Re: [Speed cubing group] An idea for a new competition format
- I don't think he was talking Cube Cup format, I think he meant all
people go at once and first x Done move on...The way you explained it
is faster of 2 moves on. The way he explains it, You have to do it
under a specific time. If you do it, you can move on. There wouldn't
be rounds. I guess technically there would be rounds but not in the
way you mean.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Ryan Heise <ryan@...>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:32:14AM -0000, Gilles Roux wrote:
> > Instead of timing with a stopwatch, you could use a countdown timer.
> > Set it to X seconds, you win if your attempt is faster than X seconds.
> > You'd have a competition just like high jump or pole vault. A limited
> > number of attempts/competitor, challenges of increasing difficulty.
> > Take risks, but not too much.
> Sounds fun.
> I also like the sound of head-to-head battles, tournament style:
> - round 1: 32 players, 16 matches (in pairs)
> - round 2: 16 players, 8 matches
> - round 3: 8 players, 4 matches
> - round 4: 4 players, 2 matches
> - round 5: 2 players, 1 match (grand final)
> A match could just be one head-to-head battle, or a series.
> Ryan Heise
> I also like the sound of head-to-head battles, tournament style:Do you like head-to-head with one battle/round, or average/round?
The reason why I think it's a bad idea is that in cubing, you compete
against yourself, more than against others, so it's not really a
battle. It's very different than races, where there's much more
The "pole vault" competition format gives more strategy, and it would
be the only way for me to beat Anssi, if he decides to start his
competition at sub-12 and fails :-)
> A match could just be one head-to-head battle, or a series.A head-to-head tournament style with each round based on the "pole
vault" format is a possibility.
- On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 05:53:45PM -0000, Craig Bouchard wrote:
> I don't think he was talking Cube Cup format,I think you missed the part where I said:
> I "also" like the sound of ... [ another idea ]:-)
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 06:15:58PM -0000, Gilles Roux wrote:
> The reason why I think it's a bad idea is that in cubing, you compete
> against yourself, more than against others, so it's not really a
> battle. It's very different than races, where there's much more
> strategy involved.
Maybe we liked different things about your idea? One of the things I
really liked was this bit:
> competitors racing for the same challenge solving at the same time
> under a common timer.
Now, it is true, there is a fundamental problem with speedcubing as a
"sport", which is the element of chance. And it really affects competing
of both kinds, whether it be competing against yourself, or against
others. In both cases, chance can make it difficult to tell whether you
were actually better or worse. It also means speedcubing isn't
inherently better suited to one form or the other, and really depends on
what whether the individual thinks is "fun".
(When I was a student, I found Doom boring, but multiplayer Doom fun :-)
> Do you like head-to-head with one battle/round, or average/round?
I think both can be fun. The average/round or best-of-set/round can
account for chance to some extent, but would also slow things down.
Another thought is that maybe in the far distant future, speedcubists
will be so advanced that they will eliminate the element of chance all
by themselves :-) Supposing everyone is given the same scramble,
everyone is an expert in the cube and doesn't rely on luck, and everyone
has the same opportunities to take advantage of.