2-7 relay callange.

[Kenneth]

Pew, that was something... I just made a relay on 2x to 7x

Time:

47:36 minutes.

Cubes used:

2x2x2 ES
3x3x3 Rubik D.I.Y
4x4x4 Rubik Studio
5x5x5 Rubik Studio ... I got a V5 but it's still stiff so my rubiks rules as now.
6x6x6 VC
7x7x7 VC

Solved from 2x and up. It was my second solve on 6x and 7x ever.

Wat is your times?

 

[Leviticus]

I will do it tomorrow so i will save this spot i guess. Im estimating i will get around 20 minutes on a good run and 25 on a bad one, so somwhere around there.

 

[AvGalen]

For me that should have been roughly:
0:10
0:25
1:30
2:30
7:00
11:00
= 22:35
But due to an explode on the 6x6x6 (and other smaller pops) it was more like Kenneths time. If others will try this, just use the 2-7 relay scrambles from this weeks competition

 

[Leviticus]

I keep trying to film a solve on the 6x6 and i POP'ed and actually lost a piece

 

[Mike Hughey]

My weekly competition time on this was 33:25.44. (Sorry for being silly with the hundredths. I know the hundredths don't count, but I got used to doing times this way ages ago, and so I intend to keep reporting them this way even if it is silly.) My 7x7x7 time was horrible - 16 minutes - largely because I did it at a time when I was completely exhausted.

 

[Kenneth]

Aha, I did not know it was in the weekly already, maybe I should try that instead.

But I did not use the scrambles from there so then I have to make a new try (and probably a lot faster, the cubes are getting better pretty fast)... Later if ever, it is really a bit of work

BTW, is there a 6x6x6 FMC in there too? I just made a 295 STM solve

 

[AvGalen]

Aha, I did not know it was in the weekly already, maybe I should try that instead.

But I did not use the scrambles from there so then I have to make a new try (and probably a lot faster, the cubes are getting better pretty fast)... Later if ever, it is really a bit of work

BTW, is there a 6x6x6 FMC in there too? I just made a 295 STM solve

Did you write it down?

 

[Kenneth]

No, and I used a manual scramble so I can't redo it. But I think I can average sub 300 using my method, that solve was not aspecially easy nor lucky in any step. It was basicly a normal solve with extra look ahead.

 

[badmephisto]

I have a hypothesis that average time of solve grows linearly with the number of pieces on a cube.
an n-dimensional cube has n^3 - (n-2)^3 pieces.

Here are best averages for each cube from WCA website:
Dimension Pieces Best average
2 8 3.63
3 26 11.28
4 56 53.99
5 98 95.04

plotted graph is attached.

According to the hypothesis:
6x6 average: 153 seconds, or 2 minutes 33 seconds
7x7 average: 223 seconds or 3 minutes 43 seconds

these are the times that you guys should be trying to get at Especially Erik i guess

----------------------
based on these results i propose that you divide each time by number of pieces to get your average solving time per piece on each cube. That will give you a better measure of how good you are overall, because the way you have it right now, the 2x2 time barely counts in comparison to 7x7 time.

i.e. your time/piece is:
2x2time/8 + 3x3time/26 + 4x4time/56 + 5x5time/98 + 6x6time/152 + 7x7time/218

X-axis: number of pieces
Y-axis: best average for corresponding cube from WCA

 

[Mike Hughey]

My times/piece for this week's competition:

2x2x2: 1.46
3x3x3: 1.05
4x4x4: 2.18
5x5x5: 1.99
6x6x6: 3.47
7x7x7: 4.18

Clearly I need lots of work on 6x6x6 and 7x7x7. But hey, I never tried them at all on computer simulations, so they're brand new to me.

 

[rjohnson_8ball]

What is the official notation now, for turning clockwise the 3rd slice from the right on a 7x7 cube? According to what I just read here the term 3R2 means turn all 3 of the right most layers clockwise. Could we use 3R2 for the single slice, and 3Rw2 for the wide turn? By the way, I think the new notation should not try to involve subscripts or superscripts because they don't always display right, and also, they might be too tiny to read when the main font is small.

 

[aznblur]

Hmm theoretically, I should get
2x2 - 0:07
3x3 - 0:20
4x4 - 1:10
5x5 - 2:00
6x6 - 4:30
7x7 - 7:00
Total - 15:07

 

[Dene]

My times/piece for this week's competition:

2x2x2: 1.46
3x3x3: 1.05
4x4x4: 2.18
5x5x5: 1.99
6x6x6: 3.47
7x7x7: 4.18

Clearly I need lots of work on 6x6x6 and 7x7x7. But hey, I never tried them at all on computer simulations, so they're brand new to me.

Wow, your 5x5x5 times sure are good!

 

[philkt731]

I have a hypothesis that average time of solve grows linearly with the number of pieces on a cube.
an n-dimensional cube has n^3 - (n-2)^3 pieces.

Here are best averages for each cube from WCA website:
Dimension Pieces Best average
2 8 3.63
3 26 11.28
4 56 53.99
5 98 95.04

i.e. your time/piece is:
2x2time/8 + 3x3time/26 + 4x4time/56 + 5x5time/98 + 6x6time/152 + 7x7time/218

For odd number cubes you need to subtract six because the centers don't count as pieces, they're already solved, so a 3x3x3 has 20 pieces, 5x5x5 has 92 pieces and a 7x7x7 has 212 pieces

 

[aznblur]

My times/piece for this week's competition:

2x2x2: 1.46
3x3x3: 1.05
4x4x4: 2.18
5x5x5: 1.99
6x6x6: 3.47
7x7x7: 4.18

Clearly I need lots of work on 6x6x6 and 7x7x7. But hey, I never tried them at all on computer simulations, so they're brand new to me.

Wow, your 5x5x5 times sure are good!

Its times/piece, not times.

 

[AvGalen]

What is the official notation now, for turning clockwise the 3rd slice from the right on a 7x7 cube? According to what I just read here the term 3R2 means turn all 3 of the right most layers clockwise. Could we use 3R2 for the single slice, and 3Rw2 for the wide turn? By the way, I think the new notation should not try to involve subscripts or superscripts because they don't always display right, and also, they might be too tiny to read when the main font is small.

Unfortunately the official notation uses subscript which didn't work on the forum. I "invented" the 3R2-notation and used it as a quick fix.
I don't like having notation for every slice-turn on really big cubes. For scrambles it would just be 3R2 followed by 2R2 to perform a slice.

I still have to think about this problem for next weeks competition. I might just stick with "3R2"-notation

 

[masterofthebass]

I think that having lowercase letters works for multislice, and uppercase can denote individual slice moves. So, 3r2 = R2 + 2R2 + 3R2

 

[AvGalen]

I think that having lowercase letters works for multislice, and uppercase can denote individual slice moves. So, 3r2 = R2 + 2R2 + 3R2

I like that idea and that's the way I have proposed it in the yahoo group about a year ago. With this idea you only need [n][RUFLDBrufldb]['2] to allow every move in the xyzMESRUFLDBrufldb notation and it would work on every size cube.

n means a number ranging from 1 to the order of the cube. So for a 7x7x7 n could be [1234567]. 7r would be equivalent to x, 7R would even be equivalent to L'

 

[badmephisto]

I have a hypothesis that average time of solve grows linearly with the number of pieces on a cube.
an n-dimensional cube has n^3 - (n-2)^3 pieces.

Here are best averages for each cube from WCA website:
Dimension Pieces Best average
2 8 3.63
3 26 11.28
4 56 53.99
5 98 95.04

i.e. your time/piece is:
2x2time/8 + 3x3time/26 + 4x4time/56 + 5x5time/98 + 6x6time/152 + 7x7time/218

For odd number cubes you need to subtract six because the centers don't count as pieces, they're already solved, so a 3x3x3 has 20 pieces, 5x5x5 has 92 pieces and a 7x7x7 has 212 pieces

I thought about that, but I decided against excluding those 6 pieces from the total. You still need to solve the centers in the sense that you have to take them into account. On the other hand on a 4x4 you are not restricted like that from the beginning, and instead you have somewhat of a freedom to choose the colors as you want them. Its iffy