what is the 3x3x3 single WR boundary.

[Enter]

I think when you are really lucky on the F2L and LL skip it could go to sub 5.

 

[ben1996123]

Well Faz and Stefan Huber already have sub 5's without LL skips, so I think definitely sub 4, maybe sub 3.

 

[Enter]

Sub 3 that is immposible!
Quadruple X-cross with LL skip

 

[izovire]

I think low 4 sec. using fridrich this is possible with a lot of luck.

If it were humanly possible to solve it in one look and less than 20 moves.. the WR would be like 3-4 sec.

Then there'd also be FMC Wr's too! lol

 

[Kirjava]

3.90 exactly.

 

[Carson]

Assuming organizer's do not throw out scrambles because they are too easy: someone will eventually get something like a R U R' or a U Perm as a solution. It could happen this weekend, or it could be 10 years from now... there is no way to be sure.

 

[StachuK1992]

Assuming organizer's do not throw out scrambles because they are too easy: someone will eventually get something like a R U R' or a U Perm as a solution. It could happen this weekend, or it could be 10 years from now... there is no way to be sure.

Optimal scramble lenths, etc.

R U' R' or equivalent != legit scramble.

 

[Stefan]

3.90 exactly.

I agree. Surely 3.90 is possible, but 3.89 or less is impossible.

Assuming organizer's do not throw out scrambles because they are too easy: someone will eventually get something like a R U R' or a U Perm as a solution. It could happen this weekend, or it could be 10 years from now

Or, way more likely, it could be a few billion years from now.

 

[PatrickJameson]

Or, way more likely, it could be a few billion years from now.

For some reason, I don't see cubing being around in a few billion years. Hell, the sun could have expanded enough to kill all life on Earth, so by that time there could be interplanetary records. I'd say the next few decades are a bit more likely that a ridiculous scramble gets loose(assuming again that they don't throw away scrambles).

 

[hawkmp4]

Optimal scramble lenths, etc.

R U' R' or equivalent != legit scramble.

It's perfectly plausible that CE spits out a a cube with a 3 move solution.
Is it likely? No. There are roughly 18^3 = 5832 (less, actually, because I'm over counting in several ways. But it's a good enough rough estimate) states that have 3 move solutions. 6000/43 quintillion = 1.4 × 10^-16. But there's no mechanism that prevents CE from generating such a position.

 

[pcuber]

People could be living on other planets by then and two billion years is a long time.

 

[StachuK1992]

It's perfectly plausible that CE spits out a a cube with a 3 move solution.
Is it likely? No. There are roughly 18^3 = 5832 (less, actually, because I'm over counting in several ways. But it's a good enough rough estimate) states that have 3 move solutions. 6000/43 quintillion = 1.4 × 10^-16. But there's no mechanism that prevents CE from generating such a position.

I've been under the impression that CE did have a mechanism to prevent such things.

If not, I'm now under the impression that scrambles such as ones for Pyra and 2x2 will be used for more puzzles, thus eliminating this.

 

[Eleredo]

I vote for sub 5. With A LOT, and I really mean, A LOT of luck, it should undoubtedly be possible.

 

[QCcuber4]

Ive never seen anything lower than Yu's 6.57, and it was a PLL skip, for all i know, i don't see how it could go any lower than 4.50... then again we've were worshiping sub 20 not so long ago... so yeah. But a sub 7 avg... now THAT would kick some ass. Go Feliks.

 

[hawkmp4]

I've been under the impression that CE did have a mechanism to prevent such things.

If not, I'm now under the impression that scrambles such as ones for Pyra and 2x2 will be used for more puzzles, thus eliminating this.

As far as I know, scrambles for 2x2 and Pyraminx are functionally the same as our 3x3 scrambles. A random state is generated, then solved. The inverse of the solution is the scramble. Again as far as I know, we don't 'throw out' scrambles for any puzzle.

 

[StachuK1992]

As far as I know, scrambles for 2x2 and Pyraminx are functionally the same as our 3x3 scrambles. A random state is generated, then solved. The inverse of the solution is the scramble. Again as far as I know, we don't 'throw out' scrambles for any puzzle.

Ah, okay.

And some judges have done so - <insert some Toronto comp 1-2 years ago>

 

[DavidWoner]

If I recall correctly, it wasn't thrown out, it was inversed. Same with the WR 2x2 scramble from nationals, except that took place halfway through the round.

 

[Andrew Ricci]

I can't see lower than sub 5 with Fridrich.

If a new, totally amazing method comes out that destroys the current ones, maybe sub 4.5 is possible. Maybe.

 

[Stefan]

For some reason, I don't see cubing being around in a few billion years.

How dare you attack my math with reality?

 

[Chrish]

*A wild StefenPochmann appears before you!*