What should be fair cutoffs for competitions.

[Ronxu]

It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.

>more people
>18 timers sitting empty while the last couple of 6 minute megaminx competitors finish their last 2 solves.

 

[Tabe]

I can't be the only one who couldn't give two squirts of silk for the WCA and their competitions, can I? Everyone says that I should be competing against myself or the clock and neither I nor it have cut-offs.

I'm sure you're not but you're missing out if you do feel that way. WCA competitions are a lot of fun and a great way to meet other cubers.

 

[cubeshepherd]

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
It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.

I don't necessarily think that is true. For one, cubing has been growing a lot over the last few years and it will continue to do so for a while, so I do not for see people not wanting to compete due to not "making cutoff" for an event or two. If that is/was the attitude for everyone then why did you/do you continue to compete? I think if everyone thinks about it, when you first started out cubing (either for the first time or with a new event) and saw that you would have to work at getting time x, that motivated you to practice and get better, not not complain about the cutoff times and therefore not practicing, which would lead to you never trying to get better/get better. And from my view, if I were to be upset at the cutoff times (despite the fact that they are fair) I ould never have done several events (i.g. 6x6, 7x7, BLD events, OH and Sq1 as of recently), but guess what I dealt with it in a optimistic way and still competed in those events. And as @Kit Clement said you can still almost always get a single, which means you are fast enough to at least get that, so be happy and content with that, and if you really want a average next time then you might work a little harder until the next comp, and not focus as much on the events that you already know you will make cutoff on.

Additionally, you all do realize that the events that are getting the most talk about not making cutoff are ones that will need to take a bit of practice to get better at (such as 6x6, 7x7 Megaminx, BLD events (although BLD is a bit harder to argue). And events like 2x2-5x5 (maybe not always 5x5, but I will add it), 3x3 OH, Pyra, Skewb, Clock if they have a decent one) are events that most people compete in and get averages in. That already is a great number of events that most competitions have and people compete in, and again if there is an event that you want a average in then you will practice a bit more of that event.

 

[Tabe]

>more people
>18 timers sitting empty while the last couple of 6 minute megaminx competitors finish their last 2 solves.

18 timers + 2 being used = 20 timers, which would imply a large, or very large, competition. No one's asking for loose cutoffs on big competitions.

 

[Underwatercuber]

It's also directly counter to the mission of the WCA, which is to spread cubing to more people and to be more fun.

Where is the bit that says in order to have more competitors you have to allow more people averages? Or that in order for everyone at the competition to have more fun that everyone has to get an average?

I would argue that having cutoffs which allows for more events and rounds allows more people to stay involved in cubing and to enjoy competitions more.

not only that but cutoffs incentivize improvement, and improvement is usually pretty fun to see

 

[cubeshepherd]

I can't be the only one who couldn't give two squirts of silk for the WCA and their competitions, can I?

What does that even mean? Based off of what I think you are trying to say, I think you are completely off on saying that.

Everyone says that I should be competing against myself or the clock and neither I nor it have cut-offs.

So you are saying that rather then having fun at competing in the event, trying to beat your previous PB's, enjoy meeting new people, and appreciating having a competition to even compete in you are going to complain about a cutoff time that you do not get a average in? If that is what you mean I feel like you are missing a lot about competitions and competing as a whole.

 

[Tabe]

Where is the bit that says in order to have more competitors you have to allow more people averages? Or that in order for everyone at the competition to have more fun that everyone has to get an average?

Please go back and reread what *I* responded to.

 

[Ronxu]

18 timers + 2 being used = 20 timers, which would imply a large, or very large, competition. No one's asking for loose cutoffs on big competitions.

Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.

 

[Tabe]

Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.

Maybe, maybe not. How much time does it really add? 15 minutes? 10? No different than having a 3-minute 3x3 solver (which DOES happen).

 

[Underwatercuber]

Maybe, maybe not. How much time does it really add? 15 minutes? 10? No different than having a 3-minute 3x3 solver (which DOES happen).

Those 10-15 minutes really add up when you have a few rounds of a few events.

Cutoffs and time limits are generally more lenient for 3x3 as that’s the most common event, comps usually will cater to newcomers with 3x3 and they plan the schedule on the fact that 3x3 is going to take a while as a result. If that was done for every event the comp would have fewer events and/or rounds

 

[One Wheel]

Scale that down to 1 out of 10 then. It's still a bad use of competition resources.

When I’ve organized comps and there has been somebody lagging we’ve started the next round using the other timers. If it’s only a minute or two and we’re on schedule we’ll wait, but if it’s going to be long we go ahead. It really doesn’t add that much time or waste many resources.

 

[Underwatercuber]

When I’ve organized comps and there has been somebody lagging we’ve started the next round using the other timers. If it’s only a minute or two and we’re on schedule we’ll wait, but if it’s going to be long we go ahead. It really doesn’t add that much time or waste many resources.

That’s still a few minutes in which you aren’t running all the timers that you could be running for an event. Also in cases where something like megaminx round 2 is scheduled directly after megaminx round 1 it complete stops everything until they finish.

 

[Underwatercuber]

I have a question for the people arguing fast cutoffs aren’t good, what are your thoughts on subsequent rounds? Is “fast” people getting more solves than “slow” people unfair?

 

[Tabe]

Those 10-15 minutes really add up when you have a few rounds of a few events.

Cutoffs and time limits are generally more lenient for 3x3 as that’s the most common event, comps usually will cater to newcomers with 3x3 and they plan the schedule on the fact that 3x3 is going to take a while as a result. If that was done for every event the comp would have fewer events and/or rounds

Let's take it to the extreme - you have four events with loose cutoffs so you've added an hour. What does that cost you? Maybe 1 round of 1 event.

But, in general, that's not going to happen. You would have maybe 1 event with loose cutoffs that would impact stuff.

And you can also do stuff like starting the next round or whatever while the previous one is finishing.

I've done comps with loose cutoffs - this is nowhere near the issue you seem to think it is.

 

[Kit Clement]

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

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said "you have to put in the effort to compete" in my post at all, and you quote it as if I did. As I mentioned, time limits at most competitions are fair enough to let almost anyone get one/two solves. The only exception to this I've consistently seen is 6x6 and 7x7, but it's difficult to have limits above 10 minutes due to the stackmats. In general, I think many WCA events are very open to beginners, and there is no shame in getting your two solves in an event. But if you have any goal, whether it is making cutoff, second round, podium, etc., then you have to work for that to some extent. It is a competition, after all. You might see this as elitist, but I think the WCA does a very good job on providing an inclusive environment for new competitors while also serving as a competition.

 

[itsrandomstuff]

Here is a thread where you can discuss what are good and fair cutoff times for competitions. Please keep it polite.

Yeah, I've seen this trend of cutoffs getting faster and faster. I think this is unfair for new cubers who have taken a interest in cubing and are looking into competing at competitions. Cutoffs getting faster and faster is probably because cubers are getting faster and faster with new cube hardware. \

 

[PetrusQuber]

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.

Do you get ranked even if you don’t make the cutoff?

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

Do you get ranked even if you don’t make the cutoff?

yes

 

[PetrusQuber]

yes

Never knew that. Where does it come up? Or am I misunderstanding and ranked doesn’t mean results put up? Because I’ve never seen a 3 DNS solve.

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

what do you mean