The Future of Competitive Speedsolving (a discussion)

[Jungleterrain]

In terms of recognition, why is there little mention of the 21 other people who currently have world records and in some cases are breaking their own records regularly too (e.g. 7x7 or 5x5bld)?

You have to realize that Feliks is an inspirational force for a lot of new cubers to start out. Therefore, most of the new cubers know who he is, PLUS 3x3 is the main event at most WCA events and speedcubing in general. A majority have a 3x3 here in the forums, and I would imagine they practice it more than most of their other puzzles. Almost everyone here in the forums is familiar with your son, and I think that's a good thing. He's a role model for the new cubers

 

[tozies24]

Here might be a reason why people jump to the conclusion that the Fridrich Method is "the best method".

http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Road_to_Sub-15_Second_Averages

Now that we have seen other methods get to sub-15, there could be an expansion to this page, or the page could be moved so it isn't on the front page of the wiki.

 

[Andrew Ricci]

Here might be a reason why people jump to the conclusion that the Fridrich Method is "the best method".

http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Road_to_Sub-15_Second_Averages

Now that we have seen other methods get to sub-15, there could be an expansion to this page, or the page could be moved so it isn't on the front page of the wiki.

I also think a reason why new cubers automatically assume they should use CFOP is because of BadMephisto's "how to become a speedcuber" video. In which, he basically says that none of the top cubers use Roux, Petrus, or ZZ and said methods shouldn't be used in actual competition.

 

[Jorghi]

Well.. if you can't beat faz with an equal method then he will always be better than you.

 

[a small kitten]

Well.. if you can't beat faz with an equal method then he will always be better than you.

A brick is a brick. But a wall is just a lot of bricks.

 

[HelpCube]

A brick is a brick. But a wall is just a lot of bricks.

I don't quite understand, but that was beautiful

 

[David Zemdegs]

I don't quite understand, but that was beautiful

Pink Floyd?

 

[RussianWhiteBoi]

Going back to the first post,

Spoiler

With the likes of Feliks Zemdegs consistently dominating multiple records, and with the incremental nature in which these records are broken (ie: within fractions of a second), does this contribute to a declining interest in speedsolving in general? Has interest in speedsolving reached its peak, and are we seeing the downward end of the cycle?

I don't think so. No one has yet discovered God's Algorithm, and that will surely take many years. Of course, there will probably be a barier for the 3x3, but like someone has already mentioned, big cubes have a long way to go. And so does blind and FM

 

[Hershey]

Well.. if you can't beat faz with an equal method then he will always be better than you.

So you think CFOP is better than any other method just because Feliks uses it? You really are ignorant.

 

[cubeslayer]

I look forward to the day when the speed cubing limits for the 3x3 are reached ( and I believe that day has come. Faz truly outdid himself with the official 5s solve). But, the " speed solving" focus will likely shift towards the bigger puzzles more--and that's exciting.

 

[RaresB]

A brick is a brick. But a wall is just a lot of bricks.

Can you explain what you mean I'm actuly interested and it's stuck on my mind. But ot I don't think it's not over I mean look at it so far records keep on being set and broken.

 

[a small kitten]

Oh don't worry about what I said. I was just philosophizing with Jorghi.

 

[Jorghi]

ZZ doesn't have much of an advantage. Cfop is nice and simple enough to finish a lot of your solve during inspection, and you can block build the start easily. ZZ might be good if eoline could be sub 1....

Roux is good but nobody does it color neutral?

 

[Phlippieskezer]

ZZ doesn't have much of an advantage. Cfop is nice and simple enough to finish a lot of your solve during inspection, and you can block build the start easily. ZZ might be good if eoline could be sub 1....

Roux is good but nobody does it color neutral?

Wow, you're ignorant. Have you ever even tried ZZ? Thing is, EOline can be sub-1'd. ZZ also has the advantage of all the edges already being oriented in the last layer making for easy OLL/COLL. ZZ also has what's possibly the sexiest F2L ever. Using just R, U, L with absolutely no cube rotations is seriously underrated.

Also, being colour neutral generally only saves around 2 - 3 moves on average. Solving Roux saves around 15 moves on average (relative to CFOP - many Roux solvers average 45; many CFOP solvers average 60).
(There are colour neutral Roux-solvers out there, btw, just not many)
Both methods can also make a lot out of pre-inspection.

Really, there's no way to prove which of our current methods are the best. It's more the cuber, at the moment (and if it ever comes down to methods, they will be separated by very little).

 

[Jorghi]

Movecount isn't everything. Why make 2 big blocks when f2l is soo much simpler .


And mathematically you can find an un harmed f2l pair during inspection 60% of the time. There is more to it than just moves.

 

[Phlippieskezer]

Movecount isn't everything. Why make 2 big blocks when f2l is soo much simpler .


And mathematically you can find an un harmed f2l pair during inspection 60% of the time. There is more to it than just moves.

Two 3x2x1 blocks is simpler than doing full F2L. It's stupid to even suggest otherwise.

And obviously movecount isn't everything. I never said it was.
Solve time is dependent on movecount and TPS, so it still is a factor. 15 less moves is consequently still a pretty damn big deal. That being said, fast TPS is also quite important (though, my TPS sucks and I'm almost sub-15). Also, that unharmed free pair is extremely useful in Roux as well. It's no better for CFOP than it is for Roux to find a free pair.

Also - it's been posted earlier in this forum - being colour neutral saves very few moves on average.

 

[uberCuber]

Could this be some sort of proof that knowing the advanced stuff makes the normal stuff so much easier that it improves your times?
Even in solves where you do not even use the advanced stuff?

I definitely agree with this line of thinking. This reminds me of something that Chris Hardwick said back when he was learning ZBF2L. He said that the concentration necessary to be able to lookahead to and recognize the ZBF2L case quickly made normal CFOP solving seem much easier than before, and by extension, making lookahead better.

 

[Jungleterrain]

I definitely agree with this line of thinking. This reminds me of something that Chris Hardwick said back when he was learning ZBF2L. He said that the concentration necessary to be able to lookahead to and recognize the ZBF2L case quickly made normal CFOP solving seem much easier than before, and by extension, making lookahead better.

So it's possible that the more you know, the easier everything you knew before gets?

And I realize we're getting off topic here.

 

[TMOY]

Cfop is nice and simple enough to finish a lot of your solve during inspection, and you can block build the start easily.

Solving Roux saves around 15 moves on average (relative to CFOP - many Roux solvers average 45; many CFOP solvers average 60).

Movecount isn't everything. Why make 2 big blocks when f2l is soo much simpler .

lolJorghi. Don't you think you're contradicting yourself here ?

 

[Jorghi]

Ok.. But why are you guys acting like roux is the legendary solution.. Its just a different form of cfop.. Build, preserve, build.. Then fixing orientation and permutation.

The only decent step is the first, second block..
That is where all the efficiency is from.


We need a fully new way of thinking not ollcp or zbll, or 2gll.