Fewest-moves competitions are not attractive because:
- There's nothing to see.
- The audience fells asleep after 2 minutes.
- Results come late, and they're only numbers on a paper.
- Competitors cube alone.
- It's not a show.
- I like them as a competitor only. Otherwise, they're sooo booooring!
That's why the following format could be very interesting:
- 2 competitors at a time on the scene with a judge (8 competitors and 4 judges is possible to speed up qualification rounds).
- They're given the same scramble.
- They must solve their cube in a minimum of moves.
(1) Judge tells competitor 1 "OK".
(2) Competitor 1 has T seconds to make a move. A face turn that can be clearly seen by the judge.
(3) Judge tells competitor 2 "OK".
(4) Competitor 2 has T seconds to make a move.
(5) If a competitor has solved the cube, he wins. If both have, it's a draw. Otherwise, go to (1).
When a competitor takes a long to decide, it's an advantage for the opponent too. Strategy?..
The principle of elimination would make the event attractive.
There are some rough edges like penalties (when time goes out, or if the judge things a competitors performed 2 moves instead of 1) and scrambles (when identical scrambles, should we ask for competitor 2 to start with a different first move for example?), but I think it could work.
For it to be a success, we would need 2 things:
- People interested in fewest-moves solving (not just speed demons and blind guys).
- Enough time in some competitions (but I think that's not the problem given the time allowed to multi-bld events!).
With T=15s, and given that the last moves are much faster, a solve would last about 10 minutes.
With 16 competitors and 4 rounds (16, 8, 4, 2), we could have a nice knock-out competition in less than 1 hour, a competition on scene B that does not require stackmats.
Variants can be imagined, like having 3 competitors instead of 2. Or qualification after 2 wins to leverage the luck factor. Or a lot more competitors together and keep the best half each round. Etc.