Random Cubing Discussion

[PenguinsDontFly]

I was curious and checked my Prisma timer history. Nowhere is my average of 5 better than my mean of 3, but for 4x4 the difference is less than half a second, and it's only 1.5 seconds for 7x7.

this only recently happened to me in OH...

 

[joshsailscga]

Dont you guys hate it when your PB ao5 is faster than your PB mo3?

It's kind of funny though I think that's currently the case for a couple events for me, can't remember which ones though.

 

[cuBerBruce]

Can someone give me the earliest known date to when ortega was invented? The earliest I've heard so far is 2000.

I don't know about the Ortega 3x3x3 method, but what is (now) called the "Ortega 2x2x2" method goes back to at least 1981. It was published in a booklet "Jeff Conquers the Cube in 45 Seconds" by Jeffrey Varasano (copyright 1981) as part of a corners first solution for the 3x3x3 cube.

 

[Rubiks560]

I don't know about the Ortega 3x3x3 method, but what is (now) called the "Ortega 2x2x2" method goes back to at least 1981. It was published in a booklet "Jeff Conquers the Cube in 45 Seconds" by Jeffrey Varasano (copyright 1981) as part of a corners first solution for the 3x3x3 cube.

Yeah, I met him. I'm going to make an ortega tutorial with a history lesson telling people why it should be called Varasano and not Ortega. But I'd like to have info of Ortegas release date for comparison in the video.

 

[Berkmann18]

What do you mean by "statistically unlikely"? All you need is to have the slowest solve in the middle of the Ao5.

I never got a single time a faster Ao5 than the fastest Mo3 on a session or several sessions combined.

 

[Bindedsa]

I never got a single time a faster Ao5 than the fastest Mo3 on a session or several sessions combined.

People have had sessions with better Ao12s than Ao5s before, Mo3 being faster than Ao5 is a lot more likely to occor.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

its not unlikely at all. its more likely to get 3 fast solves separated by a non-counting slow solve than it is to have 3 fast solves in a row.

But with MO3, the best solve is counting. I can get a 7 (I've had 5 or so) and then two decent solves (let's say 12.5; my PB AO100 is 12.94) and get a MO3 better than any AO5 I've ever gotten (PB AO5 is 11.02). Fluke good solves matter in MO3, and not in AO5.

It definitely happens. I've had AO5 faster than MO3, and even AO12 faster than AO5 (in big cubes, not in 3x3) but that doesn't happen to me too often.

To answer your original post, no. It's not annoying to me; I would love for that to happen on 3x3. AO5 is what matters; I'd rather have a MO3 that's disproportionately bad than an AO5 that is. For big cubes, it's annoying, since MO3 matters more.

 

[Berkmann18]

People have had sessions with better Ao12s than Ao5s before, Mo3 being faster than Ao5 is a lot more likely to occor.

I know.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[guysensei1]

my 3x3 single and average world ranking differ by only 3 O_O

 

[joshsailscga]

my 3x3 single and average world ranking differ by only 3 O_O

I guess that means compared to the average cuber, you had the average amount of luckiness for your single :O

 

[Bindedsa]

my 3x3 single and average world ranking differ by only 3 O_O

Mine only differ by 1, I'm pretty sure they've been the same before.

 

[TheCoolMinxer]

my 3x3 single and average world ranking differ by only 3 O_O

At some point, my OH single and avg had the exact same world rankings. (16xy)

 

[IRNjuggle28]

In the almost two years I've been cubing, I've never felt like I reached a plateau. I never practiced an event tons without improvement, likely because I practice everything from 3x3 to 7x7. Whenever I got stuck on one event, I could practice others and beat PBs. I feel like I'm finally reaching a more difficult plateau in 3x3, though. My best AO100 is 12.94, and getting a sub 13.20 AO100 is pretty normal for me. I've gotten lots of low 13 averages, but am not really breaking through. I'll probably have to do something other than just a lot of solves if I want to improve more. Slow turning. New fingertricks. Metronome solves. Something. A new cube is worth considering, too, although I don't expect to average any better than 12.6 or so with a perfect cube. It's odd that 3x3 is the first event I reached a true plateau in; I'm much better at 5, 6, and 7. You'd think I'd run out of improvement room in those first.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

F2 sexy F2 and the inverse. Try it. Might be useful. Had no idea that solved an F2L case

 

[guysensei1]

F2 sexy F2 and the inverse. Try it. Might be useful. Had no idea that solved an F2L case

I learnt this from Porkynator's FMC tutorial. I don't use it in normal solves as F2 is awkward but I do in FMC, just to see if anything good happens.

 

[obelisk477]

F2 sexy F2 and the inverse. Try it. Might be useful. Had no idea that solved an F2L case

lol look at how alg.cubing interpreted it.. I just copy pasted without thinking about it and was like 'this doesn't look correct...'

 

[OLLiver]

Ok here is a question-
Which method in your opinion has the potential to be faster ZZ or ZB?

 

[Hssandwich]

lol look at how alg.cubing interpreted it.. I just copy pasted without thinking about it and was like 'this doesn't look correct...'

Brilliant!

 

[KRAMIST]

can nyone upload or pm me pavan ravichandra's average against chris olsen at us nats 2015

 

[Berkmann18]

Ok here is a question-
Which method in your opinion has the potential to be faster ZZ or ZB?

I think it's ZB.