The Petrus God's Conspire Against Me Yet Again....

[StachuK1992]

Thanks.

As far as your average goes, I'm currently in attempt to get sub-22.
I could definitely be there by now, but I keep on experimenting with other methods, which GREATLY slows me down. I just have to pick a method, and decide to stick with it forever, or at least until I can get decent averages .

 

[Poke]

Well back on topic, I find that when I am doing okay and then get like 3 sub 45s right after i can't even get under a minute, its depressing.

I feel your pain. I took an average of 5, got a 52.xx, a 56.xx, a 1:08.xx, a 1:06.xx and then I got a 1:15.xx.

Made me so mad that those times had to go to waste.

 

[Lord Voldemort]

"I'm pretty chill, dawg-ee-fresh."

wtf? It's not like he made a whole post solely about that.

Oh no. Please don't turn this into a post-count rave..

You both need to calm down...
It's not that big a deal. Granted, if some noob made a thread like this, there would probably be more people with a problem. But again, it's not a big deal, and I don't think it warranted the response that Stachuk had.

As I said before, I regret stating my "initial argument(?)" so bluntly/harshly, but it still expresses many of the point that I wished to express.

No, that wasn't my point.
If you wasted space just saying that, it would indeed be laughable. But that wasn't all you said. I honestly couldn't care about post count, and I don't see why anyone should. It's not like you get 2 seconds knocked off your times for free every 500 posts or something. Sorry about interfering if you saw it that way, I just didn't want this to get out of hand.

anyway, on topic. Sub 20.... I had a 13.34 non-lucky single yesterday, and I don't know what happened. After that, I had 2 sub-20s, and then a 21.x and a 22. My first average of 5 was like 18.10 or something. My next few solves went well, and then 3 out of my last four solves I had pops. I think this is partially because I was using a borrowed type A instead of my unpoppable type D, and also due to excitement.

 

[JLarsen]

Yeah I could see that ruining your times. I normally average in the low 18's to high 17's right now, and if somehow it wasn't clear I use Petrus from my sig, or the title, I use Petrus. Also I've come really really close in the past to sub 17, but I always get nervous and lose it. I'll update my sig because my pb 10/12 is no longer 17.08 or whatever it says in my sig, its 17.04! lol

 

[Cloud_9ine]

Well I got a 42 a sec ago then got a 1:02 right after

 

[StachuK1992]

Yeah I could see that ruining your times. I normally average in the low 18's to high 17's right now, and if somehow it wasn't clear I use Petrus from my sig, or the title, I use Petrus. Also I've come really really close in the past to sub 17, but I always get nervous and lose it. I'll update my sig because my pb 10/12 is no longer 17.08 or whatever it says in my sig, its 17.04! lol

Yeah. The hard thing is deciding on which method to use.
Out of the following info, what do you(all) think I should stick with?

Fridrich
-24s avg
-really nice cross
-I execute/recognize PLL's REALLY slowly for some reason

Petrus
-38s avg
-HORRID block-building
-WV that I learned from ZZ

ZZ
-30s avg
-I like this method, but suck at EOline
-WV again

Roux
-35s avg
-probably my favorite method, but I absolutely fail at the first/second blocks...intuition == bad

 

[JLarsen]

Go with whatever funnest. So for you, Roux. Unless you care about how easy it is to get fast. Then of course go Fridrich.

 

[StachuK1992]

Hmmm...Fridrich until the 30'th (my competition), then probably switch to roux/zz

 

[JLarsen]

Average: 16.87 Individual Times: 15.22, 15.81, 17.82, (19.94), 16.43, 16.34, (14.96), 18.13, 19.89, 16.05, 17.17, 15.88

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was getting pretty nervous, but what I basically did is did the average over like a 15-20 minute time span, and talked a lot on aim with a friend to calm me down, and it worked like a dream. Try this some time people.

 

[Lord Voldemort]

Average: 16.87 Individual Times: 15.22, 15.81, 17.82, (19.94), 16.43, 16.34, (14.96), 18.13, 19.89, 16.05, 17.17, 15.88

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was getting pretty nervous, but what I basically did is did the average over like a 15-20 minute time span, and talked a lot on aim with a friend to calm me down, and it worked like a dream. Try this some time people.

I wish I could have my worst time be 19.94
Congrats though, enjoy the sub 17 until you are warped into the goal of sub 15!

 

[JLarsen]

Thanks but sub 16 sounds good for now. =]

 

[Danny84]

#1- D' R' D F2 D R' F R L' F' B' R F B U' L' B' U'

 

[rachmaninovian]

Go with whatever funnest. So for you, Roux. Unless you care about how easy it is to get fast. Then of course go Fridrich.

just a comment...i think speedcubing is ultimately losing its purpose...people switch to fridrich just to get fast...and not have fun =P

an ex-petrus user I have to admit I failed =P i went to fridrich in an attempt to speed up my cage times...and I am stubborn NOT to switch to reduction because I don't want to miss out the fun =P

wells work hard on petrus =P the improvement might not be as rapid as fridrich...but I guess petrus has the potential of beating fridrich after a very long time..=P

 

[soccerking813]

Congratz on the nice time

Hopefully some day a world record will be made with a method other than fridrich.

 

[Rubixcubematt]

why dont we just create a thread titled "Cubing failures thread"?

 

[Cride5]

Yeah. The hard thing is deciding on which method to use.
Out of the following info, what do you(all) think I should stick with?

Fridrich
-24s avg
-really nice cross
-I execute/recognize PLL's REALLY slowly for some reason

Petrus
-38s avg
-HORRID block-building
-WV that I learned from ZZ

ZZ
-30s avg
-I like this method, but suck at EOline
-WV again

Roux
-35s avg
-probably my favorite method, but I absolutely fail at the first/second blocks...intuition == bad

Interesting set of stats! How long have you been working on each method? EOLine is deffo hard to begin with. I've never done XCross, but I'd imagine its on a similar level of difficulty to master. I started with EO+Line, but after 4 months EO planning is becoming easy enough to start integrating the line during planning. I don't think I'm quite there yet, but I'm sure that once EOLine is second nature ZZ will be rapid

PLL recognition is always a bit of a b**ch for me too, especially compared to corners only OLL. If you're going with ZZ or Petrus COLL could speed up your overall LL recognition time.

I'd recommend ZZ ... not biased in the slightest of course :rolleyes:

 

[Haste_cube]

Just use the method that the most compatible to you. If you think Roux, then Roux. If it's ZZ then go for it