Hi everybody, I got an idea. In order to have big competitions, to get expertised scramblers is always problem. The regulation allows playing scramblers if they could compete in advance with the others. If we could set some top cubers as seeded (they can skip first round). They can help scrambles for first round and enter from the next round. We can have another scrambles from those whose couldn't proceed to the next round. I believe the scrambles shouldn't be fixed for all rounds.

[quote="Masayuki":2b46t2dw]If we could set some top cubers as seeded (they can skip first round).[/quote:2b46t2dw] Would anyone want to throw away opportunities to beat official records?

[quote:kbzgdqvn]Would anyone want to throw away opportunities to beat official records?[/quote:kbzgdqvn] There are many many kind cubers in Japan who help organization of competition. That is the reason why we could run a fuge competition in a day. And that is why I suggest this here. If we could set seeds for competing scarambler, the competition becomes much smoother at least for our cases.

Another idea I had was the following. First we have some group of cubers scramble cubes according to the scramble program. Then we have some beginners do some extra random moves. Of course this means that we will not have all competitors solve the same scrambles, but it would be much easier to do the job. Ron

According to schedule of US National, they had two preliminary sessions on Friday and Saturday, and the results are combined together. I think it is great idea to seperate preliminary round into two groups. It looks like preliminary rounds for World Cup Soccer. I don't know how they handled the current regulation "4e) Competitors must solve the same scrambles per round. ". I think this regulation may not need for preliminary round. If we could seperate preliminary A and B, the competitors from each group can work as competing scramblers for the other group. Since it is related to "seed", I mean how to incorporate competing scramblers efficiently, I posted here.

I would caution against seeding certain people. Even if it is based on official WCA rankings, because someone has done well in a certain year does not mean that they are worthy of entering the finals automatically. Our rankings take the *fastest* time or average achieved in competition, and a competitor holds that spot for the entire year whether or not he is actually capable of those types of times at the current moment. If our rankings were more like tennis rankings which combine every performance in a certain time frame as opposed to just the fastest since January of that year, I think we'd have a ranking system that would be more conducive to seeding. We probably aren't ready for seeding until we have a ranking system that utilizes more than just one result for a given year. And I don't think we'd be ready for a new system until we get an automized system for the WCA records. It'd be horrendous that someone has to manually calculate everyone's rank.