What's the fastest method for 3x3?

Phillip1847 said:

People don't drive, generally, at drastically different speeds and ways.
People that know full CFOP can average 50 seconds, while faz may average 7.5 seconds.

Click to expand...

None of my five definitions involve people knowing full CFOP and averaging 50 seconds (well, maybe the third, but very unlikely). The fourth doesn't even use people at all, and the fifth only rather indirectly.

Sure, you can make up bad measurements. But that doesn't mean good measurements are impossible. I believe all the people and programs I actually did use in my definitions are pretty good and the variation between them isn't like 50 to 7.5 seconds.

Also, yes, there's probably not a factor of 6.67 in variation of travel speed among different drivers actually driving at similar times at similar points on the route. But factor 2 to 3, I believe. And what what about traffic jams? That can influence times quite a bit. Also, the routes I showed are said to take 41 and 42 hours, respectively. Pretty much nobody is going to drive non-stop. During that travel, people will usually have to take breaks for various reasons, and their number and durations differ. And some noob drivers might be bad at reading maps and take much longer cause they're constantly uncertain where to go or even get lost.

But even if the driving variation were smaller, I'd say that would just make the route times more accurate and reliable. Not turn them from impossible to possible.

Phillip1847 said:

This is why routes can have speeds - people drive somewhat similarly.

Click to expand...

This is why methods can have speeds - good cubers cube somewhat similarly.

Stefan said:

None of my five definitions involve people knowing full CFOP and averaging 50 seconds (well, maybe the third, but very unlikely).

Sure, you can make up bad measurements. But that doesn't mean good measurements are impossible. I believe all the people and programs I actually did use in my definitions are pretty good and the variation between them isn't like 50 to 7.5 seconds.

Also, yes, there's probably not a factor of 6.67 in variation of travel speed among different drivers actually driving at similar times at similar points on the route. But factor 2 to 3, I believe. And what what about traffic jams? That can influence times quite a bit. Also, the routes I showed are said to take 41 and 42 hours, respectively. Pretty much nobody is going to drive non-stop. During that travel, people will usually have to take breaks for various reasons, and their number and durations differ. And some noob drivers might be bad at reading maps and take much longer cause they're constantly uncertain where to go or even get lost.

But even if the driving variation were smaller, I'd say that would just make the route times more accurate and reliable. Not turn them from impossible to possible.

This is why methods can have speeds - good cubers cube somewhat similarly.

Click to expand...

you win.



A better question than "Which method is the fastest?" would be "Which method is easiest to get very fast(ie, sub 8) quickly(compared to other methods)?"
The answer to both is ambiguous.

*NOW I'M A 45 SECONDER FOR FRIDRICH*
So should I continue using fridrich or learn more methods?
Also, should I try to learn new methods or just continue practicing one?

What's zeroing?
A method or technique?

Say there's probably one easy way to calculate it : maths.
You takes for each subset the odds to have a given case, the optimal way to solve it, and count the moves it takes. Moves such as B or F should probably count as 1.5, especially if these are odd moves, x y or z moves should also count for more than 1. You sum it all up with the correct ratios and you should get the average move count of a method which should lead to the fastest one. Then, of course, you can say that some methods have cases harder to recognize, but if you master a method, you should instantly recognize a case at any step. And except you average more than say 6 tps, move count should be the biggest factor for speed I believe. Of course I assume I might be wrong, but that's probably the approach I'd go for. I'm also convinced one could get good times with any "logical" method if one would give it enough practice.

You can try and quantify speeds for different methods if you like, but that does not mean that they will give useful or meaningful results for what you want to know.

Kirjava said:

You can try and quantify speeds for different methods if you like, but that does not mean that they will give useful or meaningful results for what you want to know.

Click to expand...

mm

Don't waste more time trying to find the best method than you could spend practising to be decently fast.

Kyky20024 said:

*NOW I'M A 45 SECONDER FOR FRIDRICH*
So should I continue using fridrich or learn more methods?
Also, should I try to learn new methods or just continue practicing one?

Click to expand...

Learn more methods if you prefer another. You can't just say that a method is "too complicated" and "fail at it", because the reason they're methods is because they are manageable such that one can learn and maybe master it in a reasonable amount of time (be that a few years). You must persevere, and just watch the tutorials a few times until you understand.

Kyky20024 said:

What's zeroing?
A method or technique?

Click to expand...

Neither, it's a joke

brian724080 said:

Neither, it's a joke

Click to expand...

No it isn't, you just don't know about it because it's a secret.

Kyky20024 said:

What's zeroing?
A method or technique?

Click to expand...

It's a bit like the force. Only a true master can use it. Like Feliks - the zeroing is strong with that one.

Kyky20024 said:

What's zeroing?
A method or technique?

Click to expand...

a top secret 3x3 technique achieved only by reaching black belt level in card jitsu at the club penguin dojo

5BLD said:

Don't waste more time trying to find the best method than you could spend practising to be decently fast.

Click to expand...

Kyky. This guy is pretty good, you should listen to him.

Personally I think that CFOP and Roux are the most popular methods right now. They in my opinion are the most commonly used and hence these methods are used by tons of fast people so i say that these two are the fastest methods.However there are still lots of methods that are good such as ZZ, Petrus,etc.

Then again, there isn't really a "fastest" method. It is how you use the method that counts. People say that CFOP is the fastest but if a person cannot look ahead well or execute the steps quickly, it is not the fastest. It is a matter of personal preference and the way your finger tricks and/or turning style matches the method. Like if you are really good at finger tricking the M slice, you should try Roux because it might actually be better for you.

Fastest way to solve a Rubik's cube?

Hi,

I would really like it is people could say what method they use to solve the Rubik's cube the fastest.

Thank you

Most people use a method called CFOP and it is the method for many really fast 3x3 solvers, however Roux is a very fast method too that many people don't stop to consider. It can be almost as fast, but looks cooler and many think that it is a more fun solving style. I would look up tutorials for both and see which one you like best

PS: "They float Georgie! They all float, and you'll float too!" (Just had to say that)

Turning it is the fastest method to solve it.

Solve it in your mind xD

cfop, roux, zz, or petrus

"Methods don't have speeds" - Alexander Lau
But from my experience, CFOP and Roux seem to be the 2 fastest currently.

PJKCuber said:

"Methods don't have speeds" - Alexander Lau

Click to expand...

He was quoting me actually.