With more and more people investing time in perfecting algorithms, we always try to go for crazy stuff like ZBLL, OLLCP, full floating 3-style and so on. I think these algsets are possible to use in actual solves if a lot of work is put into it.
But there are some algsets like 1LLL and UF5 (5-style edges), which have the number of cases in the thousands, and will take a lot of effort to even properly categorise and retrieve the algorithms once they are learnt.
So my question is, what do you think is the feasibility of such big algsets? If someone becomes a full time cuber and starts from the age of 5, will they be using such algsets.
For reference, such algsets are still smaller in size for memorisation as compared to what elite chess players memorise in their opening theory.
Right now? No probably not worth it at least for something like 1lll. There are too many problems.
1) Genning good algs is going to take forever.
2) recognition time will pretty much always take longer
3) even if you learn them, you will probably have worse execution for all of them because you will see each one fewer times in your practice solves because there are so many of them meaning you’ll have less practice,
4) Many of the algs are going to just be worse then doing OLL and PLL or some other set, and figuring out which ones are worse is going to be a pain.
these are just the issues I can think of off the top of my head. However I do think this brings up an interesting question. Once records start stagnating where will cubing go? CFOP has hard limits as a method when it comes to minimum movecounts required to complete each step, extensions to them help people break through those limits a little bit but even those extensions have hard limits. Once we start hitting the wall of what’s humanly possible with the method what will happen? Will people start using Roux because it has a higher ceiling? The, average movecount is lower, of course it’s more intuitive meaning it’s harder to turn faster, but that’s only placing more of a burden on the brain, which has a very high ceiling, to get faster instead of having an actual physical limit. Of course Roux has a physical limit too, so what happens when we hit that wall too? Do you go to a very low movecount method like heise, which isn’t even seen as a speed solving method at all, in order to break those limits, or do you learn massive alg sets in order to solve more with fewer moves? Just placing more and more of a burden on the brain until we hit the physical limits of your brain (if that even exists), or even the limits of how good you can get within the time period of you life that your brain has fast enough reaction time to compete at the top level. Of course there are physical limits of the cube, the mean minimum amount of moves it takes to solve a cube from any cube state is about 18 moves, turning at 12.5 moves per second (Ruihang’s TPS during his best official average) would get you 1.44 seconds. Of course to be able to average this time would require you to inspect a world class FMC solution within a 15 second inspection time consistently and probably just 1 look the whole cube just to keep up tps. This is obviously completely unreasonable, and almost definitely impossible, however maybe these large alg sets will become necessary to even have a chance at beating records.
my bets on when CFOP (including all its extensions) becomes completely stagnant is when people start averaging around 3.6.
