Fast but boring or slow but fun?

[dill2345]

I don't know whether I should do Fridrich or Petrus. Fridrich is very fast but learning the algorithms is very boring, but Petrus is fun but its a bit slow. I was wondering what you think I should learn. Also, I would appreciate it if nobody told me to do intuitive Fridrich because i don't like it, thanks.

 

[brunson]

You don't want to learn algs, but both Fridrich and expert Petrus use the same 21 PLLs, only in OLL do you save algorithms, but there are still algorithms to learn. Petrus is basically a form of intuitive F2L, which you don't like, so clearly you should do neither. Take up some other hobby.

 

[Cerberus]

Or... you go for Roux or corners first or for keyhole, stick to LBL.
Why don't you like inuitive F2L? if you don't like learning algorithms it is fine and it is still extreme fast if you practise.
Also just learning algorithms would bring you to sub-20 or whatever, it is all about practise!

 

[dill2345]

I meant i don't like intuitive Fridrich, and i didn't mean algorithms as in OLL and PLL, just the Fridrich Algorithms. Also, how are algorithms saved in OLL and what is expert Petrus?

 

[Lofty]

ughhhhh
Expert Petrus does not equal Petrus with OLL and PLL... there is no such thing as expert Petrus.
You don't necessarily save algorithms by switching to Petrus it just makes it easier to use less algorithms.
Also there is no evidence Petrus is slower than Fridrich, there are some people who are quite fast at Petrus.

 

[pjk]

Petrus could be as fast if not faster than Fridrich.

 

[fanwuq]

dill2345,

How do you do Petrus without doing the F2L intuitively?
You aren't making any sense.

 

[DAE_JA_VOO]

dill2345,

How do you do Petrus without doing the F2L intuitively?
You aren't making any sense.

LOL, i was just thinking the same.

 

[Lofty]

I'm sure he has just heard intuitive F2L so many times in reference solely to intuitive fridrich he is just meaning that. Petrus F2L is never referred to as just intuitive f2l while non-alg based fridrich f2l is always referred to as intuitive f2l with no reference to what method is being talked about.

 

[llamapuzzle]

If you don't like intuitive F2L in general (Fridrich and Petrus) either go for another method (try Roux or Heise maybe). Or good luck learning all the cases for the algs of Fridrich F2L. You cannot possibly do Petrus without intuitive F2L. It doesn't exist. But I think your best bet is other methods.

 

[brunson]

Expert Petrus does not equal Petrus with OLL and PLL... there is no such thing as expert Petrus.

Well, then I've just coined the term. From now on Expert Petrus == Petrus using 2LLL after edge orientation. There you go. ;-)

 

[fanwuq]

If you don't like intuitive F2L in general (Fridrich and Petrus) either go for another method (try Roux or Heise maybe). Or good luck learning all the cases for the algs of Fridrich F2L. You cannot possibly do Petrus without intuitive F2L. It doesn't exist. But I think your best bet is other methods.

Are you kidding, Roux and Heise are even more intuitive.
I'd actually suggest to stick with LBL until your understanding of the cube is better.

 

[bundat]

You don't like the intuitive approach, and you think learning algs is very boring.. what else is there? I don't think you could actually learn to cube if you avoid both.

And intuitive F2L is one of the block-building techniques in Petrus, so you can't avoid it at all anyway.

And yes, Petrus is slow...also with the learning curve.
From most petrus users I know, it takes them at least 6 months to hit sub-3, and more than a year, even two, to hit sub-20.

With Fridrich, you can hit sub-30 in a month, sub-20 in less than two. I've even heard of cuber hit sub-15 in less than half a year.

Anyway, with a question like "Fast but boring or slow but fun?", I think you don't want to be a SPEEDcuber, just a FUNcuber. Try something purely intuitive like Heise instead.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

Expert Petrus does not equal Petrus with OLL and PLL... there is no such thing as expert Petrus.

If anything, COLL/EPLL is better.

 

[AvGalen]

Expert Petrus does not equal Petrus with OLL and PLL... there is no such thing as expert Petrus.

If anything, COLL/EPLL is better.

That depends on your definition of better.
OLL/PLL requires only 7 + 21 algs and many (former) CFOP solvers will already know them
COLL/EPLL requires 40 + 4 algs and not many CFOP solvers know the COLL algs. It also seems that COLL algs are not very easy found/documented/explained so people have trouble switching.
But for speed/fewer moves COLL/EPLL beats OLL/PLL, especially because of the 1/12 chance of EPLL skip (although I guess OLL skips happen quite often too, so knowing PLL's is a very good thing)

 

[brunson]

I think a combination of Petrus up to edge orientation and third slot, then use MGLS, finish with one PLL would be the bomb for OH. I just need to learn MGLS. ;-)

Seriously, though, a semi-intuitive MGLS is one of my goals for this year. After I learn OH versions of all my PLLs.

 

[Johannes91]

So now you guys have redefined "F2L"? In almost every thread before it has meant exclusively Fridrich F2L, so it makes no sense to say that Petrus requires "intuitive F2L".

And yes, Petrus is slow.

Rubbish.

 

[Lofty]

I agree with Johannes.
Petrus is a very good method. I can average sub-30 OH and 2H with it and I don't even ever use it.

 

[brunson]

Petrus is basically a form of intuitive F2L

Not specifically F2L, but similar in concept.

 

[bundat]

And yes, Petrus is slow.

Rubbish.

I meant the learning curve if you didn't truncate my post.
I personally know quite a few Petrus users, and it's discouraging to see how many new Fridrich users are easily surpassing them.