• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

The FMC thread

kinch2002

Premium Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,504
Location
Guildford! UK!
WCA
2009SHEP01
YouTube
kinch2002
Today at Berlin Cube Day 2013 I finished my 35th and last official FMC attempt in 2013. In the beginning of 2013 I decided to submit a solve on all my attempts and managed to do so except for one anger DNF. So here is my Average of 2013:

32, 26, 26, 27, 27, 27, 26, 26, 30, (DNF), 28, 25, (23), 30, 31, 29, 27, 26, 31, 26, 29, 26, 31, 23, 25, 29, 25, 30, 29, 24, 32, 27, 27, 29, 26 = 27,64
Amazing!
Here's my year, which looks rather lame compared to yours
27, 28, (26), 31, 31, 29, (DNF), 26 = 28.67 avg8
 

Mikel

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
1,323
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2011MIKE01
YouTube
rayquazapwn88
Today at Berlin Cube Day 2013 I finished my 35th and last official FMC attempt in 2013. In the beginning of 2013 I decided to submit a solve on all my attempts and managed to do so except for one anger DNF. So here is my Average of 2013:

32, 26, 26, 27, 27, 27, 26, 26, 30, (DNF), 28, 25, (23), 30, 31, 29, 27, 26, 31, 26, 29, 26, 31, 23, 25, 29, 25, 30, 29, 24, 32, 27, 27, 29, 26 = 27,64
I don't know what is crazier, the value of your average or that you did 35 official FMC attempts in a year.
 

okayama

Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
547
Location
Hiroshima, Japan
WCA
2009OKAY01
YouTube
okayamat
Today at Berlin Cube Day 2013 I finished my 35th and last official FMC attempt in 2013. In the beginning of 2013 I decided to submit a solve on all my attempts and managed to do so except for one anger DNF. So here is my Average of 2013:

32, 26, 26, 27, 27, 27, 26, 26, 30, (DNF), 28, 25, (23), 30, 31, 29, 27, 26, 31, 26, 29, 26, 31, 23, 25, 29, 25, 30, 29, 24, 32, 27, 27, 29, 26 = 27,64
Amazing!
Here's my year, which looks rather lame compared to yours
27, 28, (26), 31, 31, 29, (DNF), 26 = 28.67 avg8
Well done both, whereas my result is a bit disappointing.
29, 31, (DNF), 28, (25), 28, 29, 30, 29, 30 = 29.25 avg8

I hope I will do better next year.
 

brandbest1

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
1,054
Location
The one and only New York City
WCA
2011LINB01
YouTube
brandbestawesome
Feedback on my (quick 20-minute) solution? This was actually PB. (I was going to do an attempt to practice insertions and stuff, turns out I didn't really use any, and my solution is kinda speedsolving-ish.)

Scramble: R F' R D' B' U L2 D B' R D2 F2 U2 D2 L2 F' U2 F R2 U2 F2

On the inverse:

B L F R2 L' D \\ 2x2x2 block

Scramble:
D' L R2 F' L' B' \\ premove

U2 B' U B' R B R' \\ 2x2x3 block
L' B2 L2 U B' U' B' L' B' L \\ Finish F2L
R' B' U B R B' R' U' R \\ OLL
U2 B' L R' U2 L' R B' U2 B \\ PLL + AUF
D' L R2 F' L' B' \\ correction

Final solution: U2 B' U B' R B R' L' B2 L2 U B' U' B' L' B' L R' B' U B R B' R' U' R U2 B' L R' U2 L' R B' U2 B D' L R2 F' L' B' = 42 - 0 = 42 moves (no cancellations :( )

I didn't mean to actually do the OLL + PLL combo but it went into a U-Perm which was pretty nice.
 

guusrs

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
682
Location
Netherlands
WCA
1982RAZO01
Hi Sebastien, Daniel & Tomoaki,

Congratz for all your FMC-2013 series and crazy sub-30 averages.
I had a very short 2013-serie: 33 DNF 29 27 (no average)
I will try to not-DNF in 2014.

Guus

Guus
 

Sebastien

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
800
WCA
2008AURO01
This weekend at Duisburg Winter 2014, there was FMC held the first time ever as Mean of 3 format. We encountered 3 horrible scrambles, please have fun trying, it might be a nice challenge to get a sub30 Mean of 3! :)

1. D B' D2 F L' U2 R' D L2 F D R2 F2 U F2 D' B2 D B2 U R2
2. B2 D R2 D2 F2 U B2 L2 U2 L' F' L2 B' R2 D R2 D2 L F' R2
3. D B U B R2 B' U2 D R' D R2 D2 L2 D2 F' U2 F L2 U2 B2

Podium (3 people usually being sub30):

1. Me (30.0)
2. Marcel Peters (30.33)
3. Jan Bentlage (32.66)
 

Mirek

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
108
My no-time limit solution for #483 at http://fmc.mustcube.net/ does not show up despite the system confirmed my submission. It was a typo (swapping two characters \L) that caused it. Anyway, this was my linear style 27-move answer for Scramble F' R' U L' U2 F' R' L' U' D R' U2 F2 B' U2 L B D' L R2 U2 L U R L2 B' U2 F2 L U
2x2x3: B F2 R U F2 L2 D' R2 U2 R' F R (12)
f2l: U L' U2 L U2 L' U' L U (9/21)
OLL: U' L' F' L2 F L' U B L' B' (6/27) 4 moves cancel out
PLL: skipped
I had a lot of 2x2x3 in 10 or 11 moves but none of them was easy to finish.

Mirek
 

Mirek

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
108
Mine didn't submit either. The system said it worked and was submitted. Weird. It was 30 moves.
Remember replacing all apostrophes with \' in the comment window (not in the Solution line) and avoid typos. Always double check (which I didn't).
 

Lucas Garron

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
3,557
Location
California
WCA
2006GARR01
YouTube
LucasGarron
Forgot to post earlier: my solution from Berlin Cube Day 2013.

Scramble: F R' L D' L' D F R U2 B' U2 R2 B2 D' R2 B2 R2

R2 B2 R2 B R2 B2 // 2x2x2 at BRD
F' R U R' L F2' // FR pseudo-block
U L2 U L U' L' // Block/F2L at BL
U2 F // ELS
R U' R' U' R U2 R' U2 // CLS + PLL Skip
View at alg.cubing.net

(28 moves)


I tried quite a few clever things things, but I found this simple ending about 10 minutes from the end by pure luck.
 
Last edited:

Julian

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,157
Location
Near Toronto, Ontario, Canada
WCA
2010DAVI06
Forgot to post earlier: my solution from Berlin Cube Day 2013.

Scramble: F R' L D' L' D F R U2 B' U2 R2 B2 D' R2 B2 R2

R2 B2 R2 B R2 B2 // 2x2x2 at BRD
F' R U R' L F2' // FR pseudo-block
U L2 U L U' L' // Block/F2L at BL
U2 F // ELS
R U' R' U' R U2 R' U2 // CLS + PLL Skip
View at alg.cubing.net

(28 moves)


I tried quite a few clever things things, but I found this simple ending about 10 minutes from the end by pure luck.
Uhhh.... how did this happen

R2 B2 R2 // square
D B2 // 2 squares
R2 U2 B U2 // xxcross
R' F' R // F2L-1
R' D' L D L' R F' // done

17 moves wtf

EDIT: oh it's the inverse. wow lol
A definite case for non-optimal scrambles for FMC.
 
Last edited:

Julian

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,157
Location
Near Toronto, Ontario, Canada
WCA
2010DAVI06
Inverse scramble makes perfect sense as a "human" solve. Oh god. What if someone gave it as a solution?
Edit: I'm serious. How is a delegate supposed to handle this case?
If I was at Berlin Cube Day I very well might have. Even easier to arrive at "my" solution when you put the last pair in normally and get an OLL which cancels to the same thing.

EDIT: E2e says DNF, and I don't think E2e1 is enough to counteract that. Which sucks, but I think there has to be a way to prevent this.

EDIT: If I sledgehammer the last pair in, then do Niklas to solve, that's 23 moves and not directly the inverse. What then? Still DNF I guess?

EDIT: To obfuscate it even more, I could insert the Niklas somewhere random close to the beginning.
 
Last edited:

guusrs

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
682
Location
Netherlands
WCA
1982RAZO01
Uhhh.... how did this happen

R2 B2 R2 // square
D B2 // 2 squares
R2 U2 B U2 // xxcross
R' F' R // F2L-1
R' D' L D L' R F' // done

17 moves wtf

EDIT: oh it's the inverse. wow lol
A definite case for non-optimal scrambles for FMC.
Looks like a valid solve to me. Your explanation is very clear an logic.
I think you would have found it as well with a different scramble (but same position of the cube). Isn't it?
And a close escape for WCA nobody found this during the competition.
At least you share the UWR now with me (-;
 

Erik

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
2,664
Location
Enschede, Netherlands, Netherlands
WCA
2005AKKE01
YouTube
frk17
If I was at Berlin Cube Day I very well might have. Even easier to arrive at "my" solution when you put the last pair in normally and get an OLL which cancels to the same thing.

EDIT: E2e says DNF, and I don't think E2e1 is enough to counteract that. Which sucks, but I think there has to be a way to prevent this.

EDIT: If I sledgehammer the last pair in, then do Niklas to solve, that's 23 moves and not directly the inverse. What then? Still DNF I guess?

EDIT: To obfuscate it even more, I could insert the Niklas somewhere random close to the beginning.
It'd probably be unclear to the delegate as well if he faced the problem. The thing is, the last 3 moves made some nice block. You could have seen this while scrambling, but of course it's very possible if you didn't scramble it yourself as well. To me it would make sense to just allow it as long as you can explain it completely, though not sure if E2e1 indeed is enough to counteract E2e in this case.

Possible solution: unoptimal scrambles? Like always use a 22 move scramble for FMC? I remember when scrambles were not this good and we actually found a solution better than the scramble @ Istvan-WR in Czech.
 

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,754
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
jernqvist
This is rarely a problem, but I think the 30 move scrambles that Fredlund uses are long enough to avoid this, but not too long to be impractical. Also 30 random moves should be very close to random state.
 

porkynator

Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Messages
1,263
Location
Belluno, Italy
WCA
2011TRON02
YouTube
PorkyDays
No doubt that 17-move solution is legit, so I think it should be accepted too. But this leads to a problem: how can you tell if someone found a good solution that coincidentally matches the inverse scramble, or if he "studied" the inverse scramble for 1 hour trying to find a "human-solve" explanation for it? Unlikely, but possible.
Long scrambles (>25HTM) are annoying, but they may be a solution.
 

Sebastien

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
800
WCA
2008AURO01
Wow...I'm just happy that the delegate didn't had to face this problem or even worse: find that solution himself.
 

okayama

Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
547
Location
Hiroshima, Japan
WCA
2009OKAY01
YouTube
okayamat
I remember this post, which contains my opinion for the scramble length.

I still think that the enough length of the scramble should be regulated, like
"For FMC, the length of the generator should be 20 or longer."

This does not intend random scramble sequence, but intends the following steps:
  1. Pick a random state (the same as usual),
  2. Generate a scramble to the state that is 20-move or longer.
I prefer this idea rather than 30-move random scramble,
which is employed in Per's FMC site.

I don't have a strong reason of the number 20, just intend that
only inverting the scramble does not lead to the new world record.
Erik said 22, and it also looks fine for me.

EDIT:
No doubt that 17-move solution is legit, so I think it should be accepted too. But this leads to a problem: how can you tell if someone found a good solution that coincidentally matches the inverse scramble, or if he "studied" the inverse scramble for 1 hour trying to find a "human-solve" explanation for it? Unlikely, but possible.
See this post for my opinion, the same as your concern.
In short, explanation of the solve does not guarantee that the competitor does not cheat.
In my opinion, making some explanation is not so difficult, even for the computer solution.
In fact I did several times, such as this and this, which were computer's solutions.

Therefore, if the solution has many similarities to the scramble, I recommend that the delegate judges it as DNF.
 
Last edited:
Top