# Polish Nationals 2012 - Multiblind WR



## prażeodym (Aug 4, 2012)

hi guys
Today was a first day of Polish Championship.
New WR(s?):
- Marcin Kowalczyk (Maskow) Multiblind - 26/29 : 53:01

I think there were cauple of NRs but I don't rememer them and I am too lasy to check ;d
You can see live results here http://antros.ovh.org/cubing/live/


----------



## jla (Aug 4, 2012)

OMG!!! That's incredible, congratz Maskow!!!!!


----------



## Endgame (Aug 4, 2012)

Nice!


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 4, 2012)

WHAT. THE ****.


----------



## That70sShowDude (Aug 4, 2012)

wat


----------



## vcuber13 (Aug 4, 2012)

does he have another attempt?


----------



## prażeodym (Aug 4, 2012)

vcuber13 said:


> does he have another attempt?



Yes he do, this is the first competition with 2 rounds of multi blind (best of 2 each) so he have still 2 chances to beat it tommorow after 10 am


----------



## qqwref (Aug 4, 2012)

Go Maskow!


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Aug 4, 2012)

Multi is such a weird event: the WR has went from having 2 unsolved cubes to 3 unsolved cubes. This is really awesome, but I really want to see just how far Marcin can go with MBLD.


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 4, 2012)

WO HOO! He is such an inspiration! Hope he has a good route for tomorrow.
EDIT: Time just makes it even more impressive! almost 7 minutes to spare!


----------



## Dene (Aug 5, 2012)

Holy crap, 26/29 in 53 minutes >.< 

Brain EXPLODE


----------



## BlackStahli (Aug 5, 2012)

You know, I've always thought that multi-BLD WR holders had eidetic memory. Perhaps that's true 
Congrats to Marcin for breaking that WR twice in less than half a month!


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 5, 2012)

BlackStahli said:


> You know, I've always thought that multi-BLD WR holders had eidetic memory. Perhaps that's true
> Congrats to Marcin for breaking that WR twice in less than half a month!



They certainly don't. Even if they did, how would it be of any use?


----------



## MirzaCubing (Aug 5, 2012)

I'm looking at the live results for 5x5. Did Cezary Rokita really get 1:00.00 5 times in a row?


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 5, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> They certainly don't.


[citation needed]



drewsopchak said:


> Even if they did, how would it be of any use?


Remembering objects or images with extreme accuracy? How WOULDN'T that be of use?


----------



## Dene (Aug 5, 2012)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Remembering objects or images with extreme accuracy? How WOULDN'T that be of use?



My thoughts exactly XD. Dunno what that kid is thinking, unless he just doesn't know what "eidetic memory" is.


----------



## aronpm (Aug 5, 2012)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> [citation needed]



They don't.

source: I used to be kinda good at MultiBLD


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 5, 2012)

aronpm said:


> They don't.
> 
> source: I used to be kinda good at MultiBLD


Now this I can accept as a source lol, because you're respectable and knowledgeable and credible.


----------



## bluecloe45 (Aug 5, 2012)

Super, can't wait for someone to get a 27/27+


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 5, 2012)

Dene said:


> My thoughts exactly XD. Dunno what that kid is thinking, unless he just doesn't know what "eidetic memory" is.



How would an eidetic memory help with remembering cycles of pieces?


----------



## Dene (Aug 5, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> How would an eidetic memory help with remembering cycles of pieces?



Why bother memorising cycles of pieces if you have an eidetic memory?


----------



## Ranzha (Aug 5, 2012)

Dene said:


> Why bother memorising cycles of pieces if you have an eidetic memory?



And methinks that visual memo + eidetic memory = formula for BLD success.


----------



## TMOY (Aug 5, 2012)

Dene said:


> Why bother memorising cycles of pieces if you have an eidetic memory?



Memorizing by position instead of cycles makes memo faster but execution significantly harder. I know it because that's what I'm doing for big cube centers (and no, I don't have an eidetic memory).


----------



## Dene (Aug 5, 2012)

TMOY said:


> Memorizing by position instead of cycles makes memo faster but execution significantly harder. I know it because that's what I'm doing for big cube centers (and no, I don't have an eidetic memory).



Perhaps, but we are talking about 3x3's not bigcubes, and immediate recall during execution. Therefore execution could be performed as if one had their eyes open (although probably still doing comms as opposed to a 3x3 speed method).


----------



## TMOY (Aug 5, 2012)

If you memo by position, you still have to figure out which pieces you have to cycle, and you have to do it in your head which is a bit harder than juste seeing the pieces during memo. And about solving eyes open, remember that a BLD method is not a speed method, even if movecount is not that high (at least for BH), recognition is bad because you have to look for pieces everywhere on the cube during the whole solve.


----------



## Akash Rupela (Aug 7, 2012)

Did the 2nd round get cancelled? Nothing shows on live results website


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 27, 2012)

Dene said:


> Why bother memorising cycles of pieces if you have an eidetic memory?


If your not going to solve cycles how would you solve?


----------



## vcuber13 (Aug 27, 2012)

he said memoing cycles, not solving them


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 27, 2012)

vcuber13 said:


> he said memoing cycles, not solving them


After I asked how an eidetic memory would help memoing cycles.


----------



## Dene (Aug 28, 2012)

If you have an eidetic memory you don't need to memorise cycles. Why is this so hard to understand?


----------



## drewsopchak (Aug 28, 2012)

Dene said:


> If you have an eidetic memory you don't need to memorise cycles. Why is this so hard to understand?



Okay. If you don't memorize cycles, then you don't solve cycles. Right? What method would you use to execute?
EDIT: and you couldn't speed blind it because that would require tracing pieces which isn't made easier by having and eidetic memory.
What am I missing?


----------



## vcuber13 (Aug 28, 2012)

im only guessing but you could memo what the cube looks like, then when solving, look at you buffer and see where it needs to go using cycles


----------



## qqwref (Aug 28, 2012)

If you can see the pieces in your head, you don't need to *memorize* cycles. You'd just look at the cube, don the blindfold, and find the cycles as you go.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 28, 2012)

Wikipedia mentions that a good piece of evidence that there is actually no such thing as eidetic memory is the fact that the World Memory Championships have never had a winner who claimed eidetic memory - they all claim to use mnemonic strategies, much like us blindfold solvers all currently do. (At least, I don't know of anyone who doesn't.)

Things will get interesting the first time a BLD cuber comes along who claims eidetic memory. Of course, our community being who we are, we'll want to subject that poor soul to some really tough tests.

The problem with confirming or denying eidetic memory is that it's all in the head. I really can't see how you could construct a test that could absolutely prove or absolutely disprove it. If eidetic memory required only an instantaneous glance at an object to memorize it, then it might be fairly easy to prove, but since eidetic recall generally requires a while to study the object in order to memorize it, I don't see how you could easily test for it.


----------



## TMOY (Aug 28, 2012)

qqwref said:


> If you can see the pieces in your head, you don't need to *memorize* cycles. You'd just look at the cube, don the blindfold, and find the cycles as you go.


Or you can just not bother with cycles at all and solve everything you spot using comms. Works perfectly well for big cube centers.


----------



## qqwref (Aug 28, 2012)

Aren't cycles and comms the same thing? And don't forget that someone with a theoretical case of eidetic memory would be able to remember the initial pattern of the cube but not necessarily update it as they go. So you're going to have to solve pieces in some kind of cycle configuration however you do it, as opposed to e.g. a cage-style speedsolving method.


----------



## TMOY (Aug 29, 2012)

Not necessarily. I generally solve a whole center, then another one, and so on. I sometimes even deliberately solve a center at the wrong place, and correct at the end with comms swapping whole centers. This is not really what I call solving by cycles.

And I never said someone with an eidetic memory would automattically be good at BLD. He would have to practice anyway.


----------



## qqwref (Aug 29, 2012)

Yeah, as I said, even with eidetic memory you're not going to be able to track the position of all the pieces as you do random cage comms. If you can track pieces like that you might as well just use a normal speedsolving method.


----------

