Sub-7 With Waterman (Dont accuse me of faking this one)

[LukasCubes]

Sorry doesn't count, under 20 moves

yes and mine was 31 moves

 

[xyzzy]

Sorry doesn't count, under 20 moves

I don't know if this is serious, but just for the record, there's no requirement that the scramble be at least 20 moves long (*) and no requirement that the solution be at least 20 moves long either (**).

(*) Almost all (>99.9999%) possible scrambles are 19 or less moves. Scramble sequences are often 20-21 moves long, but that's a side effect of how the internal Kociemba solver has a cutoff at 21 moves; even then, it's not super rare to have scramble sequences that are 17-19 moves long.

(**) If you really want to institute such a rule, you might want to start with disqualifying all the sub-20 FMC singles.

Btw - I also managed to get a lucky single on camera!

Should've continued solving! The next scramble seems pretty lucky too; you might even have broken the ao5 UWR if you kept going.

 

[Eli Apperson]

I don't know if this is serious, but just for the record, there's no requirement that the scramble be at least 20 moves long (*) and no requirement that the solution be at least 20 moves long either (**).

It was in jest. I was wrong about the 20 move thing, I thought I had heard somewhere otherwise.

 

[LukasCubes]

I don't know if this is serious, but just for the record, there's no requirement that the scramble be at least 20 moves long (*) and no requirement that the solution be at least 20 moves long either (**).

(**) If you really want to institute such a rule, you might want to start with disqualifying all the sub-20 FMC singles.

He meant the scramble i think. My scramble was 20 moves.