# What of these (insane) WR´s would you pick if you could?



## Mr Cubism (Jan 14, 2010)

Lets play around in the world of fantasy, what of these WR 
below would you choose if you could (and to be official)? 
You can pick only ONE!

2x2 single; 0.48
2x2 average; 1.99
3x3 single; 5.99
3x3 average; 8.99
4x4 single; 32.92 
4x4 average; 39.93
5x5 single; 59.88
5x5 average; 1.09.91
6x6 single; 1.59.95
6x6 average; 2.18.45
7x7 single; 3.24.99
7x7 average; 3.39.93
Megaminx single; 53.53
Megaminx average; 58.98
3x3 blindfolded; 29.99
3x3 one-handed single; 11.88
3x3 one-handed average; 14.44
3x3 fewest moves; 19
Pyraminx single; 1.99
Pyraminx average; 2.99
Square-1 single; 8.88
Square-1 average; 12.42
Rubiks clock single; 6.46
Rubiks clock average; 8.28
Rubiks magic single; 0.66
Rubiks magic average; 0.79
Master magic single: 1.49
Master magic average; 1.77
4x4 blindfolded; 3:15.00
5x5 blindfolded; 8.59.99
3x3 multiple blindfolded 26/26 57.00

I would pick.....eeeh.....5x5 single....sub-1.....yeaaah!


----------



## Caedus (Jan 14, 2010)

4x4 average of 39.93 for sure. You'd have to be crazy fast at 3x3 as well and average means it's consistent, so yeah. Doubly good.


----------



## Lofty (Jan 14, 2010)

I don't want any of these.


----------



## CitricAcid (Jan 14, 2010)

I'd pick 3x3 single. .

PS: Your avatar scares me.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3x3 single!


----------



## Neo63 (Jan 15, 2010)

What no square-1? 
um 2x2 single


----------



## TemurAmir (Jan 15, 2010)

Megaminx Single


----------



## Dene (Jan 15, 2010)

Firstly, not many of those are "insane". Secondly, that is not a very comprehensive list.


----------



## Edmund (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3 single for sure.


----------



## Edward (Jan 15, 2010)

Dene said:


> Firstly, not many of those are "insane". Secondly, that is not a very comprehensive list.



Quit being so negative and just chose already .


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3x3 single of course. But why is there no BLD on that list? I would absolutely go for it.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Jan 15, 2010)

Wut's an avarage?

I want 3OH with 13s average.


----------



## Mr Cubism (Jan 15, 2010)

Okay okay, very important message! I have put in extra events.

You who have already posted an event have the permission to make another choose now.


----------



## Edward (Jan 15, 2010)

Then I change mine to 3x3 BLD.


----------



## iSpinz (Jan 15, 2010)

What is an avarage?


----------



## TemurAmir (Jan 15, 2010)

Magic average


----------



## Edward (Jan 15, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> What is an avarage?



Its like, a country right?


----------



## daniel0731ex (Jan 15, 2010)

Magic Sniggle.


----------



## cooldayr (Jan 15, 2010)

7x7 avg.
I LOVE BIG PUZZLES
5x5 6x6 7x7 gigaminx 9x9 and soon 11x11 and teraminx


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 15, 2010)

Caedus said:


> average means it's consistent, so yeah. Doubly good.



No it doesn't.

I'd pick 4x4x4 AO5.


----------



## Anthony (Jan 15, 2010)

Most definitely sub 30 BLD. That's ridiculously intense. There really aren't very many people who can even memo in that time.


----------



## lilkdub503 (Jan 15, 2010)

Logically, 3x3 single. Non-cubers, i.e. nearly all of the media, only care about the fact that they can write, "blankety blank solved the cube in only 5.99 seconds." If you can get that, you get the most non-cuber love.


----------



## rubiknewbie (Jan 15, 2010)

I pick the richest man in the world.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 15, 2010)

lilkdub503 said:


> Logically, 3x3 single. Non-cubers, i.e. nearly all of the media, only care about the fact that they can write, "blankety blank solved the cube in only 5.99 seconds." If you can get that, you get the most non-cuber love.



Probably 3rd least for cubers though, after 2x2 single & Pyraminx. This depends on how much magic & feet is hated though.

Also I think more non-cubers would like to say Blankety Blank solved the cube in Blank.... WITH THEIR FEET!


----------



## Ryanrex116 (Jan 15, 2010)

Probably 3x3 average.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 15, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> Rubiks clock single; 6.46
> Rubiks clock avarage; 8.28



I would be disappointed with these times.


----------



## Anthony (Jan 15, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> lilkdub503 said:
> 
> 
> > Logically, 3x3 single. Non-cubers, i.e. nearly all of the media, only care about the fact that they can write, "blankety blank solved the cube in only 5.99 seconds." If you can get that, you get the most non-cuber love.
> ...



lolwut? Of course cubers care about the 3x3 single WR! For instance, almost all cubers know who Erik Akkersdijk is, but not all know who the clock WR holder is. (No offense to Oliver, everyone *should* know who he is! )


----------



## fanwuq (Jan 15, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> Mr Cubism said:
> 
> 
> > Rubiks clock single; 6.46
> ...



Haha, I knew you would say that.
Rubiks clock single: 3.46
Rubiks clock average: 5.28
Better?

I'd say the most amazing one mentally on that list is 19 moves for FMC. The most amazing one physically is clearly master magic. 1.42 seems impossibly fast.

The records for 3, 4, 5 speed and BLD look very possible in the near future.


----------



## PHPJaguar (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3 average. Having a low average is better than having a low single IMO.
PS: Average, not avarage.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 15, 2010)

Anthony said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > lilkdub503 said:
> ...



I don't think many people are extremely impressed with the 3x3x3 Single since it matters a lot whether or not you get lucky, not so much for 5x5x5.


----------



## cincyaviation (Jan 15, 2010)

you spelled average wrong, every time, ill pick 7x7 single if you lower the time by 2 mins


----------



## Anthony (Jan 15, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> I don't think many people are extremely impressed with the 3x3x3 Single since it matters a lot whether or not you get lucky



7.08 seconds isn't impressive to you? It takes skill to get to PLL in under 7 seconds. It almost certainly would have had been a sub 10 and probably a low 8 second solve had Erik got an edge permutation as PLL like he expected. Instead, he was lucky and almost sub 7'd. Regardless of the luck it's still pretty impressive if you ask me (and most cubers).


----------



## TheMachanga (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3x3 single, duh


----------



## Kevster270 (Jan 15, 2010)

square 1 single OMG 8 seconds i can barely get under a minute


----------



## blade740 (Jan 15, 2010)

Those sq1 times are fast but not insane. 

I'd be happy with them, but there's still room for improvement.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 15, 2010)

fanwuq said:


> DavidWoner said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Cubism said:
> ...



5.28 single and 6.46 avg would come closer to insane, and still remain in the realm of possibility. Of course, that's still slower than my PBs.

Most of the times listed are slower than the UWRs. And in some cases, they are almost double the UWR (5bld)


----------



## Chuck (Jan 15, 2010)

:fp



Spoiler



Multi BLD?


----------



## moogra (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3x3 single. The time is already epic, and wow 4 seconds? That's like solving it after 3 F2L pairs if it's on par with the 7.08 time. 

btw a few of these times I can see beaten within the next few years (i.e. 3x3 bld, magic average)


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 15, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> 5x5 blindfolded; 13.59.95


Err, that's pretty much exactly my dream.

Except that after this weekend, it probably won't be nearly good enough to be a WR.


----------



## Enter (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3 avarage; 8.99


----------



## Zubon (Jan 15, 2010)

Personally I would want the 3x3 average because I, like most cubers know that single times don't really mean much at all.

But that single record would get you a lot of media attention.


----------



## zevipa (Jan 15, 2010)

2x2 single; 0.48


----------



## iasimp1997 (Jan 15, 2010)

None. I would rather advance to those levels myself.


----------



## rahulkadukar (Jan 15, 2010)

Dude Ville has better times at all BLD times than the ones u have mentioned. Just watch out for him tomorrow when he is going to decimate everything in Aachen open 2010.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 15, 2010)

rahulkadukar said:


> Dude Ville has better times at all BLD times than the ones u have mentioned. Just watch out for him tomorrow when he is going to decimate everything in Aachen open 2010.



I'm pretty sure the 3x3x3 time would take a pretty good solve for him to beat, although certainly he could do it. A sub-4 4x4x4 is probably pretty normal for him; for him to do that badly on 5x5x5 would require a pretty horrible solve. Like I said before, the current 5x5x5 BLD world record is completely out of whack with current abilities.


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jan 15, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> 4x4 blindfolded; 3:59.99
> 5x5 blindfolded; 13.59.95



Clearly something is wrong with this.


----------



## Erik (Jan 15, 2010)

I beat at least 3 of those on your list at home already


----------



## Kenneth (Jan 15, 2010)

Megaminx, it is just a matter of a few comps for some certain people and the records will be better than the times in your list...

Simon is going to Danish, maybye then, mabye not. Bálint will not compeate before Euro or Hungarian he said the other day, a pity, he is the one with most capacity. Erik, this weekend?


----------



## Mr Cubism (Jan 15, 2010)

Erik said:


> I beat at least 3 of those on your list at home already





Oh noo.....the fantasy list is destroyed.........but we all know that you are insane!


It would be great so see someone change the list officiallly this year, but i doubt it. Maybe more space for improvement for 4x4 and 5x5 blind, but....lets see....will be an exciting year!(again!) - A note; "insane" in the description just means "really really good".


----------



## LNZ (Jan 15, 2010)

I'd take the 2x2 single. With only 3674160 possible states, the 2x2 can produce very short scrambles.

My PB for the 2x2 is 8 seconds and I even don't pratice the 2x2 much at all.


----------



## Fox (Jan 15, 2010)

Hum... 3x3x3 single or average, I prefer average.


----------



## Tyrannous (Jan 15, 2010)

3x3 Average probably, def seems like a good one to me


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 15, 2010)

Swordsman Kirby said:


> Mr Cubism said:
> 
> 
> > 4x4 blindfolded; 3:59.99
> ...



Clearly. The fact that those would be WRs. It's ridiculous. (Especially the 5x5x5 number.) But we'll probably see it fixed very soon.


----------



## Micael (Jan 15, 2010)

add multi BLD please


----------



## kurtaz (Jan 15, 2010)

Balint will beat the minx single and average


----------



## cmhardw (Jan 15, 2010)

Mike Hughey said:


> Swordsman Kirby said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Cubism said:
> ...



4x4 blindfolded; *3:15.00*
5x5 blindfolded; *8:59.99*

Fixed that for you 

Also, I am not claiming these times. They're just my prediction for relatively(?) near future insane WRs.

Chris


----------



## Carrot (Jan 15, 2010)

I want the pyraminx average ^^ and as I have only have had 1 average of 12 sub3... 2.99 would be amazing =D


----------



## Mr Cubism (Jan 15, 2010)

cmhardw said:


> 4x4 blindfolded; *3:15.00*
> 5x5 blindfolded; *8:59.99*
> Chris




Yea, I change to this + multiple blindfolded


----------



## Dene (Jan 15, 2010)

cmhardw said:


> Mike Hughey said:
> 
> 
> > Swordsman Kirby said:
> ...



hmm. Have you heard about the 5x5bld times Ville has been getting recently?


----------



## gibsonguitarist55 (Jan 15, 2010)

5x5
i can solve like 2:54 
and its my fav cube


----------



## SebCube (Jan 15, 2010)

All a Dem


----------



## guusrs (Jan 15, 2010)

FMC of course!


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 16, 2010)

Anthony said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think many people are extremely impressed with the 3x3x3 Single since it matters a lot whether or not you get lucky
> ...



Which is more impressive to you a 3x3x3 Single or a 3x3x3 AO5?


----------



## Owen (Jan 16, 2010)

2x2 single. They would call me "The King of Kubez", which is a title I would love to have.


----------



## Anthony (Jan 16, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> Which is more impressive to you a 3x3x3 Single or a 3x3x3 AO5?



That obviously depends on the times.  Anyway, that's still irrelevant. You claimed that the 3x3 single WR isn't highly coveted by many cubers, which is not true.


----------



## tim (Jan 16, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> 3x3 multiple blindfolded 20/20 59.59



Fix:
3x3 multiple blindfolded 26/26 57:00


----------



## shoot1510 (Jan 16, 2010)

Anthony said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Which is more impressive to you a 3x3x3 Single or a 3x3x3 AO5?
> ...



Hint Hint!: To get fastest 3x3x3 times? Make or find the method that will give the lowest moves/turns needed.


----------



## Edward (Jan 16, 2010)

shoot1510 said:


> Anthony said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...



Fridpetroux?


----------



## Mr Cubism (Jan 16, 2010)

Dene said:


> hmm. Have you heard about the 5x5bld times Ville has been getting recently?



No, I have missed that. I don´t have 100% insight in UWR blindfolding times and that was one reason I didn´t put blindfolded in the list in the beginning.:fp Ville back in action would be great!




tim said:


> Fix:
> 3x3 multiple blindfolded 26/26 57:00



As you wish! Insane is the word!


----------



## rowehessler (Jan 16, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> Mr Cubism said:
> 
> 
> > Rubiks clock single; 6.46
> ...


then do it....


----------



## CubesOfTheWorld (Jan 16, 2010)

3x3 average


----------



## hyunchoi98 (Jan 16, 2010)

I would pick... all of them.
then i would have the world record for the most world records


----------



## SittinonSukhaya (Jan 16, 2010)

> 3x3 one-handed single; 11.88
> 3x3 one-handed average; 14.44



*this two records are possible to be done. 11.88 single can be done with out skipping. avg 14.44 is kinda hard but yeah its still do able*


----------



## Jai (Jan 16, 2010)

Exactly what I was about to say, Turbo. Sub-12 OH single isn't really that hard with a really nice scramble; Rowe has gotten a sub-10 single with a skip before. Sub-15 average is harder, but can be done if you have a decent average with 2 good solves (= one good counting solve).


----------



## RubikMagicPuzzleToy (Jan 16, 2010)

Doesn't matter the time, but I would easily pick (arguably) the most important: 3x3 single!


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 16, 2010)

Anthony said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Which is more impressive to you a 3x3x3 Single or a 3x3x3 AO5?
> ...



I'm pretty sure avg. is highly coveted more than single.


----------



## Anthony (Jan 16, 2010)

SittinonSukhaya said:


> > 3x3 one-handed single; 11.88
> > 3x3 one-handed average; 14.44
> 
> 
> ...






Jai said:


> Exactly what I was about to say, Turbo. Sub-12 OH single isn't really that hard with a really nice scramble;



You guys were right. Apparently Chris got one today. 11.97 NL. :O



Cyrus C. said:


> Anthony said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...



Dude, Cyrus, that's irrelevant. You're dragging this on longer than you should. My point wasn't that the single WR is more "highly coveted" than average record. My point was that the 3x3 single WR *is not* one of the *least* wanted WRs by cubers, as you said before.


----------



## vgbjason (Jan 16, 2010)

Megaminx single


----------



## manyhobbyfreak (Jan 17, 2010)

the 3x3 single would be so great, then the whole world would hear your name XD. megaminx single + mean would be possible.


----------



## GermanCube (Jan 17, 2010)

SittinonSukhaya said:


> > 3x3 one-handed single; 11.88
> > 3x3 one-handed average; 14.44
> 
> 
> ...



At least the single has (nearly) been done today, I'm curious, when these other "insane" records will be broken .


----------



## pwndnoobcuber (Jan 17, 2010)

i would want the 3x3 OH average and 3x3 blindfolded so i could combine them and look awesome casually solving whilst, for example, eating some noodles


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jan 17, 2010)

Owen said:


> 2x2 single. They would call me "The King of Kubez", which is a title I would love to have.



Nah.


----------



## shelley (Jan 19, 2010)

Owen said:


> 2x2 single. They would call me "The King of Kubez", which is a title I would love to have.



:fp 2x2 single is such a joke, if such a title did exist it would not be because of that record.


----------



## Tim Major (Jan 19, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> 4x4 average; 39.93
> 5x5 average; 1.09.91
> Rubiks clock single; 6.46
> Rubiks clock average; 8.28



I'd want 4x4 average. Just to point out, 5x5 average, and the Rubik's clock records aren't that insane. They will be done in the next 2 or 3 years probably.
But then the 3x3 single is really insane, and people would hate me for it (if I still averaged 22-23)

^^ noone cares about the 2x2 single. Well, that's wrong. Noone thinks you're really good because of 2x2 single. Most people would say Rowe is better than Erik at 2x2 (and quite a lot would say 3x3, but I don't want to say anything mean, so just say they're the same). Erik has the single record for both events, but Rowe would be considered better, at 2x2, and Erik wouldn't be considered better at 3x3, just because he has the single record.


----------



## Faz (Jan 19, 2010)

IMO, the following will be beaten within a few years.



Mr Cubism said:


> 3x3 average; 8.99
> 4x4 average; 39.93
> 5x5 average; 1.09.91
> 6x6 average; 2.18.45
> ...


----------



## Tim Major (Jan 19, 2010)

fazrulz said:


> IMO, the following will be beaten within a few years.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about those three. 3x3 BLD, has been done, just not at competitions, but I still think it unlikely. 7x7 average, MAYBE, for me, I don't think so, unless Yu, Michael H or Dan Cohen, really focus on 7x7.
3x3, that's almost a definite no for me, but there is still a hint of yes. This year, none of those, but I don't know what cubing will be like in 2-3 years, so maybe^

Lol this post would be confusing


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Jan 19, 2010)

The biggest NxNxN puzzle.


----------



## gyc6001 (Jan 21, 2010)

square-1 single.


----------



## Mr Cubism (Jan 21, 2010)

Mr Cubism said:


> 3x3 one-handed single; 11.88




I quote myself here....the new WR 11.97 is really close...!


----------



## Brunito (Jan 21, 2010)

pyrmainx eheheh


----------

