1. M isn't a "shorthand" for anything. It's equivalent to R L' x', sure, but it's definitely a move in its own right, since it's clear that you can physically turn the M slice by itself on a real cube. Even being strict and only allowing single moves in your generator, <M,U> is definitely 2gen.

2. Originally Posted by JonnyWhoopes
17.41 OH FreeFOP solve. D U2 L2 B L' U R U2 B' R2 B2 F2 D' L B2 U2 D F2 B L B2 D' B U' R'

y' z
L2 U' R D y R U'
x' y2 R U R' r U r'
x U R' U2
x' y U2 R U R'
U2 F U R U' R' F'
U R U2 R' U' R U' R'

34 moves if I count correctly. Not bad for a speedsolve I'd say. Too bad it wasn't 2H...
That is the tastiest speedsolve solution I've ever seen. Nice one.

3. No more dead-end pages on wiki except Smerbia, Speedcubin, Standard Table Formats, and a page which says under construction that I don't want to mess with.

Edit: No more double redirects. At all.

4. I failed you Andrew 10.81, 10.33, 12.03, 8.88, 9.08 = 10.07
Edit: 10.88 AO12
Edit 2:
10.76 AO12 11.63 AO100

5. 40.32 pyraminx OHITA single (NL)

6. 14.69 non rolling Average of 12 =]

13.65 RA 5 within
Spoiler:
Rubik's cube
Jun 7, 2011 7:19:40 PM - 7:26:52 PM

Mean: 14.64
Standard deviation: 1.94
Best Time: 11.13
Worst Time: 17.69

Best average of 5: 13.65
4-8 - (16.00) 14.56 13.80 (11.13) 12.59

Best average of 12: 14.69
1-12 - 16.59 12.61 16.36 16.00 14.56 13.80 (11.13) 12.59 (17.69) 16.21 12.94 15.25

1. 16.59 U2 B2 F2 U' B2 D2 R2 B2 L2 U2 L2 F R' L2 B' L' D U2 R' B' R2 U'
2. 12.61 U' R2 F2 D' B2 F2 R2 L2 U F2 D' L' D2 B' D' U2 L' B2 F' U R
3. 16.36 U' L2 U B2 R2 B2 U' B2 U2 L2 D' L B R' L' B L B R2 U F
4. 16.00 F2 U R2 U B2 R2 D' U L2 B2 U2 F' D L2 U2 F2 L B L' D2 U2
5. 14.56 R2 F2 D' L2 U' B2 F2 U2 F2 D2 F' L' F2 L' D' B F2 R' L2 D' U'
6. 13.80 F2 L2 F2 R2 D2 U B2 D R2 D U' B' U F' R B D' F2 U2 L B2
7. 11.13 R2 F2 R2 D' B2 D' R2 D R2 U B2 L F R2 D U F2 D U2 R' B' U2
8. 12.59 R2 U2 R2 B2 U2 B2 U L2 D' L2 U B' F2 R' D2 L' D2 F' L' B2 F
9. 17.69 F2 U' R2 D' U B2 U R2 L2 D2 U' L' D' L' D U R' B U2 F' L2
10. 16.21 L2 B2 D' L2 U F2 R2 U' B2 R2 U' F R2 L2 U F U L' D L2 B'
11. 12.94 L2 D' R2 D B2 R2 U' B2 D2 F2 L2 F R2 L D' U R' F U2 F L
12. 15.25 F2 L2 D' L2 D2 F2 U' L2 U' L2 D2 R' U2 B F2 L F2 R D2 R U

After a few terrible days of cubing I'm again seeing some really good, but sporadic solving times. I'm starting to do some insanely efficient solves and keeping up a steady turning speed. During that average I found myself turning incredibly slow but I'm just so satisfied with the efficiency of my solutions. I've always viewed my efficiency of my solves as a wall to sub 15 and I think I'm on the right path to break down that wall. ^_^

Within the confines of speedsolves, do you think there is a correlation between efficiency of solves and standard deviation?

I'll try to word this the best I can....

Consider two solving styles.

1. Slow turning and efficient
2. Fast turning and inefficient or brute force

My thought process is that that 1st solver will be more inconsistent because the speed of their solve is more reliant on the luckiness of the solution, (or efficiency), and is more affected by longer solutions. The second solver I would think would have a much more stable move count, and be less effected by bad cases because they are more brute force oriented to begin with. The logic is kind of after the fact in that I'm using more efficient solutions recently, but I'm getting really bad singles mixed in with incredibly fast singles. Thoughts?

PS

Please tell me how well I'm explaining things or ask me to clarify if my wording is bad. I feel like I explain things poorly too often so I took more time than normal to write this post. I've been doing the same on my other posts as well.

7. 15.83 non lucky single!

8. Originally Posted by Sn3kyPandaMan
Really long quote

Slower turners will always be most affected by the luckiness of the solves, due to the nature of slow turning. (This assumes by Slow/Fast you mean TPS (look-ahead considered)) I think the standard deviation of the solve times is affected by the standard deviation of the efficiency of the solve. i.e. if Method Q has an average move count of 45, but solves are generally between 30 and 60 because there is a high chance of skips, the solver's SD will be high (relative to their average) regardless of turn speed. If Method V has an average move count of 60, but solves are generally around 50 due to skips being very hard to get, the SD of the solver will be low. This also assumes that the sub steps of both methods have consistent move count. If, for example, 12 of your PLL algs are 15 moves and 8 are 30 moves, then your SD would be higher.

Does that make sense, or am I misunderstanding your post?

9. Originally Posted by Erzz
Slower turners will always be most affected by the luckiness of the solves, due to the nature of slow turning. (This assumes by Slow/Fast you mean TPS (look-ahead considered)) I think the standard deviation of the solve times is affected by the standard deviation of the efficiency of the solve. i.e. if Method Q has an average move count of 45, but solves are generally between 30 and 60 because there is a high chance of skips, the solver's SD will be high (relative to their average) regardless of turn speed. If Method V has an average move count of 60, but solves are generally around 50 due to skips being very hard to get, the SD of the solver will be low. This also assumes that the sub steps of both methods have consistent move count. If, for example, 12 of your PLL algs are 15 moves and 8 are 30 moves, then your SD would be higher.

Does that make sense, or am I misunderstanding your post?
Thanks for responding to my post! You definitely understood exactly what I was saying. Given what you said about Method X vs Method Y in terms of how much it skips, do you think that Petrus would have a higher SD on average than Fridrich? (I suppose *would solvers* have a higher SD) I don't have an incredible amount of experience with Fridrich but it seems like Petrus has a lot more room to skip massive amounts of a solve. I posted something like a 30 move speedsolve I got the other day and I got something around a mid 30 today as well. Do you have much experience with Fridrich? If so do you feel like lucky solves are more possible with other methods?

lol @ really long quote

Edit: I went and threw this in the Petrus Home Thread. This conversation is probably a little off topic in this thread.

10. WHAT. THE. ****.

Previous PB Ao12 was 5.95. These scrambles were insane.

Ao12 is almost one full second under NR Ao5.