Message #713

From: Melinda Green <>
Subject: Re: [MC4D] Re: 3^4 parity problems
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:18:43 -0700


It’s great to hear from you again! Some of our newer members may not
know that Remi is one of the more passionate boosters of our little
puzzle so I’m very happy that the recent news has piqued his interest.

I like your suggestions for holding speed contests. Would you like to
run some? I know that you would enjoy competing but I’m afraid that you
will crush everyone else, and you certainly have more experience with
speed contests than most of us. Still, I stand by my offer to run a
contest if at least three people sign up. Either way, I think we should
wait until the public release of version 4 so that we can shake out
unknown bugs and any problems with different platforms. Anytime after
that is fine with me, including immediately after as part of a product

-Melinda wrote:
> Dear Melinda,
> With new version of MagicCube4D with different steering on 2^4 you
> should post a scramble which will be base for shortest solution for
> everybody. I think it will be easy to beat present shortest record on
> 2^4. You can even make it as a competition due to new version première :)
> I must argue with seeing solving "corners" on 3^4 as 2^4 cube solve.
> There are different methods to solve this two cubes. Some alg’s concerns
> middle layers. Solving stage 4C (after previous solving 2C and 3C
> stages) on 3^4 has nothing to do with solving 2^4 cube due to avoiding
> messing with solved pieces. (I think such try of using corners 3^4 as
> the 2^4 solve will be visible due to mixing 3C pieces)
> When it comes to Hyperspeedsolving I vote for:
> ->2^4 competition without macros
> ->3^4 with macros (No reasonable solve time without macros on 3^4 ->
> 1,5h is too much)
> I was starting with 20 macros and at my best days I could reach time
> 18min 27sec. Sending solution will take at best around 15-30 seconds if
> mail or communicator will be prepared, but still we won’t get actual
> time of solve. Interior timer is a nice idea. It’s hard to decide what
> to do with time during performing twists from macro: I always needed to
> see what was going on the cube, so I’ve never used no-time macro.
> Switching positions of colours makes my eyes (and brain) hurt:P
> Different scenarios (there is no sense to treat solving cube with or
> without macros or even from different scenarios below, there are just
> different types of competition with different strategies, just like one
> hand, classic 3x3, etc) :
> a) everybody can have, lets say, 10 macros prepared before start; after
> start one can build new macros (or not)
> b) after start competitor should build set of macros from scratch and
> it’s up to him/her how many macros will be build (building macros
> consumes competition time)
> That’s all. Good night for everybody. Hyper dreams,
> Remigiusz