[WR] Rowe Hessler 2.45 2x2 Average

[LarsN]

#Odder: I'm not talking to you until you beat Rowes record times, only you do it on pyraminx...

 

[Kenneth]

Amazing Rowe!

4.65 5.93 5.06 (6.54) (2.42) --> 5.21

My times from those scrambles, wery easy ones (both FL and CLL), I'm normally 6-8 something depending on hardness.

 

[jtjogobonito]

Who's that handsome devil in the background?

 

[Piotr]

2.80 2.44 3.67 (4.30) (1.27) -> 2.97 avg
With no warm up. Nice scrambles ;]
And of course, congrats Rowe!

 

[Novriil]

wow..
just - crazy.

 

[rowehessler]

for all you who think this average was "lucky", you are wrong. The second scramble did have an LL skip solution, but i did not see it and i had a complete full step solve. Even without the 1.03 LL skip, this would be a 2.81 WR. Sure the scrambles were "easy", but technically my 2.19, 2.22, and 2.93, the counting solves, were all full step.

 

[StachuK1992]

the counting solves were all full step.

like a boss.

 

[Stefan]

Who's that handsome devil in the background?

Bob Burton.

 

[Olivér Perge]

for all you who think this average was "lucky", you are wrong.

And even if it was lucky?! It is a world record! Try to beat it!

 

[oskarasbrink]

He's super lucky...2 skips as well as 2 easy FL...
well, i decide to learn CLL after i saw the video which makes me completely shocked...

rowe got 1 skip. not 2

 

[Vulosity]

I was wondering, what 2x2 cube did he use?

 

[rowehessler]

He's super lucky...2 skips as well as 2 easy FL...
well, i decide to learn CLL after i saw the video which makes me completely shocked...

rowe got 1 skip. not 2

yeah me 2, but many people had this as a solution for the second scramble: x2 F R U' R' U2, which i sadly did not see. clearly by the video it was a full step CLL solve.

 

[joey]

Rowe is fast

 

[Kenneth]

for all you who think this average was "lucky", you are wrong. The second scramble did have an LL skip solution, but i did not see it and i had a complete full step solve. Even without the 1.03 LL skip, this would be a 2.81 WR. Sure the scrambles were "easy", but technically my 2.19, 2.22, and 2.93, the counting solves, were all full step.

I did not say it was lucky but it was for sure easier scrambles than the average ones. 2x2x2, Pyraminx and Square-1 are puzzles where the scrambles count the most, as few as five can give really great differences in the average.

Maybe we should change to average 10(12) for 2x2 and pyra in competitions?

Both have short solving times and scrambling is easy (Sq-1, that is only true for the fast solvers and not for scrambling so I don't suggest that one too)

He's super lucky...2 skips as well as 2 easy FL...
well, i decide to learn CLL after i saw the video which makes me completely shocked...

rowe got 1 skip. not 2

yeah me 2, but many people had this as a solution for the second scramble: x2 F R U' R' U2, which i sadly did not see. clearly by the video it was a full step CLL solve.

I did: start in white, do F R U R' for FL and then it is a Niklas of wich you can save the first turn...

 

[StachuK1992]

Maybe we should change to average 10(12) for 2x2 and pyra in competitions?

I wouldn't really like this idea. We'd have to get rid of the old results, because so few of them would be comparable to averages of 12, and then we'd have to start all over, like we've done with multi-BLD, and call what we have now "2x2 OLD", which I think would be a waste of a lot of previous time.

 

[Tim Reynolds]

It might be reasonable for people like Rowe to do averages of 10/12 in a competition, but having everyone do one would take quite a while.

 

[ianini]

The last solve was insanity!

 

[Kenneth]

It might be reasonable for people like Rowe to do averages of 10/12 in a competition, but having everyone do one would take quite a while.

Well, if we have a format that gives average of five for the first round and then for the finals seven more solves to make a 10(12) for the best ones then?

Old and new styles, the 5x5 is a mixture of Mo3 and 3(5) averages and that works so why not for 2x2?

 

[DavidWoner]

It might be reasonable for people like Rowe to do averages of 10/12 in a competition, but having everyone do one would take quite a while.

Well, if we have a format that gives average of five for the first round and then for the finals seven more solves to make a 10(12) for the best ones then?

Old and new styles, the 5x5 is a mixture of Mo3 and 3(5) averages and that works so why not for 2x2?

Err, when was the last time any competition used Mo3 for 5x5?

 

[Kian]

Rowe is fast

Understatement of the century.