First off i don't compete in these puzzles, mostly because they don't contribute to helping me get better at solving the more conventional twistypuzzles. For magic there are no thought process involved and i have seen competitors who can't solve a magic by flipping but they are lightning fast using the standard method. That's just dumb. I've solved the clock only a few times, mostly because i think of it as a puzzle you apply a fixed method with little space for intuition and special skills/tricks. I might be very wrong on this though Discussing this might help us in the process of selecting which events to retire and to introduce.

[quote="MadsMohr":1el064r6]i have seen competitors who can't solve a magic by flipping but they are lightning fast using the standard method. That's just dumb.[/quote:1el064r6] How many do you know who can solve the 3x3x3 without algorithms they don't understand? [quote="MadsMohr":1el064r6]I've solved the clock only a few times, mostly because i think of it as a puzzle you apply a fixed method with little space for intuition and special skills/tricks.[/quote:1el064r6] Certainly true on a slow level. At the top level, I think I don't lead anymore partly because I don't use special tricks like Matyas and Oliver do. Oh and at least Magic is a very popular and quick event.

[quote="StefanPochmann":1z980iqb]How many do you know who can solve the 3x3x3 without algorithms they don't understand?[/quote:1z980iqb] Yeah, i wasn't that clear on what my point was. You wont really benefit from knowing how to solve the magic using flipping, but you will really benefit from understanding how algorithms on the cubes work. [quote="StefanPochmann":1z980iqb]Oh and at least Magic is a very popular and quick event.[/quote:1z980iqb] Yeah, i just wanted to include magic as an example to start the discussion. I could have used solving with feet, but there are all ready a thread on that. Let me say this: If the magic was introduced on the market today would we then include it as an official event?

[quote="MadsMohr":a713rjyq] I've solved the clock only a few times, mostly because i think of it as a puzzle you apply a fixed method with little space for intuition and special skills/tricks. I might be very wrong on this though [/quote:a713rjyq] Take a clock scramble, and then solve using the standard solving method and let us know your click and pin count. Then calculate out God's algorithm for the clock and let us know your click and pin count. Like Stefan said, there are people who use advanced methods, they just haven't caught on yet.

I would argue in favor of retiring Magic for the following reasons: 1. It is not a puzzle. 2. Regulating this event is a nightmare. Even though it doesn't take up much time, regulating this puzzle is a horror. Especially with stopping sequences and the whole "Magic Lying Flat on the Table" thing. As for Clock, I have trouble with allowing Clock to be an official event when you cannot buy Clocks from a distributor and they are no longer manufactured.

Magic is a fast, fun and popular event that people enjoy participating in. There are as many people that have participated in the Magic event as in the 5x5 event. Supressing events has been argued in other topics in this forum, and it generally transpires that at best, there is no benefit,and at worst, it seriously harms the spirit of the WCA. Judging Magic doesn't require wizardry either. The rules are clear, and even if you care to differ, I'm sure that it's possible to amend the rules so as to be sufficiently consistent to your taste. In any case, I don't think that you should get rid of an event simply because the rules haven't reached full muturity.

Number of competitors in an event is not really the right way to compare popularity. I'm pretty sure if I held a "ball in cup event" (which has been done...), we would be able to get more competitors than Magic. Then perhaps we should start a separate thread on how to fix the rules for Magic?

Magic is an official event, ball in cup isn't, "so, it's not really the right way to compare popularity". I still believe that the number of participants in an event is a fairly food reflection of the popularity of an event. But yes, you are right, it might be a good idea to discuss Magic regulations further.

[quote="Jason":ed2erpwj]Magic is an official event, ball in cup isn't, "so, it's not really the right way to compare popularity". I still believe that the number of participants in an event is a fairly food reflection of the popularity of an event. But yes, you are right, it might be a good idea to discuss Magic regulations further.[/quote:ed2erpwj] My point with that was that Magic had a lot of participants because it is trivial to solve. It's far easier to learn than 5x5x5, and much less of a hassle. A beginner 5x5x5 solver will take 10 minutes maybe, whereas a beginner Magic solver, one who learns in 30 seconds before the competition, can solve it in 15 seconds. Magic is more similar to "ball in cup" than it is to 5x5x5. Feel free to dispute this if you would like. (not that it matters at all) But ball in cup is a stupid event. Why does magic have more merit?

Magic is a trivial solve, it's accessible, a lot of people enjoy it because it adds a bit of variety. The WCA offers a frame within which people can have fun in competing in this event, why do you want to remove it now? If Magic did come onto the market now, perhaps it wouldn't be recognised as WCA worthy, but that is not the case, it's been around and people have put sweat into it. People have trained really hard at this event so as to be recognised by the WCA and the community. It would be pretty nasty to turn around now and say, "Sorry, you've been wasting your time, we don't even recognise what you're doing as worthy in the frame of the WCA".

Magic *is* a puzzle, even though we don't treat it as such in competition. Ball-in-cup is not a puzzle at all. Clock isn't produced right now, but if you want one you can get one easily. One obvious source is ebay, and right now there are 12 there, including three with buy-it-now.

The reason why it should be removed now is because it never should have been an official event in the first place. The only reason we let it in the first place was because it had the name Rubik's on it. It has become apparent that this was a mistake, and does not contribute to speedcubing in any way. The same argument goes for clock.

Magic should be removed because at the end of the day, it ISN'T a puzzle. There are no faster methods being invented. There are no innovations. Just a repetitive exercise that is not what cubing is all about. If you wanted to see who had the "fastest hands," get into cupstacking. Cubing is about solving a puzzle, which is different every time.

# Competitors World Championship 2007/ European Championship 2008 Rubik's Master Magic 22/37 Megaminx 27/25 Square-1 28/26 4x4x4 Cube: Blindfolded 14/10 5x5x5 Cube: Blindfolded 9/5 Rubik's Cube: Multiple Blindfolded 32/27 Rubik's Cube: With feet 13/13 [size=150:2xdxhuty] [b:2xdxhuty]Rubik's Clock 42/37 Rubik's Magic 61 /47[/b:2xdxhuty][/size:2xdxhuty] [u:2xdxhuty]"Clock isn't produced right now, but if you want one you can get one easily. One obvious source is ebay, and right now there are 12 there, including three with buy-it-now."[/u:2xdxhuty] It´s true!!!

I think the arguments for Clock and Magic should be separated. Clock, though quite trivial, is still a puzzle. There are still tricks to learn, and innovation is possible. The same is not true for magic. The reason so many people compete in magic is because it's easy. There's no reason not to. You can learn how to solve it 2 minutes before your attempt. Clock is similarly easy to learn (though not AS easy) but a bit more difficult to become really fast at.

I vote for keeping both events. I find Magic a bit silly but it is harmless, quick (does not screw up the schedule), attracts quite a few participants, adds variety and it is there and adds to the fun! Clock is a puzzle! /Anders

Maybe it's time to figure out exactly what events we want... Magic is a puzzle but not if it starts in one solved position; Clock is a puzzle, but not a twisty one. So maybe we should decide, is cubing about solving twisty puzzles, or solving puzzles related to Erno Rubik, or... what? The events we have right now seem kind of random - I'd like to move toward a situation where we can say, for some certain property of puzzles/objects, "objects with this property are WCA events, and all WCA speedsolve events have this property". But maybe that's a bit idealistic. Anyway, just remember that making an event unofficial after it has been official for many years only hurts people, Even if you don't like the event you don't HAVE to hold it just because it's there - eventually you might not be able to hold all events in one weekend anyway. (Even in a national competition, you don't really need to hold it - does it really matter who the National Champion of Magic is? For that matter, does anyone really want to have that title?) If you remove an event, you aren't affecting the organizers who don't hold that event, but you are preventing the people who want to hold it from being able to, so unless there's a near-consensus among competitors that they hate Magic or Clock or whatever I'd suggest to keep it in.

Regarding official and official-wannabies events, I reason according to the following: Our fundamental event is Rubik's Cube Speedsolve. From this origin, we may have two vectors: variation of Rubik's Cube Speedsolve and other twisty puzzles speedsolve. With variation of Rubik's Cube Speedsolve I mean Rubik's Cube bld, FM, OH, feet,... With other twisty puzzles I mean 4x, 5x, square-1, magic, clock,... With such a reasoning, for instance, Rubik's Cube speed bld, skewb, 6x and 7x speedsolve are valid candidates of being official events eventually, but not, for instance, 6x bld, Square-1 FM and 4x OH. I suggest that this should be the guiding principle when considering new events. Thus, I am in favour of allowing a broad variety of puzzles for speedsolve, including magic and clock. One argument is that it will be more exciting with several different kinds of puzzles since it will be harder for any individual to dominate all of them. /Anders

Hi! I the clock is a puzzle and should remain an official event, magic, too, but not with the current format, because in that way is not a puzzle A greeting to all! Ernesto

[quote="Ernesto":3rdalhcq]magic, too, but not with the current format[/quote:3rdalhcq] What new format would you suggest? I don't think the depth of the puzzle is enough to ensure there's not going to be a simple 2-flip, shift, or twist to solve the puzzle almost instantly.

yeah lets delete an even which only takes 15 minutes tops for a competition with 40 competitors where they all have a bit of fun... [/sarcasm] Magic is still a FUN rubiks puzzle and a puzzle it is, though sadly the solution to it is just way too simple... As for clock, I don't see any reasons to delete that event! It's really a puzzle, it's unique, it's easily available (I've got 3 and I'm not even a clock-er)! I'd see more reasons to delete 5x5 than to see clock being retarded to be honest....

I especially see no reason to retire the clock. The puzzle is unique and easy to run in competition. The scramble is different every solve and the puzzle is easy to obtain on ebay. My suggestion for Magic would be to start with a random scramble of a flat state, but this is a bit complex I suppose. It IS a puzzle...the solution is just very simple, the same every time, and extremely easy to learn.

One of the greatest thing with Magic is that newbies can wery quick learn how to solve it and also get it to decent times. I have seen many that starts with only 3x3x3. The next event they add is usally 2x2x2 and then Magic (or the other way around). Having puzzles like Magic, Master Magic and also Snake is not a big effort for competiton organisers; you don't need scrambles/scramblers. The event/events are done quickly compared to most other events.

[quote="Jason":11pshyyy]I still believe that the number of participants in an event is a fairly good reflection of the popularity of an event.[/quote:11pshyyy] How many cubers would pick up the Magic if it weren't an official event? And why is Magic an event while Rubik's Snake isn't? All the arguments for the Magic being simple and fun and still a puzzle (albeit a trivial one) apply to the Snake too.

[quote="Shelley":ql4hoyx4] And why is Magic an event while Rubik's Snake isn't? All the arguments for the Magic being simple and fun and still a puzzle (albeit a trivial one) apply to the Snake too.[/quote:ql4hoyx4] Well, if Wikipedia is to be believed, we can blame Bob Burton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Burton ... .27s_Magic), and to a lesser degree, Ian Winokur and Tyson But today, if we were looking at events and deciding what to make official, I'm guessing Magic wouldn't make the list. But that doesn't mean we should remove it immediately, we should just make sure we don't make the same mistake.

[quote="BryanLogan":3tfe9x4q]Well, if Wikipedia is to be believed, we can blame Bob Burton [/quote:3tfe9x4q] Oh hell no. If you're going to put blame on me, go back further and put blame on Dan Gosbee for holding it in '03.

[quote:3s6drwjo]How many cubers would pick up the Magic if it weren't an official event?[/quote:3s6drwjo] Well, it isn't the case, is it!!! It just means that we should be more weary from now on about what becomes a WCA event, and what doesn't. There's no point in making the decision retro-active, because there ARE a lot of cubers that HAVE now picked up Magic!! By the way, again, there is a difference between Snake and Magic; one is official and one isn't (with all the consequences that it carries...). And if you're really scared that snake might become popular and people might enjoy it and have fun with it, make sure it doesn't become an event!

How is retiring an event making a retro-active decision? We're not invalidating all past records, just deciding not to hold it any more. If Magic is an official event, Snake should become an official event. If Snake is not worthy of being an official event, neither should Magic. Why discriminate between the two? They are very similar puzzles in terms of simplicity and how they are solved. Magic is only more popular because it's an official event. I don't think that's reason enough to keep it if its merits as a puzzle are debatable.

[quote="blade740":1f8o8zj8]Magic should be removed because at the end of the day, it ISN'T a puzzle.[/quote:1f8o8zj8] The thing about Magic is that it really IS a puzzle. If you give a Magic to Tyson Mao, can he solve it? Probably not. If you showed him the solution, can he replicate it? Sure. Just because its solution is less than one-second long and only has two real "moves" in it, doesn't mean it's not a puzzle.

A magic is a puzzle to a person who has never solved one. Once you know the solution, there is nothing to "figure out" Someone who has never solved a magic should not be competing.

[quote:capijytc]If Magic is an official event, Snake should become an official event[/quote:capijytc] No, an event shouldn't become official for such a reason. An event should become official because there is a general consensus for it becoming official. If we were to follow your reasoning, then all twisty puzzles should be official simply because they are twisty and not trivial (pyraminx crystal, teraminx, 2x2x4...). In the same way, if there is a general consensus that there is no real reason of having to get rid of Magic, then it shouldn't be gotten rid of. People who don't like Magic can just pretend it doesn't exist, competitors and organisers alike, it's not like it has any effect on them.

[quote="Shelley":20m8j8ho]Magic is only more popular because it's an official event.[/quote:20m8j8ho] Magic also has the advantage of possessing a declared goal state ("link the rings", it's even its subtitle). This is also reflected in that rubiks.com's description of the magic contains the word "solve" while that of the snake doesn't. [quote="blade740":20m8j8ho]A magic is a puzzle to a person who has never solved one. Once you know the solution, there is nothing to "figure out" Someone who has never solved a magic should not be competing.[/quote:20m8j8ho] Equally valid statement: A cube is a puzzle to a person who has never solved one. Once you know the solution, there is nothing to "figure out" Someone who has never solved a cube should not be competing. So what was your point there?

I don't call it solving, just a dexterity trick with no added value. This event is completely uninteresting for most audiences. It is very questionable to measure such low times under such timing conditions. => This event is a shame.

[quote="StefanPochmann":xx28gmgl] [quote="blade740":xx28gmgl]A magic is a puzzle to a person who has never solved one. Once you know the solution, there is nothing to "figure out" Someone who has never solved a magic should not be competing.[/quote:xx28gmgl] Equally valid statement: A cube is a puzzle to a person who has never solved one. Once you know the solution, there is nothing to "figure out" Someone who has never solved a cube should not be competing. So what was your point there?[/quote:xx28gmgl] But the cube has differences between different solves. You still have to find pieces, to adapt to different situations. Magic is the same every time, unless you make a mistake.

[quote="Jason":dra81d80]People who don't like Magic can just pretend it doesn't exist, competitors and organisers alike, it's not like it has any effect on them.[/quote:dra81d80] If it were that simple, we wouldn't have run Magic at US Nationals. The general consensus among Caltech cubers is that the Magic is a lame excuse for a puzzle and it's a waste of time. But there is sufficient demand for it that we end up running it anyway.

[quote="blade740":2kg8fmqy]You still have to find pieces, to adapt to different situations. Magic is the same every time, unless you make a mistake.[/quote:2kg8fmqy] Then why wouldn't every solve either be exactly the same time, or a DNF? Magic is completely about adapting to different situations. You have to pick it up (hey, even "find" it!), manipulate it, finish it, and pull your hands to the timer very rapidly. There are a lot of minute difference in Magic placement, current string tension, distraction, physical body/hand condition, nervousness... this is our short event to test dexterity and ability to cope with situation. And I don't care what the Caltech people think, I'm going to host Magic every time I'm organizing or in charge of selecting events. Even if I'm terrible at Magic myself.

I think we should keep these events. Some people like it, some don't. That goes for all events. Ron

Which procedures will be followed for retiring an old event or for introducing a new one? I do not find this clear. /Anders

[quote="cubetalk":1d9v6ixe]how is it regulating a nightmare.[/quote:1d9v6ixe] [url=http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=506:1d9v6ixe]Lurk moar[/url:1d9v6ixe]. There is controversy over regulating it. [quote="cubetalk":1d9v6ixe]where is it available?[/quote:1d9v6ixe] [url=http://www.google.com/products?q=rubik's%20magic:1d9v6ixe]Many places[/url:1d9v6ixe]. Or did you mean [url=http://cgi.ebay.com/Rubik%27s-Clock-Puzzle,-Matchbox-1988,-Excellent-w%2fBox_W0QQitemZ170281459183QQcmdZViewItem:1d9v6ixe]clock[/url:1d9v6ixe]? And please don't triple post. I'd like to see these events kept, at least for this year. They really don't take much time at all, as pointed out, and are still puzzles. I don't mind sparing 15 minutes in competition for this.