next WR lucky - probability ?

I'd definitely say the next WR solve will be a lucky solve. People get a little over 10.xx second non-luckly solves... one lucky of those will break it by a good second, at least I think so. Or maybe someone who solves with another method will break it, that would be something.
 
I would say, eventually people will be able to perform the same as they do at home at competitions. There are a few people who can solve sub-10 non-lucky somewhat consistently, and just haven't been able to do it in competition. Like Erik said, he had a faster non-lucky solve later that day. The next WR will probably be lucky, but there's a possibility it will be broken by a non-lucky solve.
 
I think it will be the result of an easy scramble. Seeing a double extended cross, for example, ending with something like a Sune and a U or an H.

As for probability, I don't think we can actually get an actual number; too many factors involved. Who can do solves in under 9.77, how many competitions they will go to in the future, competitions in the future having a lucky/easy scramble, etc...

It does seem high, though intuitively and whatever this number turns out to.
 
Of course, we could try to use all the stats we have to produce an actual number (averages, propability distributions of the times of the fastest cubers, etc). But common sense tells me that it's definately more likely that the next WR will be a lucky case as well.

Time will tell. The WR will be broken again, that is for sure!
 
well...I had a lucky 8.81 the other day :)

but I don't think I can do that well on competition...at least not now

I think there's a chance that someone gets a non-lucky WR...but those are small, compared to the chance of the new WR being lucky

I'd say something like...hmmm...maybe 70% for lucky? or 75%
 
Joël said:
Of course, we could try to use all the stats we have to produce an actual number (averages, propability distributions of the times of the fastest cubers, etc). But common sense tells me that it's definately more likely that the next WR will be a lucky case as well.

Time will tell. The WR will be broken again, that is for sure!
Click to expand...

didn't Erik say that you've been getting lots of sub 10s ? how' that coming ?
 
I'd say Joel and Erik are going in the direction I intended. I do not want to hear about people's gut feelings, that's what I've seen mentioned in other threads. Here I'd like to get an educated estimation, a number between 0 and 1 and some justification for it.

Erik said he had more nonlucky than lucky sub10s. Human memory is flawed, though, particularly it's selective. Maybe he just remembers the nonlucky ones better because he likes them better.

My suggestion would be that some of the fast people (those who have a chance to beat 9.77) count the number of lucky and nonlucky sub9.77s they get. They must be decide this in advance, though. If they decide to add to the statistic once they get their first (for example) nonlucky sub9.77, this is already biased.

Or, if people have sufficiently detailed statistics already, e.g., averages of 100 with all the lucky solves correctly marked as such, this could maybe be used if the cuber doesn't know anymore about the number of (non)lucky sub9.77 solves in it (again to prevent bias).
 
Well, I don't know if you can consider it anything under 9.77 an easy solve. I've never been close to being sub 10, but in my experience, the best solves are not always the easiest. My best solves usually entail me being able to execute the f2l quickly because of lookahead. Granted an easy f2l and OLL definantly helps that speed, but the top guys are able of doing any scramble that fast, if they just see it the right way. That's the main difference between the really top guys and everyone else. It's not all about the speed of your algorithms.
 
New record

This is the first thread I'm intentionally bumping, so I hope I'm doing this right.
In the probability thread I asked the world record isn't faster, and I thought this needed its own thread, but I found this old one.

Feliks can do 9-20 TPS, and the world record fewest moves was 23 I believe, and fridrich averages at 60 turns, so say he gets a pll skip, thats only 50 moves, and easy cross, that's 45, and maybe 1 f2l pair skip, that's 40. The majority of a solve is algorithms, in which feliks can do 15-20, and the cross f2l is 9-15. And if someone who knows full zb (which from what I've heard averages at 40 turns) can do at least 10 tps, that's 4 seconds, plus maybe 0.5 recognition time. So why hasn't anyone gotten a sub-5 solve? out of the hundred if not thousands of competition solves each year SOMEONE who can do 10+ tps must have gotten a LL skip and maybe an f2l pair skip.

Someone please explain.
 
Eazoon said:
This is the first thread I'm intentionally bumping, so I hope I'm doing this right.
In the probability thread I asked the world record isn't faster, and I thought this needed its own thread, but I found this old one.

Feliks can do 9-20 TPS, and the world record fewest moves was 23 I believe, and fridrich averages at 60 turns, so say he gets a pll skip, thats only 50 moves, and easy cross, that's 45, and maybe 1 f2l pair skip, that's 40. The majority of a solve is algorithms, in which feliks can do 15-20, and the cross f2l is 9-15. And if someone who knows full zb (which from what I've heard averages at 40 turns) can do at least 10 tps, that's 4 seconds, plus maybe 0.5 recognition time. So why hasn't anyone gotten a sub-5 solve? out of the hundred if not thousands of competition solves each year SOMEONE who can do 10+ tps must have gotten a LL skip and maybe an f2l pair skip.

Someone please explain.
Click to expand...
People don't average that many TPS in solves. That's why.
 
Eazoon said:
This is the first thread I'm intentionally bumping, so I hope I'm doing this right.
In the probability thread I asked the world record isn't faster, and I thought this needed its own thread, but I found this old one.

Feliks can do 9-20 TPS, and the world record fewest moves was 23 I believe, and fridrich averages at 60 turns, so say he gets a pll skip, thats only 50 moves, and easy cross, that's 45, and maybe 1 f2l pair skip, that's 40. The majority of a solve is algorithms, in which feliks can do 15-20, and the cross f2l is 9-15. And if someone who knows full zb (which from what I've heard averages at 40 turns) can do at least 10 tps, that's 4 seconds, plus maybe 0.5 recognition time. So why hasn't anyone gotten a sub-5 solve? out of the hundred if not thousands of competition solves each year SOMEONE who can do 10+ tps must have gotten a LL skip and maybe an f2l pair skip.

Someone please explain.
Click to expand...

Nobody can 1-look a solve.
You'll probably have about 1 or 2 seconds of recognition time.
Feliks:
Pause between transition of F2L and OLL.

Oh yeah, Feliks uses ZB only for OH.
EDIT: PLLs are usually 13-15 moves.
 
Last edited:
jonlin said:
Nobody can 1-look a solve.
You'll probably have about 1 or 2 seconds of recognition time.
Feliks:
Pause between transition of F2L and OLL.

Oh yeah, Feliks uses ZB only for OH.
EDIT: PLLs are usually 13-15 moves.
Click to expand...

No, Faz just gets lucky. He knows half of ZBLL-T and then some random other cases here and there.
 
Eazoon said:
This is the first thread I'm intentionally bumping, so I hope I'm doing this right.
In the probability thread I asked the world record isn't faster, and I thought this needed its own thread, but I found this old one.

Feliks can do 9-20 TPS, and the world record fewest moves was 23 I believe, and fridrich averages at 60 turns, so say he gets a pll skip, thats only 50 moves, and easy cross, that's 45, and maybe 1 f2l pair skip, that's 40. The majority of a solve is algorithms, in which feliks can do 15-20, and the cross f2l is 9-15. And if someone who knows full zb (which from what I've heard averages at 40 turns) can do at least 10 tps, that's 4 seconds, plus maybe 0.5 recognition time. So why hasn't anyone gotten a sub-5 solve? out of the hundred if not thousands of competition solves each year SOMEONE who can do 10+ tps must have gotten a LL skip and maybe an f2l pair skip.

Someone please explain.
Click to expand...

Don't pull numbers out of your ass. It just makes you look silly. Besides, even if any of this were even close to legitimate, nobody can do 10+ tps right now, not even close when it comes to something like ZB. And do you know how rare LL skips are? Give me a break.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

unirox13
Looking to collect the decorative sticker from the Next Gen Rubik's 3x3 boxes
Replies
0
Views
174
unirox13
unirox13
CubeWizard23
4 Pad is Coming Next Year
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
3,373
That0newe1rdo
That0newe1rdo
Smiley01Sun
So... What Next for Clock?
Replies
6
Views
464
Kami
Kami
Nikcubing13
What puzzle to learn next
Replies
19
Views
952
TimoChristianCuber
TimoChristianCuber
doctorgibberish
3x3 next steps?
Replies
19
Views
958
SpeedCubingLord
SpeedCubingLord
Back
Top