# Hand scrambles vs Computer scrambles



## Faz (May 8, 2008)

Hey,

I currently use computer scrambles printed off a sheet.

I use jnetcube too.

This morning i hand scrambled it myself and got a 27.53!! Yay!

I am not sure whether to add this to my pb's as it was an easy cross (3 moves)

Should i or should i not make this my single pb.


----------



## Faz (May 8, 2008)

hey cool i just got a new comp scramble pb 31.39!


----------



## pcwiz (May 8, 2008)

It's really your choice, and if I were you, I would do it. 

You got a new PB? Well you should update your time log then!
http://masterthecube.com/forums/index.php?topic=1413.0

You averages or close to mine.... well not that close - my best one is 33.40 seconds... improving is getting hard


----------



## fanwuq (May 8, 2008)

Well, for me, hand scrambles are always about 30-60 moves with really bad cross and usually bad first F2L pair. When I do the Sunday contest, I'm surprised at my times and how easy the cross is.


----------



## MiloD (May 8, 2008)

I usually scramble untill I don't immediately see any connected pairs. For the most parts I find easier 2x2x2 blocks on computer scrambles.


----------



## Faz (May 8, 2008)

hey milo, nice petrus times man.

I updated my master the cube timelog.

check it out at http://masterthecube.com/forums/index.php?topic=1413.msg21463#msg21463


----------



## ThePizzaGuy92 (May 8, 2008)

my PB was hand scrambled by my mom, I count it, it was a full step solve, why not?


----------



## immortalcube (May 8, 2008)

> I usually scramble untill I don't immediately see any connected pairs.


I usually either do it like that, or I close my eyes/look away from the cube, and do a set number of random rotations.


----------



## Faz (May 8, 2008)

mine was a 2 step OLL skip (about 5 seconds of my solving time).


----------



## *LukeMayn* (May 8, 2008)

I just scramble randomly.... I don't care if there are blocks... I use them even. But usually I don't count my hand scrambles...(got all my records with com scrambles anyway) usually I never make a hand scramble with over two pieces in the right place.


----------



## Dene (May 8, 2008)

I don't see the point in doing a hand scramble unless you don't have access to a computer...


----------



## *LukeMayn* (May 8, 2008)

Dene said:


> I don't see the point in doing a hand scramble unless you don't have access to a computer...



well personally for me it is a heck of a lot faster... my scrambles (reading from com) and 1 tps


----------



## Crzyazn (May 9, 2008)

I find that my hand scrambles are biased towards simple triggers and i end up missing some faces (i don't like doing L or D' turns)


----------



## mrCage (May 9, 2008)

Hi 

This is also an old topic. When hand-scrambling it is easy to fall into the habit of just doing "semi-random" moves. One does a few good scrambling moves, but often one just repeats them unconsciously. This may lead to poor scrambles even with a high turn count. On the other hand cautious hand-scrambling may be very good. One deliberately breaks any good blocks forming by visual inspection. A good hand scramble is comparable to deliberate fully random compouter based scrambles (permutation- not turn based). Ie a computer scramble where you set a random state and find how to set it up. Not the other way round by just doing random turns. There has been a few analysis done that indicate a much higher turn count should be used for normal computer scranbles to achieve truly random scrambles.

My personal opinon is that we only need fair scrambles not "hard" scrambles - as far as competition goes anyway.

-Per


----------



## Alex DiTuro (May 9, 2008)

Dene said:


> I don't see the point in doing a hand scramble unless you don't have access to a computer...



i agree. Most computer scramblers mix up the cube so it can be solved in no more than 7 moves. whenever I hand scramble the cube it usually takes about 10-11.


----------



## scuber123 (May 9, 2008)

Alex DiTuro said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see the point in doing a hand scramble unless you don't have access to a computer...
> ...



I don't think that you are telling the whole truth.


----------



## qqwref (May 10, 2008)

If you can solve the cube in 7 moves each time, why aren't you under 5 seconds yet?

Anyway computer scrambles and hand scrambles are about the same, but I've noticed that good hand scrambles tend to have fewer blocks because I consciously try to break them. This is especially true on 5x5, where computer scrambles give me 2x2 blocks of centers quite often, but I very rarely have them when I hand scramble. It's neat stuff.


----------



## Dene (May 10, 2008)

That's true. I'm happy that I have a 5x5 scrambler now (in Cubemania) because I'm always harsh to myself mixing up the 5x5.


----------



## deno (May 12, 2008)

Some of you noted that hand scrambling misses face turns, so I suggest doing double layer turns (that's what I do). Also, I personally practice with hand-scrambles using visual inspection (breaking blocks/roundabouts/similar patterns). Computer scrambles are too slow for me and i occasionally do L instead of L' or so.


----------



## rjohnson_8ball (May 14, 2008)

When I hand scramble, I probably favor certain faces so I also rotate the entire cube at random every 10 or so twists about x or y or z, all the while not looking at the cube. I make sure I do 180 degree, CW and CCW twists. I stop after maybe 40 turns or so, and do not care what the cube looks like as I go to solve it. If I intend to record my times (like for Sunday Contest) I use the computer scrambles provided.

Obviously for 4x4 and 5x5 you need some double layer twists. (I am focusing on 3x3 these days.)


----------



## Faz (May 14, 2008)

Hey guys, its me again

Just to let you know i am usually getting 1/5 solves a sub 30 and i have a new pb.

19.31 with a comp scramble. PLL skip.

I can usually get around 34 average


----------



## royzabeast (May 20, 2009)

scuber123 said:


> Alex DiTuro said:
> 
> 
> > Dene said:
> ...



It's impossible for a cross to take over 8 moves.


----------



## Ellis (May 20, 2009)

royzabeast said:


> scuber123 said:
> 
> 
> > Alex DiTuro said:
> ...



Impossible? No. I can do a cross in 10 moves.


----------



## Faz (May 20, 2009)

LOL, I was such a noob. (Still am)


----------



## IamWEB (May 20, 2009)

lol, I was thinking 'wow, faz has improved a lot!'


----------



## Johannes91 (May 20, 2009)

Ellis said:


> royzabeast said:
> 
> 
> > It's impossible for a cross to take over 8 moves.
> ...


I can do it, too! http://laire.dy.fi/t/cross/solver.pl?scramble=RU&N=10


----------



## Bryan (May 20, 2009)

Ellis said:


> royzabeast said:
> 
> 
> > scuber123 said:
> ...



Yes, if any of us try hard, we can probably pull off a 25-move cross.


----------



## AvGalen (May 20, 2009)

Nice programming Johannes. I would like to know how it works. http://laire.dy.fi/t/cross/solver.pl?scramble=RUFBDLB2R'UDF'&N=1000 works so fast and I don't see any obvious cancelling sequences in there



> Yes, if any of us try hard, we can probably pull off a 25-move cross.


If I try really hard, I can probably do that indeed. I might get "rest of cube-skip" though


----------



## tikva (May 20, 2009)

AvGalen said:


> Nice programming Johannes. I would like to know how it works. http://laire.dy.fi/t/cross/solver.pl?scramble=RUFBDLB2R'UDF'&N=1000 works so fast and I don't see any obvious cancelling sequences in there
> 
> 
> 
> > Yes, if any of us try hard, we can probably pull off a 25-move cross.



For N = 1000, he can just do 992 random moves and then find a cross with a depth-first search of maximum depth 8 (not stopping if the cross is found at depth <8). Right?


----------



## KubeKid73 (May 20, 2009)

http://laire.dy.fi/t/cross/solver.pl?scramble=LR'&N=1000 Lmao. Just do M or M' I forget which one goes the same direction as R'.


----------



## EmersonHerrmann (May 20, 2009)

When I read the post by Feliks and he said his pb was 19 with a PLL skip, I knew something was askew xD


----------



## Johannes91 (May 21, 2009)

tikva said:


> For N = 1000, he can just do 992 random moves and then find a cross with a depth-first search of maximum depth 8 (not stopping if the cross is found at depth <8). Right?


That'd work, but it might also solve a cross before N moves.

I used a simple depth-first search of maximum depth N that tries the moves at each depth in a random order to make the solution look interesting and backtracks if there's a solved cross too early.

The running time varies a lot; from <0.1s to >8s. The value of N doesn't matter much, just how much backtracking is needed when it gets to N moves.



KubeKid73 said:


> M or M' I forget which one goes the same direction as R'.


M


----------



## rahulkadukar (May 25, 2009)

Well just scramble with your hand for 30 seconds


----------



## JE007 (Jan 6, 2013)

*Handscrambles*

Half of the time that I'm cubing, I not time my solves.
Because of that I do handscrambles a lot..
But the last few days I just scramble and suddenly 2 pairs are in place or the full F2L is solved again.

Has anyone the same problem?
I think I just going to use computer scrambles more or pay more attention while scrambling.


----------



## Schmidt (Jan 6, 2013)

I've had a few solved Pyraminx when I was done "scrambling" without paying attention.


----------



## PeelingStickers (Jan 6, 2013)

whenever I handscramble I look away. if the cube seems half solved then I mix it up a little more just to insure it's not a setup solve.


----------



## AvGalen (Jan 6, 2013)

to handscramble I almost only use R U on every layer, so on a 5x5 it would look like this:
RU
2R 2U
3R 3U
4R 4U
then throw it in the air and repeat just as many times as the cube has layers. Just add a few random turns in there somewhere and you will always get a nicely scrambled cube


----------



## cubernya (Jan 6, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> to handscramble I almost only use R U on every layer, so on a 5x5 it would look like this:
> RU
> 2R 2U
> 3R 3U
> ...



Basically what I do, minus the RU part. I just scramble it, toss it in the air once, and repeat.


----------



## AvGalen (Jan 7, 2013)

You should give that R U layer scrambling a try. You will be surprised how well it scrambles a cube with a low amount of really fast turns


----------

