• 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!

Is Guimond a dead method?

Zarxrax

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
1,267
Location
North Carolina
The Guimond method for 2x2 has always been a fascinating method to me because it just works so differently than a lot of other methods. But, it seems like hardly anyone ever talks about this method, let alone uses it. If I search for Guimond content on YouTube, there are just a small handfull of videos, most of them 6-12 years old. I started learning Guimond about 6 or 7 years ago, but then quit cubing for a while, and it looks like this method has only declined further in popularity since that time.

Ortega is super popular as a beginners method. Then it seems undisputed that EG is the best 2x2 method. But there is an incredibly large gap between those two methods, particularly in the amount of algorithms you need to learn. It just seems puzzling to me that more people don't learn some sort of intermediate method like Guimond rather than either sticking with Ortega or going all in on EG.

There was a video on YouTube in 2009 of an unofficial avg12 using Guimond of 2.61. That included an avg5 of 2.26. The official world record avg 5 at that time was 2.45, and the 2nd place was 3.28! With the imrovements we have seen in hardware since then, I just wonder what sorts of times people could get with Guimond today.

I'm just curious what are some thoughts on why Guimond doesn't have more representation? It would at least be nice to see some decent YouTube content from some experts with the method.
 

Zarxrax

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
1,267
Location
North Carolina
People want to be fast. So they learn the fastest method.
I don't think this is necessarily true. Sure, if you look at the top competitors, they are going to have to learn the best method in order to be competitive. But I think the majority of cubers are never going to bother with EG because they just aren't that dedicated to it. A lot of people never learn full OLL on the 3x3. That doesn't mean that they don't want to get faster. A lot of peple just have their own goals for themselves that don't involve trying to set a world record.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
422
So about this I might be switching to guimond/vop because I just want to be different? But it’s very interesting and I may get really good with it.
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
467
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
The thing with Guimond is that it fills in a gap that doesn't really exist. You either learn ortega and stop, or you learn EG. There aren't very many people who use just CLL in comparison to the other methods, and the potential with ortega is still very high, so just use it and don't bother with Guimond.
 

tx789

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
1,873
Location
New Zealand
WCA
2010HUNT02
YouTube
Visit Channel
2x2 algs are really easy to learn so 120 isn't that much for basic EG if you are experienced. 2x2 had to be one-looked at the top level.

People talk about intermediate method for 3-style but no it is agreed on by everyone that you should learn one or which one(there are two).
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,087
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
2x2 algs are really easy to learn so 120 isn't that much for basic EG if you are experienced. 2x2 had to be one-looked at the top level.

People talk about intermediate method for 3-style but no it is agreed on by everyone that you should learn one or which one(there are two).
Intermediate method for 3 style? How does that relate to any of this lol
 

CurlyFries

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2019
Messages
33
WCA
2015BURE01
Guimond is an intermediate method for 2x2 comparable to Ortega/Varasono. You make 3/4 of a face of opposite colors(the same color can be used). This step is often already done at the start of a solve. You then use an algorithm to orient the rest of the corners using an algorithm, most of which are no more than four moves. You then separate the two colors into their respective places, and finish of the solve using PBL, the same algorithms from Ortega. Lots of the algorithms are very simple and some could be sen as intuitive.(an algorithm for the second to last step is just R2)

The link to the website from which I learned, with algorithms, is http://www.amvhell.com/stuff/cubes/guimond/guimond.html .

As to how I think this method compares to other methods, it seems very fun and slightly better than ortega. I might start using it as it seems fun and i currently don't do 2x2 much, which I hope tot change.
 

Zarxrax

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
1,267
Location
North Carolina
LOL, ^that's the guide I wrote, and I still haven't learned the method yet. How bad is it that people are having to learn the method from technically a beginner? I am about to learn it though, once I pick up a new 2x2 cube that isn't 8 years old.
 

Iwannaganx

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
464
Location
Victoria, Australia
I looked at the guide, but I still don't understand the step 0 and step 1. I get the seperation and PBL but I don't get the other first bits... More info?
 

kadabrium

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
72
in a similar line, theres the ''sarah advanced" skewb method that is basically suboptimal algs made for ease of memorization. you never see this anywhere else in cubing for example people doing EG by using fixed combinations of oll and pbl algs.
 

CurlyFries

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2019
Messages
33
WCA
2015BURE01
I looked at the guide, but I still don't understand the step 0 and step 1. I get the seperation and PBL but I don't get the other first bits... More info?
Step 0 is getting a V of opposite colors such as this picture.
9B91C8BA-0BE5-493D-B90D-B76CC995271E.jpeg
Step 1 is OLL, but also orienting the un oriented corner on the bottom.

So the cube will go from this,(the face previously shown is on the bottom)
01266914-A52C-4510-A44A-5EE7B1E8E002.jpeg

To this:
F3573B96-302E-4D4A-9E01-CE160D033830.jpeg

The cube is now ready for the separation step.
 

Iwannaganx

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
464
Location
Victoria, Australia
Top