Kirjava
Colourful
You know what, it largely doesn't actually matter.
[Proposal] Rename the Ortega 2x2 Method to Varasano
- Thread starter Rubiks560
- Start date
CubeWizard23
Veteran
Agreed
S
Scruggsy13
Guest
Kir has spoken. But in all seriousness, I wouldn't mind calling it VO, Varasano, or Ortega.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stefan
Legend
Where did Ortega popularize it as a 2x2 method? I don't even see 2x2 mentioned at all on http://rubikscube.info/ortega.php, which is probably *the* page for the Ortega method.
I showed you an Amazon review apparently written by Ortega, where he wrote "[The Simple Solution to Rubik's Cube by James G. Nourse] is what I used to learn to solve the cube in 1981 (I was 7 at the time)". So why do you say "long before Ortega even thought about cubing"? Also, in that review he mentions five other people+methods, and Varasano and his book aren't among them.
"he even says that he based the Ortega method off of Jeff's book"? Wasn't Ortega who wrote that, didn't say Jeff, didn't say it was based off of that book (says "inspired" and only is the second book mentioned (if it really is that book), and apparently only recalled from memory, and http://rubikscube.info/ortega.php says "This solution method is based on Minh Thai's Winning Solution. Ideas and sequences are borrowed from other solution methods, and appropriate attributions are made in those sections." and I couldn't find "Varasano" mentioned anywhere on the site).
Rather disappointed. Wasn't the purpose of this video/thread to *correct* something?
I showed you an Amazon review apparently written by Ortega, where he wrote "[The Simple Solution to Rubik's Cube by James G. Nourse] is what I used to learn to solve the cube in 1981 (I was 7 at the time)". So why do you say "long before Ortega even thought about cubing"? Also, in that review he mentions five other people+methods, and Varasano and his book aren't among them.
"he even says that he based the Ortega method off of Jeff's book"? Wasn't Ortega who wrote that, didn't say Jeff, didn't say it was based off of that book (says "inspired" and only is the second book mentioned (if it really is that book), and apparently only recalled from memory, and http://rubikscube.info/ortega.php says "This solution method is based on Minh Thai's Winning Solution. Ideas and sequences are borrowed from other solution methods, and appropriate attributions are made in those sections." and I couldn't find "Varasano" mentioned anywhere on the site).
Rather disappointed. Wasn't the purpose of this video/thread to *correct* something?
Last edited:
IAmAPerson
Regular
I'm down for the Varasanortega method.
Rubiks560
Nub
Clearly I was misinformed. I went based off of information given to me by people who met Jeff before I did.
My apologies for messing up so badly.
Carrot
Veteran
It has been done before. (if you look up Oka tutorials for pyraminx you will most likely find keyhole tutorials instead)
Praetorian
Veteran
is a name change really necessary? all we can probably do is simply acknowledge the work he's put into this method, but changing a name that's already ingrained can be a bit difficult, don't you think? and beginners who want to learn 'ortega' will probably search for ortega. a popular video for teaching this method is by crazy bad cuber whose probably not gonna change that name, and it'll probably be a tutorial who most people that are interested in it will turn to, and ortega will grow on them
So you messed up and want people to call it Varasano based on incomplete wrong information!?!? Seems like a bunch of hooey to me.
I'm calling it Ortega.
Ordway Persyn
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
- Messages
- 2,236
- Location
- Mimal the Elf's boot
- WCA ID
- 2016PERS01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
VO sounds the coolest of all the names, I'll call it that from now on.
You could however call the 3x3 method Varasano and the 2x2 method Ortega.
You could however call the 3x3 method Varasano and the 2x2 method Ortega.
Kit Clement
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,626
- Location
- Champaign, IL, USA
- WCA ID
- 2008CLEM01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Considering that both their main intentions were to make 3x3 methods, this makes little sense.
Tim Major
Platinum Member
Would you say you use EG, or advanced Varasano Chris? I think this is unnecessary.
ottozing
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2011
- Messages
- 3,304
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- WCA ID
- 2012MCNE01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Sajwo
Veteran
I can only imagine that pitiful smile when someone ask what method do you use and you answer with "Varasano!" and they are like wtf?
.. just stick with ortega name :rolleyes:
.. just stick with ortega name :rolleyes:
Last edited by a moderator:
Berd
Legend
VO sounds cool!
kcl
Legend
1. The claim that Varasano's book was published before Ortega started cubing is invalid. Who cares? It has no effect on the rest of this.
2. Whether he based it off of Varasano's book or not, it was still the first published source of the method, and I believe that's worth noting. Jeff's book was published in 1981, a year before Minh Thai's "Winning Solution".
Granted there are some claims here which are not properly fact checked, but the main point remains the same. Varasano was, as far as we know, the first person to create and publish this method.
Seems to me like the facts that matter are still valid.
Last edited:
noodlez
Regular
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2015
- Messages
- 39
Yeah, why not?
FatBoyXPC
Veteran
I feel like if anybody would have used an Amazon review as evidence to back up their claim to you, you wouldn't accept it.
Josef, who helped developed the method, mentioned "solve cube in 45 seconds (or st. like that)". The only first page results when I google "solve cube in 45 seconds" that relate to a book all point to Jeff Varasano's book. I think it's a pretty safe bet that Josef was talking about that book in the conversation we saw a screenshot of in the video.
Stefan
Legend
I don't see why I wouldn't. Unless I have good reason to doubt it. Which I'd then say. I'm certain I wouldn't just ignore it and claim, without evidence, pretty much the opposite of what it says. Though I suspect Chris didn't ignore it but rather missed it. Which is a bit sloppy. Which, like I said, disappoints me particularly in a thread like this where setting things straight is pretty much the entire purpose. And I'm really wondering why he said "long before Ortega even thought about cubing". How does he know when Ortega started cubing or even "thinking about cubing"? That Amazon review is the only piece of information I have seen regarding that, and I think it says the opposite.
kcl
Legend
What makes you care so much? You're missing the entire point.
Similar threads
