• 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!

[WR] Patrick Ponce - 4.69 3x3 single

M

Malkom

Guest
Bindedsa already knows more than half of 1LLL and gets sub-6 at home with them, proving fast recognition.... Definitely possible.
Now when i think about it it should be quite easy, OLL can be predicted during LS, CP recog is ez pz and EP shouldn't be so hard since you always can see two stickers on U.
 

Gomorrite

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
471
I think at this moment, if you take an average of his latest Avg5, Patrick Ponce is the 5th fastest 3x3 cuber in competition. It also seemed to me that until now he was the fastest cuber that people rarely talk about. A very good Avg5 by Patrick Ponce is also long overdue (he has a 7.10, 2 x 7.11, a 7.16...).
 

turtwig

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
656
But i don't think we will ever see a truly legit sub-2. ever.

In Drew Brad's 3.72 video, it says that the solve was 23 moves. It was so lucky that he said he wouldn't count it as a PB, but it shows that these kinds of solves, while incredibly rare, do happen, and I see no reason why the WCA would reject such a solve.

I believe Feliks's UWR TPS for a solve is 13.4, so if he wanted to get a 1.99 solve, it would have to be 1.99*13.4≈27 moves, which is higher than Drew's solve.

In Lucas's 'Fastest J-Perm' video, he says that his J-Perm was 20.63 TPS, so a 1.99 solve would only need to be 1.99*20.63≈41 moves, which coincidentally is how many moves this WR was.

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I think that a sub-2 single might to more likely than we think. If it does happen it'll probably be quite far off in the future though.
 

Sajwo

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
Poland
WCA
2012SZEW01
YouTube
Visit Channel
In Drew Brad's 3.72 video, it says that the solve was 23 moves. It was so lucky that he said he wouldn't count it as a PB, but it shows that these kinds of solves, while incredibly rare, do happen, and I see no reason why the WCA would reject such a solve.

I believe Feliks's UWR TPS for a solve is 13.4, so if he wanted to get a 1.99 solve, it would have to be 1.99*13.4≈27 moves, which is higher than Drew's solve.

In Lucas's 'Fastest J-Perm' video, he says that his J-Perm was 20.63 TPS, so a 1.99 solve would only need to be 1.99*20.63≈41 moves, which coincidentally is how many moves this WR was.

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I think that a sub-2 single might to more likely than we think. If it does happen it'll probably be quite far off in the future though.

Sub2 in competition is impossible, unless you have millions people competing every week.

Besides that I think it's also impossible at home.
 

cuber314159

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
2,973
Location
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norther...
WCA
2016EVAN06
YouTube
Visit Channel
In Drew Brad's 3.72 video, it says that the solve was 23 moves. It was so lucky that he said he wouldn't count it as a PB, but it shows that these kinds of solves, while incredibly rare, do happen, and I see no reason why the WCA would reject such a solve.

I believe Feliks's UWR TPS for a solve is 13.4, so if he wanted to get a 1.99 solve, it would have to be 1.99*13.4≈27 moves, which is higher than Drew's solve.

In Lucas's 'Fastest J-Perm' video, he says that his J-Perm was 20.63 TPS, so a 1.99 solve would only need to be 1.99*20.63≈41 moves, which coincidentally is how many moves this WR was.

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I think that a sub-2 single might to more likely than we think. If it does happen it'll probably be quite far off in the future though.
I don't know how you could possibly do j perms like that but it may be possible but I personally don't think we will see it for a long time especially in competitions but if cubing grows it may become possible. I predict that there will be an official sub4 by the end of 2021
 

Alex B71

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
111
Location
Lincolnshire, UK
I don't know how you could possibly do j perms like that but it may be possible but I personally don't think we will see it for a long time especially in competitions but if cubing grows it may become possible. I predict that there will be an official sub4 by the end of 2021

I'm going to say we will see a sub-4 somewhere between July and October 2018. Anyone else got a prediction?
 

Hazel

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,681
Location
in your walls :3
Bindedsa already knows more than half of 1LLL and gets sub-6 at home with them, proving fast recognition.... Definitely possible.
You could still lower the case count by quite a bit by using very minor edge control to make sure you never get a dot LL case
 

turtwig

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
656
But an effieceint f2l isn't nearly as finger-trickable as a j perm.

I'd admit my argument was a bit weak, but I was more just pondering about the plausibility of it happening and taking some stats and numbers that I knew than making a definitive case that it'll happen. I would say that the chance of a sub-2 ever happening is okay, but it'll definitely take a very long time to happen (especially in comp), and there's definitely a good chance that, due to many reasons, it never will.
 

Umm Roux?

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
307
Who cares if your biggest concern is memes then you have your priorities out of order. To me it seems a lot of people only care about memes which is unbeavilable.
Oh man I sincerely apologize for not adding another generic celebratory greeting. Also when did I prioirtize anything, its not like people type everything they think, I thought(and didnt type) about how this accomplishment is cool and whatnot but I typed what I typed because I dont find it necessary to type another generic post(an in terms of post about the solve itself I dont have enough interest in cubing although thats just personal preference).
 

Sue Doenim

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
448
Here's my view on the world record.

B2 R2 U F2 D2 B U' R U' L F L F' L2 R D R'

x' y2 // inspection
r' (U D') R' F' (U D') // EOLine
R' U R2 // Right block square
U' R' U2 L' U L // Left block square
U' R U' R' U L U L' // Left block
U U' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R // Right block
U' R U R' U R U2' R' U2// ZBLL

ZZ is good.
 

Reed Merrill

Member
Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
111
Location
Canada
Here's my view on the world record.

B2 R2 U F2 D2 B U' R U' L F L F' L2 R D R'

x' y2 // inspection
r' (U D') R' F' (U D') // EOLine
R' U R2 // Right block square
U' R' U2 L' U L // Left block square
U' R U' R' U L U L' // Left block
U U' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R // Right block
U' R U R' U R U2' R' U2// ZBLL

ZZ is good.

I think this is a really good point. A lot of what people applaud in really great CFOP solves could easily happen in every ZZ solve (rotationless, and 1LLL). 1LLL in ZZ is of course accomplished by using ZBLL or ZZLL, but that's a lot better than learning OLLCP. Imo EOline can also usually be as move efficient as cross, but even if not, blockbuilding during F2L should more than make up for the difficulties associated with EO.

My basic argument is that ZZ is always rotationless, and although people say that EOline is really difficult, which is definitely true, it's probably much less time consuming that learning OLLCP, which is what it takes to get the 1LLL solves that advanced ZZ users get all the time.

But, I might be biased so I'm interested in hearing what other people think. :)
 
Last edited:

Sue Doenim

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
448
Anyone heard about his new 2.99 UWR? Here's a reconstruction.

Scramble: R B2 R' B2 L' D B R B L U' B2 U R2 L2 F2 D' L2 U2 L2
z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' // XCross
y2 R' U' R // 2nd pair
U L' U L // 3rd pair
R U' R' // 4th pair
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Wait a second . . .

z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' y2 // EOLine+Left block square
R' U' R // Right block square
U L' U L // Left block
R U' R' // Right block
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Coincidence . . ?

I THINK NOT!!!!!
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Messages
105
Location
QLD
WCA
2017WARR04
YouTube
Visit Channel
Anyone heard about his new 2.99 UWR? Here's a reconstruction.

Scramble: R B2 R' B2 L' D B R B L U' B2 U R2 L2 F2 D' L2 U2 L2
z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' // XCross
y2 R' U' R // 2nd pair
U L' U L // 3rd pair
R U' R' // 4th pair
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Wait a second . . .

z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' y2 // EOLine+Left block square
R' U' R // Right block square
U L' U L // Left block
R U' R' // Right block
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Coincidence . . ?

I THINK NOT!!!!!
I Suspect he was ZZeroing. How else could he beat Feliks?
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
1,778
Location
At home. Where you should be.
Anyone heard about his new 2.99 UWR? Here's a reconstruction.

Scramble: R B2 R' B2 L' D B R B L U' B2 U R2 L2 F2 D' L2 U2 L2
z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' // XCross
y2 R' U' R // 2nd pair
U L' U L // 3rd pair
R U' R' // 4th pair
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Wait a second . . .

z'
F' D' F' R U R' D' y2 // EOLine+Left block square
R' U' R // Right block square
U L' U L // Left block
R U' R' // Right block
U' R U' L' U R' U' L // ZBLL

Coincidence . . ?

I THINK NOT!!!!!
Who was this?

EDIT: NM, I should have read the title of the thread first.
 
Top