3x3x3 time limits?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have seen a 6.28 second solve on Youtube. So sub 6 seconds is possible.

Given since the invention of the 3x3x3 cube, that less than 0.0001 pecent of all 4.32E19 states of the cube have been seen, I'll say sub 6 in an official WCA event will happen one day. It will take ten of thousands of events though.
if a top guy gets a good run + LL skip, there you have it. Takes a lot of tries, though xD

Who says there is a video?

Breandan's 4.72 LL skip is in the Easy scrambles thread somewhere. I had 4.83 PLL skip but I scrambled wrong.
Breandan also has a full step 4.72. But it's tremendously lucky :P
ARE YOU SERIOUS
yes I am serious
 
I don't think we will see anybody that can average better than 8 tps (the UWR for tps in solve is 8.18 with Breandans 7.21 I think), I guess that there will be people who use ZZ-ZB with say, a 44 move count on average.
O wait, that gives us an average of 4.5s xD

I expect that somebody will hit 7-8s average in the future, but I don't think that it can go any (much) further without some serious method development.
 
ZZ-ZB is hard. )';
We need someone to get really good at it, maybe, that person could be you. :p

(I think I'm the only who uses it, and I can barely eke out a sub-20 average of 5)
 
Mark Waterman method is the fastest faster than Fridrich
 
Last edited by a moderator:
in my opinion the only way to avg sub 8 EVERY TIME is to learn full ZB (or ZZ+ZBLL) and to get the recognition down to less than a second. and than lucky solves can get sub 5 easily.
 
in my opinion the only way to avg sub 8 EVERY TIME is to learn full ZB (or ZZ+ZBLL) and to get the recognition down to less than a second. and than lucky solves can get sub 5 easily.

I don't believe that ZB makes you any faster, infact the inverse as you cannot practise the algorithms nearly as much and i would imagine the recognition in hell. I agree that the main factor will be how many very fast cubers go to competitions often.
 
there is absolutely no limits to the 3x3 time.
If you're lucky enough, you could get something like a 5 move solve and sub-1 is possible.
 
assuming your average solve takes around 60 moves (that an average solve for people right?)

at 10 tps you could get ~6 second solves constantly, however i want to see anyone be able to do 10 tps...
 
assuming your average solve takes around 60 moves (that an average solve for people right?)

at 10 tps you could get ~6 second solves constantly, however i want to see anyone be able to do 10 tps...

Maybe 60 moves for Fridrich and Petrus. But I was averaging somewhere around 45 moves when I was using "Roux".
 
in my opinion the only way to avg sub 8 EVERY TIME is to learn full ZB (or ZZ+ZBLL) and to get the recognition down to less than a second. and than lucky solves can get sub 5 easily.

For a second there I thought you said "inspection".
 
Uhhh, ZZ+ZBLL.... hmmm, sub-5 average with that method would be tough.
REALLLLYYYY TOUGH.

I was thinking the lower bound to be 7 or 8.

Also, Tomk, you have no idea how ZBLL is recognized, do you?
I mean, looking at an OLL case, and then 4 stickers is really hard. D:

Or even recognizing edge cycles!
That's as hard as determining a U, Z, H perm, and knowing if it's clockwise or counter-clockwise! D:

ZZ+ZBLL is a really good method.
It just needs someone to be good at it, I'm not exaggerating when I say that 40-50 move solves can be achieved on average.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top