• 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 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Let's talk about Petrus

StachuK1992

statue
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
3,812
Location
West Chester, PA
WCA
2008KORI02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Several years ago, I popularized the term "The Big Four," in reference to what I, at the time, thought were the four most powerful speedcubing methods.
http://stachu.cubing.net/rants/methodrantings.html


Petrus was always 4th place in my head, and I considered it inferior to the other methods.


Why?


I'm personally not sure.
Maybe it's due to empirical evidence as I haven't seen anyone 'fast' do petrus in a while.
Maybe the blocks take just a bit more brain-power than Roux's.
Maybe it's the awkward rotations between the 2x2x2, 2x2x3, and EO that I always seem to do.


For me, ZZ's the obvious choice for OH, and CFOP, ZZ, and Roux all seem to be equals in my head for 2H.


Thoughts? Why do I discriminate against Petrus?
 

Smiles

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
573
YouTube
Visit Channel
I do the same thing. petrus is too intuitive and until last layer there's nothing that is done to speed it up other than move reduction. there are no finger tricks or useful move restrictions like roux and zz.

edit: the faster cubes we have the worse petrus becomes in relation to the big 3

oh and the eo step is way too hard.
 
Last edited:

waffle=ijm

Waffo
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Waffletopia
WCA
2008MANA02
YouTube
Visit Channel
EO step is lame. Like you do it after blocks which then limits you so much. With ZZ, you have an open cube to work with so there's more efficiency in terms of move count. Petrus on the other hand has EO as it's own little step. Why don't we incorporate EO while building blocks or while finishing F2L? If Petrus was ever to be rewritten then I'd like EO to be fused with other steps rather than it being a step by itself, because as of right now EO takes a lot of moves for Petrus (well to me at least)
 

DeeDubb

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
1,432
Location
South Korea
WCA
2014WHIT07
YouTube
Visit Channel
I've been dabbling in CFOP, but I think on about 50% of my solves, I try to start with a 2x2x2 (X-Cross) which comes from being able to build blocks. I'm not sure if this helps me that much though.
 

Noahaha

blindmod
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
3,015
Location
CT
WCA
2012ARTH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
As someone whose cubing style is heavily influenced by Petrus blockbuilding, the times I get when I focus on a pure CFOP style tend to be faster.

Same boat. Since I spent so long on Petrus, solving a 2x2x2 block comes most naturally to me. Unfortunately 4 times out of 5 it's better just to go for the cross.
 

mDiPalma

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
1,534
My avg1000 with Petrus is 13.5. I'm not good at it, but it's the most fun method for me.

in my opinion, there are 3 reasons why the Petrus method appears slower than other methods.

1) there's too much freedom (too many distinct things to look for at any given moment). there are too many decisions to consciously make in a speedsolve. it's impossible to weigh pros and cons of each possibility so quickly.

2) solves are "framed" in CFOP/ZZ/Roux solution styles, depending on the user. too many "Petrus" solves are just 3 cross pieces and 2 F2L pairs.

3) people are too lazy to inspect for more than 3 seconds. i often just find a good 2x2x2 or 2x2x1 and call it quits after a few moments of inspection.



how these problems could be solved:

1a) always decide ahead of time which 3x2x2 to expand to. Because my ZZ orientation involves blue/green on F and white/yellow on D, I can easily force myself into a particular expansion, but it may not be the most efficient/ergonomic.

1b) plan out the entire 3x2x2 in inspection

2) don't use dumb CFOP pairs. don't do EO ahead of schedule. Don't do 3x2x1->3x2x2. Do whatever is most efficient/ergonomic.

3) inspect for 15 seconds. or at least track where your block pieces will end up.


tl; dr - i think the best Petrus averages will come from a efficient, organized approach to blockbuilding, with a patient inspection phase
 

pdilla

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
811
Location
Salem, Oregon
Lack of finger tricks and, as you say, awkward cube rotations which seem to lead to tougher look ahead are the biggest problems that I can see.
 

ion

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2015
Messages
6
Location
France
Lolz. Obviously, you have not studied the method seriously.
EO the hardest step ? No fingertricks ? Lolz lolz lolz
 

qqwref

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,834
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I think Roux and CFOP are really the big two. ZZ is pretty good, but I feel like at the same skill level and number of LL algs CFOP will end up faster. Petrus can be okay too, but the ergonomic point is definitely true - it does seem to require more thought than CFOP, and planning out a whole 2x2x3 block at once is not easy. The 2gen step is really not much of an advantage over just building pairs CFOP style (rotations and F moves are quite fast nowadays, thanks to improved hardware and fingertricks) and blockbuilding and EO do slow things down.

Remember, the list of methods that have seen a sub-10 avg12 is pretty short, and there is still a gigantic difference between that and sub-7. Petrus is reasonably popular and well-known, but I don't anticipate anyone becoming world-class with it as their main method. You might as well use Tripod (ben's had some really fast singles), or Heise, or my Columns thing, or Tao Yu's CFOP/Roux hybrid.
 

Smiles

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
573
YouTube
Visit Channel
I think Roux and CFOP are really the big two. ZZ is pretty good, but I feel like at the same skill level and number of LL algs CFOP will end up faster. Petrus can be okay too, but the ergonomic point is definitely true - it does seem to require more thought than CFOP, and planning out a whole 2x2x3 block at once is not easy. The 2gen step is really not much of an advantage over just building pairs CFOP style (rotations and F moves are quite fast nowadays, thanks to improved hardware and fingertricks) and blockbuilding and EO do slow things down.

Remember, the list of methods that have seen a sub-10 avg12 is pretty short, and there is still a gigantic difference between that and sub-7. Petrus is reasonably popular and well-known, but I don't anticipate anyone becoming world-class with it as their main method. You might as well use Tripod (ben's had some really fast singles), or Heise, or my Columns thing, or Tao Yu's CFOP/Roux hybrid.

I feel like zz has potential because its designed for a speedy f2l, and the LS LL options are huge. someone will find a combination that works best, if only more people used the method.
 
Last edited:

Smiles

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
573
YouTube
Visit Channel
maybe COLL + EPLL but take out all the mediocre COLL algs and replace them with kirjava's 1-look 2-alg set instead of ZBLL for easier recall and no need for practicing the algs.

oh and wv and sv whenever convenient of course.
 

ion

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2015
Messages
6
Location
France
You make the 222 in DBL. Then you expand to 223 in DBR (<R,U,F> fingertricks). Then you orient the edges (<R,U,F> fingertricks). Then you do ONE rotation (y'). Then you finish the F2L (<R,U> fingertricks). Then you do the LL (in your favourite way).

Weird rotations ? Bad fingertricks ? I don't understand why you say that. There is often only one rotation and blockbuilding is RUF (then RU).

Also, look-ahead. Once you made the 222, you can see ALL the unsolved cubies. All the hidden cubies are the solved ones.
And block-building don't require a lot of thought when you are used to it.

I'm not saying Petrus is the best method. I even think CFOP and Roux are slighty better. But Petrus is underrated, and is as good as ZZ in my opinion. ZZ has his advantages, but Petrus too (we look at only one side of the cube, we utilize only one hand...)
I can post speedsolves reconstructions if you are interested in.

(Also, sorry for my bad english.)
 
Top