that he is still pretty bad at it. 100 cubes in 10 hours seems possible to me (not for me, yet), especially without needing 100% perfection. But I don't expect this to happen because not many people will ever put in the effort to try this. Maybe someone could offer a 1 Euro per Cube price? (or simply sponsor the top-mbf-ers by actually giving them 100 cubes)

True there never really is a LIMIT, but like i said we are reaching GREAT potentials and now and before we NEVER THOUGHT of 100 cubes to be possible but now it just could be so why make a limit now. but i really didnt mean a limit is 100 just in competition i meant because really 100+ cubes in just the time given for the whole competition would be VERY difficult.

 

[Mike Hughey]

We as a community need to be open to some change, as we realize past mistakes and try to fix them (as we did with the score changes)

As we did with the score changes? I'd be interested to know, out of people who have done 5+ cubes multi in practice, how many believe the new points system is for the better. It might be more convenient now, and less stressful for the competitors, but I think few of us would call the past scoring a "mistake". Or maybe I'm wrong.

For what it's worth, I prefer the old points system. But I'm not overwhelmingly opposed to the new system; it's okay too I guess. I like the idea of it requiring perfection, even if that brings a fair amount of luck into it. Somehow the perfection makes it special. That's why I always try for perfection at a certain number of cubes in the weekly competitions before I move up to the next number. (still trying for 10)

And I agree about the time chosen. If we go with a time limit, I think 2 1/2 hours is a silly time to choose (and looks suspicious because it keeps Tim's record valid). An hour seems nice and round and logical to me. We could either go with an hour total time, or perhaps do like hour cards and go with an hour to memorize and another hour to solve. I think those are the two most logical times to choose, if we decide to do that.

I really think I prefer the original format now - I really would rather it not change. And knowing it has a 10 year history makes me even more convinced. (Thanks for that link, Michael.) But if it changes, I'll be happy to participate in the event no matter what it morphs into, I'm sure. (As long as I'm good enough to compete in whatever the rules become - if it has to be 3 minutes per cube, for instance, I might not be able to compete then.)

 

[shelley]

I don't see the 2:30 time limit anywhere in the official regulations. If another competition is willing to devote 5 hours to multi-BLD, you can set the WR there.

Competition organizers should be allowed to (and in fact often do) set time limits for events with respect to feasibility and to keep a tournament running smoothly. Just as we won't accommodate someone who takes two hours on a "speed"solve, we won't accommodate someone who wants to do 100 cubes multi-BLD.

 

[Mike Hughey]

I don't see the 2:30 time limit anywhere in the official regulations. If another competition is willing to devote 5 hours to multi-BLD, you can set the WR there.

The time limit isn't in the regulations, yet; Dennis started this rumor with the following quote:

Rowe and i talked about that, so i'm just posting this:
There might be a time limit for multiple-blindfolded of 2:30 hours.

Competition organizers should be allowed to (and in fact often do) set time limits for events for feasibility and to keep a tournament running smoothly. Just as we won't accommodate someone who takes two hours on a "speed"solve, we won't accommodate someone who wants to do 100 cubes multi-BLD.

I'm guessing there's probably some competition organizer out there who might be willing to accommodate someone who wants to do 100 cubes. Probably there aren't many, but there's likely to be somebody out there.

And I think it makes perfect sense for competition organizers to choose what they will and won't deal with. Time limits for a specific competition (as the rules specifically allow - rule 8d) are just fine by me.

Shelley: is there a time limit for multiBLD at the US Open?

 

[Tyson]

Most of the people who are against this time limit are looking at multi BLD with a very narrow mind. You guys have preconceived notions of what you take "3x3 multiple blindfold" to mean. This is a new sport, and multi BLD is an even newer event. We as a community need to be open to some change, as we realize past mistakes and try to fix them (as we did with the score changes)

VERY NARROW MIND? we have mentioned tons of ideas, opinions, contributions, etc and that is Narrow? what else do you want us to do? and again where is the problem in not having such a small limit for MultiBLD? Actually putting a limit On MultiBLID is taking out bigger possibilites and making the event even more narrow itself so why do that? why not go farther and let the limits be reached and especially because it is such an amazing event?

I can't help but think that your signature takes away from your credibility. I do feel that the way you interpret multi-bld is your opinion, that isn't necessarily shared unanimously by the community.

Many of the points here are very good. First of all, what is multi-bld trying to measure? I don't necessarily think that it's this "as many cubes as you can solve" idea.

The multi-bld competition really only measures your ability to solve cubes in the multi-bld event according to its regulations. I'll admit, the regulations for the multi-bld are less than satisfactory right now.

We should be open to restructuring the regulations and the event mechanics to suit today's practicality for competitions.

 

[shelley]

I don't see the 2:30 time limit anywhere in the official regulations. If another competition is willing to devote 5 hours to multi-BLD, you can set the WR there.

The time limit isn't in the regulations, yet; Dennis started this rumor with the following quote:

Rowe and i talked about that, so i'm just posting this:
There might be a time limit for multiple-blindfolded of 2:30 hours.

Shelley: is there a time limit for multiBLD at the US Open?

The 2:30 time limit he's talking about is the time limit we're putting on multi-BLD at the US Open, as we told Rowe. Rowe wanted to attempt 60 cubes, which would take pretty much the whole day. There hasn't been any talk about making 2:30 (or indeed any other time limit) part of the official regulations. At least not to my knowledge.

 

[Derrick Eide17]

I don't see the 2:30 time limit anywhere in the official regulations. If another competition is willing to devote 5 hours to multi-BLD, you can set the WR there.

Competition organizers should be allowed to (and in fact often do) set time limits for events with respect to feasibility and to keep a tournament running smoothly. Just as we won't accommodate someone who takes two hours on a "speed"solve, we won't accommodate someone who wants to do 100 cubes multi-BLD.

Most of the people who are against this time limit are looking at multi BLD with a very narrow mind. You guys have preconceived notions of what you take "3x3 multiple blindfold" to mean. This is a new sport, and multi BLD is an even newer event. We as a community need to be open to some change, as we realize past mistakes and try to fix them (as we did with the score changes)

VERY NARROW MIND? we have mentioned tons of ideas, opinions, contributions, etc and that is Narrow? what else do you want us to do? and again where is the problem in not having such a small limit for MultiBLD? Actually putting a limit On MultiBLID is taking out bigger possibilites and making the event even more narrow itself so why do that? why not go farther and let the limits be reached and especially because it is such an amazing event?

I can't help but think that your signature takes away from your credibility. I do feel that the way you interpret multi-bld is your opinion, that isn't necessarily shared unanimously by the community.

Many of the points here are very good. First of all, what is multi-bld trying to measure? I don't necessarily think that it's this "as many cubes as you can solve" idea.

The multi-bld competition really only measures your ability to solve cubes in the multi-bld event according to its regulations. I'll admit, the regulations for the multi-bld are less than satisfactory right now.

We should be open to restructuring the regulations and the event mechanics to suit today's practicality for competitions.

@shelley: Please name me one competitor that has ever needed to take up to 2 HOURS to solve a 3x3..

@Tyson: Do you mean my signature or dans? Mine is not related to MultiBLD really or even this topic i changed it way weeks before.

Edit: Okay its obvious now that u mean my sig not dans, but what do u meant exactly by what u said?

 

[Tyson]

2 hours was just a value she threw out. Most competition organizers would not tolerate a 9 minute 59 second one-handed solve either.

I guess let me explain to you what your signature conveys. Basically, you make it sound like you're whining, that somehow you have worked so hard at cubing and you deserve things as a result of your hard work. Furthermore, you undermine everyone else's hard work by saying that no one in the world works as hard as you on the cube.

How do you feel you should be rewarded for your hard work? What is the injustice that the world has committed against you, because you have worked so hard at the cube? Do you simply work the hardest out of all the cubers in the world, and no one recognizes you for your work? What type of reward would you like for your work on the cube, that has been more devoted than every other cuber out there?

What I mean is that people probably won't take you seriously if you have that type of attitude about the cube. I'm only telling you this because you asked for an explanation.

 

[DennisStrehlau]

I don't see the 2:30 time limit anywhere in the official regulations. If another competition is willing to devote 5 hours to multi-BLD, you can set the WR there.

The time limit isn't in the regulations, yet; Dennis started this rumor with the following quote:

Rowe and i talked about that, so i'm just posting this:
There might be a time limit for multiple-blindfolded of 2:30 hours.

Shelley: is there a time limit for multiBLD at the US Open?

The 2:30 time limit he's talking about is the time limit we're putting on multi-BLD at the US Open, as we told Rowe. Rowe wanted to attempt 60 cubes, which would take pretty much the whole day. There hasn't been any talk about making 2:30 (or indeed any other time limit) part of the official regulations. At least not to my knowledge.

Hey Shelley I talked to Ron and he said, its official already. But he also told me like: I wont organize competitions with more than 2:30 h time limit........so i guess, if an organizer wants a time limit, that is higher than the 2:30 h, he is still allowed to do that, because then, Ron wouldnt have to say: i wont organize comp. with more than 2:30 h anymore (too much work etc.).

Greetings...Dennis

 

[Tyson]

Hi Dennis,

I think there's a difference between official and de facto official. If WCA Delegates never organize a competition with a time limit longer than 2:30, and WCA never approves of any such competitions, then the regulation isn't official, but it is de facto official because of the circumstances allowed.

This isn't really necessary, but if you wanted to get technical about it, that's my viewpoint.

By the way Dennis, your reactions are really good. Have you seen Chris Krueger's 1:15 BLD solve in Canada?

 

[DennisStrehlau]

Hi Dennis,

I think there's a difference between official and de facto official. If WCA Delegates never organize a competition with a time limit longer than 2:30, and WCA never approves of any such competitions, then the regulation isn't official, but it is de facto official because of the circumstances allowed.

This isn't really necessary, but if you wanted to get technical about it, that's my viewpoint.

By the way Dennis, your reactions are really good. Have you seen Chris Krueger's 1:15 BLD solve in Canada?

Okay, thanks. Nice, that you like my reactions Yes, i saw Chris' reaction, it was crazy xD. He wasnt allowed to shout i guess
By the way: Whats your PB in bld-cubing???

Greetings...Dennis

 

[Tyson]

Well, my personal best in competition is 1:27.77 I think... on Monday I raced Bob in cubing. I did a BLD, and he solved a 4x4x4, and normally it would be a fair race, but he scrambled it quite easy and I did a 1:07.91, so I guess that's kind of my personal best, but it was an easy case. A strong time for me is about 1:20.

I'm old. I just can't compete with the elite anymore. You might as well ship me off and turn me into glue.

 

[Mike Hughey]

The 2:30 time limit he's talking about is the time limit we're putting on multi-BLD at the US Open, as we told Rowe. Rowe wanted to attempt 60 cubes, which would take pretty much the whole day. There hasn't been any talk about making 2:30 (or indeed any other time limit) part of the official regulations. At least not to my knowledge.

Thanks for clearing that up. Now I know what I have to work with when I choose how many cubes to do.

Hey Shelley I talked to Ron and he said, its official already. But he also told me like: I wont organize competitions with more than 2:30 h time limit........so i guess, if an organizer wants a time limit, that is higher than the 2:30 h, he is still allowed to do that, because then, Ron wouldnt have to say: i wont organize comp. with more than 2:30 h anymore (too much work etc.).

Greetings...Dennis

If Ron is preventing any competition from going over 2:30 h anymore, it must be recent, considering Rowe did an officially recognized 4:24:11 30-cube attempt at the end of April this year. And from your words there, it just sounds like you're saying he personally won't organize one like that. There are plenty of other organizers out there, and some of them probably actually enjoy big multiBLD attempts. For instance, what's to stop you from organizing a competition with a 10 hour limit?

 

[shelley]

@shelley: Please name me one competitor that has ever needed to take up to 2 HOURS to solve a 3x3..

That's irrelevant. No competitor in WCA history has taken that long on an official solve, but that doesn't mean there doesn't exist anyone who takes over an hour to solve a cube. Unless you were born knowing how to solve the cube in under a minute, I'm sure even you have been at that level at some point. And if such a person does wish to compete at a competition, we probably wouldn't allow it.