2x2 single WR at Trentin Open 2011

[Tim Major]

2 move + tips at Norwegian comp

That supports what I was saying, pyra comp single is usually held by top 5.

 

[Fabian Auroux]

 

[Rpotts]

Lol it's so unremarkable to him.

 

[Branca]

Here's my solve

 

[timelonade]

Time to change your 2x2 single time in your sig ..

 

[Escher]

OMG IM SO ANGRY WHAT A DUMB TIME

 

[ben1996123]

This was announced at UK open. I lol'd.

 

[Stefan]

OMG IM SO ANGRY WHAT A DUMB TIME

You now have 2698 posts, clearly that means "2x2x2 in 0.69, alr8!". Or the 8 refers to the number of pieces, not sure.

 

[RyanReese09]

Not true at all. We throw out unfair scrambles. Otherwise, Rowe would have the WR with a 0.5 or something when U2 F2 showed up on the scramble sheet.

Rowe wouldn't be the only one to have a high chance of WR. I doubt he would be the fastest out of everyone

 

[thackernerd]

I wish I didn't suck at 2x2 now...

 

[r_517]

On UK Open yesterday there was a very easy scramble on clock final. Daniel decided to change it because it was way too lucky. (I got 4.17 on that scramble at home without any warm-up).
What I'm trying to say is, whether the delegate decided to change it or not, people should stop complaining others getting luck. Yes this 4-move scramble was indeed nice, but still there were only 3 people managed to solve it under 0.96s. There's no point in saying "That's easy so that shouldn't count. " Nobody can accurately define what scramble is "easy".

 

[lobster]

wow... its so crazy.....wondering if anyone else can break it....

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

wow... its so crazy.....wondering if anyone else can break it....

nobody can its 2 gud

 

[Branca]

Usually we print a lot of scramble papers an then, when comes to scamble, pick up one randomly and use it for that round/group so there is no way to know which scramble sheet will be in final, semi, etc.
BUT, even if a delegate would choose scramble for each group there won't be way to know if you are getting a lucky scramble from that solves. The delegate should have to scramble all the cubes, even the one he's suppose to compete with, and then decide. Of course THIS is unfair.
Even from 20 moves 2x2 scramble you can get 4 moves solve.
The program by WCA was made to make random scrambles. So we click on the "Scramble" button, print them, then randomly pick them up when comes to scramble. The scramble are read in the moment all the competitors are already in the waiting area, waiting for the cubes. Probably even the delegate. What should the scramble guy do? Go ask to the delegate to check the scramble, of his group, cuz they're too easy? No way.
Lucky scrambles are the part of the game, the computer generates them. I don't see why a delegate should CHECK the scrambles, the computer already checked them when generated.
If the computer generated scrambles are the problem, invent a generator with no lucky scrambles.

 

[ardi4nto]

How to decide it's lucky or not?
The delegate must try all scrambles one by one? No way.
And, "lucky" or not is depend on the competitors.

I agree that if we don't want to get a lucky/easy solve, invent a scramble generator without "easy" one.

 

[Louie]

This is why the average solve is the main event. You can't say a scramble is unfair - A generator that eliminated lucky scrambles wouldn't be a scramble generator at all - it would be a challenge generator and would render all previous records null and void. Congrats to the winners!

 

[coinman]

Not true at all. We throw out unfair scrambles. Otherwise, Rowe would have the WR with a 0.5 or something when U2 F2 showed up on the scramble sheet.

On UK Open yesterday there was a very easy scramble on clock final. Daniel decided to change it because it was way too lucky. (I got 4.17 on that scramble at home without any warm-up). .

Is this really allowed?

Quite seriously, I think it is highly doubtful that a delegate or organizer sort out scrambles even when considering that they are easy. While they may not do like that in a different competition, such as the one in Italy, you will trick the competitors in the competion of the chance to beat the world record. Likewise, in such cases to sort out those scrambles that are difficult or purposely sort in those that are easy or difficult.
Such behavior again raises the question of how to increase security around the scrambles in competitions. The only safe way according to me is that you have a computer in place at the competiton that randomly selected the scrambles just before use, and no sorting will be done away!
Another option, if you absolutely do not want to short solutions in puzzles like 2x2 and Clock is that someone writes a scramble program that removes such scrambles, and that all then have to use this program.

 

[Jaycee]

Lol, I just got a 0.71 single, and I average ~5.5-6.

2x2 single means next to nothing.

But I am disappointed that I can't say I have a sub-WR single xD

 

[Tim Major]

What should the scramble guy do? Go ask to the delegate to check the scramble, of his group, cuz they're too easy? No way.

This is a fair point.
In the hypothetical situation that TimMc and Dene were in the same group at 2x2 (very hypothetical as Dene doesn't do 2x2), what would I do if I found a 4 move scramble whilst scrambling. Bring Tim/Dene over, only for Tim/Dene to say it's fine, but then they can't do it. The delegate doesn't scramble his own solves.

Edit:

Not true at all. We throw out unfair scrambles. Otherwise, Rowe would have the WR with a 0.5 or something when U2 F2 showed up on the scramble sheet.

What if you're competing? (assuming you're the only delegate)

 

[Dene]

The delegate could always just get the inverse scramble.