The disadvantage of block building

[JLarsen]

fine,
using petrus' site, he positions the corners and twists them, and then does an EPLL.

CPLL
COLL
EPLL.

reduced to
CLL
EPLL.

i assumed that everyone would know what i meant when i said ELL. seeing as EOLL is done, obviously only EPLL is left. calling it 'CLL/ELL' make more obvious the difference between it and OLL/PLL.

and of course you can use OLL/PLL with petrus.
but 'the petrus method' is not the same as 'Petrus f2l with fridrich LL'.

k?

What?
Full Petrus LL is ZBLL.
He has all the algs on his site. I think Petrus himself either uses OLL/PLL or COLL/EPLL, and probably some random ZBLL algs. I think he also had a system where you orient Corners and permute edges at the same time, then A or E perm it.

A method is not confined to its last layer as authenticity of being the orignal method. In other words, Petrus f2l, with "Friedrich ll" is still the Petrus method. Just because Lars uses something other than OLL PLL, doesn't mean that it's not the same method without it. However something like a cross somewhere in there, is not the Petrus method...

 

[Escher]

if you reread post 15, you will notice that when i referred to the method, i actually referred to a hypothetical 'jessica fridrich vs lars petrus' cube-off. hence the confusion.

wait... im going to his site...
copied from his cube page...
Step 1 - Build a 2x2x2 corner
Step 2 - Expand to 2x2x3
Step 3 - Twist the edges --- 2, 4 or 6 bad edges
Step 4 - Finish 2 layers --- Step 4b tricks
Step 5 - Position the corners --- Complete Step 5+6 index
Step 6 - Twist the corners --- Complete Step 6+7 index
Step 7 - Position the edges

to me, that looks a little like CPLL, COLL, EPLL.

then on bernard helmstetters site (linked on his site), he gives all of the algs for the combinations of steps that petrus lists. e.g 5+6 (CLL), 6+7 (COLL+EPLL), and then 5+6+7 (CLL+EPLL in one step, so ZB).

on his site, on the example solves, it seems he uses the easiest step combo he sees. so i'd imagine that he knows 5+6 and 6+7. however, he just gives a link to helmstetters site that gives all of the algs for 5+6+7, and never mentions actually knowing or using them.

so, whats the problem?

anyway, i apologise for not being clearer earlier on in how i was defining the methods.
and if you did use petrus f2l + OLL+PLL, you would probably say that when describing your own method, you wouldnt just say petrus.

 

[qqwref]

Yeah, that is the pure Petrus method, but I think you'll find that the fastest 'Petrus' solvers don't actually use that last layer, because they've found something more efficient. I think I've heard of Petrus solvers doing OCLL/PLL, COLL/EPLL, CPLL/2GLL, 2x2x1-block/rest, and ZBLL for their last layer, but I can't recall anyone who is sub-15 with Petrus (there are four or so, right?) using a three-step last layer for their primary method. Of course they still call it Petrus because they do the 2x2x2, 2x2x3, orient edges steps (which are in my opinion the ones that really define the Petrus method). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.

 

[JLarsen]

Yeah, that is the pure Petrus method, but I think you'll find that the fastest 'Petrus' solvers don't actually use that last layer, because they've found something more efficient. I think I've heard of Petrus solvers doing OCLL/PLL, COLL/EPLL, CPLL/2GLL, 2x2x1-block/rest, and ZBLL for their last layer, but I can't recall anyone who is sub-15 with Petrus (there are four or so, right?) using a three-step last layer for their primary method. Of course they still call it Petrus because they do the 2x2x2, 2x2x3, orient edges steps (which are in my opinion the ones that really define the Petrus method). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.

I really can't agree with you more on that one to be honest. Let me give you a video link to what im saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLDq0LlpCEs&watch_response

This is a video response to....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK-W49sqpcc

Listen to what he has to say.

 

[Escher]

lol thats settled then

i apologise for being a git.
really.

 

[JLarsen]

lol thats settled then

i apologise for being a git.
really.

It's fine, I dont get worked up over tiny things, like some people on the forum. I.E. USE THE SEARCH NEXT TIME OMFGABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP!!!!111!!!

 

[Escher]

lol im like that sometimes... but usually i try to give it more as advice than as a personal attack...

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

Yeah, that is the pure Petrus method, but I think you'll find that the fastest 'Petrus' solvers don't actually use that last layer, because they've found something more efficient. I think I've heard of Petrus solvers doing OCLL/PLL, COLL/EPLL, CPLL/2GLL, 2x2x1-block/rest, and ZBLL for their last layer, but I can't recall anyone who is sub-15 with Petrus (there are four or so, right?) using a three-step last layer for their primary method. Of course they still call it Petrus because they do the 2x2x2, 2x2x3, orient edges steps (which are in my opinion the ones that really define the Petrus method). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.

Petrus does COLL if I'm not mistaken, so Petrus doesn't do Petrus. And I count four sub-15ers with Petrus, as well.