- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 11,932
- Location
- Indianapolis
- WCA ID
- 2007HUGH01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
edit: nevermind the results are up!
Oh wow - Ryosuke Mondo multiBLD 33/50 in 6:03:13! He tried one in competition!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
edit: nevermind the results are up!
He tried 50 in competition? o_0 insaaaaaaaane
Maybe he's trying to get in the biggest possible attempt before we switch to One Hour Multi ;-)
He tried 50 in competition? o_0 insaaaaaaaane
Maybe he's trying to get in the biggest possible attempt before we switch to One Hour Multi ;-)
he told me before that one day he wanted to eventually try 100 in comp.
I hope we see that before One hour Multi![]()
![]()
edit: nevermind the results are up!
Oh wow - Ryosuke Mondo multiBLD 33/50 in 6:03:13! He tried one in competition!
edit: nevermind the results are up!
Oh wow - Ryosuke Mondo multiBLD 33/50 in 6:03:13! He tried one in competition!
edit: nevermind the results are up!
Oh wow - Ryosuke Mondo multiBLD 33/50 in 6:03:13! He tried one in competition!
Only 66%? I think he tried way too many cubes.
Actually, I disagree with this. I think our current metric is actually pretty accurate. I think 2/3 of 50 cubes is roughly equivalent in difficulty to getting 100% of 16 cubes. Which still means Arnaud shouldn't feel bad for me - Mondo deserves to be ranked higher than me.Ah, but tim, if you watch his youtube he usually gets success rates similar to that. His last few multibld youtube videos were 32/50, 36/51, 7/7, 18/24, 15/20. In a way getting 2/3 of 50 cubes is more impressive than getting all of 10 cubes, or even 20![]()
Well, it's only a difference of one point (33/50 = 16 pts versus 15/15), so it's kind of debatable. But yeah, I agree, 20/20 is more impressive than 33/50.
Still, Mondo actually broke a bunch of records: most cubes attempted in competition; most cubes solved after a multi in competition; most cubes not solved after a multi in competition; and most time spent on a multi in competition. It's crazy to even imagine that many.
But for the MegaMinx WR I can't help but thinking "lucky" solve. He is obviously very skilled, but a sub 60 solve and two 1:20-ish (1:19.09 1:18.52 59.33) solves seems like a huge difference.
I saw you do one of those good solves (1.05) in Switzerland. About 4 pairs in the whole solve were already connected and only needed 3 move insertions.But for the MegaMinx WR I can't help but thinking "lucky" solve. He is obviously very skilled, but a sub 60 solve and two 1:20-ish (1:19.09 1:18.52 59.33) solves seems like a huge difference.
It's maybe a lucky solve, but maybe not.
I often have big difference between my megaminx times.
Once, I got an 1min01 solve at home, unlucky, and just after a 1min2x
You can have a very good looking ahead on one solve and a not so good looking ahead on the others.
The only "luck" is maybe just having this good solve during the competition, and that's not really "luck"
I don't think that scramble was particularly easy. Look at the other competitors' results: no one did his best time on the third attempt, except the last one who obviously doesn't practice megaminx very much. I agree that more efficient solves than usual happen from time to time, that's what gave me an unexpected qualification for the 1st round of 5^3 at Euro 2008 for example![]()