Highest reachable tps (turns per second) in a 3x3 solve

[Robert-Y]

What is the highest reachable tps (turns per second) in a 3x3 solve?

The highest I have come across is about 8.18 done by Breandan in his 7.21 solve (59/7.21 = 8.18 (2.d.p.). My highest is about 5.9 (time was about 10.5). I think that other fast cubers have gotten over 6 tps before (Harris for sure, probably Erik and Nakaji). I think the highest reachable tps might be 10-15tps.

 

[Stefan]

I just tried it and got an 8.26 tps solve easily (doing (RUR'U')100 after the cross).

 

[Robert-Y]

Oh I meant without doing unnecessary moves.

Btw I like measuring the tps of my solves because it tells me whether my solve is good or not. For me, any solve over 5 tps is good enough. Tbh, I don't care about my times that much, I kinda care more about my tps

 

[a small kitten]

Well, you can probably reach ridiculously high when you execute last layer algs. Some OLLS and PLLs are easily sub second so like Rowe's A perm. But on average 5 tps is really good already.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

Highest I've gotten is like...6? Rowe's T perm is sub-1, also.
My highest TPS for OH is probably 3 or so.

Robert, you are right...the highest is probably 10-15 TPS about.

 

[jcuber]

I'd like to see 10-15 TPS in an actual solve (not just R U R' U' or something like that).

 

[Robert-Y]

Lol, me too. It would be weird seeing someone turn twice or even thrice as fast as the average fast cuber .

 

[byu]

I just got a 2.15 tps. I think I really need to improve. (Move count - 70, Time -32.50)

 

[JTW2007]

I thought Nakaji hit about 10 during one part of his 6.whatever solve.

 

[Lucas Garron]

I thought Nakaji hit about 10 during one part of his 6.whatever solve.

What does that mean?
During my fingertricks, I probably turn 50tps at during some short intervals.

High tps is around 10-20, that's been covered enough.
For a practical solve, Stefan has the right idea. TPS is the wrong thing to talk about.
I've done a lot of reconstructions; fast solve are generally 5-6tps. Note that the fastest solves have skips of alg steps, which reduces tps.

 

[Robert-Y]

Ah ok, maybe I should change the question to: "what is the highest reachable tps in a non lucky 3x3 solve without unnecessary moves?" ?

@ Lucas: "During my fingertricks, I probably turn 50tps at during some short intervals." Do you mean 5tps or am I not thinking hard enough about what you're saying?

 

[fanwuq]

Ah ok, maybe I should change the question to: "what is the highest reachable tps in a non lucky 3x3 solve without unnecessary moves?" ?

@ Lucas: "During my fingertricks, I probably turn 50tps at during some short intervals." Do you mean 5tps or am I not thinking hard enough about what you're saying?

You mean: What is the highest average tps in a real nonlucky 3x3x3 solve.

Lucas does mean 50tps in the split second that you pull the trigger.

 

[JLarsen]

Oh I meant without doing unnecessary moves.

Btw I like measuring the tps of my solves because it tells me whether my solve is good or not. For me, any solve over 5 tps is good enough. Tbh, I don't care about my times that much, I kinda care more about my tps

Efficiency > TPS. I could spam the cube with 4lll algs every solve and increase my tps, but what would that accomplish? I try to decrease my delays, use efficient but fast algs ,and i solve in the fewest moves possible.

 

[Lucas Garron]

Lucas does mean 50tps in the split second that you pull the trigger.

Uh-huh. I don't plan to talk more in this topic, though.

 

[Robert-Y]

Hmm I'm thinking of deleting this thread as I don't really think there is really anything else to talk about...

 

[Harris Chan]

Sometimes I get that feeling that my TPS on the F2L is faster than my LL (or the same :S

 

[bundat]

This is like Starcraft's APM (actions-per-minute).
It's good to measure, as long as you're not aware of it.

Before people cared about it, the APM of the world's top players with godly micro abilities (like Slayers_BoXeR) was almost above everyone else. When people noticed this, they started measuring their own APMs, and started doing stupid things like random clicking and dragging just to increase their APM, which made it pointless.

So I guess measuring TPS from a solve which was not meant to be a "high TPS solve" would be better than actually focusing on measuring and increasing your TPS in each solve.

 

[Sir E Brum]

This is like Starcraft's APM (actions-per-minute).
It's good to measure, as long as you're not aware of it.

Before people cared about it, the APM of the world's top players with godly micro abilities (like Slayers_BoXeR) was almost above everyone else. When people noticed this, they started measuring their own APMs, and started doing stupid things like random clicking and dragging just to increase their APM, which made it pointless.

So I guess measuring TPS from a solve which was not meant to be a "high TPS solve" would be better than actually focusing on measuring and increasing your TPS in each solve.

I just looked up SlayerS_'Boxer' and you are exactly right.

You can't artificially increase your TPS by doing useless moves and hope for that to be helpful. Increased TPS just comes with practice.

 

[rahulkadukar]

I think 10 TPS over a solve cn be achieved especially after you watch Nakajima

 

[Lucas Garron]

I think 10 TPS over a solve cn be achieved especially after you watch Nakajima

So I should watch a Nakajima solve before every time I solve a 3x3x3, since it can make me faster?