[Unofficial] Michael Gottlieb hi-games 5x5 Average of 5: 1:18.80

In another thread somebody said that 6x6 averages would be around 2:45 but you already proved that wrong with your signature, 2:23.12 ^^ I would use Ryan Heise's simulator but it's hard to learn the controls when I know I could just pick up a cube.
 
Nah, the 2:40 estimate was for a real cube (and 2:23 is a single time). A big part of the reason I spend time doing the hi-games cube is that it's quite a bit faster than a real one (and I don't actually have a real 6x6 to pick up ;) ) - so if I get a fast time on that simulator it doesn't necessarily mean it's possible on a real cube.
 
Ah I thought they all said average, I should have looked more closely. And yes while computer cubes may be faster I didn't think there would be a 17+ second margin.
 
Hey Michael, I'm pretty sure I called you "the guy who does computer big cubes really fast" at Princeton, or something to a similar effect. :p Do you get that a lot at competitions now?
 
Tell me. What is it? What's wrong? It's not fast enough? Do I need a sub-1 average to even remotely compare with a 1:57 on a real cube?

Only three people have responded to this topic and it's been up for quite a while. This video on youtube has been up for longer and only three comments. Nobody who is sub-2 with a real 5x5 has responded at all. I simply don't understand why it is cooler to see Erik do a 1:23 than to see me do a 1:13. Maybe it's stage presence - maybe Erik is just so much cooler than me that he will always get dozens of comments and I will never get any. But hell, I can't get a 1:23 in comp. I've only had ONE average in competition since I was sub-2. Erik has had, let me count, SIX? No wonder he's got better competition videos, and more of them, than I have. I don't even have a V-cube. I'm stuck with this old ES which locks up all the time.

Sure, a computer cube is easier to do than a physical cube. But it's not by THAT much. All I means when I say it's easier than a real cube is that it's easier to get a specific time, say 1:59, on a computer cube than a real one. But a computer cube is nothing but a normal cube that moves faster, doesn't lock up, and isn't obstructed by your hands. You can't do macros (a set of automatic turns) or cheat on this thing. I typed every turn in myself and this is five consecutive solves. (If you're wondering this is the third average of 5 I recorded that day and ever, the first two being low 1:2x.) It's the same damn puzzle.

You think it's so easy that it's not even worth commenting on? You think anyone could get these times with minimal effort? Go try it. http://hi-games.net/cube-5x5x5/, that's the URL. I bet nobody here on speedsolving could get a single sub-1:20 solve, except maybe Erik. I've played with Clancy's V-cube and I can certify that it is definitely better turning than any other 5x5 I've ever tried - if times on a V-cube are perfectly legal, how is it right to completely disregard times on an even better cube?

It's not like I'm slow at 5x5x5. I'm ranked sixth in the world and I haven't even been to a competition for two months (Erik's been to three since then, counting Benelux (same weekend) and the one he's at now.). My best time on a real one is in the low 1:3x range. I have a video of a 1:38 in competition, but of course that must not be an impressive time, because it doesn't even have 300 views, and there wasn't any clapping in the video anyway. Does ANYONE here even know who I am?

But I don't have a camera and so I don't have a way to record these videos. Sometimes I get to record videos from other people's cameras but it is not that often, so I can't put up ALL of my personal best times like Dan Cohen and Erik Akkersdijk and Lucas Garron and Harris Chan do. This is the best I can do at the moment, taping things from the computer with a screen capture program.

I know I'm a selfish jerk at times but I do not think it is at all fair to just ignore my times when people who are much slower than me get much more praise and encouragement. Respect shouldn't be given out based on friendship or personality. Just because I'm not fast enough to set an official world record doesn't mean I suck. I think getting an average of five this fast on the hi-games 5x5 is a real accomplishment and I challenge anyone else to even get near it, on ANY cube or simulation. I don't think anyone else can.



Oh, and MiloD: No, I don't. Very few people (not counting friends I've had for a while) have any idea who I am. The whole reason I put it in my signature is because I don't think people DO have any idea about it.
 
Last edited:
I've considered it, but I find AvG edges sort of awkward (you change the cube's position a lot and make a lot of different kinds of slice turns, so I think it would make my cube lock up even more; also I can't fingertrick stuff like U'RU) and I'm not sure but it seems to me that 369 centers is faster than 2469 for most cases.
 
Michael,

Don't call me out. It's ridiculous for you to even suggest making all of my times DNF's. It's not the cube that makes us fast. I've only used the VCube in two competitions and I am perfectly capable of doing the same times with a Rubik's brand 5x5.

I've never done anything to disrespect you. I would appreciate it if you return the favor.

Frank Morris
 
qqwref said:
Tell me. What is it? What's wrong? It's not fast enough? Do I need a sub-1 average to even remotely compare with a 1:57 on a real cube?

Only three people have responded to this topic and it's been up for quite a while. This video on youtube has been up for longer and only three comments. Nobody who is sub-2 with a real 5x5 has responded at all. I simply don't understand why it is cooler to see Erik do a 1:23 than to see me do a 1:13. Maybe it's stage presence - maybe Erik is just so much cooler than me that he will always get dozens of comments and I will never get any.
Click to expand...

I think that's because it doesn't look that fast. Of course these are very nice solves, but Erik's 5x5 solves look so much faster. I don't know why, that's just what i noticed.
 
Last edited:
whoa...did I miss something? why are you so angry? O.o

I think what you do on computer cubes is truely awesome! I mean...wtf?! 2:32 6x6? my best time was 7:40...

and 5x5, 4x4...pff...I'm way too slow (both computer and real ones)
 
I don't understand your reasoning. And before you ask, no, I haven't watched the video, I don't have time to watch this video in my list of priorities (yes I did watch the video of Erik as well).

You want attention? Why not ask for it? Force feeding people your attention through anger is never nice. And, by the way, I have no idea who you are, I'm going to assume your name isn't qqwref?

On a happier note, well done on the average, that is amazingly fast, however presence counts for a lot. What would be better is a video where we could see your hands tapping the buttons rapidly on the keyboard with the cube on the screen.

EDIT: I see looking at the title it has your name, although that doens't shed any light on the topic :)
 
Hey Michael,

You shouldn't be that angry, after all I guess you've made a great achievement which I would be proud of if I were you. Well I'm not saying that you don't look proud but, you know for people like me (who have never touched a 5x5) the only words that come are "Amazing", "cool", "great", blabla, "really great", etc...and so that would be the only thing I could say about this video :D

Plus I won't make a judgment out of the comments I've received from youtube. I've made a quite good achievment (for me) and my video only has like...2 comments ? I don't really mind, as long as you know you've made it, you've made it.

However, I asked some people about my 4x4 BLD achievement because there was literally nobody to cheer up that success with me ! I just needed some encouraging comments, and I believe I asked it nicely :D

voila,

Keep up the amazing work,

Nghia
 
qqwref said:
Tell me. What is it? What's wrong? It's not fast enough? Do I need a sub-1 average to even remotely compare with a 1:57 on a real cube?

Only three people have responded to this topic and it's been up for quite a while. This video on youtube has been up for longer and only three comments. Nobody who is sub-2 with a real 5x5 has responded at all. I simply don't understand why it is cooler to see Erik do a 1:23 than to see me do a 1:13. Maybe it's stage presence - maybe Erik is just so much cooler than me that he will always get dozens of comments and I will never get any.

You think it's so easy that it's not even worth commenting on?

It's not like I'm slow at 5x5x5. I'm ranked sixth in the world and ... because it doesn't even have 300 views, and there wasn't any clapping in the video anyway. Does ANYONE here even know who I am?

I know I'm a selfish jerk at times but I do not think it is at all fair to just ignore my times when people who are much slower than me get much more praise and encouragement. Respect shouldn't be given out based on friendship or personality. Just because I'm not fast enough to set an official world record doesn't mean I suck. I think getting an average of five this fast on the hi-games 5x5 is a real accomplishment and I challenge anyone else to even get near it, on ANY cube or simulation. I don't think anyone else can.

Oh, and MiloD: No, I don't. Very few people (not counting friends I've had for a while) have any idea who I am. The whole reason I put it in my signature is because I don't think people DO have any idea about it.
Click to expand...

You are one of the first cubists I found online. IsoCubeSim is really great for big cubes. :D
You have probably the most UWRs ever. I'm surprised not a lot of people notices you. I was expecting you to break the WR for a big cube at Princeton! If they allow computer cubes, I think you will have so many Official Records! Would they make computer cubes a real event?
Amazing, you are the fastest cubist I know. :D
I will never be able to have such perfect look ahead on big cubes. So many pieces!
All my cube apprentices at school wished that they had went to Princeton to meet you!
 
tim: Call me odd but I think it's a characteristic of big cubes themselves. They're just so big and you change hand position so often that the hands end up moving faster than the cube itself, so if you just watch the cube it doesn't seem to be going as fast (this works for a lot of the top 5x5ers). On the other hand when you see the fastest people doing 3x3 their cube is flying and their hands are not. Maybe this is the key to fast 3x3 solving.


Dene: I can include some flashing lights in my video if you want? There's only so much screen presence you can get out of a screen capture.


fanwuq: It's the focus on the main events (especially blindfold) really, you get on the news for being good at them and people watch you if you can do fast blindfold solves, but other things seem to be just a curiosity. That's the really weird thing - UWRs are fun to practice and challenge people to, so why don't more cubers try them when they're getting bored of the regular events? It seems to me that you can only be interested in an event if you have given it some serious thought or tried it.


Kenneth: Ah, master magic one-handed :) Too bad I don't have one that solves Pochmann style anymore. (Unless you're using Ooms too? Seems harder to me.)

I'm not really a new cuber from last year though - maybe speedcuber, but I've been interested in cubes since around 2005. My twistypuzzles account is much older :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

qqwref
[Unofficial] Michael Gottlieb - 30x30x30 sim in ~95 minutes
Replies
12
Views
2,354
qqwref
qqwref
qqwref
[Unofficial] Michael Gottlieb solves Vulcano in 1:01.22
Replies
7
Views
1,891
Michael Womack
Michael Womack
qqwref
[Unofficial] OH avg12 - 17.28 (Michael Gottlieb)
Replies
9
Views
1,808
a small kitten
a small kitten
qqwref
[Unofficial] Michael Gottlieb - two sub-1:10 solves of Face-Turning Octahedron
Replies
17
Views
5,377
qqwref
qqwref
qqwref
[Unofficial] Michael Gottlieb - Megaminx (real) in 1:22.05
Replies
6
Views
1,850
qqwref
qqwref
Back
Top