[Unofficial] Maskow: Single Blindfold 16.50

[Lazy Einstein]

16.50 for memo and execution for an unofficial solves. Meh to the rest.

anyway. Awesome solve Maskow! I also liked your reaction. I hope you get the WR single soon.

 

[Cubeologist]

Yeah this is amazing. Great job. This beats my two handed, open eyes PB. I'm going to go practice now haha.

 

[Riley]

I got 17.29. Nice job Maskow!

 

[qqwref]

Like picking up the cube in 2x2x2?

If you have a better idea of timing solves that fast, I'd love to hear it! Stackmat is pretty good in practice for determining how long a solve takes in a way that is unbiased and not affected by human error, but I agree, having to pick up the puzzle is an imperfection. If we could, it'd be nice to film solves with a high-speed camera - say, 100fps or more - and count the number of frames between the time the cube starts being turned and the "end of the solve" (let's say, the time when the cube is <45 degrees from the solved state). But that's not really plausible right now when we can't even get all WRs on film.

 

[G2013]

Wow!!! Memo in less than 6 seconds and execution in 11... amazing!
Good job

 

[Renslay]

If you have a better idea of timing solves that fast, I'd love to hear it! Stackmat is pretty good in practice for determining how long a solve takes in a way that is unbiased and not affected by human error, but I agree, having to pick up the puzzle is an imperfection. If we could, it'd be nice to film solves with a high-speed camera - say, 100fps or more - and count the number of frames between the time the cube starts being turned and the "end of the solve" (let's say, the time when the cube is <45 degrees from the solved state). But that's not really plausible right now when we can't even get all WRs on film.

Picking up the cube is an important part of the solve. Like the start signal in running or car racing. They do not use filming for counting frames either - even if the technology and the equipment is there.

 

[Kirjava]

If you have a better idea of timing solves that fast, I'd love to hear it! Stackmat is pretty good in practice for determining how long a solve takes in a way that is unbiased and not affected by human error, but I agree, having to pick up the puzzle is an imperfection. If we could, it'd be nice to film solves with a high-speed camera - say, 100fps or more - and count the number of frames between the time the cube starts being turned and the "end of the solve" (let's say, the time when the cube is <45 degrees from the solved state). But that's not really plausible right now when we can't even get all WRs on film.

You're missing the point. Conforming to a fair standard gives better comparisons.

We should be using rules that cost a fraction of time when not doing so comes at the cost of timing accuracy and comparability.

 

[Stefan]

I have also one idea how we can cut another 1 second only changing rules for friendlier to competitors.

You could also save a little by just using your eyelids as the blindfold. No need to change the rules for this, I think.

 

[RayLam]

16.90
i cheated also,no box and no randon orientation XD.that was a pretty good case

 

[Maskow]

Can you elaborate more on how others are "cheating" on their solves? Do they ask the judge to reorient the cube after it has been transferred? Random orientation shouldn't be only applied to world record solves, but to everyone.

Reorient the cube by the judge is the easiest way. BUT it's really unnecessary, you only need to know what orientation is under cover, it don't need to be your orientation, you will save some amount of time anyway. Your own orientation is stupid idea because it can be easily checked on the videos. And yes, you need to ask judge about it. And it's really very hard to prove it, don't you think? It's really impossible to prove it, I think.

Of course there are many other ways to cheat in speedcubing but IMO this one is the most obvious and "noninvasive" and they really don't feel that it's cheating because it was legal. That's a problem.