# [WR]Feliks Zemdegs 3x3 OH single 6.88

#### Bunyanderman

##### Member

What is cubing with out drama? A lifeless game.

#### PokeCuberAlex

##### Member
Not surprised with this being Feliks Zemdegs, keep it up as you really are made of WR's! =D

#### DeeDubb

##### Member
This is insane! Very impressive!
(too bad the whole thing is a bit soiled by an incompetent scrambler tho)
This part I have a problem with. To deem him as "incompetent" based on one mistake is a really harsh judgment. He already must feel bad enough about his mistake, and this kind of abuse is unnecessary and unfair.

#### Gallifrey

##### Member
The scrambler made a mistake. If the scrambler made a mistake scrambling someone else's cube, then this wouldn't have been such a big deal. Don't blame the scrambler for making a little mistake.
If the scrambler intentionally gave Feliks(in particular) easy scramble, then there's a problem.

Amazing solve either way.

#### cashis

##### Member
The scrambler made a mistake. If the scrambler made a mistake scrambling someone else's cube, then this wouldn't have been such a big deal. Don't blame the scrambler for making a little mistake.
If the scrambler intentionally gave Feliks(in particular) easy scramble, then there's a problem.

Amazing solve either way.
From what I hear, the cross was even easier on the original scramble. So

#### josh42732

##### Member
I think the result is legit, but I suggest faz give up the record.
There was also sq1 WR with wrong scramble, but he thought it was too fast at that time, so he give up the record.
6.88 is too much improvement from 8.27, so it cause the growth of OH event hugely
I see where you are coming from, and I completely understand why he might do this. But, however, if you got a WR, would you give it up, even though you have been cubing for over half of your life? That's like Usain Bolt not wanting a WR because the protein shake he had that morning had too much protein in it or something like that. The point is, Feliks deserves that WR, whether it gets approved or not. I personally would want to do as much as I can to keep that.

#### Millet

##### Member
From what I hear, the cross was even easier on the original scramble. So
At no point is the validity of a scramble based upon which method the solver uses. A bad scramble for CFOP may be a good one for Roux, and a bad scramble for ZZ may be an easy one for CFOP.

#### EpiCuber7

##### Member
At no point is the validity of a scramble based upon which method the solver uses. A bad scramble for CFOP may be a good one for Roux, and a bad scramble for ZZ may be an easy one for CFOP.
most people use cfop...

##### Member
most people use cfop...
How does that matter? The rules are not built around what method most of the people use.

#### Tim Major

##### Platinum Member
This part I have a problem with. To deem him as "incompetent" based on one mistake is a really harsh judgment. He already must feel bad enough about his mistake, and this kind of abuse is unnecessary and unfair.
Especially since it is only one mistake. Doing R instead of R';
B L2 D' R L2 F2 B R(') D' F R F2 R L2 U2 D2 L' F2 L' B2

I'm sure he knows which direction R is, he maybe just didn't quite see the '. Regardless, you can't say based on one error in the middle of the scramble that he did it to help Feliks as some people suggested earlier. If Feliks had a bad OLL into a bad PLL it could've been a 12. The last layer doesn't have much to do with the scramble.

Based on precedent it will be awarded, and I'm sure the scrambler in question will be far more cautious in future

#### Dene

It was not a complaint or a suggestion, it was a question.
Ooooooooooooh right, so I wasn't meant to read anything more into it than what was written out.

Because I'm a total idiot right?

>_>
<_<

#### BboyArchon

##### Member
Especially since it is only one mistake. Doing R instead of R';
B L2 D' R L2 F2 B R(') D' F R F2 R L2 U2 D2 L' F2 L' B2
Now that the problem has been detected, the board should give him the WR.

#### mafergut

##### Member
Now that the problem has been detected, the board should give him the WR.
The question is how do we now know that? I mean, from the information we have it seems to me pretty difficult to arrive to the conclusion that it was exactly that R/R' mistake. I didn't even kown that we knew the exact estate Feliks' cube was when he started his solve unless in the video most of the sides can be perfectly seen during inspection and the estate can be reconstructed and then, what? the suboptimal solution for the scramble that gives that estate just happens to be the same than the original scramble but with the R/R' difference? I'm not very knowledgeable in cube theory so maybe I'm saying something stupid, in that case please correct me, I'm always happy to learn ;-)

But, accepting this as a fact, it is now clear that it was an unintentional misscramble. So any conspiracy theories of someone giving the advantage on purpose can be forgotten now (not that I believed any of that myself even for a split second). The only reasonable conclusion in my opinion is to award the WR, I fully agree.

#### David Zemdegs

Especially since it is only one mistake. Doing R instead of R';
In a programming language I use often there is a big discussion on why you shouldn't use the backtick "" to continue lines as small fonts make it hard to tell that from a single quote "'" and when you add a printer that might be a bit dodgy, a small fleck could easily just be totally missed. So maybe the scramble sheet was printed with a printer that had a hiccup on the black ink just at that R which made the ' almost impossible to see?
Just saying that things might not always be as obvious as you might think...

#### PenguinsDontFly

##### Member
In a programming language I use often there is a big discussion on why you shouldn't use the backtick "" to continue lines as small fonts make it hard to tell that from a single quote "'" and when you add a printer that might be a bit dodgy, a small fleck could easily just be totally missed. So maybe the scramble sheet was printed with a printer that had a hiccup on the black ink just at that R which made the ' almost impossible to see?
Just saying that things might not always be as obvious as you might think...
Yeah so true. On cstimer, sometimes my mouse is covering the ' and I guess if its ' or not by just looking at the amount of space between the 2 letters. Makes you wonder why we picked such a small character...

#### SenorJuan

##### Member
In the early days, inverse turns were sometimes written as -1 in superscript, like: R-¹ U² R

#### EMI

##### Member
The question is how do we now know that? I mean, from the information we have it seems to me pretty difficult to arrive to the conclusion that it was exactly that R/R' mistake. I didn't even kown that we knew the exact estate Feliks' cube was when he started his solve unless in the video most of the sides can be perfectly seen during inspection and the estate can be reconstructed and then, what? the suboptimal solution for the scramble that gives that estate just happens to be the same than the original scramble but with the R/R' difference? I'm not very knowledgeable in cube theory so maybe I'm saying something stupid, in that case please correct me, I'm always happy to learn ;-)

But, accepting this as a fact, it is now clear that it was an unintentional misscramble. So any conspiracy theories of someone giving the advantage on purpose can be forgotten now (not that I believed any of that myself even for a split second). The only reasonable conclusion in my opinion is to award the WR, I fully agree.
You can easily reconstruct how the cube looked when the solve is on video (even if not all sides are visible during inspection). If that state is identical to the misscramble, it's extremely likely that this is what happened.
Btw this doesn't mean the optimal solution has the same length. In this case though, they both require more than 16 moves (too lazy to check for optimal).

#### mafergut

##### Member
You can easily reconstruct how the cube looked when the solve is on video (even if not all sides are visible during inspection). If that state is identical to the misscramble, it's extremely likely that this is what happened.
Btw this doesn't mean the optimal solution has the same length. In this case though, they both require more than 16 moves (too lazy to check for optimal).
So basically they repeated Felik's solve in reverse, okay, fine, I'm su dumb I didn't think of that possibility. But to discover that you can get to that estate with just changing an R/R' is what I don't get, unless somebody tried "let's see if it was just this D that was changed into a D'"... with every turn in the official scramble, but in case the misscramble had been another issue (like permuting two moves: R F -> F R) there are so many possibilities to make a mistake... And I wouldn't think that the random state generator would just generate a scramble sequence that is just the same than the correct one but for the R/R' but maybe that's exactly the case, not sure how random state scramblers generate the scramble sequence.

#### mDiPalma

##### Member
B L2 D' R L2 F2 B R(') D' F R F2 R L2 U2 D2 L' F2 L' B2
What if I was at the competition, and someone promised to give me 3 dollars if I got him a legit but easy scramble?

...Then I went over to the scrambling table and memorized the scramble
....Then I went back to my laptop and typed the scramble into my computer program
...and the computer program generates "typo scrambles" in which 1 of the moves is just slightly different (1 R becomes R', one B becomes B', etc)
...and then it checks each one of these scrambles for the lowest-move xcross, then spits it out to me.

...Then I go back to the scrambling table and scramble their cube. Then I go buy some candy with my 3 bucks.

Ok WCA

#### Faz

##### Former Clock NR Holder
What if I was at the competition, and someone promised to give me 3 dollars if I got him a legit but easy scramble?

...Then I went over to the scrambling table and memorized the scramble
....Then I went back to my laptop and typed the scramble into my computer program
...and the computer program generates "typo scrambles" in which 1 of the moves is just slightly different (1 R becomes R', one B becomes B', etc)
...and then it checks each one of these scrambles for the lowest-move xcross, then spits it out to me.

...Then I go back to the scrambling table and scramble their cube. Then I go buy some candy with my 3 bucks.

Ok WCA
One would hope you wouldn't sell your integrity for 3 dollars.