Matt meets Feliks Zemdegs: Rubik's Cube World Champion
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лип 2017
- I was in Melbourne in April 2017 and so I dropped by to have a chat with Feliks Zemdegs: the perpetual Rubik's Cube World Champion.
We talk about his recent 4.73 second record-breaking solve, how solving other types of Rubiks puzzles are different (Megaminx, 4×4, 5×5 etc) and how fast he thinks the world records can get.
If you want to learn speed cubing: Feliks has a website with tutorial videos!
cubeskills.com/
Or buy yourself a speed cube.
mathsgear.co.uk/collections/r...
Check out Feliks’s 4.73 second solve sat next to Mats Valk.
• Rubik's Cube World Rec...
He puts videos of his new records up on his channel (including his new 3×3 average record of 5.97 seconds).
/ fazrulz1
His dad also has a channel!
• Feliks Zemdegs world r...
Here is the video of when I went to a cubing comp.
• UK Rubik’s Cube Champi...
And my interview with Mats Valk.
• New Rubik's Cube World...
Current list of Rubik’s World Records:
www.worldcubeassociation.org/...
CORRECTIONS:
None yet. Let me know if you spot anything (other than records which have since been broken and so the ones mentioned in the video are no longer true).
Thanks to my many Patreon supports! Here is a subset:
Tianyu Ge
Samuel Ytterbrink
Philippe von Bergen
Ben White
Adam Scatchard
Support my videos on Patreon:
/ standupmaths
Filming by Trunkman Productions
Music by Howard Carter
Design by Simon Wright
MATT PARKER: Stand-up Mathematician
Website: standupmaths.com/
Maths book: makeanddo4D.com/
Nerdy maths toys: mathsgear.co.uk/ - Розваги
He is definitely a humble and likable person.
Nietzsche has spoken.
+Friedrich Nietzsche He is absolutely lovely. Cubing could not ask for a nicer ambassador.
Am Australian. Am proud.
Wait, Nietzsche deserves the record?
terracottapie the ole youtube cube-a-roo!
"You can do the math"
"Oh believe me, I will"
The maths of the rubics cube is ridiculously hard, it is a discrete group that is not commutative and has a crazy large order... Pretty much the only thing I can prove about it, is, that any scramble, if repeated often enough, is also a solution to this exact scramble
Chalk Chalkson RUBIK'SSSSSS
he'll have a go, anyway.
them freaking non-abelian groups eh?
Yet another Parker cube of a follow-up.
"When did you first get the world record?"
"which one, the single or average?"
Gunner J xD
Weird flex but ok
Savage
Reminds me of the exchange from the film Shine:
“Can you play Beethoven’s Fifth?”
“Of course! Of course! Symphony or Concerto?”
Legend
Love how this is almost entirely unedited. Feels really genuine and real. Great interview!
+Martin Gerdes We didn't edit anything out: just dropped in some close-up shots and removed the footage of Feliks and me taking about what we were going to talk about. It's more of a documented chat than an interview.
"You're never going to get truly lucky on the 3x3"
*Yusheng Du has joined the chat*
SportStacker97 thank you
LOL
salt is real
You're not kidding. That guy is only 38th for an average of solves.
Feliks himself has said that he was unable to find Yusheng Du’s solution to that scramble, I’d say that’s pretty impressive
I've met Feliks in real life at a couple different competitions before. He's a really nice guy.
Zemmiphobiac noice
True hes pretty friendly
Where does he live
Good for u
@@ruishen4476 australia
He was certainly the “hardest” competitor in the room when he got the wr.
You so that too
😂😂😂😂😂
He had misplaced his megaminx "somewhere".
LMFAO
I dunno, I'd say the competition wasn't that stiff
@@Abdullah-gb7kg i think it was his mastermorphix
Feliks: im really bad at remember things
(knows hundreds of algs)
Anyone who practice maybe 1/10 as often as he does can easily remember hundreds of algs
And all the moves he did in a 4.7 second solve a while ago
Either it's muscle memory or he's bad at short-term memory
*thousands
Does it clog his brain?
16:19 "My solution is just to mix it up and try again" -- Oh good, I thought I was the only one...
lol i do the same when i get parity on square 1
AConspiracyUnmasked there are people who enjoy solving square 1?
Me too.
Roberto Fontiglia i
Ive been practicing at disassembling and reassembling to a solved state as fast as possible. Gotta think outside the box
Multiple camera setup?? And even a camera operator it seems.
GETTIN' FANCY.
+JustOneAsbesto I know! La-de-da. Blame my Patreon supporters. They pay for the extra camera and camera operator.
And that was some quality content.
You can see that they hid the extra cameras behind glasses!!! How smart
2:52 well Feliks wasn't technically lucky. Remember everyone has the same scramble for that solve, so everyone is just as lucky as each other, making it fair (therefore Feliks wasn't any more luckier than other competitors.)
Okay finished watching, it was an excellent interview, thank you Matt for doing this. We really needed someone who know what's going on to interview a cuber.
+Vic Jang That is a very good point about everyone getting the same scrambles. I guess once people start in a certain direction for a solve it is luck how the last layer turns out. Until Feliks achieves his omniscient final form and can see that far ahead during inspection time.
It totally could be unfair too if the scrambles are not truly random (as in automated). Knowing some of the cubers' habits, especially in the first steps, one can craft a scramble that is marginally worse or better for that person.
Want proof by example? You could make a certain first color cross harder to perform but then yield a big skip in the last layer and the easiest cross yield the most complicated permutations. A color neutral cuber like Feliks will upon inspection pick the later cross to solve first, and couldn't help but get a slower time.
Sure, most if not all top cubers are color neutral but they certainly can be made to pick a marginally slower path.
By the way, I don't know if cubes are oriented the same when first shown to the contestants, that can also make a difference and make it "less fair".
Scrambles are computer-generated, so if these instances occur they are by chance. Also, you can't really design a realistic scramble with an "easy last layer," because slight differences in the way the solver solves the cross, how they solve the f2l pairs, what order they insert their f2l pairs, etc. will result in a different last layer case, and furthermore, what algorithm they use to solve their oll case will influence what pll case they get.
Assuming one can craft the scrambles, there are still ways to influence the last layer and such, probabilistically. You can bias them to a degree.
There are random computer generated scrambles so almost no one gets the same scramble
There is always some point in these kind of videos where it kind of goes above your head but you just keep watching in awe because the explanation makes sense but then it goes WOOOOOSH and it's done. Same goes for Computerphile/Numberphile, some parts are way too mathy or techy but it's just too interesting.
Most of these things are actually quite simple, you can probably learn the first 2 layers intuitively with the "Friedrich" method in a day tops.
You pretty much just make the cross (should be doable) and then bring a matching corner and edge to the top, where put them above a free corner, and orient them to show the same face. Then you stick them together and fit them in.
For the last layer I think the minimum set is 4 algorithms to solve it, orient edges, permute edges, permute corners, orient corners.
orient edges means getting the cross, you can get that for example by spamming FURUi-RiFi, if it doesn't work, you may need to rotate the cube 90°.
To get the face to be all the same, spamming RURi-URU-URi and rotating the top layer randomly in between sets of this will eventually work, but you could also just hold the cube sideways (so the last layer points to your left and repeat URUiRi until the corner is oriented, then rotate (only!) the former top, now left layer to put the next corner into that top left position.
To permute 3 the sides pieces facing you in a V shape on the top, you can use RRU-RURi-UiRi-UiRi-URi
Now all you have left is putting the corners where they belong: Rotate the cube so the top is now facing away from you, now just do RiURi-DD-RUi-Ri-DD-RR. This swappes the all the corners that were not the bottom left before you rotated the cube.
R-rotate the right layer clockwise
U-top layer clockwise (up)
F- front layer
D-bottom layer (down)
The "i" stands for inverted (counterclockwise) some people note it down as R' [R prime] instead of Ri [R inverted]
This is a terribly inefficient way of solving the cube, but one that fits into a YT comment. If you mess about a bit with a cube you will quickly understand what he is doing and what he is talking about :)
With numberphile and computerphile it is probably best just to watch the video twice and/or watch related videos. Brady and his associate at computerphile generally do a good job of asking questions to get the information a total outsider needs I think (but I might not be able to judge this, university maths leaves an impact :P )
I usually replay such parts over and pause it and think about it. If you think about it long enough it'll start to make sense.
The most impressive part is that he can scramble into those specific problems as fast as he solves... That blew me away
You use the same sequence of moves to create a problem as you do to undo it
underrated reply, for those who know nothing of sped-cubing, this is very impressive
Good point. It reminds me of how chess grandmasters are able to recall entire games from memory extremely easily.
Nearly 4.73 minutes to explain what he did in 4.73 seconds... amazing. (1:20 - 5:55)
You don't know how time works, do you?
4.73 minutes is about 4 minutes and 43 seconds, the time the OP quoted is 4 minutes and 35 seconds. Close enough. I think it is you, Alex, who doesn't know how time works.
Michael Reilly
4.35 Idiot, did you learned maths?
@@SkyRed69 Oh, I'm sorry, but did you not read "Nearly" in that sentence? Or you didn't know what that word means? And you were so sure that you said "Idiot" not knowing that you were wrong.
Also, "Learn".
Oh my god they should make a Rubik's cube with the Parker square on each side xD
You are a genius my friend, someone should send this to Matt for the Parker Square anniversary! ^-^
lol Agree
Vegee McSalad And if you don't know when the anniversary is, just give it a go and send it anyway. It's alright if it doesn't quite work out.
Although I think the address probably does require some precision...
Parker cube!
Well that would be a fun prank.
"I have a very bad memory", remembers all moves he did in 4.7 seconds a long time ago... fml...
That's actually not that hard if the solve was very special (like a world record). Especially because most of the moves he's just doing what he would do, since the solution is his, only in part he is actually remembering the moves he did.
ThaTyger the cube was set to that event... So yeah
That'd a significant moment for him though he should be able to recall. For example do you remember what you did over the summer last year?
ThaTyger he writes the scramble on something genius
Well he’s probably tried the same scramble many times, and many cubers like me can tell what they would’ve done in a Average solve
3:08
"That's noice."
"That's quite noice."
Very noice
Vary VARRY NOICE
(;
nNICE ooooh
I loik it
"It could have been better!"
"No, it's good enough"
such a chill humble guy
>25s pb, 40s average
>haven't cubed for over a year
>try it after watching this video
>22s
feelsgood
sagiksp exactly me (except for the last line) (and my avg is 25 and pb 18)
17s pb, 25s average at my peak, 30s average now.
Well done mate! I've got the same thing a week ago, didn't cube since beginning this year, suddenly pb ao5.
I know, feels like a god
>10.05 pb , 14 avg
>cubes everyday
>same thing
3x3 is stupid
Skewb anybody
I would love to see a video from Matt on parity issues in larger cubes.
If you use the centers last solution, you can see the source of the parity errors and correcting them becomes easy.
The two errors are OLL and PLL, named because of what happens during the 3x3 part of the solve at the end if you don't correct them before that.
The PLL error makes it impossible to Position Last Layer because it looks like 2 edges have swapped place. This error comes from the centers being rotated a quarter turn off from where they belong. That can't happen in an odd numbered cube because of the fixed centers. But in a void cube, you can get the PLL error even on a 3x3. Simply rotate the middle layer of the cube 90 degrees, resolve the edges for the new orientation, and then do the top layer. Now if you have already solved the centers, then you need to fix the fact that 4 of them are now in the wrong place. That's basically what the algorithms are doing, but it is hidden under the complex instructions. All those 180 degree turns are moving the centers out of the way and then back into the correct place and also swapping the edges into the correct locations after a quarter turn so that when you're all done, everything is correct. But if you do the centers last, you don't need to worry about it. Just fix the edges like you would on an ordinary 3x3 if all the edges happened to be wrong, and then do the last layer.
The OLL error makes it impossible to Orient Last Layer because either the whole edge piece (on a 4 x 4) or parts of an edge piece (on larger cubes) have flipped with everything else in the correct orientation. Of course, the middle edge piece on an odd size cube can't flip, just as a single edge on a 3x3 can't flip. So if it appears that's what happened, then actually all the other edges pieces except the middle one on that edge are flipped. And of course they aren't actually flipped, they are swapped, the pieces next to the center edge are swapped with each other and/or the pieces next to those are swapped (or in a 4x4, the only two edge pieces are swapped with each other). This is caused by an odd number of moves that have sliced through the misoriented layer of the cube. A typical move to position edge pieces will involve slicing through the central pieces an even number of times. However, if there were an odd number of slices in your scramble, then when you finish all these moves, you will end up with one edge where the pieces are swapped and can't be fixed with your typical parity maintaining edge algorithms.
The easiest way to think of it, in my opinion, is to imagine that the cube is solid, with cubes all the way down rather than just the surface. When you slice through a middle layer, you are changing the orientation of those hidden inner cubes. If they are misaligned, then it is impossible to align the edges on the surface at the same level as those inner cubes. On a 4x4, think of a 2x2 hidden inside. If the 2x2 has a single twist, then you get the 4x4 OLL parity error. On a 5x5, if the 3x3 hidden inside has a twist on any one layer, again you get the OLL error. On a 6x6, you could get the error if the imaginary hidden 4x4 has a twist on it's outer layer. That would cause the outermost edge pieces to be swapped. Or you could have the imaginary hidden 2x2 deeper inside with a twist, which would result in the innermost edge pieces swapped. Or you could have both, which would result in the entire edge being flipped around. On larger cubes, you can get multiple OLL errors. On a cube of size n, you can get (n-2)/2, rounded down OLL errors at the same time, each corresponding to one of the imaginary cubes inside with a twist on the corresponding surface.
(Note that typically, this is discussed in terms of other surface effects. The same parity is also connected to some of the pieces in the center, but there is no easy intuitive fix for that, so I ignore it. If you are using a picture cube, though, and solve the centers first, you will not encounter the parity error.)
When you think of it the way I suggest, the fix is easy and intuitive (as long as you do the centers last). Solve the edges. If it is an odd cube, it will be quickly obvious what OLL parity error you have (if any) because the center edge piece will always be correct. For any layer on that last edge that doesn't match, rotate it 90 degrees. (Note, only do this on half the final edge. Each flipped edge piece will have a corresponding one on the opposite side of the center of the edge, but you only slice the rows on one side of that center, not both.) Now solve edges again with your ordinary algorithm. For an even number cube, it may not be immediately obvious if you have a parity error and if you do, what the error is. First solve the shell as though you are doing a 3x3 (you may have to solve a PLL parity problem in the process, but with practice you can recognize both the OLL and PLL errors together and solve both at the same time).
Solving the centers last is slow, but easy. There is a simple 8 move algorithm that will swap any 2 pieces within the centers on a cube of any size. You should be able to find it on youtube. I make a lot of use of it, but I didn't originate it. It can also be used to swap whole chunks of center pieces, if you find the need for that.
Totally read all of that.
Okuno Zankoku it's very simple really.
Maybe a colab with superantoniovivaldi
F : "So we do...."
M : "Yeah yeah yeah"
F : "and then we permu.."
M : "Yeah yeah"
F : "And like that"
M : "Yeah"
😁
My proudest possession is a YJ Guanlong signed by Matt Parker, (and also James Grime!) which I hide away at the back of all the other puzzles so that the signatures don't fade away.
This video combines two of my favourite people that inspired my hobbies and interests, keep up the good work guys!
Callum Strachan sorry i am new to this channel and i was gonna say "you mean max park right?" until i realized thats probably the guy interviewing name 😂
Callum Strachan thing is, the guanlong is one of the only cubes to cost less than the event entry. I got a guanlong for £4 and entered a comp for £5.
Callum Strachan Singing Banana signed your cube?!
I am so jealous...
Guanlongs were copied by Duncan Toys to make a quick cube
Such a good video, thanks so much for filming! His look of despair on having that pause and getting 8 seconds is priceless. Great to hear his thoughts on big cubes etc.
"I have a very bad memory."
*memorizes over 100 OLL algorithms*
Agam Kohli *57
surely he knows at least 500
@@marijotodoric9750 Thats too much now😂😂😂
There are only 57 😂
You can stil memorize a lot of information with a bad memory. It just takes longer.
18:40 "For me that's too much thinking" say the amazing guy who sees a cross and 3 F2L pairs in 15 seconds of inspection time XD
What a great ambassador he is. Not of cubing (of which I know nothing) but of society.
So polite, charming, intelligent and humble.
i love this video so much! i've watched it a few times. Feliks is such a lovely bloke (so humble) and Matts obvious fawning over his skill. And Matts comedic glances to the camera, make this such a brilliant watch!
Julian HG ok
Smart, nerdy -- and good-looking
+John Bicycle Why thank you! …oh yeah. Feliks. Yeah, him too, I guess.
2 out of 3 is not bad.
Sol\me like Balding.
Actually, I also thought he was talking about you.
And good with his hands
Feliks is just ridiculous, he beats WRs weekly, I don't even know how many he has right now.
100!
He has broken records over 100 hundred times.
The 3x3 average WR was his 100th. He hasn't broken anymore since last weekend.
Thijs Beentjes Incorrect. I feel at this point I should direct you to his WCA profile, which shows 100 WR's after his recent 555 records. www.worldcubeassociation.org/persons/2009ZEMD01
Thijs Beentjes He broke 5x5 average 2 times in the same day, so it was counted only once.
Therefore it's 100, not 101.
A mathematician and the best cuber in one video! Thanks for making this amazing interview Matt.
+Tech A.M No problem! Thanks to Feliks for making the time to chat with me.
I really enjoyed this. I think I was smiling throughout the entirety, just because of how genuine the rapport and the convo seemed to be. UA-cam recommendation got something right for once.
I've watched this every day for two weeks now. This video is brilliant in every ways. It's funny, with two shining guys, and the content is like christmas for a cuber/speedcuber. Keep up Matt 🔥
Glad you had Feliks as a guest, he is amazing!...
I use the beginners method, takes me about 1:30 to solve the whole thing
what's the best one can get with beginners method?
@@kingsly1031 I got 1 minute with beginner method but u can even average even 30 seconds with the beginner method and practice.
@@kingsly1031 I used to be able to get 50-55 seconds using the beginners method.
I met him a couple of years ago, he is as nice as he seems in this interview, very good:)
This is one of the best videos I've seen on this channel. And I've seen some good ones too!
This was surprisingly fun to watch... More of this type of content please! But also more math! And more of everything else, too!
"something something maths" needs to be a tee-shirt...also google needs to stop trying to auto-correct "maths"
Dalton Growley Well i guess the shorter abbreviation makes more sense.
The math/maths divide seems backwards to sport/sports. In Canada you would say someone was into sports, but in England someone is into sport.
I love how he just starts practicing megaminx because the world record hasn't been beaten in a while. Cocky is one thing, but he is just ridiculously fast.
Feliks is such a master and so humble. Cool guy, great interview. Thanks.
I've been waiting for them to meet! Good stuff, and Matt, keep cubing!
6:47 Most world record holders whe you ask them "when did you first get the world record?"
*Says year*
Feliks: World record average or single?😂
Literally one of the only people who can say that.
Fun fact: he's held over 100 world records so far. (A lot of times, he just keeps beating his previous record)
I just watched a 24-minute video and understood absolutely nothing about it. Great video though.
Same 😂
Why you watch the video if you dont understand anything?
Same i just started cubing
Same😂😂
You know your doing well when you can get a person to give you 24 minutes of watch time and they don’t understand a thing.
Subbed for the increasing amount of informed cubing coverage! Definitely a fan :)
Yo Bravo! This was a fantastic interview. Covered everything you found possibly want. Cheers!
I was really impressed when he created that 4x4 parity issue from memory and so fast.
dexobj i mean if you solve 4x4 you should hope you can remember the parity algorithm
@@genericusername4206 Yeah I guess so. But you will almost always use the algorithm in the "solve" order.
If he didnt mess up the last f2l pair,the gan air um would be cheaper!!!!
Why?
MP Cuber umm... why plz
VanNoah
they used his record as a price for the cube
MP Cruber He would have gotten the same oll+pll as rur'rur' is equivalent to ru2r'
Faisal Mehboob HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It's nice to see such a legend be so humble. "I was lucky", "I'm lazy", and "Some people do it faster"... He knows he's the best, but you have to be humble and acknowledge the second-best is just around the corner, ready to catch you. And he's aware that if he doesn't keep improving his game, he'll be left behind. "There's always a bigger fish" philosophy. Like in every competition, you have to trust your skills and believe you can win, without losing respect and not underestimating your adversaries.
I'm a complete newbie, just starting f2l. Been following Felik as he is simply the best, and likeable. I'm hopeful I can learn to be advanced. It's just learning. I leart how to get 40 impossible badges on Kongregate, just like I learnt to tie my shoelaces. Really enjoyed this video.
"You can do the math"
"Oh believe me, I will"
D:
This guy's unbelievable. I just heard a BBC interview with him (never heard of any of this before that and then I looked a lot of these videos up...)
Wow/I had NO IDEA these times were even humanly possible!
Amazing.
Both such articulate and intelligent gents. Pleasure to listen in on what was a great one-on-one dialogue.
Great to see so many fellow cubers over here
standupmaths should talk about zeroing. with feliks....
TroyCubing What does zeroing mean?
But what method is this?
thats why feliks needs to tell us
the god of cubing
sd card
TroyCubing zeroing is a joke
"anything above 7x7 takes too long"
*Points to mbld*
1st Feliks interview I've seen. Great job.
15:56 they are talking about the parity situation on the 4x4. Basically, what happens there is that there are centerpieces swapped, but you can't recognize them because they all have the same color. So what you do is to do an algorithm (or just a commutator, which is a technique for intuitively swapping three pieces) that swaps the wrong edges alongside those centerpieces that are all the same color. This gives the illusion that an impossible swap was made, but what actually happened is that you just can't see part of the swap due to the lack of color recognition in the center pieces in bigger cubes.
4x4 will be broken in 2017... He knew it...
His subconscious was saying: "Hey let's get the single and average records on 4x4."
+Inigo Diaz What the wise Zemdegs spoke has come to pass.
Matt did your SD card run out? :p
+Andrew S It was just at that moment!
Only cubers will get it.
@@AndrewTyberg yeah lol
I just learned how to solve a 3x3 yesterday, so I'm particularly enjoying this interview conducted by someone who is an enthusiastic amateur.
This is one of the most enjoyable cubing vids I've seen
My favorite math UA-camr meets my favorite speed cuber!
1:00 didn't know Rubik's cubes were "that" exciting🤔👀
I was starting to feel like no one else noticed in the comments xD
I love the fact he says, I don't really understand it. cool and humble.
Great video it really helps me with understanding speedcubing
Basically did this to annoy Mats Valk.
Erick Lescano plz..... no
Professional disc golfer here who knows absolutely nothing about Rubiks cube. I do have an appreciation for tertiary sports and the passion that comes along with the commitment that it takes to become great! Came across the interview and stayed for the whole thing. Entertaining insight and brilliant back and forth conversation. I guess I'll have to start doing some research so I can come back and understand the lingo!
11:25 This information is gold about turning the cube over and working the 3x3 algs.
Such a humble person. Nothing but lots of respect for this guy.. Feliks, next time when you get a WR, tell them that you got a WR because you are the GOAT. You should’ve told him that you do fancy tricks and those kind of inspections because you’re too good at this.🙏
my record is 3.54
decades
I just got myself a nice-ish cube from Amazon earlier this week after being amused by a free "company-branded promo giveaway" one that my other half brought back from a conference. That free one was a bit cheap+nasty but I'd played with following some online guides enough to want to spend £8 on a semi-decent one. Right now I'm just enjoying doing the first parts of the basic newbie method from memory and following the guides for the later stages. I might well just stop at "I can slow-solve in a few minutes".
If this video had come out a bit earlier I might have purchased from MathsGear. I've bookmarked Mathsgear page for if I slide in to speedcubing further down the line and want to go fancier.
But yeah, it's quite fun to just follow one of the copious online tutorials.
If you're really into speedsolving, don't buy from Amazon.
He's so patient.
Yurio
Ye, my record is 3.23
Millenia
I have the best record than any one on the earth
44 SECONDS!!!!!
Take notes people at 2:03. This is what you call Zeroing.
24 minutes of 2 people that i *REALLY* like, thanks ♥
I like how chill he was I would freak out if I saw him
7:45 "I'm really bad at memory" oh get out!!
I wonder if there is a human speed limit to solving Rubik's Cubes. At what point does human physiology and even physics fail? Is it limited by the biomechanics of fingers, or the speed of nerve signals?
GuyWithAnAmazingHat I think the problem of the cube like breaking would be a problem before the problems of things like finger speed or nerve signal speed
Botman Well, people have made machines that solve cubes at incredible speeds, the current machine record is 0.9 seconds.
If cubes can survive being solved at such speeds, I think human fingers will probably break first.
Maybe the minimum possible speed is 3.14
/spooky
It's 1.618...
I wonder how "computationally" is the fastest way to solve a Rubik's Cube. So no trying to move the thing. Just have a computer take the input, and then start the hard work to do the math.. That way it doesn't have to wait for fast moving servos to be invented
Congratulations on 300K Subscribers!
+Chinmay Dhumal Cheers! You're partly to blame!
he is a great guy...really like him....plus a true ambassador for the rubik cube...and yes his favorite is the 3x3....the king of all cubes.
When you haven't cubed in a long time, but you still have the muscle memory to solve one.
"Im still worthy!!!"
He describes his 4 second solve like it was several minutes.. like how can one even think through that much that fast?
l1mbo f2l lookahead
and good LL recognition
Can't wait for the video on the Rubik's cube maths!
Yasssss!!!! I was waiting for this video for sooooo long
10:45 That look - "Please don't pop my cube!!"
The reason why he got the world record is because he is too lazy to use a slower method
GOOD point
Alfonso J. Ramos well that's one way to think of it lol
why would he use a slower method? he obviously wants to win competitions?
lmaodrewww take a joke
🤣😅5
Congrats on 300K subs!
+Lucas Snowball_Cathug Thanks for being part of it!
I have never completed a Rubik's cube before but I happened to borrow one today and have been learning how to solve it before I saw this video. Very pleased that I did it but don't think I'll be posting my time here though!
"That's noice"
"That's quite noice."
For the people who don't know, the 7.03 was in the same comp as his 6.77. It was before the 6.77 though, so it counted. All of Felik's wr single in chronological order:
-7.03
-6.77
-6.65
-6.24
-5.66
-4.73
4.22 ;)
This is the video that got me started with speed cubing. I've been doing it for maybe 6 weeks and I'm sub-50 now.
Ohhhhhh. I just now realized why the pro rubix cubes have different shapes on the [composite] cube faces based on if they're a center, edge, or corner. Smart!
You could theoretically get a scramble that is a solved cube, so the fastest possible time is how quickly you could start and stop the timer.
1 in 43 quintillion chance that you'll get it
JBroMCMXCI Regulations actually don't allow scrambles with a solution a # of moves away from being solved.
"Theoretically", if a puzzle is manipulated to a solved state, it's called a solution; not a scramble. No competition will give you a solved or even almost-solved cube to solve.
watching Matt and Feliks makes my heart warm. it feels a lot better when I know what they're talking about. except Feliks averages a 6, I average a 28.
So, what he was explaining for 6 minutes in the video, he did in his head and with his cube in 4 seconds. Extraordinary.
Wohohoow! Nice sound production there!
Now his wr is 4.22 😂😂
This guy is a Rubix god 😂😂
ICy Ghost RUBIX AHAHAHAHAHA jk chill
The one dislike is Mats Valk.
no I didn't :(
Mats Valk this reply is the greatest thing I have ever seen
Mats Valk lol
When will the Thunderclap 4x4 be released? Plz Valkkk
XXXXXDDDD We love you too Mats.
I really liked that video, yoyasked good questions and the answers were clear with a hint of ramble 👌👌👌👍👍👍
I'm not a speed cuber. My favorite method is the no layer solve. It's really fun. Instead of doing layers like everyother method, you just solve what can be solved. It takes alot of patience and alot of playing around, but once you figure out algorithms that only affect certain pieces, it really fun.
I imagine that if Feliks was able to get a smooth cross and f2l pairs with a last layer skip, the record would hold for over 5 years. I think that would be the limit. Low 3 like he said, maybe even sub 3. For average, 5 last layer skips in a row (though nearly impossible) would probably be the limit.
5 ll skip in a row is over one in a billion solves.
I think the 3.47 is gonna hold for 5 years
@@themango494 Not quite!
@@TwistyTieDominoes spose i was wrong
doesnt say he got the 5.33 dnf lol
Nam Anh Dang ikr
Why would he?
Niko Ronkainen to be honest?
+Dhruv Chawla if he was being dishonest, he would have said that the 5.33 _was_ a world record. He didn't bring it up probably because it didn't come to mind, and because it's not of extreme importance.
I'm sorry, Nam, but from now on, if you ever talk about anything cool you've done, could you please follow it up by talking about something not-so-cool you've done? Otherwise you're being dishonest. Thanks.
best cubing interview so far!
brilliant interview.