2x2x2 Lucky Scrambles

[Kirjava]

Look at the thread title again. "2x2x2 lucky SCRAMBLES". The scramble is RANDOM and therefore introduces an undeniable element of luck into the solve. You seem to be unable to distinguish that the term "lucky" is referring directly to the scramble, and is not necessarily implying anything about the solve that was performed on this scramble. Of course the cuber by extension could get the benefit of a lucky scramble, by executing a skillfull, easy or fast solve that would result in a very good, better, or best time. Whether you like it not, luck plays a part in speedcubing, and there is such a thing as a "lucky scramble".

Luck is subjective. Your argument has been nullified.

 

[joey]

Also, can you stop quoting Erik wrongly.

 

[qqwref]

reThinking: In a cubing context, "lucky" means that a step was skipped. It doesn't just mean someone had some luck, because that's meaningless when you already know the scramble is random. This is what Erik was talking about (and you don't have to put his quote in every other post) and this is what everyone means when they say "lucky". You don't seem to know this so I figured someone ought to tell you. To refer to solves that are better than average we would just say "easy" or "fast". Note that few scrambles are inherently good; most lucky solves on 3x3+, and a good portion of them on 2x2, were just done in a way that caused some part of the solve to be skipped.

 

[RyanO]

Calling the scrambles lucky is even worse than calling the solves lucky. A good portion of these were not optimal solutions, so the "luck" of the scramble isn't the real issue. One person may find a scramble to be easy while another finds it to be difficult.

 

[reThinking the Cube]

easy[/B] not lucky. Sure, they may be luck involved in the easy cases coming up but the solver still had to identify and execute the case. For instance, I really like the J-b perm and would see it as a quite lucky case but somebody else might really like an R perm and find the J-b perm horrible.

...One person may find a scramble to be easy while another finds it to be difficult.

Sorry - no valid points to miss. "Lucky" is an appropriate description for these SCRAMBLES. If I called them "Easy" then not all would agree with that either, since by your very own arguments, everyone tends to see even the same case differently (easier/harder). Those scrambles where truly "lucky" relative to the solvers that got them - and were also able to recognize the easy solves that could be used to get those great times.

"It's not a crime to get lucky" - Erik Akkersdijk

 

[joey]

Okay, call them lucky.

BUT don't use Erik's quote, you're not even quoting it properly, which has the word lucky in, when you are using a different meaning of lucky.
If you can't see that ^^ then you are truly as stupid as I thought.

 

[Kirjava]

Those scrambles where truly "lucky" relative to the solvers that got them

Prove it.

 

[RyanO]

Easy.

easy[/B] not lucky. Sure, they may be luck involved in the easy cases coming up but the solver still had to identify and execute the case. For instance, I really like the J-b perm and would see it as a quite lucky case but somebody else might really like an R perm and find the J-b perm horrible.

...One person may find a scramble to be easy while another finds it to be difficult.

Sorry - no valid points to miss. "Lucky" is an appropriate description for these SCRAMBLES. If I called them "Easy" then not all would agree with that either, since by your very own arguments, everyone tends to see even the same case differently (easier/harder). Those scrambles where truly "lucky" relative to the solvers that got them - and were also able to recognize the easy solves that could be used to get those great times.

"It's not a crime to get lucky" - Erik Akkersdijk

The scrambles are random, they have nothing to do with the solver. You are making a logical blunder when you claim that a scramble is lucky because one person did it fast.

 

[reThinking the Cube]

reThinking: In a cubing context, "lucky" means that a step was skipped. It doesn't just mean someone had some luck, because that's meaningless when you already know the scramble is random.

I know what "lucky" means in a cubing context, and that is exactly why I have carefully chosen that exact word to refer to those SCRAMBLES.

BTW - the use of the word "lucky" is not nearly as meaningless as your argument that just because the scramble is random, then it is meaningless to consider it lucky! What math school taught you that? Did they also teach you that it is meaningless to consider other random events such as - rolls of the dice, are incapable of generating chance or luck? There is nothing wrong or meaningless about refering to a random scramble as "lucky".

 

[reThinking the Cube]

Those scrambles where truly "lucky" relative to the solvers that got them

Prove it.

They already have.

 

[qqwref]

My god, you are stupid. I thought it might be true earlier but was not sure; now I am. This is not a tricky concept.

 

[Kirjava]

Those scrambles where truly "lucky" relative to the solvers that got them

Prove it.

They already have.

How so?

 

[reThinking the Cube]

The scrambles are random, they have nothing to do with the solver. You are making a logical blunder when you claim that a scramble is lucky because one person did it fast.

False. BTW - you did a pretty good job there of combining at least 4 logical errors and false assumptions. Was that easy or lucky?

 

[nlCuber22]

The scrambles are random, they have nothing to do with the solver. You are making a logical blunder when you claim that a scramble is lucky because one person did it fast.

False. BTW - you did a pretty good job there of combining at least 4 logical errors and false assumptions. Was that easy or lucky?

Dude, shut up. You're wrong. Go away.
Kirjava said it best:

Luck is subjective. Your argument has been nullified.

>_>

 

[reThinking the Cube]

This is not a tricky concept.

Then how come you can't get it?

 

[joey]

This is not a tricky concept.

Then how come you can't get it?

Don't you think that if most other people are against you on this one, you could be wrong?

 

[Olivér Perge]

At least he got the avatar right.

 

[RyanO]

He's just trying to rile people up to get attention. I say we just ignore him.

 

[reThinking the Cube]

This is not a tricky concept.

Then how come you can't get it?

Don't you think that if most other people are against you on this one, you could be wrong?

Good point. The ones against me are wrong.

 

[Muesli]

TROLL!