• 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.

Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
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.



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.
As people get faster and more people join the community you have to lower the cutoffs to keep up with demand.

Solves aren’t everything. I could do a million layer by layer solves with my crappy rubiks brand cube and I’m not going to be super fast. I’m highly doubtful that physical limitations play a major role in not making cutoffs.


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.
I agree max is talented, however I don’t believe there are any cutoffs that the only factor preventing people from making them is talent and talent only
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
I don’t believe there are any cutoffs that the only factor preventing people from making them is talent and talent only
I’m not saying that talent is the only thing keeping anybody from making cutoffs, but it could take one person 100 solves to be good enough to make a cutoff and a less talented person 5000 solves. Just because it is possible for a less-talented cuber to do 5000 7x7 solves doesn’t mean they should have to do that before competing.
 

cubeshepherd

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,998
WCA
2016STEE01
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.
I’m not saying that talent is the only thing keeping anybody from making cutoffs, but it could take one person 100 solves to be good enough to make a cutoff and a less talented person 5000 solves. Just because it is possible for a less-talented cuber to do 5000 7x7 solves doesn’t mean they should have to do that before competing.
As people get faster and more people join the community you have to lower the cutoffs to keep up with demand.

Solves aren’t everything. I could do a million layer by layer solves with my crappy rubiks brand cube and I’m not going to be super fast. I’m highly doubtful that physical limitations play a major role in not making cutoffs.



I agree max is talented, however I don’t believe there are any cutoffs that the only factor preventing people from making them is talent and talent only
Since this thread is going no where, where I wanted it to go I have changed the name of the thread to what seems to be the talk among the 3 of you. No worries and I will create a new thread for what my vision of what I wanted. Jut next time, please try to reply to the thread for the purpose of what it is meant for.

EDIT: The thread that I was hoping to me this one like is the one that pjk made, in regards to sharing tip(s): https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/share-a-tip-win-a-qiyi-mini-wuque-m-4x4.75421/
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Since this thread is going no where, where I wanted it to go I have changed the name of the thread to what seems to be the talk among the 3 of you. No worries and I will create a new thread for what my vision of what I wanted. Jut next time, please try to reply to the thread for the purpose of what it is meant for.

EDIT: The thread that I was hoping to me this one like is the one that pjk made, in regards to sharing tip(s): https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/share-a-tip-win-a-qiyi-mini-wuque-m-4x4.75421/
Thanks for understanding. I’m glad we could have this discussion, I think it’s a valuable one.
 

Tabe

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
995
Location
Spokane, WA (USA)
WCA
2017TABA02
YouTube
CoachTabeCubing
3. I have seen no evidence of natural ability in cubing, if you have some research that shows otherwise then I would love to see it.
There's obviously not going to be a scientific study to back this but...

Literally EVERY activity has some component of natural ability to it. To deny that in cubing is to deny reality.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
Let me amend my previous statement, there definitely is natural ability in cubing. I do not believe that it does play a big enough factor though to prevent competitors from making cutoffs at most competitions. Apologies for that.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Let me amend my previous statement, there definitely is natural ability in cubing. I do not believe that it does play a big enough factor though to prevent competitors from making cutoffs at most competitions. Apologies for that.
The Boston marathon has very strict qualifying standards: you have to run a recognized marathon under a given time (different standards by age group and gender, I would have to run under 3 hours) to qualify to run the Boston marathon. Some people could train for six weeks and qualify, others like myself would have to dedicate years of hard training to barely be able to make it. It’s right and good that they have those standards to allow as many truly competitive people as possible to race in what is one of the most prestigious competitions in the sport. It is also good that local marathons have time limits typically on the order of 7-8, and even up to 12 hours to finish, because like cubing most of the competition in distance running is not against other competitors but against the clock and against one’s own limitations.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
124
I think it would require a significantly well-thought out system to work, but it would be cool to see comps with a competitor limit, and then it takes previous results from all the competitors, classifies them into general speed ranges, and calculates a relatively fair cutoff time for each event when given a timeframe/ allotment of time that each event can take place in. If you’ve never competed it could just insert some arbitrary standard agreed time like 4 min or something so that way the cutoff is fair based around the specific competitors of the comp
 

Aerma

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,221
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Aerma
What about the people who don't have the time to practice cubing enough to meet fast cutoff times, or who just don't have cubing as a super high priority? Should they be excluded from competing in 5x5 just because their main passion lies elsewhere and so they don't put in the time to "git gud"?
Look, I totally understand where you're coming from, Underwatercuber. The faster the cutoff times, the more events and rounds can be held, and that's important! But there should be a place for smaller competitions with longer cutoff times. If someone has been cubing for two months, they have no chance at meeting the cutoff times. You can't say that they should just have put in the hard work prior to the competition because it just isn't realistic for anybody to average < 1:30 within two months of starting. And yes, I know there aren't going to be all that many of these people, but there's enough that it's definitely worth putting consideration into.
I've been cubing for six years and I'm sub-11.5 on 3x3, and yet I can't solve a 6x6, 7x7, or megaminx in under the cutoff times at any competition I go to. Could I, if I put in the work and didn't focus 99% of my cubing time on 3x3? Absolutely. But I think it would be nice to be able to go to a competition where I can compete in those events without having to prepare with 100+ solves for each. Some of the most fun competitions I've been to were the ones in which I've been able to participate in events that I'm most often too slow to.

There is definitely a place for competitions with fast cutoff times, but there's also a place for ones with slow ones. It should be a mix, to include the biggest variety of cubers possible in the WCA.
 

PingPongCuber

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
150
Location
Colorado
WCA
2018AMSB02
I am completely for extreme cutoffs if that is what the organizer wants. The organizers are the ones putting in all of the work into competitions, and they should not be obligated to slow down the entire competition to let slower cubers get an average. I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition. I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
I am completely for extreme cutoffs if that is what the organizer wants. The organizers are the ones putting in all of the work into competitions, and they should not be obligated to slow down the entire competition to let slower cubers get an average. I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition. I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.
It already is up to the organizers (at least in the US, it’s my understanding that there is some variation worldwide) what cutoffs are going to be. I think the relevant question is what they ought to be.

A few other notes:

I had been to one competition before organizing my first, and it took a bit of convincing before a few very generous delegates agreed to take a chance on helping me organize a small competition. It’s not really feasible for everybody to organize a competition, organizers should try to make opportunities for competitors.

Doubling cutoff times will not double the time it takes to do an event: the impact is far smaller than that, because most of the people who want to compete could make the stricter cutoff.

If you enjoy solving a puzzle and want to compete you should be allowed to do so. It doesn’t have to be that way for every competition, but I believe it would be reasonable to have all competitions other than regional, national, and world championships have quite generous cutoffs and time limits.
 

cubeshepherd

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,998
WCA
2016STEE01
I agree with UnderWaterCuber that if beginners really cannot make the cutoffs, then they can organize their own competition
I think that, that is the wrong lesson to learn/tell new cubers. I do not think that if someone is new to cubing and only been to a couple of comps (if any) should organize a competition, just so that he/she can add the events and cutoff times that it prefers. There is a lot more to organizing a comp then making sure to get the events and cutoff times you want, (but let me leave that for the other thread that jut started with people giving advice for organizing comp). Also, even though the organizer is planning everything and has the ability to create the schedule (which includes cutoff times), I think he/she should think about what makes the most sense over what they want (there have been several times I have not made cutoff for events that I have had at comps I have organized) and the reason for that is because the cutoff time was fair for the comp.

In regards to the cutoff times, I think there should be some consideration taken into account before you decide on cutoff time X. One thing should be the kind of comp (which includes what and how many events you have), the schedule and time you have planned for the day, and the competitor limit.

I think major comps (or even ones that have a competitor limit of 85 or more) should think of having a little more stricter cutoff times for some events (like longer events), but then again if a large comp has the time and decides for a more softer cutoff time then that is great and it gives slower people a better chance at getting a average. I am all for comps having cutoff times that give more people a chance at a average (trust me I have wanted a 7x7 average for a while), but that will not always work out, and again it comes down to the particular comp.

I think that there will always be competitions that beginners can compete in more events. Aerma, the people that can't compete in 5x5 because they don't practice it as much dont absolutely need to compete in 5x5 because it is not an event that they are dedicated to practicing and competing in. I personally cannot make a lot of cutoffs, so I practice to make my times reach the cutoffs, not complain to make the cutoff match my times.
Doubling cutoff times will not double the time it takes to do an event: the impact is far smaller than that, because most of the people who want to compete could make the stricter cutoff.

If you enjoy solving a puzzle and want to compete you should be allowed to do so. It doesn’t have to be that way for every competition, but I believe it would be reasonable to have all competitions other than regional, national, and world championships have quite generous cutoffs and time limits.
I completely agree with this. I have always went along with what the organizers decided (even if I wish the cutoff times were not as strict as they were). Instead of not competing in a event (if you know you are not going to get a average), I think you should still compete in it. And if it is an event that you really like and want to get better at then you might practice that more and try to get better for next time.

Lastly, none of what I have said has talked or mentioned anything about natural talent verses those that have to work harder to get better. There is not much that needs to be said here. It is harder for the naturally good people to understand the extra work that others are putting in to get better, (and that can be flipped and applied the other way as well), and that again is why I think that every comp organizer and delegate need to keep in mind what is a fair cutoff time.

I feel like I am forgetting to address or say something(s), but for now this is my 2 cents worth of advice. Also, forgive any grammatical errors that there might be. Typing it difficult and I tend to miss somethings here and there, but if I notice anything I will fix it.
 

cubeshepherd

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
1,998
WCA
2016STEE01
5 mins 3x3, 2 mins 2x2, 4 mins 4x4, 5 mins 5x5, 8 mins 6x6, 10 mins 7x7, 5 mins Megaminx, 1 min Pyraminx, I min skewb, 5 mins square 1, idk about any other events
Those are really subjective to the comp and pretty much everything I just said above, lol. But then again for certain comps those cutoff times could work and be nice to have.
 

Kit Clement

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,304
Location
Portland, OR
WCA
2008CLEM01
YouTube
KitClement
Here's the secret about cutoff times: if they aren't fast enough, you aren't actually saving any time.

The OH cutoffs at Guildford 2017 were posed, so let's take a look at the results: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/competitions/GuildfordOpen2017/results/all?event=333oh

The 1:00 cutoff affected 3 competitors. That cutoff probably saved about 1-3 minutes in the competition, when you account for the fact that the 9 solves not attempted would have probably been spread out across multiple timers, and may have been using timers that were otherwise not being utilized at the end of a group regardless. Had they used the 40 second cutoff used at a the recent Guildford competition, 14 more competitors would have been cutoff. Why did they make this adjustment? Probably because they looked at the 2017 results and realized that the community is improving, and if they wanted the cutoff to have any use, it would need to be 40 seconds.

You still get to compete in the event and be ranked even if you don't get an average as long as you can meet the time limit, which are almost always generous enough for even a beginner solver at a local competition. Back in the day, just about every competition had a best of x first round, then an average of 5 second round, so even fewer people got to get an average. People realized this was a logistical mess, and so they combined the rounds together, which led to the idea of a cutoff time, as it would be irritating to have to figure out who the top x were in a best of 2 round.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but if you want to make cutoffs, or even second rounds, finals, cutoffs, podium, etc., you have to improve. Simple as that.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
64
Here's the secret about cutoff times: if they aren't fast enough, you aren't actually saving any time.

The OH cutoffs at Guildford 2017 were posed, so let's take a look at the results: https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/competitions/GuildfordOpen2017/results/all?event=333oh

The 1:00 cutoff affected 3 competitors. That cutoff probably saved about 1-3 minutes in the competition, when you account for the fact that the 9 solves not attempted would have probably been spread out across multiple timers, and may have been using timers that were otherwise not being utilized at the end of a group regardless. Had they used the 40 second cutoff used at a the recent Guildford competition, 14 more competitors would have been cutoff. Why did they make this adjustment? Probably because they looked at the 2017 results and realized that the community is improving, and if they wanted the cutoff to have any use, it would need to be 40 seconds.

You still get to compete in the event and be ranked even if you don't get an average as long as you can meet the time limit, which are almost always generous enough for even a beginner solver at a local competition. Back in the day, just about every competition had a best of x first round, then an average of 5 second round, so even fewer people got to get an average. People realized this was a logistical mess, and so they combined the rounds together, which led to the idea of a cutoff time, as it would be irritating to have to figure out who the top x were in a best of 2 round.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but if you want to make cutoffs, or even second rounds, finals, cutoffs, podium, etc., you have to improve. Simple as that.
The reason I brought up the guildford Open cutoffs was because I was one of the people who only just made it and as a result it made me more interested in OH and cubing as a whole I get we need faster cutoffs in certain cases to allow comps to run smoothly but here in the uk the standard megaminx cutoff is now 1:45 which is very hard for newer cubers to achieve. This makes them less likely to do the event as they know they have to put in a disproportionate amount of effort just to get an average and it also means they have one less thing to do at comps and this will discourage them. Obviously you know more because you are a delegate and have been going to comps a lot longer than me but it seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist
 

Ronxu

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Messages
612
Location
Kirkkonummi, Finland
WCA
2010RONK01
YouTube
Rubikscuber96
The reason I brought up the guildford Open cutoffs was because I was one of the people who only just made it and as a result it made me more interested in OH and cubing as a whole I get we need faster cutoffs in certain cases to allow comps to run smoothly but here in the uk the standard megaminx cutoff is now 1:45 which is very hard for newer cubers to achieve. This makes them less likely to do the event as they know they have to put in a disproportionate amount of effort just to get an average and it also means they have one less thing to do at comps and this will discourage them. Obviously you know more because you are a delegate and have been going to comps a lot longer than me but it seems that the community is becoming harder to get in and the attitude ‘you have to put the effort in to compete’ seems a bit elitist
Seems a bit elitist to rank everyone based on their times.
 

One Wheel

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,355
Location
Wisconsin
WCA
2016BAIR04
Seems a bit elitist to rank everyone based on their times.
Elitist: adj. relating to or supporting the view that a society or system should be led by an elite.

Quite the opposite. Ranking is just ranking. Elitism is saying “you’re not good enough to have a rank.”
 
Top