Example TPS Solves and a Few Tips (Video)

[jskyler91]

Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.

Seriously, its like they don't want me to help out the slower cubers. I admit that this video isn't perfect, but it does the job it set out to do i.e. discuss the minimum tps required to solve at certain times given certain perquisites (f2l and 4lll and later 2lll)

 

[Jaycee]

Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.

Not against him, but against false content.

 

[jskyler91]

I already explained why I thought it was wrong.

If this video was "watch me do solves at different TPS'" then it would be fine. It's trying to say that people at 1min only need 1tps or something like that.

I'm not "hacking" this down because it's something you did, I'm doing it because I think it's wrong.

I said 1 to 1.2 or .3, seeing as how a person solving with f2l and a 4lll should average around 70 to 75 moves, those speeds were correct (70/1. 2 =58.33) . Also, they will be doing their algs faster so saying you only need 1 tps on average is a pretty safe statement .

 

[joey]

Ok, whatever, think what you want.

If you post videos that I disagree with, I'm going to say something. That doesn't make me jaded, or not want to help slow cubers, nor does it mean I'm attacking you personally; you should stop defaulting to arguments like that when people don't like your stuff.

 

[jskyler91]

Ok, whatever, think what you want.

If you post videos that I disagree with, I'm going to say something. That doesn't make me jaded, or not want to help slow cubers, nor does it mean I'm attacking you personally; you should stop defaulting to arguments like that when people don't like your stuff.

You are wrong here dude, how can you honestly argue with mathematical facts? I do agree that I may have gone too fast at times, but I am not perfect and my changes were minute. I appreciate your desire to make sure that people don't spread false information, but this info is undoubtedly true assuming the prequisites I set are met. Now let's end this so that another of my forums isn't closed. This does not mean no questions to those who may have them.

 

[PandaCuber]

Is it okay with you if I make the exact same video? Im not very good at CFOP, but I can still get a sub 20 every once and a while. I dont know ANY tricks or shortcut and barely know PLL. Only know 2 look OLL. So would I be qualified to make a video like this?

 

[jskyler91]

Is it okay with you if I make the exact same video? Im not very good at CFOP, but I can still get a sub 20 every once and a while. I dont know ANY tricks or shortcut and barely know PLL. Only know 2 look OLL. So would I be qualified to make a video like this?

That would be interesting, although I mainly meant this vid to be a what you should do, not a how you might do it. I haven't seen you cube some I wouldn't mind seeing it.

 

[joey]

[snip]

Sure, but I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

Also, x-cross for a sub-1 solver.. no? And your cross was way too good.. You did a sub15 style cross.. slowly, not a sub-1 style cross.

 

[Jaycee]

You are wrong here dude, how can you honestly argue with mathematical facts? I do agree that I may have gone too fast at times, but I am not perfect and my changes were minute. I appreciate your desire to make sure that people don't spread false information, but this info is undoubtedly true assuming the prequisites I set are met. Now let's end this so that another of my forums isn't closed. This does not mean no questions to those who may have them.

Sidenote : WHY do you keep calling posts "threads" and threads "forums"? More of the last one.

Who says it's mathematical? Even if it is, it's not very specific. "You have to do this type of F2L with this type of LL. Those are the only requirements needed you'll be able to sub-1 with those as long as you have 1 TPS". This video is 90% incorrect (Note : just an estimate) because that's basically what you're telling viewers (what I said in quotes), except all you're really saying is "Have 1 TPS and you can sub-1", or of course any of the other time barriers you have in the video. You honestly can't know this information because you're not at those speeds anymore. You just made a really really long version of "Let's assume you have an average of 60 turns. If you have greater 1 TPS you can sub-1, greater than 2 TPS you can sub-30, greater than 3 TPS you can sub-20". THAT'S the math, which any of us could do. But we're saying this is false information because many people around the 1:00 mark average much more than 60 turns, and the same goes for the rest of the time barriers. It's false information because there are too many variables.

EDIT :

Also, x-cross for a sub-1 solver.. no? And your cross was way too good.. You did a sub15 style cross.. slowly, not a sub-1 style cross.

This is what I'm saying, jskyler. Since you have the mindset and cubing style of a sub-15 person, there is no way you can give correct information about someone with a sub-1:00 mindset and style.

 

[jskyler91]

Sidenote : WHY do you keep calling posts "threads" and threads "forums"? More of the last one.

Who says it's mathematical? Even if it is, it's not very specific. "You have to do this type of F2L with this type of LL. Those are the only requirements needed you'll be able to sub-1 with those as long as you have 1 TPS". This video is 90% incorrect (Note : just an estimate) because that's basically what you're telling viewers (what I said in quotes), except all you're really saying is "Have 1 TPS and you can sub-1", or of course any of the other time barriers you have in the video. You honestly can't know this information because you're not at those speeds anymore. You just made a really really long version of "Let's assume you have an average of 60 turns. If you have greater 1 TPS you can sub-1, greater than 2 TPS you can sub-30, greater than 3 TPS you can sub-20". THAT'S the math, which any of us could do. But we're saying this is false information because many people around the 1:00 mark average much more than 60 turns, and the same goes for the rest of the time barriers. It's false information because there are too many variables.

EDIT :

This is what I'm saying, jskyler. Since you have the mindset and cubing style of a sub-15 person, there is no way you can give correct information about someone with a sub-1:00 mindset and style.

I updated my Op to include these estimates:

F2ll and 4 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 75 moves, cross+f2l- 35 moves, Oll- 8 moves (average) + 10 moves (average for oriented edge olls), Pll- Corners(A perm and v perm average) 11 moves, Edges- 11 moves

F2l and 2 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 53 (I used 50 in the vid) moves cross+ f2l- 30 moves, Oll- 11 moves, Pll, 12 moves

You guys are missing the point of this video!!! I know that people who are sup 1 min solvers probably do more than 75 turns, but what I saying is that they shouldn't and that if they can get their moves down to say 75, then they can sub one using 1 to 1.3 tps on average assuming they are using a 4ll and f2l. This video is not and did not claim to be a perfect representation of how a sub 1 cuber would be, it is simply Example Tps solves and a few tips (the title of the thread).

 

[aronpm]

Here is a better "impression" of a 1 minute solver. Of course, it's not perfect, because I average 13 seconds. Some of my rotations and turns were a little too fast, and my Y perm was way too fast at the end (and maybe not all 4LLL users would know how to use a Y perm to skip edges like I did, but I'm pretending to be an observant one)

 

[joey]

You still don't get it, it's fine.

I'm done, and won't post again in this thread.

 

[jskyler91]

Here is a better "impression" of a 1 minute solver. Of course, it's not perfect, because I average 13 seconds. Some of my rotations and turns were a little too fast, and my Y perm was way too fast at the end (and maybe not all 4LLL users would know how to use a Y perm to skip edges like I did, but I'm pretending to be an observant one)

Nice.

 

[jskyler91]

You still don't get it, it's fine.

I'm done, and won't post again in this thread.

It is you who doesn't get it man, I wasn't trying to imitate sup 1 minute solvers. I was showing them that if they did a good solve using 4lll then they only needed 1 to 1.3 tps to be sub 1 min. It is as simple as that dude.

 

[Weston]

Until you are like sub 10, you don't get faster by turning faster.

 

[masterofthebass]

It is you who doesn't get it man, I wasn't trying to imitate sup 1 minute solvers. I was showing them that if they did a good solve using 4lll then they only needed 1 to 1.3 tps to be sub 1 min. It is as simple as that dude.

except you don't get it man... The reason why people are at 1 minute is because of their lack of knowledge, not their lack of turn speed. Thats why people improve when they get better at cubing, they get faster. There are plenty of slower cubers who turn quite fast, but are slow because they lack the understanding that you do. If your entire advice is for a person who is 1 minute to get better at cubing, then there is nothing in your video that relates to TPS.

Please stop being so bullish in your arguments and just consider the possibility that your initial assumptions are wrong.

 

[jskyler91]

except you don't get it man... The reason why people are at 1 minute is because of their lack of knowledge, not their lack of turn speed. Thats why people improve when they get better at cubing, they get faster. There are plenty of slower cubers who turn quite fast, but are slow because they lack the understanding that you do. If your entire advice is for a person who is 1 minute to get better at cubing, then there is nothing in your video that relates to TPS.

Please stop being so bullish in your arguments and just consider the possibility that your initial assumptions are wrong.

I don't get how people aren't understanding me. I am not saying that slow cubers are slow because of there tps (please quote anywhere where I say that) nor am I attempting to say that one should only solve at 1 tps if they are at a minute. All I am saying is that assuming my preqs, one only needs 1 to 1.3 tps to solve it in sub 1 minute, nothing more, nothing less. Everyone else seems to be putting words in my mouth because I thought I made the thread title and my intro into the video very explicit. I am just showing how certain tps look like and using the example of certain barriers to demonstrate it. I have seen people tell new cubers that they only need 2 or 3 tps and I thought it would be nice for them to see what that meant. I am not being bullish, I am simply stating that you guys are not understanding me or the purpose of this video. I am not going to let people say my video is wrong or useless and thus make people want to not watch it when it isn't, it achieves its own goal.

 

[Weston]

I don't get how people aren't understanding me. I am not saying that slow cubers are slow because of there tps (please quote anywhere where I say that) nor am I attempting to say that one should only solve at 1 tps if they are at a minute. All I am saying is that assuming my preqs, one only needs 1 to 1.3 tps to solve it in sub 1 minute, nothing more, nothing less. Everyone else seems to be putting words in my mouth because I thought I made the thread title and my intro into the video very explicit. I am just showing how certain tps look like and using the example of certain barriers to demonstrate it. I have seen people tell new cubers that they only need 2 or 3 tps and I thought it would be nice for them to see what that meant. I am not being bullish, I am simply stating that you guys are not understanding me or the purpose of this video. I am not going to let people say my video is wrong or useless and thus make people want to not watch it when it isn't, it achieves its own goal.

So all you're saying is that a sub 20 solver can solve it in under a minute with 1-1.3 TPS. How is that useful or significant information?
If we were "putting words in your mouth" it is because we were assuming that this thread had somewhat relevant information.

 

[jskyler91]

So all you're saying is that a sub 20 solver can solve it in under a minute with 1-1.3 TPS. How is that useful or significant information?
If we were "putting words in your mouth" it is because we were assuming that this thread had somewhat relevant information.

This thread is not for people who are already fast, you already know what I am saying, it is for people who either are curious about what certain tps speeds look like and or people who are curious what the minimum turning speed they would need to turn if they were to solve optimally. It wasn't meant to be saying anything grand, it was just something I had never seen in video form and I thought it would help some people. People make completely useless threads everyday here. Today, for instance, there is a thread on someone's cube popping with an anchor in it!! At least my thread is doing something somewhat original, there have been threads on cubes popping with anchors dozens of times. I am not saying that there shouldn't be the aforementioned thread, I am just saying stop ripping my thread apart and assuming I am saying things which I didn't say when all I am ever trying to do is help people out.

 

[Forte]

Ok so just so you know:
People do not like this thread because of the content not being accurate, not because of the fact that it was you who made the thread.
If Feliks had made this thread, we would still be ripping his face out.