Sub-6 with WATERMAN is Possible

[LukasCubes]

No its not fake

i have thw cstimer stuff right here although on a broken computer for proof as well as the tps and the recon and the videos

just ask for more proof if you dont think this is enough im fine with that

if you dobt wnt to click on the recon picture, i have the recon right here

B' R2 U2 L2 U2 F' L2 B2 U2 B' D2 R2 L' F R' U L D2 B' F' U' // Scramble

y' x // Inspection (0/0)
D r' U M2 B // Waterman Layer on White (5/5)
F2 R U R2 F R2 U' R' F2 // CLL + 2 Edges (9/14)
z M' U M U2 M U // 1 Edge (6/2)
x' U2 M' U M U // 2 Edges + EO (5/25)
x U2 M U2 M' // Permute Midges (4/29)

yes it was 29 moves

 

[Timona]

What is Waterman?

 

[IsThatA4x4]

What is Waterman?

It's a corners first method that solves a layer minus 1 edge, CLL, some edges using algs or intuition, then finishes by permuting edges of the middle layer or L5E I believe at a more advanced stage.

 

[Thom S.]

What is Waterman?

One of the oldest methods

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

What is Waterman?

Roux but worse and with extra steps.

While this is a very nice single, I hope you don't take offense Lukas, I think everyone knows Waterman is capable of sub-6 singles. But that doesn't make it a viable method for world class use. I don't think Waterman offers anything that CFOP and Roux don't, besides a lower movecount (Which I'm not willing to believe given how efficient Roux is and can be). That is of course offset by it having random rotations, strange ergonomics, bad lookahead, among other things.

I'm not discouraging you from using Waterman, I actually think it's admirable that you have gotten this fast with one of the most obsolete methods and continue to pursue it, but just because you get a lucky single doesn't mean it's going to change the cubing scene. CFOP is capable of getting 29 STM speedsolve solutions and I think many would find it easier to beat >5 TPS.

GJ's.

 

[abunickabhi]

No its not fake

i have thw cstimer stuff right here although on a broken computer for proof as well as the tps and the recon and the videos

just ask for more proof if you dont think this is enough im fine with that

if you dobt wnt to click on the recon picture, i have the recon right here

B' R2 U2 L2 U2 F' L2 B2 U2 B' D2 R2 L' F R' U L D2 B' F' U' // Scramble

y' x // Inspection (0/0)
D r' U M2 B // Waterman Layer on White (5/5)
F2 R U R2 F R2 U' R' F2 // CLL + 2 Edges (9/14)
z M' U M U2 M U // 1 Edge (6/2)
x' U2 M' U M U // 2 Edges + EO (5/25)
x U2 M U2 M' // Permute Midges (4/29)

yes it was 29 moves

I believe sub-6 with waterman is definitely possible.

Good luck yo!

 

[LukasCubes]

What is Waterman?

It's a corners first method that solves a layer minus 1 edge, CLL, some edges using algs or intuition, then finishes by permuting edges of the middle layer or L5E I believe at a more advanced stage.

Solve the last Ledge/Redges while orienting the midges (L5E algs all the way up to L7E algs), then permute midges. Otherwise Timona theres your answer

One of the oldest methods

yes very old

Roux but worse and with extra steps.

While this is a very nice single, I hope you don't take offense Lukas, I think everyone knows Waterman is capable of sub-6 singles. But that doesn't make it a viable method for world class use. I don't think Waterman offers anything that CFOP and Roux don't, besides a lower movecount (Which I'm not willing to believe given how efficient Roux is and can be). That is of course offset by it having random rotations, strange ergonomics, bad lookahead, among other things.

I'm not discouraging you from using Waterman, I actually think it's admirable that you have gotten this fast with one of the most obsolete methods and continue to pursue it, but just because you get a lucky single doesn't mean it's going to change the cubing scene. CFOP is capable of getting 29 STM speedsolve solutions and I think many would find it easier to beat >5 TPS.

GJ's.

Thanks and I do like how you described Waterman except for I do believe it has a lower movecount. The thing is, CFOP sub-30 move solutions are much rarer than Waterman. Thats why I main Waterman on top of the fact I don't want to be just an ordinary cuber that uses CFOP. Also I suck at turning and strive off of effeciency. Btw any method is possible pf getting a sub-6

I believe sub-6 with waterman is definitely possible.

Good luck yo!

Thanks bro I have been getting sub-10 solves at peast one a day for like 2 weeks now lol

 

[Klaudiusz Szyprocinski]

You could also get a sub6 with LBL if the solution is 29 moves. Nice solve though

 

[Timona]

You could also get a sub6 with LBL if the solution is 29 moves. Nice solve though

I genuinely dont think thats possible in the slightest. LBL isn't built to be a low movecount method, its a method that gets the job done, regardless of how long or how many moves it takes (I think the average movecount for LBL is around 80, I dont know how efficient you have to be to get it all the way down to 29 moves)

 

[Klaudiusz Szyprocinski]

I genuinely dont think thats possible in the slightest. LBL isn't built to be a low movecount method, its a method that gets the job done, regardless of how long or how many moves it takes (I think the average movecount for LBL is around 80, I dont know how efficient you have to be to get it all the way down to 29 moves)

With enough luck you could even get FMC WR Single with LBL.

 

[LukasCubes]

You could also get a sub6 with LBL if the solution is 29 moves. Nice solve though

its possible if you get a last payer skip and some other skips

I genuinely dont think thats possible in the slightest. LBL isn't built to be a low movecount method, its a method that gets the job done, regardless of how long or how many moves it takes (I think the average movecount for LBL is around 80, I dont know how efficient you have to be to get it all the way down to 29 moves)

if you get a skip for 3/4 of the solve its possible

With enough luck you could even get FMC WR Single with LBL.

yes very true

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

With enough luck you could even get FMC WR Single with LBL.

 

[Garf]

IYO.
In your opinion.

 

[LukasCubes]

IYO.
In your opinion.

this became an fmc debate lol