Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bschne 1430 days ago
Can you get lucky with the initial configuration of the cube in some way, or is is shuffled in a way that ensures roughly equally hard solves? What's the protocol here?
2 comments

Luck can and does play a role. The official regulations for scrambling do require an optimum solution of >x moves. It doesn't take into account solving technique though as that's not really feasible. A scramble might be considered really lucky for a roux solver and unlucky for a cfop solver. It may even be lucky for a cfop solver that builds a white cross but not one that builds a green cross. There are far too many variables to take into account. Especially since one of the biggest sources of luck when using cfop is OLL skips (1/216 chance) and PLL skips (1/72 chance). An OLL+PLL skip would be insane but far too rare for competition. OLL and PLL are the O and P in cfop so occur at the end of the solve so they are pretty much impossible to predict since there are so many possible ways to do the cf (cross and f2l) portions of the solve.

Even if you don't get a skip, some OLLs and PLLs are faster than others. A "u perm" is way better than a "g perm" for PLL. In the OLL step a sune is really fast.

Oh, and luck is why I think it's more interesting to see the average of 5 record. Currently 5.08 seconds set by Max Park.
>The official regulations for scrambling do require an optimum solution of >x moves

It says it has to be more than 1 move away from being solved.

Nitpicking a little here. The minimum is 2 moves, with exceptions for 2x2, Skewb, Square-1, and Pyraminx. https://www.worldcubeassociation.org/regulations/#4b3
2 is a lot smaller of a number than I remembered but I looked at the regulations in the way back machine and it looks like it's been that way for a while. I kind of wonder why they'd have it at such a low number.
The scrambler that is usually used to generate the scrambles had a minimum move count of like 13. You were probably thinking of that.

>I kind of wonder why they'd have it at such a low number.

I don't know why it's 2 either as you might as well make it 1. They accept that the chance of such a short scramble coming up is too small to happen.

Thanks! I bet that's exactly what created my confusion
It is possible to get lucky with the original scramble. There are a couple ways to think about it. First, some pieces you care about in the early solve may be in place already (e.g., for a CFOP solve, some cross pieces may be in place), or nearly so. This will save you a move or two.

Secondly, sometimes the combination of the scramble and your early path through the solve creates future opportunities. Sometimes you’re lucky that a later step in the solve can be skipped. With a 10-second inspection time, no one can look this far ahead. With a world record hovering around 3 second, skipping one step that requires a 5-10 moves is a big deal.

The world record for the 2x2 is currently an eye-watering 0.49 seconds. 2x2 solvers use inspection time to plan the entire solve, something not possible with 3x3 and above. So that record 2x2 scramble was solvable in under a dozen moves; that’s good luck.