bldcuber314
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2024
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- grinding for nr 5bld mean
- WCA ID
- 2023JAIN31
I don't think OPA is 100% accurate either though.I've seen people using that and still getting parity.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't think OPA is 100% accurate either though.I've seen people using that and still getting parity.
It’s only not accurate if you don’t count your edges and slices right.I don't think OPA is 100% accurate either though.
What is this supposed to mean? On both square-1 and 4x4 if you trace properly and in the case of 4x4 , you have to get the slice count right, but I honestly don’t see how the argument that it isn’t ‘100% accurate’ could have originated. When you see top squanners get parity they obv mistrace and do the wrong solution, but that’s just human error and nothing down to the technique itselfI don't think OPA is 100% accurate either though.
And what is going on here? You make a good point then follow it up with nonsense. No offence but neither of you probably know how csp works so you shouldn’t be spreading misinformationIt’s only not accurate if you don’t count your edges and slices right.
Edit: I realized that he was talking about CSP.
I was replying to a guy that was talking about OPA, who replied to a guy who they thought was talking about OPA when they were talking about CSP. I was talking about slices as in 4x4 slices, not squan slices. FYI I have no idea how parity works on squan, only 4x4 OLL parity.What is this supposed to mean? On both square-1 and 4x4 if you trace properly and in the case of 4x4 , you have to get the slice count right, but I honestly don’t see how the argument that it isn’t ‘100% accurate’ could have originated. When you see top squanners get parity they obv mistrace and do the wrong solution, but that’s just human error and nothing down to the technique itself
And what is going on here? You make a good point then follow it up with nonsense. No offence but neither of you probably know how csp works so you shouldn’t be spreading misinformation
I meant not 100% accurate because of human error, because I thought that was what SpeakCuba meant in his original post. I don't really know how CSP or OPA work- I was just confused because SpeakCuba was arguing that CSP wasn't completely accurate due to human error but that OPA was 100% accurate.What is this supposed to mean? On both square-1 and 4x4 if you trace properly and in the case of 4x4 , you have to get the slice count right, but I honestly don’t see how the argument that it isn’t ‘100% accurate’ could have originated. When you see top squanners get parity they obv mistrace and do the wrong solution, but that’s just human error and nothing down to the technique itself
And what is going on here? You make a good point then follow it up with nonsense. No offence but neither of you probably know how csp works so you shouldn’t be spreading misinformation
agree, it’s just the same subject after allmeta hot-take: all the hot take threads should be merged into a megathread
@abunickabhi
Hot take: No it's gonna be Chinese kids foreverChina will only dominate in cubing (more specifically 3x3 and 2x2) for the next 5-10 years and then more western countries will start to re-dominate.
hot take: the aliens would dominate cubing over us earthlingsHot take: No it's gonna be Chinese kids forever