# 2.64 Single (Jackmennie_23 on IG)



## alexiscubing (Apr 24, 2020)

So this is extremely controversial because he averages 8, but he got a 21move solve with a bunch of free pairs and an LL skip. I asked him some questions, but it wasn't on cam, and he retried it on cam and got a 1.83. The recon is on his story, but both of us think that it is that stupid that it shouldn't count as his PB or UWR (of course no video evidence so it wouldn't have been uwr anyway). This is rly controversial but I personally think that a time that good would be possible, but im not sure about the first time you try it. (tps is rly high)
What part of the solve did you plan in inspection

I planned the first three pairs

Did you predict LL skip at last pair?

Skip at last pair

What was the initial time

2.64

Stackmat or keyboard

Yuxin timer

Ok

What was the reaction? Shock or disbelief



I initially thought wtf the I was like WTF then I yelled WTF!!! then I realised that people won’t believe me when I tell them that I got a 2 bc my previous Pb was. 4.89 and also I did the solve oh after and got a 3.97


What cube was used

Wrm with mf3rs springs and set up with weight four dnm and mystic

Did you think it would be PB after you got the scramble?

Yep bc I could see first three pairs with I had only done once and that was my previous Pb

Ok

What is your global avg

Sub 8.5



Please don't see this thread and immediately send him hate or things saying it is fake, I have seen him get 8-10 TPS before in comp


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 24, 2020)

I will send the recon soon and might make a youtube video on it


----------



## ProStar (Apr 25, 2020)

Woah! That's crazy. Assuming it's true, the 2 should definitely count as PB, just because it's crazy lucky doesn't mean it can't count. I'd really like to know scramble though, as well as a recon


----------



## ProStar (Apr 25, 2020)

For everyone accusing this solve as fake(and any fast solve for that matter), I have a question to ask you: If Feliks Zemdegs had made this post, saying he got a 2.64 on a 21 move solve, planned 3 pairs, did a recon, etc.; would you accuse him of being fake or would you be really congratulatory and happy and ecstatic?

What I'm trying to say is that we don't have any evidence that he faked it, and we should believe him unless proof appears disproving him. Just because it's not Feliks or Max doesn't mean it has to be fake. People are reacting the same way they did to Yusheng's record: "Not feliks or max? FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


----------



## Hazel (Apr 25, 2020)

ProStar said:


> For everyone accusing this solve as fake(and any fast solve for that matter), I have a question to ask you: If Feliks Zemdegs had made this post, saying he got a 2.64 on a 21 move solve, planned 3 pairs, did a recon, etc.; would you accuse him of being fake or would you be really congratulatory and happy and ecstatic?
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that we don't have any evidence that he faked it, and we should believe him unless proof appears disproving him. Just because it's not Feliks or Max doesn't mean it has to be fake. People are reacting the same way they did to Yusheng's record: "Not feliks or max? FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


While I generally agree with giving people the benefit of the doubt, fake solves are common. People would believe Feliks or Max could get that amazing of a solve because a) they've proven they're incredibly skilled, and b) they've been around for long enough to have established trust with the community.
This solve could very well be real, but it's reasonable to be skeptical due to how many fake solves there are by relatively unknown people. I do agree, however, that we cannot say _for sure_ that it's fake.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 26, 2020)

just saying, i avg 13 and got a 4 first try so it is an incredibly easy solve. He can get mid 1's on it


----------



## weatherman223 (Apr 26, 2020)

I just downsolved it to a 1.72. This is an oblivious fake scramble.


----------



## TipsterTrickster (Apr 26, 2020)

What is the scramble?


----------



## Sowrduk (Apr 26, 2020)

The scramble is 4-gen with the only F and B moves F2 and B2, which preserves EO. The scramble was possibly generated elsewhere. Also, if he had retried it on cam, why would he need to reinspect? It seems (not definite) like he wanted to retry the solve ON CAM and post it online. He had a Yuxin Timer (2 actually) but he didn't use it when retrying (possibly trying to make the time faster)

I know him in person and I felt like he was faking solves for a while. I wasn't sure and I thought maybe he was improving but he (possibly) faked a sub 3 (sub 2 on cam) so yeah. Ummm


----------



## Owen Morrison (Apr 26, 2020)

TipsterTrickster said:


> What is the scramble?


----------



## Sowrduk (Apr 26, 2020)

I forgot lol


----------



## Samuel Baird (Apr 26, 2020)

lol


----------



## brododragon (Apr 26, 2020)

Sowrduk said:


> He had a Yuxin Timer (2 actually) but he didn't use it when retrying (possibly trying to make the time faster)


What's weirder is that he said he originally used a Yuxin Timer for the solve.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 26, 2020)

Sowrduk said:


> The scramble is 4-gen with the only F and B moves F2 and B2, which preserves EO. The scramble was possibly generated elsewhere. Also, if he had retried it on cam, why would he need to reinspect? It seems (not definite) like he wanted to retry the solve ON CAM and post it online. He had a Yuxin Timer (2 actually) but he didn't use it when retrying (possibly trying to make the time faster)
> 
> I know him in person and I felt like he was faking solves for a while. I wasn't sure and I thought maybe he was improving but he (possibly) faked a sub 3 (sub 2 on cam) so yeah. Ummm


I agree. It seems fake, but we shouldn't automatically write this off as fake. I think most likely, he found an easy scramble on youtube and got this time using a scramble he found ot be easy. saying this, he isn't counting this as a PB or uwr, just a stupid solve


----------



## Shaun Mack (Apr 26, 2020)

reply i posted on facbook under a comment asking if OP was gonna count a dumb squan solve as pb. so if this kid isnt counting this as uwr, we have our answer


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 26, 2020)

weatherman223 said:


> I just downsolved it to a 1.72. This is an oblivious fake scramble.


it was generated on cstimer


----------



## Owen Morrison (Apr 26, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> it was generated on cstimer


WHAT WAS THE SCRAMBLE!!!!!!?????


----------



## brododragon (Apr 26, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> it was generated on cstimer


Did they just export the text? Anyone can mess with that. The only real proof is a photo.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 26, 2020)

The solution is very straightforward


----------



## Owen Morrison (Apr 26, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> The solution is very straightforward


What cross did he go for?

I can't find any good solutions to it.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 26, 2020)

yellow preserve the free pair

solution that we both had
yellow bottom blue front
U' R
L U' L'
U L' U' L
U R U' R' U R U' R'
U' R' U' R

first try without seeing the scramble beforehand 5.14
after that 2.62 it is very easy the only thing people might not see is the cross that preserves the pair


----------



## brododragon (Apr 26, 2020)

So no one has any actual proof that it was generated by csTimer?


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

i think he does, i will check later


----------



## u Cube (Apr 27, 2020)

"The recon is on his story, but both of us think that it is that stupid that it shouldn't count as his PB or UWR (of course no video evidence so it wouldn't have been uwr anyway). "
doesn't need to be recorded to be uwr. Also this will be a recurring problem, anybody not world class who gets a sub 3 (maybe even sub-3.5) will have people who doubt them. A thread similar to this was made about Sameer Aggarwal. But anybody who is sub-10 could probably get a sub-3 with the right scramble, just a matter of how long it takes to get one.


----------



## fun at the joy (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> The solution is very straightforward


This post doesn't make sense at all.
This makes it even more suspicious if he doesn't count it as a legit solve.

"This is the scramble to my UWR (w)ich I'm not counting" - Just think about that sentence for a bit and notice how extremely stupid this is.

Maybe I would've believed him (haven't looked at the scramble yet) but this post just ****s me up and has destroyed all the hope.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

fun at the joy said:


> This post doesn't make sense at all.
> This makes it even more suspicious if he doesn't count it as a legit solve.
> 
> "This is the scramble to my UWR (w)ich I'm not counting" - Just think about that sentence for a bit and notice how extremely stupid this is.
> ...



I agree, It's like @Shaun Mack said: Not counting a WB is a fancy way of saying it was faked (paraphrased)


----------



## Username: Username: (Apr 27, 2020)

Owen Morrison said:


> What cross did he go for?
> 
> I can't find any good solutions to it.



I (think) it's the blue cross.

I got 2 free F2L pairs and the other two was easy, OLL is Sune, PLL is the Gd Perm?! how many Gd Perms do I get? lol

edit : I didn't see other people posting the solution when I posted this.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

Owen Morrison said:


> What cross did he go for?
> 
> I can't find any good solutions to it.



1 Move yellow cross, 2 moves if you want to preserve a free pair


----------



## Ayce (Apr 27, 2020)

The scramble might have been one of those 3x3 subsets which give you obvious x-cross(es) I would think it isn't legit, no video and breakdown is suspicious. CFOP solves have triple the move count.


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I agree, It's like @Shaun Mack said: Not counting a WB is a fancy way of saying it was faked (paraphrased)


Yeah. It seems like he just wants all the attention without people actually caring to debunk it because it's not the WB.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

Ayce said:


> The scramble might have been one of those 3x3 subsets which give you obvious x-cross(es) I would think it isn't legit, no video and breakdown is suspicious. CFOP solves have triple the move count.



To be fair, lucky solves will obviously have way lower movecount than normal. Yusheng's solve was 27 moves


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> To be fair, lucky solves will obviously have way lower movecount than normal. Yusheng's solve was 27 moves


Yusheng's solve was one in literal millions.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

brododragon said:


> Yusheng's solve was one in literal millions.



That doesn't change anything, it's possible for a scramble that easy to come up


----------



## Username: Username: (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> To be fair, lucky solves will obviously have way lower movecount than normal. Yusheng's solve was 27 moves



Why didn't Yusheng get a sub 3 or a low 2? I (think) the amount of luckiness in Yusheng's scramble was the same as this scramble.


----------



## WoowyBaby (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> To be fair, lucky solves will obviously have way lower movecount than normal. Yusheng's solve was 27 moves


The difference between 27 and 21 is not small. I would say it's equivalent to 40 moves versus 52 moves or something like that.

And also, this solve was literally just 3 free pairs and a skip so I can basically be certain it's set up.

Something like 2x2x3 -> Multislot -> ZBLL, or just something with uniqueness that shows it's not a 'perfect solve' that would never show up just due to its simplicity (and having 3 free pairs lol).


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

Also, beside the math, there's some other shady things about this solve.
1. He said he did it with a Yuxin Timer, but retried without it.
2. Dead Giveaway: He doesn't want to count it as a WB or PB.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

I think the main reason h


alexiscubing said:


> solution that we both had
> yellow bottom blue front
> U' R
> L U' L'
> ...


guys this is the recon
it is rly straightforward
preserve free pair and insert into back
free pair in front left
easy pair in front right
free pair back left LL skip no auf



brododragon said:


> Also, beside the math, there's some other shady things about this solve.
> 1. He said he did it with a Yuxin Timer, but retried without it.
> 2. Dead Giveaway: He doesn't want to count it as a WB or PB.


Im just saying if you got a 2 single on a scrmable like this would you say to everyone that you got WB and a 2 single? No, he wants to keep knowledge of it down and doesn't want hate from people saying you dont deserve it. that is why he isnt counting it as uwr


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> Im just saying if you got a 2 single on a scrmable like this would you say to everyone that you got WB and a 2 single? No, he wants to keep knowledge of it down and doesn't want hate from people saying you dont deserve it. that is why he isnt counting it as uwr


So he’s passing up bring pretty famous because he doesn’t want people trying to disprove his totally legit solve with no evidence (not even a screenshot) and a bunch of other shady things? It’s not that we hate him, it's just like science; try to disprove something in every way possible.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

everyone hated on many solves, such as the andrew huang wr and the sameer agarwal wb


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> everyone hated on many solves, such as the andrew huang wr and the sameer agarwal wb


But they're so many other things wrong with the solve besides the fact he's not counting it. 3 free pairs?? Preserved EO?


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

brododragon said:


> But they're so many other things wrong with the solve besides the fact he's not counting it. 3 free pairs?? Preserved EO?


I got four free pairs in a 5.88 which is exactly why im not counting it. i have evidence as well, i was doing comp sim with friends. (not this scramble btw)


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> I got four free pairs in a 5.88 which is exactly why im not counting it. i have evidence as well, i was doing comp sim with friends. (not this scramble btw)


What about a LL skip? 21 moves is FMC, not 3x3. Almost half the move-count is LL on an average solve. This solve* was* set up.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

its not impossible tho


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> its not impossible tho


It's not. But when you add it all together, there's overwhelming amounts of evidence.


----------



## Username: Username: (Apr 27, 2020)

brododragon said:


> It's not. But when you add it all together, there's overwhelming amounts of evidence.



you two are flooding me with notifs!


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

got on cstimer 22/4


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> View attachment 11965


So we've forgotten that Inspect exists?


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

i thought you said you wanted a screenshot of the cstimer solve
i have given it to you
what else do you want


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> i thought you said you wanted a screenshot of the cstimer solve
> i have given it to you
> what else do you want


There's just too many things wrong with this. It would stink if it was legit, but 9/10 it's not, and I can't just believe someone for that 1/10 of the time. I wish I could get myself to believe this, but the list of strange things is just too much.


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

why would it stink?
i thought i said pls dont hate on him


----------



## tasguitar7 (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> why would it stink?
> i thought i said pls dont hate on him



The arguments made here aren't hating on him. The argument is that the simplest explanation of what is being presented is that the solve is fake. It is not impossible that the solve is real, but certainly given the information we have in this thread it is the outcome which has less supporting evidence. There is not much here to make such an unlikely circumstance seem real and people are naturally suspicious of believing unlikely circumstances.

I think brododragon said it best:



brododragon said:


> It’s not that we hate him, it's just like science; try to disprove something in every way possible.



There is just nothing convincing here and the default for something so unlikely is disbelief.


----------



## weatherman223 (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> View attachment 11965



It’s partially cut off but do those last 2 digits say .16?

Yeah, any small amount of faith that I had in this is now gone. Now going to Cube Explorer to see if it was grabbed and inputted from there.


----------



## Samuel Baird (Apr 27, 2020)

weatherman223 said:


> It’s partially cut off but do those last 2 digits say .16?
> 
> Yeah, any small amount of faith that I had in this is now gone. Now going to Cube Explorer to see if it was grabbed and inputted from there.


I already tried that out and couldn't find anything, he definitely genned that scramble though.


----------



## weatherman223 (Apr 27, 2020)

Samuel Baird said:


> I already tried that out and couldn't find anything, he definitely genned that scramble though.



Yup, couldn’t find anything of note either


----------



## BradyCubes08 (Apr 27, 2020)

I tried doing the ruwix cube solver thing with this scramble (where you input colors for each sticker on your scrambled cube and it generates a solution) and the solution came out as the inverse of the scramble, which means he could have just set this up, put it in the solver, inverse the solution and bam you've got yourself a legit looking fake solve!


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

Samuel Baird said:


> I already tried that out and couldn't find anything, he definitely genned that scramble though.



You can put your own scrambles into csTimer to have them show up(which is what I do for sub-x races), then when you look at a solve it will seem as though that was a naturally generated scramble


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

BradyCubes08 said:


> I tried doing the ruwix cube solver thing with this scramble (where you input colors for each sticker on your scrambled cube and it generates a solution) and the solution came out as the inverse of the scramble, which means he could have just set this up, put it in the solver, inverse the solution and bam you've got yourself a legit looking fake solve!


Wow. That's extremely strange, given that Ruwix doesn't have an optimal solver.


----------



## fun at the joy (Apr 27, 2020)

The oddest thing is that the scramble was 4-gen. I have never had a scramble on csTimer that wasn't 6-gen.
Maybe he selected the EOLine option.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

brododragon said:


> Wow. That's extremely strange, given that Ruwix doesn't have an optimal solver.



Makes since, the solve was 21 moves, which wouldn't have been optimal


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> Makes since, the solve was 21 moves, which wouldn't have been optimal


But usually it can't even get sub-25.


----------



## ProStar (Apr 27, 2020)

brododragon said:


> But usually it can't even get sub-25.



Enter the setup scramble


----------



## brododragon (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> Enter the setup scramble


Ohhh now I get what you mean.


----------



## NevEr_QeyX (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> I got four free pairs in a 5.88 which is exactly why im not counting it. i have evidence as well, i was doing comp sim with friends. (not this scramble btw)


Why in the world are you not counting a lucky solve? the WR solve was lucky x10 but THEY still counted it. when people say that they don't count lucky PBs it makes no sense.


----------



## Sub1Hour (Apr 27, 2020)

NevEr_QeyX said:


> Why in the world are you not counting a lucky solve? the WR solve was lucky x10 but THEY still counted it. when people say that they don't count lucky PBs it makes no sense.


Not counting a solve as your PB is almost a dead giveaway that its a fake scramble/solve. If you get a good time why wouldn't it be counted as your PB? That is unless you did not want it to since its fake.


----------



## Filipe Teixeira (Apr 27, 2020)

ProStar said:


> For everyone accusing this solve as fake(and any fast solve for that matter), I have a question to ask you: If Feliks Zemdegs had made this post, saying he got a 2.64 on a 21 move solve, planned 3 pairs, did a recon, etc.; would you accuse him of being fake or would you be really congratulatory and happy and ecstatic?
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that we don't have any evidence that he faked it, and we should believe him unless proof appears disproving him. Just because it's not Feliks or Max doesn't mean it has to be fake. People are reacting the same way they did to Yusheng's record: "Not feliks or max? FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


rip prostar 2020


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 27, 2020)

NevEr_QeyX said:


> Why in the world are you not counting a lucky solve? the WR solve was lucky x10 but THEY still counted it. when people say that they don't count lucky PBs it makes no sense.


yeah but i hated it because i avged 17 and my pb was 5.88 and no one believed me so i just stopped counting it


----------



## NevEr_QeyX (Apr 27, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> yeah but i hated it because i avged 17 and my pb was 5.88 and no one believed me so i just stopped counting it


But you GOT it right? That's like saying "Oh well I juggled like 15 balls but i can only usually juggle like 8 balls so I think i'll just pretend that my monumental accomplishent didn't ever happen"

If you had a recon then why didn't people believe you? Maybe you DID fake it IDK


----------



## Sub1Hour (Apr 28, 2020)

This whole fiasco reminds me of a certain Chris olsen video intro... If only I could remember






OH YEAH




Please watch to the end


----------



## alexiscubing (Apr 28, 2020)

NevEr_QeyX said:


> But you GOT it right? That's like saying "Oh well I juggled like 15 balls but i can only usually juggle like 8 balls so I think i'll just pretend that my monumental accomplishent didn't ever happen"
> 
> If you had a recon then why didn't people believe you? Maybe you DID fake it IDK


I am trying to find it, I did a post on it on the accomplishment thread a while back on my old computer


----------



## Nanite (May 4, 2020)

ProStar said:


> For everyone accusing this solve as fake(and any fast solve for that matter), I have a question to ask you: If Feliks Zemdegs had made this post, saying he got a 2.64 on a 21 move solve, planned 3 pairs, did a recon, etc.; would you accuse him of being fake or would you be really congratulatory and happy and ecstatic?
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that we don't have any evidence that he faked it, and we should believe him unless proof appears disproving him. Just because it's not Feliks or Max doesn't mean it has to be fake. People are reacting the same way they did to Yusheng's record: "Not feliks or max? FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


Preach!


----------



## lucarubik (May 4, 2020)

it must suck to get a pb like that, ure not beating it in a long long time
maybe im too sensitive with the whole hey you dont break the quaranteen balcony (didn't happen to me but it triggers me anyway) thing but you guys xddd what triggers me the most is that you don't want the turth to prevail or anything you just want to be the hero that exposes someone out
actually thats the only thing that triggers me. if you think he is cheating and say i think he is cheating im ok wit htaht but ure not doing that, nor telling someone to investigate, nor invastigating yourself. its just spitting poison. and i love it
personally if he is just someone looking for attention i would endulge him, im not his father. im not impressed enough to care, just an anecdote, a cool moment. woudlve been cool to see it

also i see the irony of me exposing you for trying to expose someone but i justify it saying that im aware of it. I too have a cop complex

also that was my last post in this forum i dont feel like reading the replies


----------



## Caden :) (May 4, 2020)

1. "Not counting it as PB or UWR"
2. Scramble is 4 GEN with moves that preserve EO
tOtALLy LeGiT!!!!!!11!!!!


----------



## GAN 356 X (May 4, 2020)

I got an 11 first try. I only get 11s about once a week because I'm tryna be CN right now. Pretty good scramble, even I predicted first 2 pairs, and I'm not great at Cross+1


----------



## alexiscubing (May 5, 2020)

Ok, this solve wasnt done by me, and i dont have a personal opinion on whether this is fake or real. My friend just sent me an easy scramble. Im just saying, if this solve was genned on cstimer (unlikely but their is a chance), and feliks or max got this scramble, i dont think anyone would be going up to him and saying, totally legit, or stop faking solves.


----------



## Micah Morrison (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> View attachment 11965


can I mention that this scramble has 2 F2's in a row. That is a big giveaway that the scramble was inputted (or inputted by you or him to try to prove it was from cstimer) because whoever did input it messed it up


----------



## alexiscubing (May 5, 2020)

Micah Morrison said:


> can I mention that this scramble has 2 F2's in a row. That is a big giveaway that the scramble was inputted (or inputted by you or him to try to prove it was from cstimer) because whoever did input it messed it up


no its been cropped wrong, no idea why


----------



## Micah Morrison (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> no its been cropped wrong, no idea why


sure......


----------



## fun at the joy (May 5, 2020)

I would be interested if a 4-gen scramble is even possible on csTimer @qq280833822


----------



## tx789 (May 5, 2020)

If you assume this is fake the solution is such an obvious one to choose. The F2L is basically as short as you can get with 4 pairs and a LL skip. It is possible this is a real scramble but faking a scramble with a dream solution seems more likely.


----------



## ProStar (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> and feliks or max got this scramble, i dont think anyone would be going up to him and saying, totally legit, or stop faking solves.



If Feliks(or Max, or Jay, or whatever) claimed a 2.64, had no video, had this scramble(which we've already discussed is suspicious), wasn't counting it as his PB or WB, and had it posted by his friend instead of himself, then yeah. I'd call him out.


----------



## alexiscubing (May 5, 2020)

ProStar said:


> If Feliks(or Max, or Jay, or whatever) claimed a 2.64, had no video, had this scramble(which we've already discussed is suspicious), wasn't counting it as his PB or WB, and had it posted by his friend instead of himself, then yeah. I'd call him out.


I also agree that it isn't very likely, but im fairly sure some other dude got the exact same scramble (not him) on cstimer @leonspeedcuber (inst) or smth like that got a 3.1 on it


----------



## tx789 (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> I also agree that it isn't very likely, but im fairly sure some other dude got the exact same scramble (not him) on cstimer @leonspeedcuber (inst) or smth like that got a 3.1 on it


Are you saying two people got the exact same scramble on 3x3 indenpendly of each other? The chances of a repeat scramble a so incredibly low that is almost impossible.


----------



## xyzzy (May 5, 2020)

fun at the joy said:


> The oddest thing is that the scramble was 4-gen. I have never had a scramble on csTimer that wasn't 6-gen.





fun at the joy said:


> I would be interested if a 4-gen scramble is even possible on csTimer @qq280833822




```
js> function test(n)
{
        let faces = 'UDLRFB';
        let histogram = [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0];
        for (let i = 0; i < n; i++)
        {
                let s = min2phase.solve(min2phase.randomCube());
                let faces_used = 0;
                for (let f of faces)
                {
                        if (s.indexOf(f) !== -1) {faces_used++;}
                }
                histogram[faces_used]++;
        }
        return histogram;
}
js> test(10000)
[0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 568, 9424]
```
4-gen is rare, but not _that_ rare. You've probably had a couple without realising it.

(I'm aware that csTimer doesn't exactly use min2phase.solve but I have my local copy of min2phase.js modified to reflect that.)


----------



## brododragon (May 5, 2020)

You can just type in scrambles...



alexiscubing said:


> no its been cropped wrong, no idea why


No you're right, he messed up when trying to make it look legit. 

That makes no logical sense. Why aren't there more errors? If it really was a cropping issue, it would probably be consistent along the X/Y axis. Let's admit it, we all know it's fake.


----------



## Micah Morrison (May 5, 2020)

brododragon said:


> You can just type in scrambles...
> 
> 
> No you're right, he messed up when trying to make it look legit.
> ...


the thing is that after the first F2 there was space for about 2 more moves in the line before the next F2 in the line below.


----------



## brododragon (May 5, 2020)

Micah Morrison said:


> the thing is that after the first F2 there was space for about 2 more moves in the line before the next F2 in the line below.


That would still make no sense because the space is highlighted. So, the highlighting stayed, but not the text?


----------



## AlphaCuber is awesome (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> Ok, this solve wasnt done by me, and i dont have a personal opinion on whether this is fake or real. My friend just sent me an easy scramble. Im just saying, if this solve was genned on cstimer (unlikely but their is a chance), and feliks or max got this scramble, i dont think anyone would be going up to him and saying, totally legit, or stop faking solves.


if Feliks or max got this scramble people would believe them as they have nothing to gain seeing as they already have actual records and people know


alexiscubing said:


> everyone hated on many solves, such as the andrew huang wr and the sameer agarwal wb


people didn‘t hate on Andrew Huangs Wr they just said the scramble is dumb and he literally said him he found it dumb and assumed it was a misscramble. People said sameers was fake because he got a sub 3 (insanely rare for someone at his average) claimed it as WB people pointed out there was a faster solve and then he pops up 2 days later with ANOTHER sub 3 that was WB this time. That sort of thing just doesn’t happen.


----------



## Caden :) (May 5, 2020)

alexiscubing said:


> Ok, this solve wasnt done by me, and i dont have a personal opinion on whether this is fake or real. My friend just sent me an easy scramble. Im just saying, if this solve was genned on cstimer (unlikely but their is a chance), and feliks or max got this scramble, i dont think anyone would be going up to him and saying, totally legit, or stop faking solves.


That’s because they are established cubers who wouldn’t be dumb enough to fake a solve, knowing that if they were found out it would destroy their reputation. The person who did this fake solve has nothing to lose.


----------



## ProStar (May 5, 2020)

AlphaCuber is awesome said:


> if Feliks or max got this scramble people would believe them as they have nothing to gain seeing as they already have actual records and people know



Don't speak for everyone


----------



## Samuel Baird (May 5, 2020)

@pjk can this thread be locked? It's been proven that this solve is fake.


----------



## brododragon (May 5, 2020)

Samuel Baird said:


> @pjk can this thread be locked? This solve has already been proven as fake


Yes please.


----------

