[Canadian NR] Kian Mansour - 6.86 3x3 average

[MoyuDayanLover3]

I know this is off topic, but any reason your username is Moyu Dayan Lover and your profile pic is a Qiyi Valk 3?

There was a reason that doesn't exist anymore, I should probably change the picture to a Valk M, and my name to something like MoyuQiyiLover or BillWang/FeliksZemdegsFanBoy.

 

[ECSCubed]

until 5 minutes ago I had never heard of this guy!

Are you a CFOP user? Haha

 

[Rahul Tirkey]

I fell bery sorry for kian, I thought he would get podium on 3×3

 

[Competition Cuber]

He needs a sub-5 single. (He has a sub-7 average, a sub-5 single would earn total respect to himself and much more respect to roux)

 

[obelisk477]

He needs a sub-5 single. (He has a sub-7 average, a sub-5 single would earn total respect to himself and much more respect to roux)

I think averages are more respected than singles in general? Also, it's pretty unlikely as CFOP tends to get fast singles more often than Roux

 

[Competition Cuber]

I think averages are more respected than singles in general? Also, it's pretty unlikely as CFOP tends to get fast singles more often than Roux

At least sub-5.3 or so. @PenguinsDontFly? Good luck.

 

[DGCubes]

At least sub-5.3 or so. @PenguinsDontFly? Good luck.

Let's be honest though, the only single that'll actually get recognition by impressionable/new cubers would be a WR. Experienced cubers already know that Roux is a viable method because of this average (and many others), not because of a theoretical lucky single.

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

At least sub-5.3 or so. @PenguinsDontFly? Good luck.

NR Single would be coool Thanks, I'll see what I can do

Let's be honest though, the only single that'll actually get recognition by impressionable/new cubers would be a WR. Experienced cubers already know that Roux is a viable method because of this average (and many others), not because of a theoretical lucky single.

Yeah I see what you mean. So many people are getting sub 6 and now even sub 5 singles that a random roux one wouldn't really make a difference unless it's WR. Obviously I would be happy with a nice single, but nobody else would care haha

 

[Competition Cuber]

Let's be honest though, the only single that'll actually get recognition by impressionable/new cubers would be a WR. Experienced cubers already know that Roux is a viable method because of this average (and many others), not because of a theoretical lucky single.

You might be right. While I do use CFOP, I think methods like roux and ZZ can be equally as fast, and deserve more credit. Sub-7 average and sub-5 single basically prove that a method and the people that use that method can be equally as fast as people like Zemdegs, Valk, Park, Etter, etc.

 

[EmperorZant]

sub-5 average

You mean Sub-5 single, right?

 

[Malkom]

You might be right. While I do use CFOP, I think methods like roux and ZZ can be equally as fast, and deserve more credit. Sub-7 average and sub-5 average basically prove that a method and the people that use that method can be equally as fast as people like Zemdegs, Valk, Park, Etter, etc.

It doesn't...

 

[Competition Cuber]

You mean Sub-5 single, right?

Yeah, fixed.

 

[Underwatercuber]

It doesn't...

Agreed

 

[Sue Doenim]

It doesn't...

Agreed

What do you mean it doesn't? You literally just said sub 7 average and sub 5 single don't mean that you're as fast as this list of people, and that's what most of them have, if even that! People need to get out of the mindset that CFOP is the only viable method for speed, while in reality it is arguably worse (Then again, so are Roux and ZZ). I personally think it's fine, but I don't use it.

 

[Underwatercuber]

"You might be right. While I do use CFOP, I think methods like roux and ZZ can be equally as fast, and deserve more credit. Sub-7 average and sub-5 average basically prove that a method and the people that use that method can be equally as fast as people like Zemdegs, Valk, Park, Etter, etc."

Just because they get a sub 7 average and sub 5 single doesn't mean that the method can be equally fast. Feliks has an official average almost a full second faster and even has much faster averages at home most (I think I can even say all?) roux users at home averages. Yes it does prove the method can be fast but it hasn't been proven yet (and it might not be proven ever) that it is EQUALLY as fast. I am hoping Kian can get some nice averages and singles soon though

 

[efattah]

"You might be right. While I do use CFOP, I think methods like roux and ZZ can be equally as fast, and deserve more credit. Sub-7 average and sub-5 average basically prove that a method and the people that use that method can be equally as fast as people like Zemdegs, Valk, Park, Etter, etc."

Just because they get a sub 7 average and sub 5 single doesn't mean that the method can be equally fast. Feliks has an official average almost a full second faster and even has much faster averages at home most (I think I can even say all?) roux users at home averages. Yes it does prove the method can be fast but it hasn't been proven yet (and it might not be proven ever) that it is EQUALLY as fast. I am hoping Kian can get some nice averages and singles soon though

This might not be fully correct. If you really want to be 'anal' in terms of statistics, you need to compare Roux averages to CFOP averages adjusting for the number of people who are using each method. You can 'weed down' the CFOP crowd by taking a random sampling, say randomly pick 1 in every 1000 CFOP users from the database. Then use their averages to compare to Roux solvers. For the comparison to be valid you need to comparing equal sample sizes. Since luck plays a role in fast singles, if you have 1000 times more people using one method, then obviously that group will also have the luckiest solves as well.

 

[Underwatercuber]

This might not be fully correct. If you really want to be 'anal' in terms of statistics, you need to compare Roux averages to CFOP averages adjusting for the number of people who are using each method. You can 'weed down' the CFOP crowd by taking a random sampling, say randomly pick 1 in every 1000 CFOP users from the database. Then use their averages to compare to Roux solvers. For the comparison to be valid you need to comparing equal sample sizes. Since luck plays a role in fast singles, if you have 1000 times more people using one method, then obviously that group will also have the luckiest solves as well.

I'm not comparing which is faster I am comparing to what @Competition Cuber said earlier about sub 7 average and sub 5 single proves roux users can be as fast as the mentioned people. Feliks has a sub 6 average so getting a sub 7 doesn't prove that it is just as fast fast in that case and literally every single person mentioned has an official average faster than Kian. Yes roux can be used to set records even if it is "less lucky" but for the time being it doesn't really prove it can be "as fast"

 

[MoyuDayanLover3]

I'm not comparing which is faster I am comparing to what @Competition Cuber said earlier about sub 7 average and sub 5 single proves roux users can be as fast as the mentioned people. Feliks has a sub 6 average so getting a sub 7 doesn't prove that it is just as fast fast in that case and literally every single person mentioned has an official average faster than Kian. Yes roux can be used to set records even if it is "less lucky" but for the time being it doesn't really prove it can be "as fast"

But Kian at home proves it. 6.6 global average.

 

[Malkom]

But Kian at home proves it. 6.6 global average.

One person being fast doesn't prove that the method he uses (and another completely different and unrelated method) is exactly equal in terms of speed.

 

[MoyuDayanLover3]

One person being fast doesn't prove that the method he uses (and another completely different and unrelated method) is exactly equal in terms of speed.

Then how come Alex was faster than Feliks? And how come Feliks himself stated that Roux and CFOP have very similar potential (on his Cube Skills blog)?