Matt meets Feliks Zemdegs: Rubik's Cube World Champion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- 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.u...
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.worldcubea...
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/
![DDG & G Herbo - Nosey [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9Ra0Zc2NlQ/mqdefault.jpg)
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!
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
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
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?
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 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
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.
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
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!!!!!
"You can do the math"
"Oh believe me, I will"
D:
About the parity problems:
It sounds like what happens is that the rule Feliks said about always swapping or flipping an even number of edges holds true on 4x4 and 5x5. The difference is that on those cubes the 3x3 edges we see are actually made up of multiple independent edge pieces.
For instance on the 4x4 you can flip two adjacent edge pieces making up one 3x3 edge to get the single edge flip parity case. This is of course, an even number. For the other parity case in 4x4 you swap four edge pieces, again an even number. Then in the single case in 5x5 the two outer pieces of a 3 piece 3x3 edge are flipped. The entire 3x3 edge on a 5x5 cannot be flipped as one piece because that would be 3 pieces, an odd number.
This also is why the way to solve the parity problems is to break up the edge, you have to move the actual pieces that make up the edge separately.
The word parity actually means even and odd numbers!
Take notes people at 2:03. This is what you call Zeroing.
11:25 This information is gold about turning the cube over and working the 3x3 algs.
"anything above 7x7 takes too long"
*Points to mbld*
Matt did your SD card run out? :p
+Andrew S It was just at that moment!
Only cubers will get it.
@@AndrewTyberg yeah lol
7:45 "I'm really bad at memory" oh get out!!
Hi matt, i solved my 1st mega minx couple of years ago and yes, i used algos from 3x3 with slight logical modifications.
+Sahil Dalvi Well done! I need to dedicate more time to it.
Stop solving Rubik's Cubes and go help the rest of the Justice League with your speed force.
CryingWife
I thought that's why Barry is there :')
Even Barry can't solve it that fast XD
@@JD-ee4df he's faz ma man, not fast
@@kakealldewae2390 Da
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.
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.
Many people can go sub 7 now with a white cross, some even sub 6, but colour neutral solving is just crazy good. Dude's just too good.
+littlefrank90 Yeah, I'm now in too deep to go colour neutral.
standupmaths
Disagree strongly. At your times, I definitely think you could switch, if you happened to get more serious about speedcubing.
1st Feliks interview I've seen. Great job.
They were a bit unclear about solving the 4x4 and 5x5 after knowing how to solve the 3x3 with the beginner's method.
If you want to learn the two bigger ones, you should start with the 5x5. You need only one additional algorithm for that. And you can avoid the parity-issue they mentioned.
After knowing how to solve the 5x5, you can move on to the 4x4. And you need two additional algorithms for it.
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!
@@Twisty543 spose i was wrong
I did once at school enter a speed cube contest back in the 80s, I got 3 minutes something and came last. I was gutted. Never picked up a cube since. Decided to try again 30 years later and got a new cube coming, going to learn again for a laugh see if I can beat 3 minutes :)
Give him a blue hair and you got yourself a Ninja 😂
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.
One who can create problems and solve them is a Master.
I used to attend competitions frequently a couple years ago, I've just kind of fell out of it though. This was really cool to watch, I can't believe they use magnets now... Good video
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.
The point about the 100m sprint being bound by muscle and not luck is kind of interesting, Tetris is actually the same where the best times for clearing 40 lines (also aptly named Sprint) is in very large parts due to pure speed and very, very little in what permutations of the randomizer one gets. Naturally, good stacking plays a role but that's almost like subliminal decision making. It is likely not possible to get lower than a second or two from the current world record, currently at 17.36 seconds, because of physical limits. The "luck" factor has been minimized to almost nothing by the changes in the randomizer in modern games, as well as the introduction of the hold mechanic.
Solving the megaminx with 3x3 algorithms is definitely doable. However sometimes the algorithms have a triple turn, which can be performed as a single turn in the opposite direction on a 3x3 but would need to become a double turn on the megaminx (since it has the extra side) so just play around with it until you figure out which turns need to change
Yasssss!!!! I was waiting for this video for sooooo long
Him, done in 3 sec.
His Dad, done in 30 min.
Me, still there three days later...
This has got to be among the neediest videos I've watched
While watching this video, I had to pause a couple of times and lie down for a few seconds to prevent my brain from exploding.
Hey Matt, I'm that kid who ran into u at that museum in dc. I'm not sure of u remember me but I was wondering if u Would make a video explaining the science of the sphere that flipped everything on the other side and how it works. Thanks!
0:02
turn on captions
feliks them bags
Feliks seems like such a great person
I like Feliks his fast faster than a robot solving a rubix cube!!!!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👍🏻
Τελικο διδαγμα..τα παντα γυρω μας ειναι Μαθηματικα!
Buddy does it in 8 seconds & is disappointed..I do it in a minute & im stoked lol this guys a legend
Amazed at how much of a decent human you are Feliks. Matt, you have two ears and one mouth, it was frustratring to hear you talk all over Feliks once you asked a question, this would have been so much better if you used your ear to mouth ratio more wisely ...
In saying that, you asked great questions, and this was overall great to watch.
Cheers guys
Hardware can drop 5 seconds off your time.... So what I'm hearing is you can solve the 3x3x3 in negative time?
Eric Owen on a large cube with bad/not great hardware. stock cubes
I do believe he can take a cube and unsolve it, yes. I wonder if doing that would give me a world record.
Only if you solve a clunker in a few seconds; and nobody does. Most cubes on the market are clunkers and serious speed-cubers don't mess with those. When he says hardware can shave 5-10 secs off your time, he means that the high-end fast cube will significantly improve your time if you're currently struggling with a non-premium brand. He's not suggesting that there's a cube capable of shaving 5 secs off HIS time.
He was talking about big cubes.
Everyone trying to call Feliks out for his memory comment, doesn't understand anything about memory in general. I know 100+ algs. I'd have to execute them to be able to write them down. Memory isn't just what you think it is...
I figured out the megaminx with 3x3 algorithms within a day and I felt really awesome
There's no way you can hate Feliks. He's so chill and nice.
For some reason all the competitions I watch people usually start with the orange cross.
9:21
Max be like: I got you bro
FELIKS!!! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH YOUR HAIR!!!
For the 4x4 on up, I use the centers last method. It is WAY easier (though it is pretty slow). If you use that method, you can understand more easily the mathematics of what is causing the parity errors. If you'd like to discuss that for a future video, I can go through it with you. It is a good discussion of grouo theory that will also teach you to solve any large rubiks cube, 4x4, 5x5, 6x6, anything.
I can also help you with the megaminx with a really simple algorithm you almost certainly already know, as I mentioned in another comment.
I feel that Feliks is a kind-hearted person
Come on Matt! Of course you can manage to do the megaminx. There are only small variations on the last layer compared to 3x3 really. If I could do it you sure can ;)
+Naabeille Fine! I'll get back to it.
0:57 does Felix have a cube in the middle of his pants
I see that Feliks uses a 3-gen U Perm... I use the Roux method, but when I get a U Perm in a CFOP solve, I use the M slice algorithm. Roux method's last step relies heavily on M slices, so I have to be able to do them fast.Don't get me wrong, MAD respect to the WR without the PLL skip. ;)
I also use the beginner method and almost everytime I solve it in 1:10 /1:30 , i will love to see a video with some tips and explanation on what to do next to improve , still havent tried, because i´m afraid of breaking my current thinking and forgot how to solve it...
I have done the Megaminx with Rubik's cube algorithm only. And I do every time
I have a rubix cube that I cant solve no matter what!
What a parker cube...
Splasheo o you spelled Rubik's wrong
George Washington what?
Rather, a Parker Dodecahedron
(Because it's a 12-sided MegaMinx)
Rubik's*
My point is proven. The hardest part about solving the Rubik's Cube is spelling it.
"So, orders of magnitude more likely to 'get lucky' at home than at a competition." You're not wrong, Matt!
Felix would be The FLASH for us now
Hello there standupmaths.
If i was to meet some person of interest, i would ask them just one question, if they could think out loud. Subject wouldn't matter.
I am a bit disappointed that you interrupted and put words into this young and brilliant young man's mouth.
I say this with respect, it is standupmaths that thought me to solve cube, among other things, but really,
let the kid speak and let him find his own words... otherwise it looks like interview with yourself.
kind regards.
Agreed. I like Matt Parker and watch his stuff a lot, but this was more of a conversation than an interview. I would have preferred the latter.
smh non-cubers
whos the non-cuber here???
Andor Engelberts This is one 😂
Andor Engelberts so basically every Matt Parker viewer? You are the minority here.
ZeroGD Matt parker isn't a noncuber as he knows how to solve a rubik's cube
I said his viewers not himself. Did you even read the full comment?
I challenge you to find an algorithm that passes through each one of the possible cube orientations and can solve it no matter at what scramble you started with (even If it would take like a million steps or something)
he broke the record for 4x4 avg in 6/17
collin burns' world record always gets forgotten...
So he is the scientist who comes in Outrageous acts of science/You have been warned?
Fantastic!
Imagine Barry Allen using his speed to beat the world record, and he only uses the beginners method
They gotta use the old original Rubik's Cubes, good luck speed solving that they were so stiff it took a decade to loosen them up :p
He can do 9-10 moves per second, that’s crazy..
"I have a really bad memory" can solve every cube on the table by memory and holds multiple world records
8.3 seconds - not warmed up. Me not warmed up - wait, what was that algorithm again? Lemme' google it real quick..
I wonder, if Feliks had a whole year to examine a scrambled cube, could he then solve it without looking?
Geez if 24 minutes is the world record I can beat that!
Well in a sprint you can have a random gust of wind.
Are u the mathematician of YOU HAVE BEEN WORNED?
"I'm really bad at remembering" ... says the one who remembered all dem algs...
Aren't you the gentleman that in "Outrages Acts of Science"?
+The Mysterious gamer I am one of the gentlemen from Outrageous Acts of Science.
standupmaths Ok cool because your voice sounded familiar
I feel lucky to solve in 1:30 seconds...but I just started and haven't gone beyond the basic "lefty" and "righty" algs yet.
EDIT: I want to see one of these guys solving on my modded 3 dollar cube......lol
The thunderclap (i prefer v1) is a decent cube for like $8 shipped.
"You're never gonna get truly lucky on the 3x3" lol
For someone who’s color nutreal that’s Impressive
Now the world record is 3.47 seconds.
I was interested to see he has the actual scramble that he solved for the record. In these competitions, do all participants get the same scramble?
Yes, to make it fair, everyone gets the same scramble.
I've been solving (onn and off) for around 3 years and my best is 20.17 and it's almost impossible for me to get faster
I got from 1 min to 30 sec in 4 months and then from 30 to 20.17 sec took longer than a year I can only imagine what it would take me to get under 10!
Felix is a god for me!
are those curtains in the back? whatever they are, they're cool looking
7:46 sarcasm by feliks
There are two new algorithms on the magaminx
Really, it is Zeliks Femdegs.
Now you set the new wr it is 4.59 by feliks and the other guy
you can solve megaminx with 3x3 algorithms
"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
"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.
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.
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
"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
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
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.
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
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
"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