# Which is harder: Playing a chess master or solving a rubik's cube

Actually, I think solving a rubik's cube might be easier, if you think about it.

there's a competition called speedcubing, how fast can you solve a rubik's cube.

however, there's no competition about how fast can you beat a GM

LarEe91 wrote:

there's a competition called speedcubing, how fast can you solve a rubik's cube.

however, there's no competition about how fast can you beat a GM

They have blitz tournaments.

That probably indicates that solving a cube is easier.

Kingpatzer wrote:

Rubik's cube can be solved from any position by following a simple algorithm. Once you know the algorithm, it's merely a matter of applying it.

The same is not true of beating a chess master.

algorithms there are more than one

Kingpatzer wrote:

Rubik's cube can be solved from any position by following a simple algorithm. Once you know the algorithm, it's merely a matter of applying it.

The same is not true of beating a chess master.

Tell that to Rybka.

ClavierCavalier wrote:
nate23 wrote:

I think that also works against chess masters, unless they double as a kung fu master.

At last I got a laugh out of this stupid thread.

Whats harder rubiks cube blindfolded or 1 handed

Are you serious?

yea

A serious cokelover.

yea

Okay, give me one good reason why one-handed solving should be harder than two-handed solving.

You two appeared "so-in" to each other.

MaartenSmit wrote:

Okay, give me one good reason why one-handed solving should be harder than two-handed solving.

I think it sounds much more physically challenging.

I'm sorry, I see some people have hated this thread this is one of my rarer forums I often talk about something chess. I guess I thought people would get a kick out of it

and they did.

solving rubic's cube is a lot more easier!!!!than "beating a GM"

who are in that picture, AndyClifton?