Weekly competition 2010-01

[Escher]

2x2x2 Blindfolded 2.69 blizzardmb

You must be joking. There is literally no way that you could have got that time, especially considering the times you got in sighted 2x2. There are probably 15 or 20 people in the entire world that could sub 5 that scramble and you are not one of them.

 

[Edmund]

wtf?! so many people rocked 2x2! I need to get back into it!

 

[MatsBergsten]

2x2x2 Blindfolded 2.69 blizzardmb

You must be joking. There is literally no way that you could have got that time, especially considering the times you got in sighted 2x2. There are probably 15 or 20 people in the entire world that could sub 5 that scramble and you are not one of them.

I agree with you. Maybe he/she does not know the rules for blindfolded.
I have already asked that (if you saw that post).

Until proven otherwise we must trust people or this contest loses its meaning.
Where shall I draw the line? Actually I noticed this because my program gave
a warning. But maybe faz or David or Simon could have managed this. To me
the scramble looked so-so, but I am real bad at 2x2 speed.

 

[Edmund]

2x2x2 Blindfolded 2.69 blizzardmb

You must be joking. There is literally no way that you could have got that time, especially considering the times you got in sighted 2x2. There are probably 15 or 20 people in the entire world that could sub 5 that scramble and you are not one of them.

I agree with you. Maybe he/she does not know the rules for blindfolded.
I have already asked that (if you saw that post).

Until proven otherwise we must trust people or this contest loses its meaning.
Where shall I draw the line? Actually I noticed this because my program gave
a warning. But maybe faz or David or Simon could have managed this. To me
the scramble looked so-so, but I am real bad at 2x2 speed.

The thing is you might be able to notice this but you couldn't start the timer without looking at it, recognize it, put on your blindfold, pick up and solve, and stop the timer all in 2 seconds.

 

[Escher]

I agree with you. Maybe he/she does not know the rules for blindfolded.
I have already asked that (if you saw that post).

Yes, it's possible they think that 15s untimed pre-inspection is given.

Until proven otherwise we must trust people or this contest loses its meaning.
Where shall I draw the line? Actually I noticed this because my program gave
a warning. But maybe faz or David or Simon could have managed this. To me
the scramble looked so-so, but I am real bad at 2x2 speed.

Yeah, I agree with your first point. I think how it has operated so far is fine though; have a general level of trust but call people out and ask for some degree of proof or explanation when unreasonably fast times are claimed.
I probably shouldn't have posted myself but I was quite pleased with the time I got...
The solution to that scramble is y2 U R' U' y' R' U' R U2, it's a one move first layer that has a cancellation with the CLL alg.

 

[MichaelErskine]

I think how it has operated so far is fine though; have a general level of trust but call people out and ask for some degree of proof or explanation when unreasonably fast times are claimed.

I'm happy to provide a full explanation of why I'm so slow

 

[liljthedude]

Mats my 26.51 3x3 isn't on there. Probably because I forgot to put the event title..Sorry about that.

 

[DavidWoner]

But maybe faz or David or Simon could have managed this.

No. I do not believe sub3 is possible on this scramble. I got 4.33, and I was expecting it to be easy. Sub-3 might be possible on something like U R U F' R' U' but not on this one.

 

[Kian]

2x2x2 Blindfolded 2.69 blizzardmb

You must be joking. There is literally no way that you could have got that time, especially considering the times you got in sighted 2x2. There are probably 15 or 20 people in the entire world that could sub 5 that scramble and you are not one of them.

I agree, which is probably why I posted the same thing 7 hours earlier.

 

[Escher]

2x2x2 Blindfolded 2.69 blizzardmb

You must be joking. There is literally no way that you could have got that time, especially considering the times you got in sighted 2x2. There are probably 15 or 20 people in the entire world that could sub 5 that scramble and you are not one of them.

I agree, which is probably why I posted the same thing 7 hours earlier.

I wanted to raeg

 

[MatsBergsten]

Mats my 26.51 3x3 isn't on there. Probably because I forgot to put the event title..Sorry about that.

Yeah, that may have something to do with it
Now you are in!

Oh well.. I will get over 500 points too some day..

Now that I have added some missing results, you actually have 501 points!!

 

[Edward]

28th 3x3 and 20th 3x3 OH.
51st overall .

 

[SimonWestlund]

Oh well.. I will get over 500 points too some day..

Now that I have added some missing results, you actually have 501 points!!

Yes!

 

[Yi Ren]

AvGalen:
Excuse me.
My results are in page 6, but i cant find them in result page.
Is there something wrong?

 

[Lumej]

But still, both Lumej and James, I think both your posts ought to be ok. But sorry, it did not work.

No problem, and thanks very much for fixing it!

 

[MatsBergsten]

AvGalen:
Excuse me.
My results are in page 6, but i cant find them in result page.
Is there something wrong?

Yes, not much but there need to be some spaces for the result calculating program
to handle your post correctly.

If you write it like this it will work:
2x2: 6.33 7.84 DNF 6.39 (4.05) = 6.85 so bad...
3x3: 17.88 18.09 (14.80) (19.28) 17.77 = 17.91 so bad...with type A V
3x3 oh: 22.89 (20.36) DNF pop 22.76 21.22 = 22.29 damn...bad avg&single
clock 14.31) 13.91 12.56 (10.44) 13.73 = 13.40 good scambles^-^
pyraminx 13.86) 9.84 10.52 (8.00) 8.26 = 9.54 not good
SQ1 54.44) (22.75) 38.78 28.56 37.67 = 35.00 avg is not good,but single is good...

that is, a little space after each event name and 3x3 instead of 3*3 (etc.).

@Simon, nu har du 503

 

[SimonWestlund]

@Simon, nu har du 503

Haha! It just keeps increasing