Petrus Example Solves by Panda

[JLarsen]

Just reading Brest's epic reconstructions, your 2x2x2 seems great every solve, but from there it just goes downhill. I think it's a bad thing that my CFOP is more efficient than your petrus.
Props for doing these though.

I think it's largely in part because after 2x2 you have to start doing something for 2x2x3 even if you don't know where all 3 pieces are. Maybe I need to start obsessing over trying to track 2x2x3 during 2x2 again?

Edit: Not going to lie it's pretty discouraging hearing that my solve are less efficient than a CFOP...but I'm not sure that there's really much I can do to fix that. 2x2x3 has a lot of freedom, but it's not practical to take advantage of any of it in a speedsolve.

Double post but definitely worth it. After reading everything in this discussion and others, I decided to try an average using X cross and 2 look OLL. Here's the results

Average of 12: 17.10

Spoiler

1. 15.74 R2 F2 D2 B' R2 D2 B' F' D2 U2 F' L D R' D B' L B D' B' U2
2. 22.06 D2 R2 F L2 U2 F2 R2 F' D2 L2 R2 U F D2 L' F2 R B F2 U'
3. 14.69 F D2 R2 B L2 B' D2 L2 F' U2 B2 R D L B2 U' R' F2 U2 F' D
4. 18.38 D2 B2 L2 F2 R2 D2 B2 D2 R B2 R B' D2 R' D B2 D F' R'
5. 15.18 D2 B' D2 R2 U2 B' L2 D2 F' R' B U' B F' L' B2 R2 B' U'
6. 19.68 U2 L' F2 L D2 L U2 B2 R D2 F2 D F' D2 L' R2 U2 B2 F' L F
7. 16.12 L2 R2 B2 D B2 L2 U2 R2 U' B2 U2 R' D2 U B' R2 U2 L' U'
8. 15.66 D' L2 B2 D2 R2 F2 D R2 F2 D' B2 F L F2 L2 B L2 R B' U' L
9. 15.51 U' L2 D R2 U F2 U' B2 L2 B2 U2 R' B U' L R2 B R' B L
10. (14.17) R2 B2 D2 F2 D' F2 L2 D R2 B2 U B R' D L' F2 R U F' L U
11. (22.38) F2 R2 F2 U2 R2 U2 L D2 L' U2 F2 U' B' L2 U R' B' L D F' L
12. 17.93 L B2 F2 L' D2 L B2 R U2 B2 U2 B' L' F U' R' B' D' L' U F2

I haven't done any movecounting yet, but something tells me that the solutions are more efficient than my usual ones. The ridiculous thing is that I don't even practice fridrich. I'm reallllly considering taking up X Cross full time, and learning full OLL, and smashing all of the barriers that I couldn't before. The solves were still pretty fun too! The 20s were me trying to remember my dot case OLL that I use....lmao

 

[Noahaha]

Double post but definitely worth it. After reading everything in this discussion and others, I decided to try an average using X cross and 2 look OLL. Here's the results

Average of 12: 17.10

Spoiler

1. 15.74 R2 F2 D2 B' R2 D2 B' F' D2 U2 F' L D R' D B' L B D' B' U2
2. 22.06 D2 R2 F L2 U2 F2 R2 F' D2 L2 R2 U F D2 L' F2 R B F2 U'
3. 14.69 F D2 R2 B L2 B' D2 L2 F' U2 B2 R D L B2 U' R' F2 U2 F' D
4. 18.38 D2 B2 L2 F2 R2 D2 B2 D2 R B2 R B' D2 R' D B2 D F' R'
5. 15.18 D2 B' D2 R2 U2 B' L2 D2 F' R' B U' B F' L' B2 R2 B' U'
6. 19.68 U2 L' F2 L D2 L U2 B2 R D2 F2 D F' D2 L' R2 U2 B2 F' L F
7. 16.12 L2 R2 B2 D B2 L2 U2 R2 U' B2 U2 R' D2 U B' R2 U2 L' U'
8. 15.66 D' L2 B2 D2 R2 F2 D R2 F2 D' B2 F L F2 L2 B L2 R B' U' L
9. 15.51 U' L2 D R2 U F2 U' B2 L2 B2 U2 R' B U' L R2 B R' B L
10. (14.17) R2 B2 D2 F2 D' F2 L2 D R2 B2 U B R' D L' F2 R U F' L U
11. (22.38) F2 R2 F2 U2 R2 U2 L D2 L' U2 F2 U' B' L2 U R' B' L D F' L
12. 17.93 L B2 F2 L' D2 L B2 R U2 B2 U2 B' L' F U' R' B' D' L' U F2

I haven't done any movecounting yet, but something tells me that the solutions are more efficient than my usual ones. The ridiculous thing is that I don't even practice fridrich. I'm reallllly considering taking up X Cross full time, and learning full OLL, and smashing all of the barriers that I couldn't before. The solves were still pretty fun too! The 20s were me trying to remember my dot case OLL that I use....lmao

=(

 

[JLarsen]

Average number 2

Average of 12: 17.00

Spoiler

1. (13.91) B2 L2 U B2 D2 B2 L2 D' R2 D2 B2 R U' L' F L2 U' L' B D F
2. 15.39 R2 D R2 B2 U2 F2 U L2 U R2 D L' F2 U' B2 R B' L' R2 D2
3. 16.76 F' B' U D' L F' U2 L2 U B' R' U2 F2 R L' D2 R' U2 F2 D2 R'
4. 17.75 U2 L' B2 F2 U2 R' U2 L' B2 F2 D2 B' D' L' U' L' B F D'
5. 18.21 L' F2 D R' F D R B' D R' F2 B2 L D2 F2 R' B2 L' U2 B2
6. 17.07 B2 R2 B2 F2 U' F2 L2 D B2 U2 B L D2 B' D' B2 L2 U R U
7. 16.36 U2 L2 D2 L2 B R2 F U2 B F' U2 R B F2 L' D2 F2 D F2 D' B
8. 19.63 U B' L2 F R D F D B' L U2 F2 D' B2 U2 F2 R2 U' B2 L2 B2
9. 15.59 R2 U2 R2 D' B2 R2 F2 R2 U B2 R2 B D2 F L' F' R' D2 L2 F2
10. 16.04 U2 L' D2 F2 R2 F2 L' R2 D2 R U2 F L U L F U' L' F'
11. (19.77) F' B' R' U2 L' B' D' R2 U B' U2 F' U2 D2 B U2 D2 R2 B2 U2
12. 17.21 R' B2 L B2 D2 F2 D2 R' F2 U2 L2 B U F2 D' L2 U B' L F' D2

I've dumped years into this method and I think it's time that I acknowledge it's flaws and move on. I'm still making a 2x2 every single solve. Very worst case scenario, the same thing happens that happened the last time I switched to Fridrich. I get bored, I do a Petrus average, and I get the best average I've ever done. I really want to get this idea out to other people that might be trying to speedsolve with Petrus.

 

[Rpotts]

I really want to get this idea out to other people that might be trying to speedsolve with Petrus.

freeeeeefaawwwp.

 

[5BLD]

I think it's largely in part because after 2x2 you have to start doing something for 2x2x3 even if you don't know where all 3 pieces are. Maybe I need to start obsessing over trying to track 2x2x3 during 2x2 again?

Edit: Not going to lie it's pretty discouraging hearing that my solve are less efficient than a CFOP...but I'm not sure that there's really much I can do to fix that. 2x2x3 has a lot of freedom, but it's not practical to take advantage of any of it in a speedsolve.

What? Well even I can take advantage of 2 of the 3 options (fixed D white or yellow) by looking through both of the three pieces through 2x2x2 and seeing which looks (may not necessarily but usually is) nicer.

Then since I planned out the 2x2x2 during inspection I can just not look at that and track the three pieces.

An alternative would be to simply find all six pieces (or for me just the edges; I do this because I can locate corners very fast anyway) and track although maybe six is a little too much. I can't do all six, haha.

But tracking two pairs for me is best if I can't do it in inspection.

Sorry if I'm completely missing the point of your post- tell me if I am.

 

[JLarsen]

You're not missing the point - I was just saying that I can't do that. I can't plan an entire 2x2 and then do it from memory without looking it at while tracking other pieces. But even if I was good at doing so, then I would be devoting myself to a particular 2x2x3 expansion before I even knew for sure how it would turn out. F2L slotting is great because you can pick whatever slot you want, and take advantage of easy cases. With 2x2x3 expansion, it's much more difficult to recognize, execute, and take advantage of any easy cases that come up because they're in awkward spots, require awkward rotations, and the ability to put together 3 pieces efficiently without having major pauses. With X cross, all I have to track and put into place are 2 edges, which is a piece of cake. All I'm saying is that 2x2x3 is a difficult step to do right.

 

[5BLD]

Although with 2x2x3 you've got so much damn freedom. You say its hard to get done right, sure but it can be done right. And it's blockbuilding so you can be that much more efficient.
F2L slotting is ok but I prefer more freedom.

As for awkward turns wide turns free stuff up for me to execute straight-up awkward solutions.

Maybe the middle ground to this is to use FreeFOP alongside CFOP?

Anyway well if you're convinced you can't be good at the first two steps of Petrus and much prefer CFOP go ahead. I personally think you should give FreeFOP a look over first however.

 

[JLarsen]

That's the plan, man. More or less doing a 2x2 and then solving the cube with whatever I like. Mainly X crosses though.

 

[teller]

That's the plan, man. More or less doing a 2x2 and then solving the cube with whatever I like. Mainly X crosses though.

I did this for awhile...I was never able to plan 2x2x2 as well as I could crosses, though...I look forward to your reports.