How fast can Petrus method go?

[ErikJ]

seriously.

I got a 13.41 average today which is like the third time I beat my pb average within 2 weeks. sub/low 14 averages are pretty common for me now and I am still getting faster. I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

what do you guys think?

details on the average: 14.59, 13.25, 13.23, 12.02, 14.59, 14.13, 13.67, 11.84, (10.64), 14.03, 12.72, (15.03)

 

[panyan]

my fastest solve is 1.40.24 (thats minutes!) using the beginner method. I am not quick but at least i can do it. Im sorry, but im no use on this thread!

 

[Rabid]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

 

[JTW2007]

The fastest I've ever heard of Petrus going is just below 13s.

 

[ConnorCuber]

I don't believe there is a limit to any method.

 

[JLarsen]

my fastest solve is 1.40.24 (thats minutes!) using the beginner method. I am not quick but at least i can do it. Im sorry, but im no use on this thread!

states worthlessness* Anyway, anythings possible, with time and maybe some luck. Oh and of course.......


GO PETRUS

 

[Dene]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

Ok, then consider this method:

Step 1: Before looking at the cube, you do an A perm. There is no reason for this, you just do it.

Step 2: You then randomly do another 10 moves, why not?

Step 3: Proceed to solve the cube 1 piece at a time using a 30 move T perm.

Step 4: With 4 pieces to go, randomly do another 10 move scramble.

Step 5: Finally, finish solving the cube.

If everyone did this method would it be faster than Fridrich?

 

[James Kobel]

I don't believe there is a limit to any method.

True, I know people who have done sub-10 with Roux non lucky, and I know that you(Erik, the rest of you have no chance of beating him to it) can get a sub 12 average with Petrus.

 

[Dene]

I don't believe there is a limit to any method.

Good luck in life.

 

[James Kobel]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

Ok, then consider this method:

Step 1: Before looking at the cube, you do an A perm. There is no reason for this, you just do it.

Step 2: You then randomly do another 10 moves, why not?

Step 3: Proceed to solve the cube 1 piece at a time using a 30 move T perm.

Step 4: With 4 pieces to go, randomly do another 10 move scramble.

Step 5: Finally, finish solving the cube.

If everyone did this method would it be faster than Fridrich?

Well in that case it would be because if everyone used that then noone would be using Fridrich so it would be faster.

 

[Dene]

Ok then: if 99% of people used that method... You're fighting a losing battle, I would stop if I were you.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

Petrus can go sub-13 or sub-12, sub-13 I'm sure of...petrus rocks

P.S. - when he says method A, he means an EFFICIENT method, not an idiotic one -_-

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

So if everyone who used method A averaged 15, and 1% of people who used method B averaged 12, then method A is faster?
Anyway, the percentage of cubers who use a method has nothing to do with how fast a method can be.

 

[James Kobel]

Ok then: if 99% of people used that method... You're fighting a losing battle, I would stop if I were you.

I can't lose to that argument until I see a 30 move T-perm. In a few minutes I will memorize it then I will give you an A5 for your uber inneficient method.

 

[JLarsen]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

So if everyone who used method A averaged 15, and 1% of people who used method B averaged 12, then method A is faster?
Anyway, the percentage of cubers who use a method has nothing to do with how fast a method can be.

They speak of fastest times of any solver. And as of right now, it's much more common to here of Harris Chan and Fridrich solvers then of gods like Erik here...

 

[Dene]

Ok then: if 99% of people used that method... You're fighting a losing battle, I would stop if I were you.

I can't lose to that argument until I see a 30 move T-perm. In a few minutes I will memorize it then I will give you an A5 for your uber inneficient method.

On the spot, I am not about to find a 30 more T perm, but I'm sure you can be crative and find one for yourself, for example, do (R2 D2)x6 at some stage during a normal T perm, which would come out to near 30 moves.
I have no idea what "A5" means.

 

[Brett]

A5 means average of 5.

R Perm them a U Perm is 26 moves for me. Then a U U U U and you've done 30 moves. Good luck...

 

[DavidWoner]

Ok then: if 99% of people used that method... You're fighting a losing battle, I would stop if I were you.

I can't lose to that argument until I see a 30 move T-perm. In a few minutes I will memorize it then I will give you an A5 for your uber inneficient method.

F R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R'

there you go, exactly 30

On-topic: Petrus can be very fast, once blockbuilding becomes fully braindead. Erik certainly hasn't pushed the limits yet.

 

[JLarsen]

Ok then: if 99% of people used that method... You're fighting a losing battle, I would stop if I were you.

I can't lose to that argument until I see a 30 move T-perm. In a few minutes I will memorize it then I will give you an A5 for your uber inneficient method.

F R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R'

there you go, exactly 30

ha, nicely done actually. Y and a Ja, sexyful.

 

[mrbiggs]

I bet that if my physical speed was better for step 4 and the last layer then Petrus method could be just as fast as Fridrich.

If 99% of cubers (thought experiment) used Method A,
Then Method A would be the fastest method.

Ok, then consider this method:

Step 1: Before looking at the cube, you do an A perm. There is no reason for this, you just do it.

Step 2: You then randomly do another 10 moves, why not?

Step 3: Proceed to solve the cube 1 piece at a time using a 30 move T perm.

Step 4: With 4 pieces to go, randomly do another 10 move scramble.

Step 5: Finally, finish solving the cube.

If everyone did this method would it be faster than Fridrich?

This analogy is not apt. If everyone did this method, then people who do Fridrich in this imaginary world would be the fastest in the world.

It's not that 99% of people do Fridrich. It's that EVERYONE who is top in the world uses a variation of it. Granted, this doesn't prove beyond any doubt that Fridrich is fastest...but it certainly implies it.

It's up to Petrus users at this point to show that their method works at the highest level. Until I see someone getting sub-12 averages with Petrus, I see no reason to believe that it's as fast as Fridrich.