Haha, I'm kidding. But in reality, if you make the best possible side every time, only 1/6 of the time it will be CLL, 1/6 the time EG-2, and 2/3 the time EG-1. But, EG-1 involves rotations often times, and EG-2 algs aren't great, so it makes sense to learn CLL first.i knowz cll
I solved because he could've been trolling and it allowed me to get... this. I would not have gotten this if I didn't report it. He got the scramble from an earlier heat (yeah, different heats and same scrambles is a problem).Congrats Rami, but if I were you I won't solve that cube if I already knew the scramble.
Damn that kid! but how got that kid the scramble? I don't know who has responsibility for scrambles after it is hand over to the scramble table ( the organizer or delegate?) Sorry I just read this thread.
See 2:I remember my last 2 competitions, one competitor solve 3x3x3 and after solved he complained it was the same scramble, and I told him that he must tell the judge before solve but delegate allowed him with extra scramble ( I am still confused about it) I think if you knew the scramble the same as before, you must tell the judge and can get the right scramble. But maybe I know just a little about it so I follow what delegate said.
Also, the reasons for why I didn't just ask for an extra scramble to begin with are:
1. He could've been trolling me, knowing that the delegate had just said that no scramble discussion was allowed.
2. Mainly - I wanted to do the solve first so I could see what I'd get just in case the WCA ends up calling it legal. If I reported it immediately, I'd have no chance at a 0.58, but rather just get that extra scramble. By doing what I did, we can decide based on the evidence between the 0.58 and the 4.xx. It's kinda hard to word this, but I hope you guys get what I mean. I wasn't really 100% sure that what happened would violate the regulations, so I decided to do it and then provide the evidence to see if it could be allowed. Kit even said that what I did was a smart choice.
So you're saying you concealed information about knowing the scramble ahead of time in order to increase your chances of getting a world record. Congratulations on getting away with it?Oh, whoops. If I did report it before the solve, I wouldn't have done the scramble at all, thus not making it possible to get this WR.
No, I just reported it after so that the WCA could eventually make the decision between whether to use this or the 4.21+. Either way it's still possible to get the 4.21+ as my official time. I wanted the WCA to be able to make the best decision based on the evidence with time to do so (not just me coming up to the delegates quickly, and let's say they give me the extra scramble... then later they decide that I actually could've done the solve normally... there'd be no option of what to do). Also, he could've been trolling. Don't forget that either.So you're saying you concealed information about knowing the scramble ahead of time in order to increase your chances of getting a world record. Congratulations on getting away with it?
He didn't know the scramble ahead of time. He got a short view on a scramble that, as far as he knew at that time, might or might not be the scramble he would be getting.So you're saying you concealed information about knowing the scramble ahead of time in order to increase your chances of getting a world record. Congratulations on getting away with it?
Not sure why this is stated as a given fact. On one side of the scale, 1 competitor is getting screwed over one single and one average. On the other side, every past, present and future solver is getting screwed over for every solve and average they do. I think using this as one of the core debates is a strange/misguised choice. Still, I don't want to be one of the annoying people who disrespect the decision, of which I mostly agree, so congratulations Rami!2. Not awarding the solve time would be more unfair than whatever unfairness there might be in the glimpse offered. Rami should not suffer for the incorrect behavior of another competitor.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|[WR] Rami Sbahi - 1.45 2x2 Average||WR/CR/NR solves||27|
|[Official] 1.79 2x2 Average - Rami Sbahi||Puzzle Video Gallery||47|
|[WR] Rami Sbahi 2x2 1.69 Average||WR/CR/NR solves||54|
|[Official] 1.95, 2.07, and 2.01 2x2 Averages (Rami Sbahi)||Puzzle Video Gallery||8|
|[Unofficial] 1.672 2x2 Average of 12! (Rami Sbahi)||Puzzle Video Gallery||5|