My Quest for Sub 8 Petrus

[mukerflap]

Why is it worse you dunno what to call you ?

Coll L5E objectively worse than ZBLL
normal petrus EO u can just use M' U M for 4 edges
RUL f2l objectively worse than RU f2l
you build 2x2x3 in back in normal petrus

 

[ProStar]

Coll L5E objectively worse than ZBLL
normal petrus EO u can just use M' U M for 4 edges
RUL f2l objectively worse than RU f2l
you build 2x2x3 in back in normal petrus

WV/SV->1LLL, which will take WAYYYYYY less algs than ZBLL. How many people do you know that actually have learned full ZBLL?
You can only sometimes do 4 edges at a time for Petrus, you always do it in Petrus-W
That's true, but not by much. Also stop saying "objectively", look it up in a dictionary before you start using it
Same as in Petrus-W

 

[PetrusQuber]

Ok, better. I'm analyzing with my extreme knowledge that happens to be less than yours right now.

Ok, as far as I can tell the 2x2x2-EO was good. For F2L I would've done

y' R U R U2 R' U' R U2 R U2 R' U2 R U' R'

And that leads to an easy COLL->U-Perm

Nice . How did you find that? Because I do too much Petrus, and this seems pretty CFOP like. (Cross edge insertion while setting up easy pair). My first thought was to just pair up an edge and corner.

 

[ProStar]

Nice . How did you find that? Because I do too much Petrus, and this seems pretty CFOP like. (Cross edge insertion while setting up easy pair). My first thought was to just pair up an edge and corner.

I just did CFOP. What you do is probably better overall, but in this specific situation doing a CFOP-like F2L was a little better

 

[mukerflap]

WV/SV->1LLL, which will take WAYYYYYY less algs than ZBLL. How many people do you know that actually have learned full ZBLL?
You can only sometimes do 4 edges at a time for Petrus, you always do it in Petrus-W
That's true, but not by much. Also stop saying "objectively", look it up in a dictionary before you start using it
Same as in Petrus-W

ZBLL isnt even hard to learn but no one takes initiative.
ZZ EO in the middle of a solve? no one could recognize that instantly and orienting 4 bad edges at a time with F is a lot harder when you are restricted by a 2x2x3, and all this gives you is a worse ergonomic f2l and 2lll

 

[Deleted member 51471]

ZBLL isnt even hard to learn but no one takes initiative.
ZZ EO in the middle of a solve? no one could recognize that instantly and orienting 4 bad edges at a time with F is a lot harder when you are restricted by a 2x2x3, and all this gives you is a worse ergonomic f2l and 2lll

No L2P ergonomics are better. You never have to regrip because the back slots are already filled.

 

[mukerflap]

No L2P ergonomics are better. You never have to regrip because the back slots are already filled.

u have to do m moves if L2P edge is in DF so regrip

 

[brododragon]

u have to do m moves if L2P edge is in DF so regrip

You don't have to.

ZZ EO in the middle of a solve? no one could recognize that instantly

Lookahead.

 

[PapaSmurf]

Petrus vs Petrus-W (only comparing post 2x2x3 and with ZBLL vs COLL+L5EP)

Spoiler: Petrus

Movecount:
EO=6
RB=10
LL=17
Total=33

Ergonomics:
EO=Good ergonomics, not super, but not awful.
RB=Very good ergonomics.
LL=Pretty good eronomics, mostly good with a few exceptions.

Spoiler: Petrus-W

Movecount:
EO=4
L2P=14
COLL=11.73 (using my algs and OH sunes where needed, so about 12 on average).
L5EP= 8.17 (using my algs)
Total=36.90

Ergonomics:
EO=Basically the same as normal Petrus.
L2P=Alright ergonomics, definitely not bad, but not super amazing either.
COLL=Great algs. Imagine all the good ZBLLs.
L5EP=Very good too.

Spoiler: Final Comparison

Petrus definitely has a lower movecount. Moreover, the ergonomics of Petrus-W definitely don't make up for the loss. The rotation in Petrus doesn't really detract from the method. At most you could say the movecount is 1 move different. If you're willing to learn ZBLL, definitely go the Petrus route (you can also use other nice add-ons). If you're not, just know that you're using something that's probably sub-optimal, but if you prefer it, go for it.

[Edit] RB movecount from 9 to 10.

 

[PetrusQuber]

Did you just work out the movecounts of each step? Because I can’t even imagine getting, say, 9 moves for RB...

 

[PapaSmurf]

Everything but RB was from sources. I just did 5 RBs, 3 were 9, 1 was 10 and 1 was 12. It will probably be 10 then, so I'll change that.

 

[PetrusQuber]

Is this FMC, or realistic during a speedsolve? I average 13-15.

 

[PapaSmurf]

They weren't full speedsolve, but i didn't go back on myself (so no undoing a move) and they were probably 5 seconds on average.

 

[ProStar]

Petrus vs Petrus-W (only comparing post 2x2x3 and with ZBLL vs COLL+L5EP)

Spoiler: Petrus

Movecount:
EO=6
RB=10
LL=17
Total=33

Ergonomics:
EO=Good ergonomics, not super, but not awful.
RB=Very good ergonomics.
LL=Pretty good eronomics, mostly good with a few exceptions.

Spoiler: Petrus-W

Movecount:
EO=4
L2P=14
COLL=11.73 (using my algs and OH sunes where needed, so about 12 on average).
L5EP= 8.17 (using my algs)
Total=36.90

Ergonomics:
EO=Basically the same as normal Petrus.
L2P=Alright ergonomics, definitely not bad, but not super amazing either.
COLL=Great algs. Imagine all the good ZBLLs.
L5EP=Very good too.

Spoiler: Final Comparison

Petrus definitely has a lower movecount. Moreover, the ergonomics of Petrus-W definitely don't make up for the loss. The rotation in Petrus doesn't really detract from the method. At most you could say the movecount is 1 move different. If you're willing to learn ZBLL, definitely go the Petrus route (you can also use other nice add-ons). If you're not, just know that you're using something that's probably sub-optimal, but if you prefer it, go for it.

[Edit] RB movecount from 9 to 10.

What about doing WV->HKPLL(or whatever it's called)? Or even CLP->L5EP if we're talking about ZBLL

 

[PetrusQuber]

700 solves, sub 18 session! And......

PB AO5!!! 14.896 -two counting 14s

 

[mukerflap]

Petrus vs Petrus-W (only comparing post 2x2x3 and with ZBLL vs COLL+L5EP)

Spoiler: Petrus

Movecount:
EO=6
RB=10
LL=17
Total=33

Ergonomics:
EO=Good ergonomics, not super, but not awful.
RB=Very good ergonomics.
LL=Pretty good eronomics, mostly good with a few exceptions.

Spoiler: Petrus-W

Movecount:
EO=4
L2P=14
COLL=11.73 (using my algs and OH sunes where needed, so about 12 on average).
L5EP= 8.17 (using my algs)
Total=36.90

Ergonomics:
EO=Basically the same as normal Petrus.
L2P=Alright ergonomics, definitely not bad, but not super amazing either.
COLL=Great algs. Imagine all the good ZBLLs.
L5EP=Very good too.

Spoiler: Final Comparison

Petrus definitely has a lower movecount. Moreover, the ergonomics of Petrus-W definitely don't make up for the loss. The rotation in Petrus doesn't really detract from the method. At most you could say the movecount is 1 move different. If you're willing to learn ZBLL, definitely go the Petrus route (you can also use other nice add-ons). If you're not, just know that you're using something that's probably sub-optimal, but if you prefer it, go for it.

[Edit] RB movecount from 9 to 10.

Petrus W EO recognition way harder, harder for CN, Probably more moves too from how i understand it

 

[ProStar]

Petrus W EO recognition way harder, harder for CN, Probably more moves too from how i understand it

That is completely wrong. The only reason is may seem harder to you(assuming you've actually tried the method) is because you're used to one over the other. If I were to ask a good ZZ solver, they'd say Petrus-W is wayyyyy easier. And CN is no harder than in normal Petrus, and 2 less moves

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Petrus vs Petrus-W (only comparing post 2x2x3 and with ZBLL vs COLL+L5EP)

Spoiler: Petrus

Movecount:
EO=6
RB=10
LL=17
Total=33

Ergonomics:
EO=Good ergonomics, not super, but not awful.
RB=Very good ergonomics.
LL=Pretty good eronomics, mostly good with a few exceptions.

Spoiler: Petrus-W

Movecount:
EO=4
L2P=14
COLL=11.73 (using my algs and OH sunes where needed, so about 12 on average).
L5EP= 8.17 (using my algs)
Total=36.90

Ergonomics:
EO=Basically the same as normal Petrus.
L2P=Alright ergonomics, definitely not bad, but not super amazing either.
COLL=Great algs. Imagine all the good ZBLLs.
L5EP=Very good too.

Spoiler: Final Comparison

Petrus definitely has a lower movecount. Moreover, the ergonomics of Petrus-W definitely don't make up for the loss. The rotation in Petrus doesn't really detract from the method. At most you could say the movecount is 1 move different. If you're willing to learn ZBLL, definitely go the Petrus route (you can also use other nice add-ons). If you're not, just know that you're using something that's probably sub-optimal, but if you prefer it, go for it.

[Edit] RB movecount from 9 to 10.

Thanks. I love this and I'm glad you actually explained yourself unlike some other people.

EDIT : But then, if you're willing to go learn full ZBLL, you might as well use ZZ, which is objectively better.
EDIT 2.0 : Oh yeah, do you know the avg move count for 2x2 and 2x2x3 ?

 

[brododragon]

The takeover of the word objectively is here!

 

[PetrusQuber]

The Petrus vs Petrus W thread!