• 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!

Ortega vs Guimond

Siraj A.

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
295
Location
VA, USA
WCA
2007ALIS01
I got my 2x2 I think almost 2 weeks ago, and I have an average of about 11 seconds. I was thinking about learning Ortega method, but some people say Guimond is faster. So what do you all use and which is better? Thanks.
 

philkt731

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
638
Location
West Lafayette
WCA
2007THOM02
YouTube
philkt731
I use mostly Guimond and average around 5 seconds, usually under. I think that if you are serious about it, you should learn Guimond so that you are more versatile because sometimes scrambles are better for Guimond, sometimes theyre better for ortega (once you've learned Guimond, Ortega does not have any more algos except corner orientation wchic are adopted from 3x3 and will come easy to you). I don't use Ortega as my main syystem ffirst of all because it requires more moves and second because I don't like performing the orientation algs on my 2x2.
 

masterofthebass

Premium Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
3,923
Location
Denver, CO
WCA
2007COHE01
YouTube
masterofthebass
if you're completely serious about 2x2, go for OFOTA. I'm thinking about learning it over the christmas break, and I'll update my progress if I do it. I average about 6-7 with ortega. Ortega can be a very fast method, since most of Japanese cubers use it.
 

philkt731

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
638
Location
West Lafayette
WCA
2007THOM02
YouTube
philkt731
I was also thinking about learning OFOTA but I realized that most of the time it is easier to do Guimond and look ahead to splitting the colors because some of the algs are quite long and aren't super fast, but I might still learn it so that when I catually do get one face of opposite colors, I can do it then, since Guimond wouldn't be the best choice there.
 

Erik

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
2,664
Location
Enschede, Netherlands, Netherlands
WCA
2005AKKE01
YouTube
frk17
When you really want serious, just go with EG.
I use Guimond and Ortega plus about 5 other systems/tricks to solve. If the first face is really easy sometimes it's better to do Ortega, but mostly Guimond is faster/fewer moves in my experience
 

Erik

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
2,664
Location
Enschede, Netherlands, Netherlands
WCA
2005AKKE01
YouTube
frk17
Ortega can be a very fast method, since most of Japanese cubers use it.
I fail to understand this implication. Maybe you should've rephrased a little ;).
Indeed it's a fast method, indeed a lot of japanese cubers use it. But it's not fast BECAUSE japanese use it, that would imply that everything japanese cubers use is fast.
Sorry I was bombarded with these things at school today... (again :( )
 

Kenneth

Not Alot
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
1,693
Location
Kauparve, Hejde, Gotland, Sweden
WCA
2005GUST01
YouTube
Kubbuth
Erik is right about that Gouimond in general is faster than Ortega. But it's not as easy to learn Guimond as Ortega. It's not about learnng the algos but to master the method.

Once you are at advanced Guimond, then that's it, you can't get deeper into it in that direction. But if you use Ortega there are EG (I used to know all cases but quickly lost 50% of them again =) and also some easier half way to EG methods (I got one 2.3 step** method based on Ortega that uses only 21 algs =)

** 2.3 because in 50% of the solves you have to end in R2 F2 R2, that's the 0.3 step =)

And after all that, I'm using "the Waterman method" = 1 layer + CLL :p
 
Last edited:
Top