What Makes a Solve Official?

For most of modern speedcubing, “official” and “WCA-official” meant the same thing. With more competition systems emerging, that may no longer be enough.

We’ve got more ways to compete in speedcubing than we used to. We still mostly describe results as either official or unofficial.

I started thinking about this while covering Yiheng Wang and Xuanyi Geng at the Monkey League finals in New York. They are two of the fastest 3x3 solvers ever, and I remember wondering what I’d write if one of them recorded a sub-2.76 single.

It would’ve happened live between two of the world’s fastest competitors, with each solving the same scramble under Monkey League’s head-to-head format. It still would not have been a WCA Record.

My first thought was something like “a world-record time at Monkey League.” I’d want the headline to recognize how fast the solve was while making clear where it happened. But would readers take that to mean a WCA Record? That is where I kept getting stuck.

For most of the WCA’s history, “official” and “WCA-official” meant basically the same thing. A result at home was unofficial. A result at a WCA competition was official.

In speedcubing, when we say “world record,” we generally mean the WCA world record. That is how I use the term in my reporting, too. My question is how to describe a faster result from another competition without misleading people or dismissing the achievement.

That language was easier when fewer competitions operated outside the WCA. Now PSL, AMSA, CCA, GAN’s Smartcubing Super League and Monkey League run competitions outside the WCA, while Cubing Contests tracks results from many non-WCA events.

These systems don’t all use the same standards. Their results shouldn’t be treated as WCA records. But putting every non-WCA result in the same category as a home solve no longer tells us enough.

Arradaza Shows Why This Matters

We already faced this question when Crimson Arradaza solved 3x3 One-Handed in 5.33 seconds at the Philippine National Speed Cubing Open.

The event was jointly organized by AMSA and the Philippine Olympic Committee. Officials oversaw the attempts, and AMSA promoted the solve as a World Record.

When I covered Arradaza, some people thought it absolutely counted as a world record. Others thought it absolutely didn’t. Most of the comments I saw fell into the second group.

Calling it ‘unofficial’ bothered me. He did everything asked of him at an organized competition, and that word barely tells readers any of it.

Patrick Ponce holds the one-handed world record at 5.62, recognized by the WCA. Arradaza’s 5.33 was faster, but it didn’t replace that record.

A result can be official within AMSA’s competition system without being a world record recognized by the wider speedcubing community. We still need to know whether the rules allow a fair comparison.

AMSA has published its own speedcubing regulations and is building an officiating system. In January, it plans to hold the AMSA Asian Speed Cubing Championships with $100,000 in prize money.

With that much prize money, this could become a competition that top cubers take seriously. If someone sets a faster time there, we will be having the Arradaza conversation again.

What Happens to Clock?

The WCA announced in June that Clock will be removed after the 2027 World Championship.

If someone breaks the fastest Clock time at an organized competition in 2028, did they break the world record? Is it an unofficial world record? Does the final WCA record remain the world record forever because the WCA stopped holding the event?

I’d probably look to Cubing Contests for future Clock rankings and call the fastest result an unofficial world record.

The community also uses “UWR,” or Unofficial World Record and “World Best” for the fastest known result, regardless of where it was set.

What About Guinness?

For a lot of people outside speedcubing, Guinness is what makes something feel like a world record.

Guinness currently recognizes WCA-ratified speedcubing records and lists the WCA as a partner organization. Its current Clock average record came from a WCA competition, and the Guinness listing specifically cites WCA rules.

Could someone set a result at a competition recorded through Cubing Contests and have Guinness recognize it? Would Guinness continue using WCA rules even though Clock is no longer a WCA event? Or would the existing record remain?

I don’t know how Guinness will handle that. But if Guinness eventually recognizes a post-WCA Clock result, calling it an “unofficial world record” will sound strange to most people.

We don’t have to use Guinness’s terminology. But if we call a result unofficial and Guinness calls it a world record, we should be able to explain why.

Where Should the Line Be?

Rules, scrambles, timers, inspection and oversight all matter. GAN’s Smartcubing Super League uses smart cubes. PSL uses 4-pad timing, and the WCA will require it beginning January 2, 2027.

One possible label is “Overall Competition Best.” I’d only be comfortable using that label if the competition had public rules, controlled scrambles, trained officials, permanent results and a way to review disputes.

I don’t think this necessarily requires another governing body. Organizations can define records within their own systems, while databases and media outlets explain where a result came from and how it was achieved.

I’m not particularly attached to “Overall Competition Best.” If UWR, World Best or an organization’s own record label does the job, that is fine.

I just want to be able to report a result like Arradaza’s 5.33 without making it sound like he did it alone in his bedroom.

We can respect the WCA’s records and still give other competition results a clearer description.

What Do You Think?

Dylan Miller’s 3.49 full-step solve in PSL is another example. He didn’t have a sub-4 WCA single at the time, although he does now. Would you say he achieved an “unofficial sub-4” after that PSL solve? If not, how would you describe it?

Does “unofficial” tell us enough? Would “sub-4 in PSL” cover it, or is there a useful label for results across competition systems? I’d like to hear how you’d handle this in the comments.