2x2x2 "COLD" solving averages using ORTEGA method

2x2x2 "COLD" solving averages using ORTEGA method?

• <4 seconds

• Total voters
29
Status
Not open for further replies.

reThinking the Cube

Member
I am curious as to how ORTEGA 2x2x2 method times would be affected by totally removing the pre-inspection.
This poll - http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showpost.php?p=376959&postcount=1
shows a very good representation for 2x2x2 Ortega times WITH pre-inspection/lookahead.

What would your average times be using Ortega method, WITHOUT allowing any pre-inspection (just random scramble and go/no peeking = "COLD" solve)?

...

Last edited:

reThinking the Cube

Member
5.62 avg of 5, about a second slower

I got 9 on one solve cuz I saw two blocks and hesitated about which one to start with >.<
Why not include that 9sec. in the average? That is what is going to happen - when you don't get any pre-inspection!

...

puzzlemaster

Member
5.62 avg of 5, about a second slower

I got 9 on one solve cuz I saw two blocks and hesitated about which one to start with >.<
Why not include that 9sec. in the average? That is what is going to happen - when you don't get any pre-inspection!

...
In an average of 5, the worst time is cut...the 9 was in the average...it was cut. Learn2average.

nlCuber22

Member
5.91, 7.61, 6.77, 5.43, 6.88 = 6.52
Doesn't make much of a difference to me.
I voted <8.
EDIT: Haha. Got a 10.45 and rolled it into a 7.08 average

Last edited:

Cyrus C.

Member
The only reason I think I'm good* at 2x2x2 is because I'm good* at using inspection.

* In relation to my other times on other cubes.

reThinking the Cube

Member
wtf is preinspection.
Since normal inspection(15 sec.) for a solve is not timed, I chose - for the sake of clarity, to make a distinction by adding the prefix - "pre". The inspection for a "Cold" solve would have to take place during the timing. So with the added format, we can have two kinds of inspection. One of them is done while timed, the other is not. So I chose to refer to the later as "preinspection" to make that distinction. Yeah, technically in WCA rules/terminology, there is only "inspection". For this poll question, "pre-inspection" is the more appropriate term.

...

The only reason I think I'm good* at 2x2x2 is because I'm good* at using inspection.

* In relation to my other times on other cubes.
Exactly, and some methods rely on inspection more than others. If cubers answer this poll honestly, we can compare the results of the previous poll, and come up with a good idea of how inspection (or lack of) affects times with Ortega 2x2x2.

...

DavidWoner

The Punchmaster
current avg100: 3.96 (σ = 0.73)

5.09, 4.32, 3.22, 4.20, 4.42, 3.10, 4.52, 2.63, 2.80, 3.92, 4.36, 4.27, 4.20, 4.31, 2.83, 6.97, 4.15, 5.47, 4.97, 4.41, 4.49, 2.19, 3.37, 4.53, 4.81, 4.65, 4.50, 2.40, 4.77, 3.46, 3.82, 4.93, 4.41, 3.59, 5.26, 2.23, 4.73, 4.64, 4.38, 3.45, 4.78, 3.68, 4.70, 3.95, 4.01, 3.80, 3.91, 2.78, 3.97, 2.58, 3.68, 3.74, 4.39, 5.66, 4.21, 3.65, 3.61, 3.61, 3.49, 4.46, 4.34, 3.42, 4.83, 3.55, 3.52, 3.58, 3.73, 3.77, 4.96, 3.64, 3.53, 3.95, 4.21, 5.28, 4.12, 3.37, 5.18, 4.02, 3.70, 3.36, 2.80, 4.33, 4.62, 2.57, 3.85, 4.75, 3.38, 4.46, 5.08, 3.46, 4.09, 3.72, 2.81, 3.30, 3.50, 3.67, 4.02, 3.59, 2.86, 2.99

I may have been a bit liberal with the definition of Ortega. Rowan will beat this anyway.

reThinking the Cube

Member
current avg100: 3.96 (σ = 0.73)

5.09, 4.32, 3.22, 4.20, 4.42, 3.10, 4.52, 2.63, 2.80, 3.92, 4.36, 4.27, 4.20, 4.31, 2.83, 6.97, 4.15, 5.47, 4.97, 4.41, 4.49, 2.19, 3.37, 4.53, 4.81, 4.65, 4.50, 2.40, 4.77, 3.46, 3.82, 4.93, 4.41, 3.59, 5.26, 2.23, 4.73, 4.64, 4.38, 3.45, 4.78, 3.68, 4.70, 3.95, 4.01, 3.80, 3.91, 2.78, 3.97, 2.58, 3.68, 3.74, 4.39, 5.66, 4.21, 3.65, 3.61, 3.61, 3.49, 4.46, 4.34, 3.42, 4.83, 3.55, 3.52, 3.58, 3.73, 3.77, 4.96, 3.64, 3.53, 3.95, 4.21, 5.28, 4.12, 3.37, 5.18, 4.02, 3.70, 3.36, 2.80, 4.33, 4.62, 2.57, 3.85, 4.75, 3.38, 4.46, 5.08, 3.46, 4.09, 3.72, 2.81, 3.30, 3.50, 3.67, 4.02, 3.59, 2.86, 2.99

I may have been a bit liberal with the definition of Ortega. Rowan will beat this anyway.
These times are a bit too fast - are you using regular (+inspection) solving format?! Maybe this 100a could be for the other poll? For this poll, you cannot have ANY inspection that is untimed. Just random scramble and go. Make sure to time it that way, and then post your averages. Thanks.

...

Escher

Babby
current avg100: 3.96 (σ = 0.73)

5.09, 4.32, 3.22, 4.20, 4.42, 3.10, 4.52, 2.63, 2.80, 3.92, 4.36, 4.27, 4.20, 4.31, 2.83, 6.97, 4.15, 5.47, 4.97, 4.41, 4.49, 2.19, 3.37, 4.53, 4.81, 4.65, 4.50, 2.40, 4.77, 3.46, 3.82, 4.93, 4.41, 3.59, 5.26, 2.23, 4.73, 4.64, 4.38, 3.45, 4.78, 3.68, 4.70, 3.95, 4.01, 3.80, 3.91, 2.78, 3.97, 2.58, 3.68, 3.74, 4.39, 5.66, 4.21, 3.65, 3.61, 3.61, 3.49, 4.46, 4.34, 3.42, 4.83, 3.55, 3.52, 3.58, 3.73, 3.77, 4.96, 3.64, 3.53, 3.95, 4.21, 5.28, 4.12, 3.37, 5.18, 4.02, 3.70, 3.36, 2.80, 4.33, 4.62, 2.57, 3.85, 4.75, 3.38, 4.46, 5.08, 3.46, 4.09, 3.72, 2.81, 3.30, 3.50, 3.67, 4.02, 3.59, 2.86, 2.99

I may have been a bit liberal with the definition of Ortega. Rowan will beat this anyway.
These times are a bit too fast - are you using regular (+inspection) solving format?! Maybe this 100a could be for the other poll? For this poll, you cannot have ANY inspection that is untimed. Just random scramble and go. Make sure to time it that way, and then post your averages. Thanks.

...
Just... shut up.

DavidWoner

The Punchmaster
current avg100: 3.96 (σ = 0.73)

5.09, 4.32, 3.22, 4.20, 4.42, 3.10, 4.52, 2.63, 2.80, 3.92, 4.36, 4.27, 4.20, 4.31, 2.83, 6.97, 4.15, 5.47, 4.97, 4.41, 4.49, 2.19, 3.37, 4.53, 4.81, 4.65, 4.50, 2.40, 4.77, 3.46, 3.82, 4.93, 4.41, 3.59, 5.26, 2.23, 4.73, 4.64, 4.38, 3.45, 4.78, 3.68, 4.70, 3.95, 4.01, 3.80, 3.91, 2.78, 3.97, 2.58, 3.68, 3.74, 4.39, 5.66, 4.21, 3.65, 3.61, 3.61, 3.49, 4.46, 4.34, 3.42, 4.83, 3.55, 3.52, 3.58, 3.73, 3.77, 4.96, 3.64, 3.53, 3.95, 4.21, 5.28, 4.12, 3.37, 5.18, 4.02, 3.70, 3.36, 2.80, 4.33, 4.62, 2.57, 3.85, 4.75, 3.38, 4.46, 5.08, 3.46, 4.09, 3.72, 2.81, 3.30, 3.50, 3.67, 4.02, 3.59, 2.86, 2.99

I may have been a bit liberal with the definition of Ortega. Rowan will beat this anyway.
These times are a bit too fast - are you using regular (+inspection) solving format?! Maybe this 100a could be for the other poll? For this poll, you cannot have ANY inspection that is untimed. Just random scramble and go. Make sure to time it that way, and then post your averages. Thanks.

...
So an avg100 that is barely sub4 is "too fast", yet you included sub3 as an option in your poll?

reThinking the Cube

Member
in during pollskew
I see. You and ErikJ (both are sub-5 2x2x2 WITH inspection), but you voted sub-3 WITHOUT inspection! Can this be fixed?

..

reThinking the Cube

Member
So an avg100 that is barely sub4 is "too fast", yet you included sub3 as an option in your poll?
I wanted the choices to be consistent with this previous Ortega method poll -http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showpost.php?p=376959&postcount=1

I know that your current 2x2x2 average is very close to 4sec. with free 15sec. inspection. Seems reasonable to me for your times to increase if you are skipping inspection. If you got those times (100a =3.96s) without any inspection, or previous familiarity with the scrambles, then I apologize for assuming otherwise.

..

Status
Not open for further replies.