The pauses are included in those splits. And what's wrong with that equaling 15? I would say that TheNextFeliks' post just means that he has to average less than those and he should be fine. He should be aiming to reach those splits for each step, and that should make him sub-15.
Sometimes they are generated from programs like Cube Explorer. Sometimes people just separate the solved blocks and put them back together efficiently before knowing what it does.
Really the only kind of good clock is a Rubik's brand (counterintuitive, right?) and you can only really find them on ebay. I got a Lingao and didn't listen to people that said that the hardware really matters, and they were right. My Lingao's wheels will suddenly not be able to turn unless I jiggle another one, the pins will fall down while solving and I'll have to fix the mistake on the other side, etc, Lingao sucks, rubiks FTW.
Will 'I had no idea where to start solving, so I just performed 5 random moves and suddenly I got a 2x2x3' be considered a proper explanation for an FMC attempt?
Will 'I had no idea where to start solving, so I just performed 5 random moves and suddenly I got a 2x2x3' be considered a proper explanation for an FMC attempt?
If that was actually what happened, you could split it up into groups of 1-2 moves and say that each one did something useful e.g. made a pair/square/2x2x2.
Anyone know if there is going to be a comp in Pittsburgh, PA or Southern Illinois Like Urbanna or Champagne or Charleston, West Virginia coming this fall/winter?
Anyone know if there is going to be a comp in Pittsburgh, PA or Southern Illinois Like Urbanna or Champagne or Charleston, West Virginia coming this fall/winter?