The Race to Sub-2

[byu]

I'm not sure if this should be in the Blindfold section or the Off-Topic Discussion section, but I figured I'd put it here.

happa95 and I are having a race to see who can get to consistent sub-2 averages first (3x3 BLD). I'm wondering if anyone else is interested in participating in this race. If you want to participate, you have to match the follow criteria.

CRITERIA:

-You do not already get consistent sub-2 averages

RULES:

-The winner will be the first person to get a non-rolling average of 5 solves with maximum of one DNF or one single time over 2 minutes. There has been some confusion over this rule. Basically this means you must have 4 sub-2 solves in one session of 5 solves.
-Use computer scrambles
-If you have won, make a post giving the 5 times, and any other things that you want to tell about the average
-All other WCA BLD rules apply

CURRENT COMPETITORS:
Name (Average, Consistency)
1. byu (2:50, 90%)
2. happa95 (2:29, 78%)
3. Mike Hughey (2:15, 70%)
4. Micael (4:20, 50%)
5. Sa967St
6. Gparker
7. Ellis
8. not_kevin
9. rahulkadukar
10. fazrulz (2:30 20%)
11. mande (3:30, 75%)
12. Chuberchuckee
13. SimonWestlund
14. fanwuq
15. snckdude

Results
1. happa95
2. byu
3. fazrulz

So, is anyone interested in participating in this race?

 

[Ellis]

If you want to participate, you have to match the follow criteria:

-You are not already sub-2

Happa already has many sub 2 solves, doesn't he?

 

[byu]

If you want to participate, you have to match the follow criteria:

-You are not already sub-2

Happa already has many sub 2 solves, doesn't he?

Me too, but neither of us average sub 2 consistently

 

[Mike Hughey]

I've had a bunch of sub-2 solves, but I don't average it consistently.

Perhaps you can define it - it would be best if there were a specific goal to shoot for. That way we'll know who wins. If your goal seems reasonable, I'd love to join the race. So how would you like to define the winner?

 

[Faz]

Sub 2 average of 5 non rolling?

 

[happa95]

Sub 2 average of 5 non rolling?

erm what is non-rolling exactly? *checks cubefreak glossary*
hmmm.....

 

[Ellis]

Sub 2 average of 5 non rolling?

erm what is non-rolling exactly? *checks cubefreak glossary*
hmmm.....

This would mean that you can't continue the average after 5 solves and have to start over after each average.
Sorry I dont know if that "hmmm..." means that you figured out what it means and are thinking about it or couldnt find it at all.

 

[happa95]

Sub 2 average of 5 non rolling?

erm what is non-rolling exactly? *checks cubefreak glossary*
hmmm.....

This would mean that you can't continue the average after 5 solves and have to start over after each average.
Sorry I dont know if that "hmmm..." means that you figured out what it means and are thinking about it or couldnt find it at all.

ah thanks for that! Okay faz, I'm fine with that. Just ask byu. I've gotten sub-2:30 non-rolling averages before =)

 

[byu]

OK, so the winner will be defined as getting a non-rolling average of 12 solves that is sub-2:00. I'll update the first thread.

 

[Mike Hughey]

OK, so the winner will be defined as getting a non-rolling average of 12 solves that is sub-2:00. I'll update the first thread.

Is that a legitimate average of 12 - meaning no more than 1 DNF? Or are you planning on throwing out DNFs and just counting successful solves? A legitimate average of 12 is pretty rough anyway - I've probably only had 10 or 15 of them ever. My personal best of those is 2:21.65, so I've definitely got some work to do to get there. (And I've never kept track of averages of 12 throwing out DNFs before; if I ever get more than a couple of DNFs, I almost always quit for the day. )

By the way, I really appreciate this race - it might be just the extra motivation I need to finally get a sub-1:30 in competition, which is my big goal for 3x3x3 BLD.

 

[AvGalen]

OK, so the winner will be defined as getting a non-rolling average of 12 solves that is sub-2:00. I'll update the first thread.

Is that a legitimate average of 12 - meaning no more than 1 DNF? Or are you planning on throwing out DNFs and just counting successful solves? A legitimate average of 12 is pretty rough anyway - I've probably only had 10 or 15 of them ever. My personal best of those is 2:21.65, so I've definitely got some work to do to get there. (And I've never kept track of averages of 12 throwing out DNFs before; if I ever get more than a couple of DNFs, I almost always quit for the day. )

By the way, I really appreciate this race - it might be just the extra motivation I need to finally get a sub-1:30 in competition, which is my big goal for 3x3x3 BLD.

No Mike, your big goal should be a 5/5 multi-blind to show those two guys that did 4/4 and 2/2 who is the master

 

[Gparker]

OK, so the winner will be defined as getting a non-rolling average of 12 solves that is sub-2:00. I'll update the first thread.

Is that a legitimate average of 12 - meaning no more than 1 DNF? Or are you planning on throwing out DNFs and just counting successful solves? A legitimate average of 12 is pretty rough anyway - I've probably only had 10 or 15 of them ever. My personal best of those is 2:21.65, so I've definitely got some work to do to get there. (And I've never kept track of averages of 12 throwing out DNFs before; if I ever get more than a couple of DNFs, I almost always quit for the day. )

By the way, I really appreciate this race - it might be just the extra motivation I need to finally get a sub-1:30 in competition, which is my big goal for 3x3x3 BLD.

No Mike, your big goal should be a 5/5 multi-blind to show those two guys that did 4/4 and 2/2 who is the master

Or 5x5 5/5 multi blind xD

 

[Mike Hughey]

No Mike, your big goal should be a 5/5 multi-blind to show those two guys that did 4/4 and 2/2 who is the master

Yeah, that 2/2 guy - who does he think he is, anyway? Temporary world record holder, pffft.

 

[byu]

OK, so I think this is fair. Of the average of 12, throw out all DNFs, but if you get more than 5 DNFs, the average counts as DNF. That would mean that you would need at least 12/17 successful in a row to succeed.

 

[AvGalen]

OK, so I think this is fair. Of the average of 12, throw out all DNFs, but if you get more than 5 DNFs, the average counts as DNF. That would mean that you would need at least 12/17 successful in a row to succeed.

That's a crazy rule.

If you do an average of 12, you do 12 solves
If you do 12 solves you remove highest and lowest and divide by ten (that's why it's an average of 12, not 10)
2 DNF's simply means no average.

Good luck achieving that sub 2

 

[byu]

So what would be a better rule?

 

[Ellis]

well, a non-rolling average of 5 would be better. You'd need 4/5 success rate to get the average rather than 12/17. Or another option would be who can get the average of 5 with no times over 2 minutes (allowing one DNF or one time over 2 minutes because it's not counted in the average).

 

[Gparker]

i would do this but im no where near an average of sub 10 minutes! need to practice alot more, when is the deadline?

 

[Micael]

Count me in the race, though I have little chance with my current average of 4-5min.

Since it should be "consistent", an average of 12 is better than 5. A standard average of 12 (a DNF is allowed). That rule is simple and everyone is used to.

 

[shelley]

Since it's a race, I suppose the deadline is effectively whenever the first person reaches that goal.