Sebastián Pino Castillo Clock WRs Invalid

Well, this is exactly the point I'm trying to make.

We tend to label some things (like a a round number, say 100000, or a particulary good scramble)
nice or special, and that when we apply randomness to generate things they should not look
nice.

1,2,3,4,5,6. That doesn't look random, that looks special.
It's just the notion that 'special' srambles can't be random, though I cannot see why they couldn't be.
 
I generated 100 numbers (pseudorandom, but nevertheless) and the chance of
getting exactly these numbers is 1 to 10^100. But I still got them.
I don't think you should be talking about probability if you don't understand it ;) (I'll rephrase: the Clock scrambles were all good in a very specific way, which is well-known by Clock solvers to save moves and time, so this isn't a case of "these specific scrambles are unlikely", it's a case of "this average is easier than the vast vast majority would be".)

PS: if you used a PRNG, the chance is actually (probably) much less than 10^100. There are generally much less than 10^100 possible seeds. So for instance, if your program happened to use a 32-bit seed, there are 2^32 or about 4.3 billion (= 10^9.6329...) possible 100-number sequences that could be generated, and the chance of that particular one is only 1 in 4.3 billion :p
 
Last edited:
I don't think you should be talking about probability if you don't understand it ;)

I might have made a poor analogy, and I'll certainly agree that I don't know too much about statistics.
Is it truly impossible to get the scrambles Pino had on his wr avg out of the 'random' WCA generator?
Because if it's not, then the scrambles are not too lucky to be random (perhaps just incredibly unlikely). Do you agree?
 
Back
Top