• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

What should be fair cutoffs for competitions.

cubeshepherd

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,998
WCA
2016STEE01
Here is a thread where you can discuss what are good and fair cutoff times for competitions. Please keep it polite.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
I have noticed a strong trend in cut offs and time limits getting quicker and it’s not good for newer cubers who need to get to a faster level just to get averages. For example in the uk at my first comp Guildford Open 2017 cutoff was 2:30 and I thought that was really hard and now in the uk lots of comps are having 2:00 cutoffs for 5x5 and this I assume is off putting for newer cubers. Many people organising and delegating comps are already at this level and therefore don’t see the problem with faster cutoffs and think it is good as it enables more rounds but it just makes comps better for fast people and worse for beginners when we should be trying to make competitions for everyone.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
I have noticed a strong trend in cut offs and time limits getting quicker and it’s not good for newer cubers who need to get to a faster level just to get averages. For example in the uk at my first comp Guildford Open 2017 cutoff was 2:30 and I thought that was really hard and now in the uk lots of comps are having 2:00 cutoffs for 5x5 and this I assume is off putting for newer cubers. Many people organising and delegating comps are already at this level and therefore don’t see the problem with faster cutoffs and think it is good as it enables more rounds but it just makes comps better for fast people and worse for beginners when we should be trying to make competitions for everyone.
If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.

Number one tip to improve clocks from me is to not hold clock or feet.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.
This is exactly the attitude I was arguing against I’m guessing you average fast enough that you can make most cutoffs and you benefit from having more rounds from short cutoffs. This is unfair for many cubers who can’t make cut offs and the trend is that cutoffs are getting quicker and it will just keep getting harder for newer cubers to do a wide range of events

Number one tip to improve clocks from me is to not hold clock or feet.
This is just ridiculous as both events are decent and there is no reason not to hold them
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
This is exactly the attitude I was arguing against I’m guessing you average fast enough that you can make most cutoffs and you benefit from having more rounds from short cutoffs. This is unfair for many cubers who can’t make cut offs and the trend is that cutoffs are getting quicker and it will just keep getting harder for newer cubers to do a wide range of events
Im guessing you don’t have a lot of experience with organizing competitions. Slower cutoffs reduces the number of events or rounds for everyone, fast cutoffs reduce solves for some people. When I started off I wasn’t able to make cuttoffs without putting work into events, I still don’t make them sometimes. Cutoffs will get faster and faster but I doubt they will ever get to a point where they are extremely difficult. If someone really wants to make cuttoffs but is too lazy to put the work into the event they can always hold a competition with slower cuttoffs and only a few rounds and events.
 

PetrusQuber

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
447
Location
My house, cubing.
YouTube
N/A
I can see the reason for cutoffs, but I can see where people are coming from. I’m thinking of competing in 3x3 OH at Guildford Open 2020, but realised that the cutoff is 40 secs - not reachable for a guy who‘s putting all his work into two handed.
But I don’t think people who don’t make the cutoff should be tossed aside on the results board - they deserve to see their results online. You could do two times, then 3 DNS’s for them.
Edit: Or I’ve got it wrong and everybody who attends a comp has extreme confidence they will make the cutoff. But that just stops beginners from wanting to come, as they’ll see themselves as too slow.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
If you make cuttoffs more lenient and allow everyone to get an average then you end up having to cut a ton of events because the whole competition is slowed down drastically. If you want an average you have to put work in.
It’s better to have more comps with fewer events and more lenient cutoffs. Few comps with tight cutoffs mean that fast cubers who happen to have an open schedule that day get more opportunities but slow cubers or people without time that day get nothing. I have organized comps with lenient cutoffs, and admittedly they’re small comps but it’s really not that bad. Most people solve fast anyway, and if somebody who takes 8-9 minutes for a 7x7 solve starts in the first heat with a bunch of people who take 3 minutes the 9 minute solver will take one solving station while the second and third heats of 3 minutes solvers finish up with the other stations. Not that hard, and everybody wins.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
It’s better to have more comps with fewer events and more lenient cutoffs. Few comps with tight cutoffs mean that fast cubers who happen to have an open schedule that day get more opportunities but slow cubers or people without time that day get nothing. I have organized comps with lenient cutoffs, and admittedly they’re small comps but it’s really not that bad. Most people solve fast anyway, and if somebody who takes 8-9 minutes for a 7x7 solve starts in the first heat with a bunch of people who take 3 minutes the 9 minute solver will take one solving station while the second and third heats of 3 minutes solvers finish up with the other stations. Not that hard, and everybody wins.
A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.
There is a place for both, which is why I strongly support the idea of some major comps having qualifying times like US Nationals has had the last couple of years. But local comps ought to be designed to give the most people the most opportunities.

Furthermore, I don’t think a lot of cutoffs are even possible for a lot of people. I just timed myself on an Ao5 for a T-perm at just over 5 tps and Ra-perm at just over 3.8 tps. I’ve known those algs for about 4 years, I can’t get them much faster. World class solvers will top out at about 4 times that tps for LL, coincidentally my PBs are just a little better than 4x the world records for most speedsolve events. I don’t believe I’m alone in being someone who enjoys cubing and is willing to put in the work but simply doesn’t have the talent and fast-twitch muscle fibers to make very strict cutoffs.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
A comp with fewer events and slower cutoffs being better than a comp with more events is and faster cutoffs is an opinion, not a fact. Both competitions have their place, it’s bad to exclusively hold one, don’t complain about cutoffs if you aren’t willing to put in work, the end.
I think your Misunderstanding, increasing cutoffs wouldn’t stop people putting work in it would just allow people who are newer to the community to have more fun at competitions. I’m going to UK Championship this weekend and i didn’t qualify for many events I do and may not make cutoffs for the ones I have qualified for. I am fine with this as it is a big competition and it makes sense in this scenario. What I am against is competitions like Guildford Open 2020 having a cutoff of 40 seconds for oh like petrusquber said because it has discouraged him from doing oh. Guildford Open 2017 was my first comp and the oh cutoff was 1 minute and as a result I got to have an average and was more interested in improving at oh as I had enjoyed getting an average.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
There is a place for both, which is why I strongly support the idea of some major comps having qualifying times like US Nationals has had the last couple of years. But local comps ought to be designed to give the most people the most opportunities.

Furthermore, I don’t think a lot of cutoffs are even possible for a lot of people. I just timed myself on an Ao5 for a T-perm at just over 5 tps and Ra-perm at just over 3.8 tps. I’ve known those algs for about 4 years, I can’t get them much faster. World class solvers will top out at about 4 times that tps for LL, coincidentally my PBs are just a little better than 4x the world records for most speedsolve events. I don’t believe I’m alone in being someone who enjoys cubing and is willing to put in the work but simply doesn’t have the talent and fast-twitch muscle fibers to make very strict cutoffs.
Saying that comps with slower cutoffs and fewer events and rounds gives more opportunities is pretty subjective, I would say the exact opposite is true actually. Example: A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 with no cuttoffs and a 10 minute time limit gives pretty much everyone the opportunity to get an average. A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 and 1 round of 2x2 with cuttoffs also gives everyone the opportunity to get a 2x2 and a 3x3 average, they just have to work for it.

1. WCAT usually don’t approve extreme cuttoffs unless it’s necessary
2. Why is it fair that everyone else gets less opportunity because some people are slow
3. having slower cutoffs because some people might not be able be able to make normal cutoffs is a poor argument. Yet again if you really want to make them then you can practice. If you are physically unable to make cutoffs then tough luck.
4. You can always hold your own comp if you somehow are really unable to solve faster than normal cuttof times

I think your Misunderstanding, increasing cutoffs wouldn’t stop people putting work in it would just allow people who are newer to the community to have more fun at competitions. I’m going to UK Championship this weekend and i didn’t qualify for many events I do and may not make cutoffs for the ones I have qualified for. I am fine with this as it is a big competition and it makes sense in this scenario. What I am against is competitions like Guildford Open 2020 having a cutoff of 40 seconds for oh like petrusquber said because it has discouraged him from doing oh. Guildford Open 2017 was my first comp and the oh cutoff was 1 minute and as a result I got to have an average and was more interested in improving at oh as I had enjoyed getting an average.
40 seconds isn’t that hard with work. If you want to be catered to then cater yourself and hold your own comp.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
I am holding a comp and have argued for cutoffs to be extended at it also basically all your arguments can be flipped e.g
1. Not sure what you mean by this can you please elaborate I’m not arguing this point as I don’t quite understand what you are saying
2.why is it fair that a lot of people get less opportunity because the fast people want more rounds even though they are already getting more opportunity from the fact they are making finals
3.not really an argument as your just saying that people should be able to make cutoffs even though people can’t because they may be newer to the community or just struggle with getting fast. (You can deny it all you want but natural ability does play a large part in cubing)
4. If you want a comp with more rounds and harsh cutoffs you can always just organise one
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
I am holding a comp and have argued for cutoffs to be extended at it also basically all your arguments can be flipped e.g
1. Not sure what you mean by this can you please elaborate I’m not arguing this point as I don’t quite understand what you are saying
2.why is it fair that a lot of people get less opportunity because the fast people want more rounds even though they are already getting more opportunity from the fact they are making finals
3.not really an argument as your just saying that people should be able to make cutoffs even though people can’t because they may be newer to the community or just struggle with getting fast. (You can deny it all you want but natural ability does play a large part in cubing)
4. If you want a comp with more rounds and harsh cutoffs you can always just organise one
1. WCAT wont approve a cutoff unless it’s necessary for the competition. Ex. They won’t allow 5 second 2x2 cutoffs unless having those cutoffs will save an hour. They will prevent ridiculous cutoffs.
2. Opportunity is not equal to handouts, everyone can work to become faster
3. I have seen no evidence of natural ability in cubing playing such a huge role that it would disallow a competitor from making cutoffs, if you have some research that shows otherwise then I would love to see it.
4. Yep, I do organize them and they work out pretty well
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
For Evidence of natural ability compare max parks TPS with basic finger tricks to pretty much any other cubers TPS with more advanced TPS. Yes he has practiced but so have many other people with much lower TPS. Generally the only people who deny natural ability in cubing are people who have it
Also although everyone can work to become faster just because they may be newer doesn’t mean they shouldn’t get to do a full average just so fast people can compete more

Also another example of natural ability is the fact that after 4 years of cubing with lots of practice I have never done a pll sub 1 and someone else I know who cubed for 3 months without even practicing that much could get multiple sub 1 plls
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
For Evidence of natural ability compare max parks TPS with basic finger tricks to pretty much any other cubers TPS with more advanced TPS. Yes he has practiced but so have many other people with much lower TPS. Generally the only people who deny natural ability in cubing are people who have it
Also although everyone can work to become faster just because they may be newer doesn’t mean they shouldn’t get to do a full average just so fast people can compete more

Also another example of natural ability is the fact that after 4 years of cubing with lots of practice I have never done a pll sub 1 and someone else I know who cubed for 3 months without even practicing that much could get multiple sub 1 plls
Max could have certain practice routines that others may not, Max may drill sets of algs while others may not, Max could be executing in a slightly different and more optimal way than other people, Max has also done tens of thousands of solves. You can’t just say the reason his TPS is so high is simply natural ability, there are so many factors.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
Well I literally said I had done more solves then him I have drilled all my plls and my execution was better than his he could just turn faster because of natural ability.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Saying that comps with slower cutoffs and fewer events and rounds gives more opportunities is pretty subjective, I would say the exact opposite is true actually. Example: A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 with no cuttoffs and a 10 minute time limit gives pretty much everyone the opportunity to get an average. A comp where everyone can compete in 1 round of 3x3 and 1 round of 2x2 with cuttoffs also gives everyone the opportunity to get a 2x2 and a 3x3 average, they just have to work for it.

1. WCAT usually don’t approve extreme cuttoffs unless it’s necessary
2. Why is it fair that everyone else gets less opportunity because some people are slow
3. having slower cutoffs because some people might not be able be able to make normal cutoffs is a poor argument. Yet again if you really want to make them then you can practice. If you are physically unable to make cutoffs then tough luck.
4. You can always hold your own comp if you somehow are really unable to solve faster than normal cuttof times
What are extreme cutoffs? They seem to creep, which is reasonable for people who can already make cutoffs and are improving, but for people who are well behind making cutoffs it looks like a farce to keep the in crowd in and the out crowd out, which is not what we should be doing at all.

Furthermore, you seem to be arguing from the idea that if, for example, 7x7 cutoffs are 8:00 then most people will take 8:00 to solve 7x7. In fact most people will take the same 4-5:00 they would if cutoffs were 5:00, there will just be a few people who, even though they try hard to go fast, will do it in 7-8:00.

If you are physically unable to make cutoffs then tough luck.
Get off your high horse. That’s just ridiculous and hurtful. Reasonable limits are one thing, if somebody takes half an hour to solve a 4x4 they’re probably guessing, but it is entirely possible to practice and still not be fast. I have 1620 timed 6x6 solves recorded, I’ve heard it should take 1000 big cube solves to be “good”. I think that figure was from Kevin Hays, not sure how he defines good, but it’s probably a heck of a lot better than my current Ao100 of 4:20.12.

Max could have certain practice routines that others may not, Max may drill sets of algs while others may not, Max could be executing in a slightly different and more optimal way than other people, Max has also done tens of thousands of solves. You can’t just say the reason his TPS is so high is simply natural ability, there are so many factors.
Max is a special talent, anybody who denies that is just denying reality. Sure, he works hard, but do you really think he’s worked harder than the other guys that he more or less routinely beats? Feliks, Kevin, Mats, Patrick Ponce, etc.? Nothing against Max, he wouldn’t have done as well as he has without hard work. But he also has tremendous talent.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
60
I have done a lot less than 1000 6x6 solves and average around 4:30 and I’m nit a natural at cubing so your right you are unlucky enough to be naturally ‘bad’ at cubing
 
Top