Algorithm Potential

[Akash Rupela]

The internet is a place Full of algorithms, for all cases. But How much time does one waste , in experimenting with different algorithms. And Always learning wrong ones, then learning better ones after some months and spending more months getting them right.

What i suggest is, In the speedsolving wiki, If the Best time that has been achieved with the algorithm is also written besides all the algorithms, How easy will it be to decide which algorithms and will one will naturally not even try algorithms with a very less potential which will just be a waste of time. True, it depends a little on the finger tricks a person performs, but that is something one can get used to. Regrips can be a little problem in a solve, but as per the algorithm , I personally believe if they are listed in order of the fastest times that have been achieved on them, It will be a very nice resource. For PLLs, many of us use mostly the same ones so it might not matter much. OLLs are too many to learn and relearning and trying all of them is something time-consuming

I know that implenting this idea will not be that easy, but whenever some person is doing his algorithms individually (I like keeping a log of mine in excel), he can just edit the column in the wiki with his best times(if its better than the one that already is there). This will take some hardwork of some people in the community, but overall, will be a large help to the entire community.


Post your suggestions about this

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

I would say that this is not a very good idea, since different people can execute different algs at faster/slower speed, so what works for one person might not work for another.
Obviously for some algs like the standard T-perm, it is probably the fastest, but there are a lot of fast J/N/U perms out there that different people are good at.

 

[Cubenovice]

I don't think adding times is a good idea.
But perhaps it could be interesting if people could "check" the alg(s) they actually use in speedsolving.
If the algs would be sorted by the amount of "checks" you can see which ones are most popular.

Note that this still doesn't mean that the most popular is best suited for "you"

 

[emolover]

That is a bad idea in my opinion. People have very different styles of turning which make it very difficult for someone who does not have that style to go at the same speed using an algorithm not in there own style.

A good example is U2 turning. Some people simply can not do an U2 with both of there hands so I an algorithm involves that, they will not be able to perform that algorithm fast.

I my self do my U and U' with the same finger and can do it with both index's which make certain algs smoother and faster for me usually.

 

[Kirjava]

I personally believe if they are listed in order of the fastest times that have been achieved on them,

This is a bad idea. Consistancy and other factors are more important than "fastest single".

 

[Godmil]

I don't think this is a bad idea, but for it's full potential I think it's a little ahead of its time. I'm sure some point in the future fingertricks will be standardised (Some super fast cuber will do an extensive tutorial showing how he turns then all new cubers will end up copying it, or something like that), at which point algs will be standardised too, in which case this method of working out which can be done the fastest will be useful.
As it stands it would be quite interesting to see, but like when I tried to copy some of Breandans OLLs recently I gave up because too many of them were from orientations that didn't work with my recognision system, or used left handed U2' which I'm not interested in adapting to.

 

[Kirjava]

A lot of people are talking about fingertrick standarisation in the future.

I don't see why anything needs to change or why it would help. What's wrong with just "doubleflick" or "eido U2'"?

 

[Godmil]

A lot of people are talking about fingertrick standarisation in the future.

I don't see why anything needs to change or why it would help. What's wrong with just "doubleflick" or "eido U2'"?

Are they, I thought it was just me
Maybe people don't need to change, it could be like colour neutrality, where it's more recommended for new people rather than switching. For example, you do a really cool left hand single finger U2 push, maybe at some point people will realise that that is a really fast move, and while it may be too awkward for people to switch to, we could certainly recommend new cubers do it.

 

[Kirjava]

Switching to CN and learning a new fingertrick are very very very very different.

 

[spyr0th3dr4g0n]

I don't see how you can really waste time learning an algorithm

 

[aznanimedude]

algorithms i feel work different for different people, some might like one over another, or not feel comfortable with certain algorithms.

i do like the popularity choice where you can see which ones are clearly the most often used, i certainly changed my R and T permutations from what i first did now that i realize how much better i like other ones, they weren't that much faster once i changed, but they certainly felt a lot more comfortable and fluid for me

 

[Robocopter87]

I don't see how you can really waste time learning an algorithm

This is the exact reason why we don't just say, "This is fastest. Do it. Don't bother with anything else."

Experimentation is so important. People have their own groove and they need to figure out what works best for them.

 

[kinch2002]

Yay for spoon-feeding people more. Remember that compared to people that started several years ago, you're spending a lot less time finding good algs so please be prepared to put in a little effort.

 

[RNewms27]

Years ago we had what you might call "dark ages" of cubing; nobody was doing much other than learning what was already discovered.

 

[Kirjava]

Years ago we had what you might call "dark ages" of cubing; nobody was doing much other than learning what was already discovered.

Define 'years ago'.

 

[RNewms27]

Define 'years ago'.

Years ago -> too young to remember.

 

[Kirjava]

You're explaining what happend at a time when you don't remember what happened?

 

[jeff081692]

Since I'm trying to improve my LL right now I kind of wanted to know what was the limit for each particular algorithm also. I know people have different styles but I also believe I can adjust to different turning styles if they proved to have better results. But in general even if an algorithm was not the best for you it is interesting to see what other people have done with it.