[Unofficial] 3x3 speedBLD: 5.52

[Roman]

Can someone please explain me the meaning of speedBLD?
If I have unlimited time for preparation (I'm sorry, for memorization), then of course I will try to optimize the solution as much as possible, and eventually the execution will be sub-wr or something. Maybe we should consider about removing this event from UWR list?.. Or change the rules, at least?

R2 F2 R2 U2 F2 D R2 U R2 F2 L' D' U2 L F' U' R B2 D' L2

Yes, it's stolen scramble, but if I'm not mistaken, one day Maskow had an UWR in regular 3BLD from stolen scramble, so after that I learned that it's not a violation

X-cross: R' F
2nd: U' L U L' R U' R'
3rd: L U L'
4th: U L' U L y' U' R U' R'
OLL: U' F (RUR'U')x2 F'
PLL: H-perm

I'm not pretending on UWR, cmon, I just want to show you the stupidness of speedBLD event idea, and discuss it.

 

[Ollie]

This might be a silly question, but did you make any moves during the memorization (preparation) phase?

 

[Applecow]

I did not watch the video but for me it sounds like you prepared the solve with doing moves. Speedbld is preparing the solve without doing actual moves, just tracing the pieces in your head and predicting the next cases.

 

[ben1996123]

your not aloud to do moves during memo

 

[Mike Hughey]

Right - with speedBLD, you're allowed to look at the scrambled cube but not make any turns, then solve it blindfolded when you've worked out your solution. This tends to mean that really low movecounts are unlikely - solves are usually around the 50-60 move range.

It is true that in the early days this was done with unlimited examination time, but I think it's safe to say that if we were to do the event officially today, it would have a time limit - probably somewhere from 10 minutes to one hour. 10 minutes seems like the minimum potentially reasonable time, and would exclude most people from being able to get successful solves without a lot of practice; one hour would allow most reasonably good cubers to be able to make a decent attempt at success, with little or no practice.

I think it's a relatively reasonable event, and might make a nice addition to the official events.

 

[Roman]

did you make any moves during the memorization (preparation) phase?

Yes I did (I used another cube for it). Most likely, I could preform the solving without it, just spending more time (which is unlimited anyway). Should I do another solve respecting the rule? I don't think I have to, the result is predictable...

Right - with speedBLD, you're allowed to look at the scrambled cube but not make any turns, then solve it blindfolded when you've worked out your solution. This tends to mean that really low movecounts are unlikely - solves are usually around the 50-60 move range.

It is true that in the early days this was done with unlimited examination time, but I think it's safe to say that if we were to do the event officially today, it would have a time limit - probably somewhere from 10 minutes to one hour. 10 minutes seems like the minimum potentially reasonable time, and would exclude most people from being able to get successful solves without a lot of practice; one hour would allow most reasonably good cubers to be able to make a decent attempt at success, with little or no practice.

I think it's a relatively reasonable event, and might make a nice addition to the official events.

Sounds good... The most foolish thing was unlimited memo time, but restricting it to 1 hour making the event really competitable and much more interesting. I'm not sure this limit is obeyed in current (and earlier) UWRs though.

 

[MaikeruKonare]

For speed blind you memorize cross, then F2L pairs, then what OLL and PLL will show up? Intense...

 

[ben1996123]

Yes I did (I used another cube for it).

this is the main thing about speedbld, you have to memorise the solve by tracing all of the pieces around the cube without actually doing any moves

 

[Mike Hughey]

Sounds good... The most foolish thing was unlimited memo time, but restricting it to 1 hour making the event really competitable and much more interesting. I'm not sure this limit is obeyed in current (and earlier) UWRs though.

I'm not sure about this, but a few years ago in this forum I was led to believe that this particular event's results were at one time considered official:
http://www.speedcubing.com/results/...gionId=&years=&show=100+Results&single=Single

As far as I know, back when it was an "official" event, there was no limit. So you're right. But then again, the same was true with multiBLD. I'm quite confident we would implement a time limit on memo time if we wanted it to be a serious event now.

 

[Noahaha]

Pretty sure Maskow's 17 was never counted as an UWR.

 

[Lucas Garron]

Can someone please explain me the meaning of speedBLD?

The meaning of speed BLD is to show cubers what their minds can do, in an age where everything has been optimized out of regular speedsolving. Where speedsolving is thoughtless, speed BLD still requires mental and visual skills.

It seems you're mistaken about the usual rules of speed BLD. The point is to take a cube, then look at it and figure out an entire solution in your head. It's like regular BLD, except that you're only counting the execution time. You can't take notes or test/practice algs on other cubes. However, there are no limits on your approach to the solution.

If you just want to practice a scramble over and over to get the fastest solution possible, see Prepared Solve Challenge.
However, for speed BLD I think it's also important that you start with a sufficiently random scramble and no expectations about easy approaches (e.g. pieces placed, short cross, or someone telling you it's a good scramble). Otherwise, you're artificially skipping the task of finding an efficient solution in your head.

Also, the memo time doesn't really matter right now, because the fastest speed BLD solvers stabilize on a solution within 20 minutes.

I expect that speed BLD is still rather untapped. It should be possible to trace an entire solve in a few minutes, and trying optimizations/variations should also be pretty fast. But an upper bound of an hour is definitely a long enough cutoff for that.

 

[TMOY]

10 minutes seems like the minimum potentially reasonable time, and would exclude most people from being able to get successful solves without a lot of practice; one hour would allow most reasonably good cubers to be able to make a decent attempt at success, with little or no practice.

10 minutes is more than enough for most people to get a successful solve with no specific speedBLD practice, by just doing a regular BLD solve.

 

[Mike Hughey]

10 minutes is more than enough for most people to get a successful solve with no specific speedBLD practice, by just doing a regular BLD solve.

That, of course, is true. And many people are likely to compete these days by doing such a solve. I'd probably see very little difference between attempting a "normal" speedBLD solve and doing a regular BLD solve - with 10 minutes to memorize, I could probably do some solves well sub-30, and my first successful attempt at "normal" speedBLD was somewhere around 25 seconds, if I remember correctly. But if people are going to do speedBLD "properly", I think they need at least 10 minutes, and it would take most people quite a bit of practice to get that fast.

 

[AvGalen]

one hour would allow most reasonably good cubers to be able to make a decent attempt at success, with little or no practice.

I really don't think so. I think most cubers would have no idea how to memo/predict/trace/etc. Most good cubers would have trouble predicting the PLL when they still have to do OLL!

Speedblind is really the untapped part of speedcubing. The problem is that nowadays people can do a sub 10 memo and a 15 second solve which used to be a great time for a speedblind execution (but would require a several hours "memo").

I think lots of things are possible in speedblind and surely a sub10 execution would be possible by a sub10 solver. But I think hardly anyone has shown interest because "it freaking makes my head hurts just thinking about this!"

 

[Kirjava]

Someone should change topic title, it's misleading.

 

[Robert-Y]

You know, it's kinda funny that we call it speedBLD, but the whole process of a solve takes a lot longer than a regular BLD solve

 

[Stefan]

You know, it's kinda funny that we call it speedBLD, but the whole process of a solve takes a lot longer than a regular BLD solve

Well, the BLD part is (or should be) shorter, so I find it appropriate.