What puzzle do you think the WCA should add next?

[goodatthis]

WCA should add 2BLD IMO. and if it is rational 6BLD.

Adding 2BLD is pointless because if you can't 1-look 2x2 solves, then you have to use an actual blindfolded method and that is WAYY slower than 1-looking 2x2 solves. It would only appeal to 2x2 solvers because it's extremely likely that the 2x2 WR holder would get the WR. In fact, he does.
http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/List_of_UWR

 

[DGCubes]

Team BLD would be awesome, and 3x3x5 would really add a new dimension to the puzzles we currently have. The 3x3x5 is one of my favorite non-WCA puzzles, because of the awesome shapeshifting and its overall enjoyability to solve.

Also, I know this might not belong on this thread, but I would like it if Clock was removed. It is a cool puzzle, but it is in no way a twisty puzzle.

 

[Coolster01]

Team BLD would be awesome, and 3x3x5 would really add a new dimension to the puzzles we currently have. The 3x3x5 is one of my favorite non-WCA puzzles, because of the awesome shapeshifting and its overall enjoyability to solve.

Also, I know this might not belong on this thread, but I would like it if Clock was removed. It is a cool puzzle, but it is in no way a twisty puzzle.

I just feel like Team BLD is so hard to judge. People could peak through the blindfold because the judge can't have a piece of paper (the caller has to see ). I really like team BLD though. Maybe something that I like called "back to back Team BLD". It's like skype team BLD, where each solver has a cube, but they are back to back so the caller can't see the other cube. It doesn't even have to be back to back (that would be hard to hear the caller), because a paper would be held by the judge anyway, so the caller couldn't see the other cube. I really like this more because getting a success is much harder (meaning that the format would be exact same as BLD).

As for 3x3x5, that's actually a really nice idea! Maybe. I don't like 3x3x4 personally because no shapeshifting, so I have to agree.

Clock is a non-spectator event and it also is, as you said, not really a twisty puzzle. I don't know where I stand with that though, because many specialize in clock alone. Maybe.

 

[nosaJ4297]

I've always loved the curvy copter, and it can definitely be solved fast enough to be interesting. Maybe even two different events, one with jumbling, one without

 

[henrysavich]

It would not only be very hard to check your solutions, but you would also have the problem of time: one hour is not going to be enough to get a good solution. People run out of time in 3x3 FMC.

Time could be extended, but I don't think it needs to be. There would be more of a time crunch, but the result would probably be a different method for 4x4 FMC, that doesn't utilize insertions and other time consuming techniques. Also I would much rather have 4x4 FMC than 3x3 FMC, you end up getting less ties with singles. I don't exactly understand why it would be hard to check a solution, do you mean the judges or competitiors?

 

[tux1230]

remove clock and feet, add mirror blocks and vertex turning octahedron

They shouldnt Remove Either feet or clock. Some people take these events seriously. Like learning tricks for just that event. Like i do for feet solving.

 

[pistelli]

Mirror blocks blind is incredibly fun. I always thought it would be nice to have that added. A purely tactile puzzle. Blindfolded even during inspection.

 

[Tempus]

Mirror blocks blind is incredibly fun. I always thought it would be nice to have that added. A purely tactile puzzle. Blindfolded even during inspection.

I second this opinion. To be clear, there would be no visual inspection. Inspection and solving would both be done blindfolded.

 

[voidcuber]

2bld, 2oh, more 2x2 stuff

 

[Deleted member 19792]

15 puzzle because easy to judge, watch, scramble, and it is fun.

There ARE GOOD 15 puzzles out there, and you can make some of them even better.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

SpeedBLD. Comps could have FMC and SpeedBLD simultaneously, and the competitors could pick which one they wanted to do.

Judging could be an issue, as you have to watch the person for the entire hour to make sure they don't turn the cube at all, but that could be dealt with. You could have one judge in a room with every single speedBLD competitor, and it would be easy to see/hear if someone was turning the cube.

 

[mkarthick]

The mastermorphix for sure. Its a great puzzle, and is harder than the pyraminx, so the WR will be something decent like 20-30 sec.

 

[CuberM]

I actually think 6BLD would be cool to see, though it's a pretty big step up from 5BLD.

 

[Mikel]

I actually think 6BLD would be cool to see, though it's a pretty big step up from 5BLD.

It's really not that big of a step-up from 5x5 BLD. I jumped from doing 5x5 BLD to 7x7 BLD and it didn't feel like that much. I do not see 6x6 BLD ever becoming official because it won't gain popularity. The current 6x6 hardware is atrocious. I wouldn't even want to compete until something better comes out. I can handle pops in 6x6 speedsolves, but they really suck during BLD solves.

 

[JasonDL13]

TeamBLD. Some other stuff include 2BLD, SpeedBLD.

And maybe 2x2OH.

 

[Cale S]

A problem with 2BLD would be holding the paper in front of someone who 1-looks a speedsolve. They would only be solving for a few seconds at most, so the judge wouldn't even get a chance to put the paper in front of them to prevent cheating. Somebody could cheat by looking under the blindfold and doing a normal 2x2 solve before the judge could put the paper up, then say that they were able to 1-look it.

I think a good puzzle to consider adding would be the mirror blocks (or mirror cube, bump cube, whatever it's called), because it would add an entirely different type of puzzle based on shapes rather than colors. Instead of having the scrambling orientation defined by the U and F faces, you could have the thinnest layer on top, and the smallest row of pieces on the top face at UF.

 

[tseitsei]

I think a good puzzle to consider adding would be the mirror blocks (or mirror cube, bump cube, whatever it's called), because it would add an entirely different type of puzzle based on shapes rather than colors. Instead of having the scrambling orientation defined by the U and F faces, you could have the thinnest layer on top, and the smallest row of pieces on the top face at UF.

Mirror blocks is just another 3x3...

 

[Ollie]

If someone with a good knowledge of the regulations and experience doing team BLD could come up with some standardized rules for an official proposal then that'd be cool. Otherwise the event list is fine.

 

[Ranzha]

Judging could be an issue, as you have to watch the person for the entire hour to make sure they don't turn the cube at all, but that could be dealt with. You could have one judge in a room with every single speedBLD competitor, and it would be easy to see/hear if someone was turning the cube.

Or you could just not allow competitors to bring turnable cubes in.
It's very easy to turn a cube without the cube making a distinct noise while turning.

Also, I don't know if there's been a proposed system for judging SpeedBLD once the time is up. To create truly fair conditions, each solver would have to go at the same time. At a large enough competition, it will be incredibly difficult to staff this. The only situation I can foresee is staggered starting times, off by a few minutes in "heats". Once the first heat finishes the memorisation phase, staff judge the timed phase, and record results. Shortly afterward, the second heat finishes the memo phase and gets judged for the timed phase, et al. (Lucas?)

If someone with a good knowledge of the regulations and experience doing team BLD could come up with some standardized rules for an official proposal then that'd be cool. Otherwise the event list is fine.

Hi

 

[Stefan]

Also, I don't know if there's been a proposed system for judging SpeedBLD once the time is up. To create truly fair conditions, each solver would have to go at the same time.

Why, what's unfair about starting at different times?