Originally Posted by pcuser
The points you make are valid. However, I don't think the average times are updated that often. I've set hundreds & hundreds of new records and have yet to see my name listed. Even if the stats were updated frequently, the averages would even out over time. As for doing 100 puzzles for few points to equal ten with high points, I would submit that it takes far longer to do 100 small ones than 10 difficult ones. As for the 4X4 puzzles and the 5X5 puzzles, nothing about their statistics compares. You can only get about 350 points max on the 4X4 puzzles while you can get about 530 points max on the 5X5 puzzles.
If the averages are not updated often, then that is possibly worse - although I agree they would flatten over time. But any "NEW"ish puzzles would have to be excluded.
The suggestion was to award points based on a variance from average. So, doing 100 puzzles at 2 seconds below average would be -200 points, as would doing 10 puzzles at 20 seconds below average. This is not saying small or difficult, just saying that even doing the same puzzle types, they have the same points but obviously the 2nd example is a much quicker solver.
I agree that there may be an argument for 2 sets of stats - one for 4X4 and one for 5X5 as they are two different categories entirely.