Is Waterman a dead method?

[5BLD]

Waterman on video

Hehe, I've always loved that video.

 

[Gaétan Guimond]

I wouldn't say its dead, its more of a method that shouldn't really be used for speed. Its more of an FMC method though it could be used for speed. One has to be determined to learn such a method.

Yes

 

[somerandomkidmike]

I wouldn't say it's the greatest for fewest moves. It is a speed method. If it's not good for speed, then why am I faster with this method than any other method?

 

[caseyd]

someone needs to get faz doing that, I bet he could sub 10 it in a week of hard practice after learning the algs

 

[Schmidt]

...but I didn't think anybody would be interested.

When did THAT stop anybody on YouTube. If you only knew the amount of <20 view videos...

But I would watch yours if you ever make a tut.

 

[irontwig]

I wouldn't say its dead, its more of a method that shouldn't really be used for speed. Its more of an FMC method though it could be used for speed. One has to be determined to learn such a method.

Yeah, starting with a layer and using a lot of slice moves sounds like a great idea for FMC.

 

[qqwref]

I definitely wouldn't say it's dead - it was never popular at all, but that doesn't mean it's bad or obsolete. There are many methods that were never popular (because of difficulty, or lack of documentation, or whatever) and Waterman just happens to be one of the better of them.

I think I was going to learn the algs for this at some point, but I was lazy...

 

[Kirjava]

someone needs to get faz doing that, I bet he could sub 10 it in a week of hard practice after learning the algs

I would bet that he could not.

 

[somerandomkidmike]

When did THAT stop anybody on YouTube. If you only knew the amount of <20 view videos...

But I would watch yours if you ever make a tut.

Probably never going to put videos with me talking on youtube ever. If I make a tutorial, it will be a a website, or a text version.

 

[somerandomkidmike]

Sorry for the double post, but I'm bumping this thread to say that I'm attempting to make a beginner tutorial. If the response is good, I'll more on to intermediate, and advanced tutorials. Also I'll make an advanced tips page as well. Again, it's going to be a text tutorial, and I might even just write it out, but I'll give people permission to take it, and use it. Maybe somebody can learn the method, and make a video tutorial.

 

[y235]

can you please post some example solves here?

 

[somerandomkidmike]

Which do you want? Beginner or advanced? Or both?

 

[Andrew Ricci]

Sorry for the double post, but I'm bumping this thread to say that I'm attempting to make a beginner tutorial. If the response is good, I'll more on to intermediate, and advanced tutorials. Also I'll make an advanced tips page as well. Again, it's going to be a text tutorial, and I might even just write it out, but I'll give people permission to take it, and use it. Maybe somebody can learn the method, and make a video tutorial.

Yeah, a tutorial (with beginner-advanced stuff) would be really nice, since the method hasn't exactly been well documented.

 

[y235]

Which do you want? Beginner or advanced? Or both?

both, please

 

[StachuK1992]

I'd rather advanced.
I figure I can make up my own beginner method from that.

 

[somerandomkidmike]

Well, I'm busy today, but here's an example of a beginner solution, using the following steps:

Step 1) Solve a layer. This time, the corners are placed, then the edges.
Step 2) Position the corners
Step 3) Orient the corners
Step 4) Place all edges on the right side (redges)
Step 5) Position all the middle edges (midges)
Step 6) Orient Middle edges.

http://tinyurl.com/algyFB-U-B-L-E

 

[y235]

Well, I'm busy today, but here's an example of a beginner solution, using the following steps:

Step 1) Solve a layer. This time, the corners are placed, then the edges.
Step 2) Position the corners
Step 3) Orient the corners
Step 4) Place all edges on the right side (redges)
Step 5) Position all the middle edges (midges)
Step 6) Orient Middle edges.

http://tinyurl.com/algyFB-U-B-L-E

i meant that you'll give a scramble and the solution

 

[Hazel]

Sorry to bump such an old thread, but if you were willing to learn all the Waterman algs than how good of a method would it be, and where could I find the algs?

 

[efattah]

You can find all of the Waterman algorithms in the LMCF document here:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2QnZ3uD6I8kNkpHSURSbzluc2s

I also suggest you check out the LMCF and WaterRoux method threads. Waterman is an incredibly fast method that can reach world class averages (sub 8) or even faster. The move count is extremely low (around 45-47), but there are LOTS of algorithms (at least 225).

The CLL algorithms of the Waterman method are specific and some differ from their LMCF versions, you can find the original Waterman CLL algorithms here:
http://rubikscube.info/waterman/booklet.pdf

One of the challenges of using Waterman is that so few people are using it that you can find a lot of discussion/help/support.

WaterRoux is a modernized version of Waterman that has world record average potential.

 

[shadowslice e]

I also suggest you check out the LMCF and WaterRoux method threads. Waterman is an incredibly fast method that can reach world class averages (sub 8) or even faster. The move count is extremely low (around 45-47), but there are LOTS of algorithms (at least 225).

While I am all for getting people into alternate methods, I think it is still a bit presumptuous to say I can definitely reach "world class" times just yet as no one has reached it yet. This is not to say that you can't but I wouldn't speak in absolutes yet. Also, a 45 movecount is not "extremely low" in the grand scheme of things.

WaterRoux is a modernized version of Waterman that has world record average potential.

Personally I'm not sure you can say it is better yet as it has not been shown to be and I find it gas drawbacks compared to pure waterman though I agree it should be looked at.