This is a kind of subjective question:
Is it worth it to learn all 57 OLL algs? (versus Winter Variation) I feel that WV is better, but is the overall move count lower? (because after all it's breaking OLL into two steps: EO then WV) and if the move count is relatively the same, which has better recognition and execution?
Winter Variation
Pros:
-Less algs (27)
-Mostly 2gen
-Less moves? (I usually do EO before/during the last F2L insertion (pretty sure this saves me moves) which would also set me up for WV algs)
-Eliminates AUF for OLL (algs can be easily modified for direction of F2L pair or slot for insertion)
Cons:
-Edges must be oriented
-Lesser known and used
-Usually two steps (b/c of EO)
I already know CFOP (Full PLL and the 7 OLLs for the full cross, plus a few other random ones) and I have been toying around with Petrus because it appeals to me as a more intuitive and less cookie-cutter of a method. Right now I use CFOP 99% of the time for speed solves and am struggling to get sub-20. Most people would probably tell me to just learn full OLL (and that would probably get me sub-20 soon afterwards) but i'm looking to improve my intuitive cubing skills and lower my move count instead of just getting fast, because in the end i feel i can be faster that way. Winter Variation seems to follow the Petrus motto of "In a good solution you do something useful all the time." without having to (in most of my solves) solve 3 F2L pairs by CFOP, insert 4th pair, take it out and EO, put it back in, AUF, OLL, AUF, then PLL. With WV i foresee my solves looking like: 3 F2L pairs (either by CFOP, Petrus, or the most efficient fusion of the two i see fit for a particular solve), 4th pair, EO, WV, AUF, PLL. Seems better to me but I'd really like to hear from someone who knows and uses WV algs rather than the countless OLL users who have never heard of WV.
Thanks for any help/input, or bringing to light anything i've overlooked. I'm only planning on learning one of the two alg sets.
ps. one option ive considered is learning WV, and OLL for just the dot cases, eliminating the least efficient cases for EO/WV
Examples:
OLL Avg. Move Count: 9.7 HTM
WV Avg. Move Count: 8.07 (not including EO)
7 OLLs (with EO, #21-27 on cubewhiz.com) - Avg. of 10 moves HTM, plus three for pair insertion: 13 moves HTM
Cases for WV can vary - Avg. moves: 8.07 moves
Four CFOP EO cases (dot, L, line, and cross) - 3 move 4th pair insertion + Avg. moves: 6 = 9 moves HTM
EO before 4th pair insertion -
Cross cases: 0 moves
Line case: 5 moves (U F' U F U2)L cases: 3 moves (F' U F), 3 moves (F' U' F)
Single edge cases: 7 moves Right(R U R' U' F' U' F), 7 moves Top(U R U' R' F' U' F'), 8 moves HTM Left(R U R' U' F' U2 F)
No edge case: 11 moves HTM (F' U F R U R' U' F' U2 F)
(0 + 5 + 3 + 3 + 7 + 7 + 8 + 11)/8 = 5.5 moves HTM
*Note: EO doesn't factor in the frequency of each case
Avg. AUF: 1 move
Example solves starting from 4th pair on U
My current average LL:
Insert Pair(3), AUF(1), EO(6), AUF(1), 1 of 7 OLLs(10), AUF(1), PLL(11.8), AUF(1) = 34.8
An average full OLL LL:
Insert Pair(3), AUF(1), Full OLL(9.7), AUF(1), PLL(11.8), AUF(1) = 27.5
An average WV LL:
EO(5.5), WV(8.07), AUF(1), PLL(11.8), AUF(1) = 27.37