WCA rankings

[LostGent]

I was wondering what people thought about the current WCA ranking system. At the moment whoever has the fastest time is ranked highest. Given the amount of WCA sanctioned events, would it not be better to assess rank on the basis of competitions won rather than fastest time. For all we know Mats could maintain the highest ranking for years, and even though he doubtless deserves it currently, if he was to retire from cubing today, he would still be ranked as the best in the world.

Thoughts?

 

[Username]

No. There are small comps in countries where speedcubing isn't popular. In those countries the comps are probably smaller, and the winning average is usually a bit slower = easier to win and become "best in the world" even though he/she might average 10 seconds slower than the fastest people.

My opinion is that the hobby is called "Speedcubing" for a reason, we are going for speed.

 

[LostGent]

I get what you're saying. I was thinking about having ranked tournaments, so obviously the bigger the event the more points go towards your ranking

I agree with you completely on the point of Speed but if a person has slowed down or retired, do they still deserve a high ranking?

 

[Username]

if a person has slowed down or retired, do they still deserve a high ranking?

Yes. Otherwise it would be like taking away all the medals of the people who won the olympics over 50 years ago. They have all probably retired

 

[scylla]

that is something different

 

[LostGent]

Records and rankings should be separate in my opinion. I'm not sure what you mean by taking away from people who won the Olympics, I'm not sure that's a useful comparison. Consider Maurice Greene who ran a 9.79 100m sprint in 1999, that would give him a ranking of 5th. But that's all time rather than current, you wouldn't consider him as a contender in the next Olympics. Would it not be more useful to separate the ranking from records so as to give a more accurate picture of current people's positions?

 

[Benyó]

the next idea is gonna be: instead of time, tps should count

 

[XTowncuber]

The purpose of the ranking is to see who has the fastest time, not to see who is currently the fastest. An unofficial ranking using this method would be cool, but the official one should stay.

 

[Stefan]

would it not be better to assess rank on the basis of competitions won rather than fastest time.

Here you go.

Records and rankings should be separate in my opinion.

Look at our menu bar and you'll see they are.

Records
Rankings

 

[LostGent]

That's not quite what I meant but sure I was only trying to get some opinions that's all

 

[Torch]

I think the idea here is similar to the distinction between world record and world leading in athletics. World record is the best time ever achieved, and world leading is the best time achieved in the current year. So Giovanni Contardi has the world record for OH single, and Gabriel Dechichi Barbar is the world leader. Since cubing records are broken so frequently, though, the world record and world leading are usually the same.

 

[Petro Leum]

that is something different

please elaborate.


I think the ranking system is as good as it can be. of course, single times are kinda lucky and at some point become hard to break / skill has lower relevance,
but thats exactly what average rankings are for.

 

[cubeninjaIV]

You can also view results by year on the WCA database

 

[LucidCuber]

You can also view results by year on the WCA database

Indeed, but where it says "until 2007" for example I think there should be a 'since 2007' also.

The general idea of 'recent rankings' had cross my mind before, but then again, if someone is ranked say 10, but 5 of the others are no longer active then when they attend competitions they are likely to come 5th giving an accurate reflection of where they rank currently.

 

[Stefan]

Indeed, but where it says "until 2007" for example I think there should be a 'since 2007' also.

There's the "only <year>" option:

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...ears=only+2006&show=100+Results&single=Single

(good old times)

 

[cubizh]

There's the "only <year>" option:

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...ears=only+2006&show=100+Results&single=Single

(good old times)

Speaking of historic, please don't forget the "best ranking ever" for competitors idea

 

[LucidCuber]

There's the "only <year>" option:

https://www.worldcubeassociation.or...ears=only+2006&show=100+Results&single=Single

(good old times)

Indeed good times, I just realised I'm on that list at #70

 

[Stefan]

Speaking of historic, please don't forget the "best ranking ever" for competitors idea

I haven't, I just want to do something else first.

Indeed good times, I just realised I'm on that list at #70

If you choose "100 Persons", you're even #14 (for me, "100 Results" was better).

 

[LucidCuber]

I haven't, I just want to do something else first.



If you choose "100 Persons", you're even #14 (for me, "100 Results" was better).

Very good times indeed compared to today's #1250 ranking

 

[TheDubDubJr]

Would it not be more useful to separate the ranking from records so as to give a more accurate picture of current people's positions?

Your idea seems interesting, but if we were to do this, how would you define if someone is an active cuber or not? There is definitely no clear cut boundary and is a lot of variability in length of time between inactive competitors.