• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

4 averages of 5 comparing 4 different LL techniques

Jbacboy

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2015
Messages
432
Location
Somewhere on the internet
WCA
2014CHRI04
YouTube
Visit Channel
A video I made proving full OLL and PLL isn't really needed.


I use full OLL and PLL and edge control to force good olls, but for beginners the most consistent choice is full PLL and 2 look OLL.
EDIT:Times:
4LLL: (11.24) 18.52 17.21 15.17 (19.88 pop)

2 look OLL, Full PLL:14.42 16.03 (10.40) 16.30 (16.94)

Full OLL, 2 Look PLL:13.70 (18.20) 14.25 (12.86) 16.66

2LLL:11.84 14.59 (10.74 PLL skip) 12.39 (14.96)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mark49152

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
4,702
Location
UK
WCA
2015RIVE05
YouTube
Visit Channel
False. Collin is sub 13 with 4LL cuz his F2L is amazing
Oh no, it's yet another "you don't need full OLL to be sub-X" fallacy thread. Fact: full OLL saves you moves and a look, and will make you faster. Same goes for PLL. Don't be lazy.

It's the same kind of argument as "you don't need to study to get a good job, look at X, s/he's successful." Go on then, drop out, and good luck! :D
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
144
Location
UK
Oh. I was expecting comparison of things like:

COLL + EPLL
CLL + ELL
OLL + PLL
EO + ZBLL
CPEOL + 2GLL
etc.

That would actually be an informative and interesting test. I mean, using full solves is a really bad way to test these 'techniques', there is just far too much variation in the rest of the solve for you to be given any meaningful data. You should at least have used LL scrambles. If you don't know how to do this, go to qqTimer, select 3x3 subsets in the first menu and last layer in the second.
 
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
113
Location
place
False. Collin is sub 13 with 4LL cuz his F2L is amazing
and he's sub9 with 2LLL, the difference is more than just 4 seconds.
someone who averages 30 seconds with 4LLL could be down to a 22 second average with 2LLL, because Collin has much better fingertricks than slow people.
 

Jbacboy

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2015
Messages
432
Location
Somewhere on the internet
WCA
2014CHRI04
YouTube
Visit Channel
Results:
4LLL: 5.64, 6.66, (8.16), 5.83, (3.77), 5.84, 7.22, 3.82, 7.65, 6.92, 8.59, 5.58 Average of 12: 6.33 Very inconsistent, as expected. Also pretty bad average.
2 look OLL, full PLL: 4.53, 6.02, (4.12), 4.26, (6.21), 4.75, 5.37, 4.75, 4.78, 5.79, 6.16, 5.52 Average of 12: 5.19 Much more consistent.
Full OLL, 2 look PLL: 6.11, (3.92), 6.66, (7.47), 7.19, 7.13, 5.34, 4.36, 7.18, 4.43, 6.62, 5.71 Average of 12: 6.07 Not much to say.
Full OLL, Full PLL: 5.23, 3.17, (6.40), (1.56), 3.77, 4.26, 5.03, 5.10, 5.23, 4.40, 3.60, 4.31 Average of 12: 4.41 Meh
 

Jason Green

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
1,136
Location
Fort Worth, TX
WCA
2016GREE02
YouTube
Visit Channel
I tend to agree that it's best for beginners. For example me, I'm really slow and don't get much practice time, an hour or two if I'm lucky. Some days none.

I learned the full PLL but I'm still at like 46 seconds. I've been taking a couple seconds off each day lately. I think if I spent time learning OLL now it would be discouraging because I would not have any time to improve for a while because I would use most of my practice time on that. Instead I feel I should greatly improve my F2L first.

I am thinking maybe when I get sub 30 I will start learning the OLLs, maybe sub 20... If I ever do. :)

I am open to being persuaded otherwise. ;)
 
Top