Random Cubing Discussion

[ninjabob7]

So I thought of an event idea yesterday. It will never become official but might be fun unofficially.

You take two cubes and apply the same scramble to both. Cover one cube while you solve the other, then put on a blindfold before uncovering and solving the second cube. There is no preinspection and your time is how long it takes to solve both.

I call it Twin BLD, and the idea is that you'll solve the first cube with more or less your normal method, memorizing the steps as you go, and then apply the same solution to the second cube. This basically allows you to learn the memorization part of speedBLD without learning how to trace pieces through the solve. Covering the second cube prevents you from reviewing your memo after solving the first cube.

I haven't done it successfully yet, but when I do I expect it to be about 2:30 (slightly faster than my normal BLD times, but would improve quickly). I think it could be done without any memo system, but it would be easier with one. For instance, you could use code words for each F2L case (like in team BLD) instead of trying to remember the shape.

 

[qqwref]

You take two cubes and apply the same scramble to both. Cover one cube while you solve the other, then put on a blindfold before uncovering and solving the second cube. There is no inspection and your time is how long it takes to solve both.

Interesting idea. It's pretty hard for me at the moment but I imagine it could be pretty fun/fast. Maybe it'll help with reconstructions :]

 

[riffz]

Like speedBLD without tracing. Might actually be fun!

 

[Anthony]

58.52 first try.
40.11 third try.

 

[oprah62]

58.52 first try.
40.11 third try.

Wrong thread?

 

[Tim Major]

Wrong thread?

er... wut?

 

[Mike Hughey]

58.52 first try.
40.11 third try.

If it's the right thread, you can't be serious!?!?!

If you are, that's awesome!

 

[joey]

I did it sub1, it's kinda easy, and with one cube.

Me and daniel lundwall tried this at EC '10. We didn't get a success.. it was 2am after all.
One does a speedsolve, and then calls it out to the next person.

Me and Kirjava did it a week ago? We got a untimed success.

 

[Kirjava]

It's easier with CFOP

 

[riffz]

It's easier with CFOP

I can definitely see why that would be true.

 

[ninjabob7]

I did it sub1, it's kinda easy, and with one cube.
...
One does a speedsolve, and then calls it out to the next person.

I'm not sure you understand what I'm trying to do. It's one person solving two cubes: the first one sighted and the second one blind.

58.52 first try.
40.11 third try.

Wow. Is this with CFOP, and if so how do you memorize? Do you remember shapes or moves for the F2L pairs (or neither)?

 

[riffz]

58.52 first try.
40.11 third try.

Do you use your teamBLD codes to help yourself memorize?

 

[joey]

I'm not sure you understand what I'm trying to do. It's one person solving two cubes: the first one sighted and the second one blind.


Wow. Is this with CFOP, and if so how do you memorize? Do you remember shapes or moves for the F2L pairs (or neither)?

I've done it by myself and as a team.

 

[theace]

They should really add a team BLD as a competition!

I'm having a hard time with the last unfold of my magic. Any suggestions? My average is around 2. If a screw up on the last unfold, it goes up to 3 or 4 too sometimes. It does go lower as well. Broke 4 PBs today: 1.91, 1.90, 1.83, 1.78, 1.69

 

[Mike Hughey]

I did it sub1, it's kinda easy, and with one cube.

Me and daniel lundwall tried this at EC '10. We didn't get a success.. it was 2am after all.
One does a speedsolve, and then calls it out to the next person.

Me and Kirjava did it a week ago? We got a untimed success.

I think sometimes I just fail to appreciate just how horribly awful I am at 3x3x3 speedsolve than most of you are. You're all totally amazing to me. I suspect if I were sub-15, I wouldn't find this all that hard either, but at the moment it just seems mind-boggling.

 

[qqwref]

I'm well under sub-15 and I absolutely cannot do this at all.

I'm getting times around a minute, but I always forget something in F2L.

EDIT: 1:10.36 success after about 20 tries today.

Spoiler

R2 D2 R' F B U' R2 B D U' B' D' F2 U2 B2 D L' B2 L B2 U' L2 B2 R2 D
xcross: U F B' R L' U2 L2
F2L2: y L' U L U' L' U' L y
F2L3: y R U' R' U2 y' R' U' R
F2L4: U2 L U2 L' U' L U L'
OLL: R U R' U' M' U R U' r'
PLL: U y (V perm)

 

[Kirjava]

and that's why there's no point learning 2 look LSE

 

[Kirjava]

12:14:09 <+Kirjava> U2 M2 F U2 M2 U2 F' U2
12:17:01 <+Kirjava> M2 U' F2 M2 F2 U
12:22:42 <+Kirjava> R2 D M2 D2 M2 D R2

I'm betting it's faster to solve cases like these 'normally'

 

[Escher]

12:14:09 <+Kirjava> U2 M2 F U2 M2 U2 F' U2
12:17:01 <+Kirjava> M2 U' F2 M2 F2 U
12:22:42 <+Kirjava> R2 D M2 D2 M2 D R2

I'm betting it's faster to solve cases like these 'normally'

They work well with the old style M2 - that is - R2 r2:

U2' R2 r2' F U2' R2 r2' U2' F' (thumb flick) U2'

R2 r2' U' F2 (RH double index flick) R2 r2' F2 U (LH push on LBU)

Got to say I prefer:

l2' U' M2 U2' M2 U' R2'

for the latter, using RH ring to reach up and pull down on UB (kind of like R' r M') for M2, and starting with LH thumb on DL and fingers on UL. Does an x2 though...

Pretty sure I can sub 1 all of these easily with a little practice (but I'm really hungover right now so cba).

 

[Kirjava]

l2' U' M2 U2' M2 U' R2'

lol nice

I should've posted the alternatives really;

UM2U2M2U MU2M'U2
UMU2M2U2M'U'M2
UM2U2M2U MU2MU2M2