What do you think is the absolute human limit of 3BLD?

[A Leman]

I imagine the very, very fastest people would have an advantage of a few seconds due to TPS? Not that the top bld people are slow by any means (Mr. Zalewski has #93 3x3 average), but if Marcell (best 3x3 average 13.29) and Feliks could have a baby, that person might do some damage...

I would agree about the tps part, but inheritence does not usually work that way. It's is more like a statistical regression towards the mean.

 

[abunickabhi]

Ville once fit in M' U M U' into a solve.

I do not believe this claim at all, unless there is some sort of proof. There has been next to none usage of UF5 in actual solves.

Apologies for the massive bump to this thread, but I feel now is a good time to revisit and assess what the community feels is the human limit for blindsolving.

 

[TyRoJo]

Crazy bump yo, interesting that 15 seconds was the most voted, I wonder what most people would say now?

 

[abunickabhi]

Crazy bump yo, interesting that 15 seconds was the most voted, I wonder what most people would say now?

Yeah the WR mean is 14.05, so we can expect a few seconds slower to be the global official and unofficial limits

 

[Isaiah Scott]

Tommy Cherry has a 9.6 or something at home and I think it’s very possible that something like a 8.5-8.8 will be seen officially in a few years. I don’t know if sub-8 seems reasonable

 

[precompsubwr]

I could see a sub 8 but definitely not a sub 7 happening anytime soon

When do you think the first sub 10 officially will be

 

[abunickabhi]

I could see a sub 8 but definitely not a sub 7 happening anytime soon

When do you think the first sub 10 officially will be

My wild personal guess is that a sub-10 official will happen on a 7-alger or less, with some fancy floating to make it 6-alger or less.

I think Tommy or Jens Haber or Cheggins have a shot at it? I am unsure about the consistency of Yifang Wang so no bets on him.

 

[efattah]

Considering how close Yiheng is to one looking an entire F2L solve, if you imagine countless Chinese prodigies trained from birth, eventually one of them will be able to 1-look an entire ZB solve and memorize the cube in 2 seconds or less, with a 3.5 second solve, so 5.5 is certainly possible and a 1.5 second memo and 3.0 second solve (4.5 seconds) is within human limits. It may be 10 years until we see that though. If anyone thinks that is unrealistic just look at pretty much any thread that is 10 years old and see how wrong they were.
Then if you consider the possibility of a ZBLL skip (1/1994), that would eventually happen too, in which case even faster would be achieved.

 

[bldcuber314]

Considering how close Yiheng is to one looking an entire F2L solve, if you imagine countless Chinese prodigies trained from birth, eventually one of them will be able to 1-look an entire ZB solve and memorize the cube in 2 seconds or less, with a 3.5 second solve, so 5.5 is certainly possible and a 1.5 second memo and 3.0 second solve (4.5 seconds) is within human limits. It may be 10 years until we see that though. If anyone thinks that is unrealistic just look at pretty much any thread that is 10 years old and see how wrong they were.
Then if you consider the possibility of a ZBLL skip (1/1994), that would eventually happen too, in which case even faster would be achieved.

I don't think 1.5 seconds is realistic for 1-looking an entire 3x3 solve, especially with cover removal and donning the blindfold

 

[efattah]

With long training it is possible to see with your eyes closed and through objects. In fact this is now being taught to school kids in some countries like Russia, and a great majority of the kids are able to do it. If so then you would be able to inspect the entire cube BEFORE YOU EVEN TOOK THE COVER OFF, and spend as much time as you want planning the solve. In that sense, memorization time is zero, and you would have a good minute or two to plan the entire F2L/ZBLS/ZBLL. If you really want to talk about human limits you need to go beyond the normal five senses.

 

[bldcuber314]

With long training it is possible to see with your eyes closed and through objects. In fact this is now being taught to school kids in some countries like Russia, and a great majority of the kids are able to do it. If so then you would be able to inspect the entire cube BEFORE YOU EVEN TOOK THE COVER OFF, and spend as much time as you want planning the solve. In that sense, memorization time is zero, and you would have a good minute or two to plan the entire F2L/ZBLS/ZBLL. If you really want to talk about human limits you need to go beyond the normal five senses.

I can't even tell if this is a joke

 

[eeeeeeeee]

I can't even tell if this is a joke

it isnt, ive seen people irl do this before

 

[bldcuber314]

OK so I have a confession to make. The post I made before tried to make this seem like a joke so that nobody would realise that this is what I've been doing for the past year. I used a slightly different method, where I instead used my X-ray vision to look directly through the blindfold. I would still pretend to 'memo' and use the BLD method to make it seem realistic. As this likely violates WCA regulations, my WCA results in BLD will probably be disqualified. Sorry guys


(Btw if anyone else wants to learn how to look directly through solid objects to cheat at BLD and probably other stuff, contact me as I'm offering a course for £15.99 a month and a 7 day free trial!)

 

[eeeeeeeee]

OK so I have a confession to make. The post I made before tried to make this seem like a joke so that nobody would realise that this is what I've been doing for the past year. I used a slightly different method, where I instead used my X-ray vision to look directly through the blindfold. I would still pretend to 'memo' and use the BLD method to make it seem realistic. As this likely violates WCA regulations, my WCA results in BLD will probably be disqualified. Sorry guys


(Btw if anyone else wants to learn how to look directly through solid objects to cheat at BLD and probably other stuff, contact me as I'm offering a course for £15.99 a month and a 7 day free trial!)

I have just sent an email to Carter Kucala

 

[Caleb Valenzuela]

I

With long training it is possible to see with your eyes closed and through objects. In fact this is now being taught to school kids in some countries like Russia, and a great majority of the kids are able to do it. If so then you would be able to inspect the entire cube BEFORE YOU EVEN TOOK THE COVER OFF, and spend as much time as you want planning the solve. In that sense, memorization time is zero, and you would have a good minute or two to plan the entire F2L/ZBLS/ZBLL. If you really want to talk about human limits you need to go beyond the normal five senses.

thought you were the serious guy

 

[abunickabhi]

I

thought you were the serious guy

He is the creator of LMCF method, he is kinda a serious and important guy in the cubing community.

But yeah his comment above is weird lol.

 

[Caleb Valenzuela]

He is the creator of LMCF method, he is kinda a serious and important guy in the cubing community.

But yeah his comment above is weird lol.

what is the LMCF method

 

[bldcuber314]

what is the LMCF method

Low movecount corners first

 

[PapaSmurf]

I do not believe this claim at all, unless there is some sort of proof. There has been next to none usage of UF5 in actual solves.

Apologies for the massive bump to this thread, but I feel now is a good time to revisit and assess what the community feels is the human limit for blindsolving.

Search results for query: bump

www.speedsolving.com

It's interesting that it's ok when you do it, but not when other people do it. You should close the thread by your own standards to stop this from happening.

 

[Mike Hughey]

Please don't close it, @abunickabhi . I think you've noticed before that I thoroughly approve of good bumps, and this was a truly great bump. Thanks for bumping this thread - it's so great to look back on what pas opinions were like!

And yeah, please remember this as you moderate in the future. Any good bump should be praised, never disapproved.

Also with regard to youroriginal bump comment about Ville, I would not be so sure. He often played with techniques just to see what could be done. If he did use it, it was probably done as an experiment, and probably wasn't at maximum speed. But I wouldn't be surprised if he did it.