Fellow cubers, Scrambling 4x4x4 and 5x5x5 is quite hard, especially for novice scramblers with the inner slice moves (lrfbud). Therefore we investigated some options, and found out that the inner slice moves (lrfbud) do not result in better scrambles than double slice moves (Ll Rr Ff Bb Uu Dd). Because the latter moves are easier to execute we decided to change the scrambling program to use a mix of normal moves LRFBUD and double slice moves Ll Rr Ff Bb Uu Dd. Jaap was as kind as to change his programs. Just try the Multi Slice checkbox in the cube scrambling program. We are open for feedback on this forum. Thanks, Ron

Hey everyone, I am really not in favor of this to be honest. And I don't mean this to sound lazy, I have asked to be a scrambler in the 5x5x5 event in Orlando this November and I would still rather scramble with the original standard. I have already posted some about this on the yahoo group, but I will repost the main points here. This new type of scrambling can generate new types of cancellations that would all need to be accounted for. Also, we don't know if the depth of this type of scrambling is as deep into the number of cube combinations as the regular way of scrambling. As examples of cancellations take: (Rr) R' = r (Rr) (Ll) = (Rr)2 with a cube rotation (Rr)2 R2 = r2 This does still allow many of the regular inner slice + outer slice combinations. r R = (Rr) r R' = (Rr) R2 r R2 = (Rr) R r = (Rr) R' (this one can't be allowed though because it is a cancellation type move) So any of the original inner slice plus outer slice combinations can be created, but now there is a new set of cancellations that need to be accounted for. Also I think other types of allowable moves for the regular standard will not be seen as often Take the legal way of scrambling for the old system R2 r l This is three moves long and does not simplify to any cancellations. You can create this same affect with our new system by doing (Rr) R (Ll) L' Notice that this three move affect takes 4 moves to achieve. Since the chance of four moves falling into place correctly is less than that of three falling into place correctly, we will not see the legal three parallel slice turn combination as often. So clearly the scrambling structure of these new scrambles has changed. Personally I don't like this new system and would prefer it not to be implemented. Why let laziness produce scrambles that could potentially be easier to solve, when we could just try to better train scramblers? Or maybe others like me, who aren't too serious about one of the big cubes, could offer their help as well in scrambling for the big cube they are not focusing on? I think this is the lazy way out, and I would not like to see this new standard implemented. Chris

[quote="cmhardw":31z7aqfx]we don't know if the depth of this type of scrambling is as deep into the number of cube combinations as the regular way of scrambling.[/quote:31z7aqfx] We don't know whether the regular way of scrambling is as deep into the number of cube combinations, either. Or do you? Generally speaking, your reasoning can be used the reverse way. Had this new way been the standard and somebody would suggest the current standard way, you might argue the reverse way yourself, you'd for example call "r R = (Rr)" a cancellation and you'd complain that the 1 move effect of Rr now takes 2 moves to achieve.