Is this UWR? Sub-8 with Waterman

[DuckubingCuber347]

He avgs 5-6. At that level tho it kind of matters less how fast u are and matters more on whether u can have good pickup, good lookahead and good tps (which xu has plenty of that lol)

But... you have to be fast to be at that level... and... those three things help you to become fast... (You left out efficiency)

 

[EvanCuber]

. I'm not sure about Tymon

Tymon has gotten a sub-6 average in every comp that he has gone to for like the past ten competitions. You can most definitely say Tymon is sub-6

 

[BenChristman1]

Say what you want about the past world record, and your argument is circular for the second point. the 3rd point is where you are dead wrong. You assumed that 48 is HTM. It is not. Roux averages 48 moves STM and Waterman averages 40-45 moves. Some rouxers do believe that roux's movecount could be lowered to 46 for advanced solvers, but either way Waterman is less moves. Ergo-wise, you might be right, but I actually enjoy waterman ergo.
As for why your argument is circular on point 2... You said that just because one person is fast with a method does not make it good. Then how do you justify a new method ermerging. I think that every method has to start somewhere, and I also think it only takes one person to prove it is viable. If only one person is fast with it then it isn't a good method and no one should use it, so therefore no one uses it and it is a bad method because no one uses it and it never gets fast so it must be a bad method because no one gave it a chance.

Also, I'm not sure who said this, but someone said getting a PB 1/2 your average is unlikely, but I disagree. I know someone who averages 12-13 and has a 6 as a pb. There are plenty of people who have very fast PBs compared to their averages. Think about top solvers, they average sub 6 on a good day and some of them have sub 3 PBs so that is 1/2 their average. A silly point, but I had to refute it nonetheless.

Honestly, your arguments just don’t make sense. I have a reason to assume that Roux averages 48 STM and not 48 HTM, but you are assuming that it’s HTM just because that’s what helps your argument. You have no evidence to back up your argument, but even though I have very little, it is still better given the lack of specificity there is.

I don’t think that a method is viable until multiple people are good at it. (At least 25+) A new method becomes popular if people get good at it. Right now, Mehta, for example, is in a phase where it has a ton of potential, but it still needs more people and better times to back it up. I may switch to it in the future, but as of now, it hasn’t been proven yet. A new method has to have people who are willing to jump in to develop and improve it. For me, Mehta is a really fun method to casually solve with, but it’s not quite to the point where I think that it is developed enough to switch to.

Tymon has gotten a sub-6 average in every comp that he has gone to for like the past ten five competitions. You can most definitely say Tymon is sub-6

But yeah, Tymon is probably globally sub-6.

 

[GodCubing]

Honestly, your arguments just don’t make sense. I have a reason to assume that Roux averages 48 STM and not 48 HTM, but you are assuming that it’s HTM just because that’s what helps your argument. You have no evidence to back up your argument, but even though I have very little, it is still better given the lack of specificity there is.

Roux averages 48 STM I use and main the method. Ask literally anyone who uses roux they will tell you that the 48 is STM. Also, since waterman uses slice moves there is no point in using the HTM average movecount since that isn't the ETM (ergonomic movecount) or the true movecount in a speedsolve.