Jonathan Cuber
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2021
- Messages
- 43
i do think so
it looks easy for some lol
bec.... many cubers have got sub-1 averages
it looks easy for some lol
bec.... many cubers have got sub-1 averages
It's been happening a lot as well in practice video sessions. Sub-1 ao12s also exist, so the time for a new 2x2 WR is ripeI think it's big distinction if you mean ao5 WR or global average.
I think it's definitely possible that someone will get sub-1 ao5.
check that soonit will take 2 years, 7 months, 22 days, 7hours and 13.87 seconds by a method neutral chinese solver (full eg + tcll, SS, ortega and guimond and a new method simply known as "2ZRNG")
That sounds like Ruihang Xu version 2.0In a few years maybe some Chinese cuber with insane TPS and very lucky scrambles. Idk how many people are practicing 2x2 actively.
Didn't he mess up two possibly sub-1 averages because he dropped the cube or fumbled it?A sub-1 2x2 average is very possible and probably will be coming soon. Zayn has a 1.02 official average, and many sub-1s at home. All he needs is a good scramble set without messing up
The logic is you should practice 2x2 moreI average 4.5s on 2x2 and 13.5s on 3x3 with LMCF where the first step is solving the corners, so in LMCF it seems that the entire solve (3x3) takes three times the length of solving the corners (2x2). This is weird because it would imply a 1-second 2x2 expert could solve the 3x3 in 3 seconds. I doubt this is true but it is hard to see where the logic is wrong.
I average 4.5s on 2x2 and 13.5s on 3x3 with LMCF where the first step is solving the corners, so in LMCF it seems that the entire solve (3x3) takes three times the length of solving the corners (2x2). This is weird because it would imply a 1-second 2x2 expert could solve the 3x3 in 3 seconds. I doubt this is true but it is hard to see where the logic is wrong.
I average 4.5s on 2x2 and 13.5s on 3x3 with LMCF where the first step is solving the corners, so in LMCF it seems that the entire solve (3x3) takes three times the length of solving the corners (2x2). This is weird because it would imply a 1-second 2x2 expert could solve the 3x3 in 3 seconds. I doubt this is true but it is hard to see where the logic is wrong.
I have a 7.90 official 2x2 average and I average global mid-10 on 3x3. To me it seems that LMCF has even greater potential then you say! If I can lower my times to low-1 I will easily be sub-3 on 3x3.I average 4.5s on 2x2 and 13.5s on 3x3 with LMCF where the first step is solving the corners, so in LMCF it seems that the entire solve (3x3) takes three times the length of solving the corners (2x2). This is weird because it would imply a 1-second 2x2 expert could solve the 3x3 in 3 seconds. I doubt this is true but it is hard to see where the logic is wrong.
Zayn already did it but it wasnt officialDoes anyone think It's possible to get a sub 1 average on 2x2x2.
I knew itZayn will get wr 2x2 avg this year
April 22ndNow were only 0.01 off, make bets on when the sub 1 will come?
I will have a comp then, does that mean I...April 22nd