Is it really that HARD to get sub-5 avg. with Ortega for 2x2?

[riffz]

I don't think its that hard to get. I don't always get them but my averages of 12 are 5.xx or lower the majority of the time with Ortega. I think at this point learning CLL is probably a good idea. My averages have gotten slower lately because I'm making a fully permuted bottom layer and then just doing orientation followed by permutation to prepare for using CLL.

You should just switch now. All you're doing ATM is LBL.

I know that. I'm learning CLL but in the mean time to practice I'm just building the bottom layer and sometimes I'll get a CLL I know. I wouldn't do that in comp...

 

[Zarxrax]

Sub 5 is really really hard.
There are only 164 people with sub-5 averages in competition, with ANY method.
Compare that to the 3x3, where the top 164 people are almost sub-13.

Despite this, I've often heard people make ridiculous claims, like one can easily get sub-5 with ortega with like 1 week of practice.

 

[Escher]

Sub 5 is really really hard.
There are only 164 people with sub-5 averages in competition, with ANY method.
Compare that to the 3x3, where the top 164 people are almost sub-13.

Despite this, I've often heard people make ridiculous claims, like one can easily get sub-5 with ortega with like 1 week of practice.

Well, not that many people have 2x2 as their main event, whereas 3x3 is a LOT of people's main event...

'Sub 5 in a week' is only possible if you are around 15 or less on 3x3, I think.

 

[vcuber13]

Sub 5 is really really hard.

Despite this, I've often heard people make ridiculous claims, like one can easily get sub-5 with ortega with like 1 week of practice.

With less than 2 days practice I got a 6.2 average of 50.

 

[riffz]

Sub 5 is really really hard.

Despite this, I've often heard people make ridiculous claims, like one can easily get sub-5 with ortega with like 1 week of practice.

With less than 2 days practice I got a 6.2 average of 50.

Sub 5 is a lot less than 6.2 on a 2x2 though...