The Ortega Method- How it works, and how to be world-class with it

Oh sorry, but what alg do you use for the bar on the bottom, diagonal on top? mine is the L D' L F2 L' D L' but i really don't like it. do you have a better one?
 
Escher said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cUlE1zZbSM

My god, this video is OLD. I feel old.
Click to expand...

that's from 2009? D:

I still use the other one you gave me, R U' R' U' R' F2 U' R U R and I love it.

wrt the video, I'm not really sure I understand why you'd use Ortega for this. I mean you admit it's easier to use CLL/EG, so why bother with Ortega at that point? Perhaps if you don't like learning algs particularly, but I don't really think that's that bad.

It seems to me kinda like trying to get sub-15 3x3 with LBL, yeah I'm sure it's possible, but it's more effort for not really any gain.

edit:
After watching the rest of the video, it's all pretty solid advice though, good job!
 
Last edited:
JustinJ said:
wrt the video, I'm not really sure I understand why you'd use Ortega for this. I mean you admit it's easier to use CLL/EG, so why bother with Ortega at that point? Perhaps if you don't like learning algs particularly, but I don't really think that's that bad.

It seems to me kinda like trying to get sub-15 3x3 with LBL, yeah I'm sure it's possible, but it's more effort for not really any gain.

edit:
After watching the rest of the video, it's all pretty solid advice though, good job!
Click to expand...

Thank you! The main reason for the video is to a) help people improve at ortega and b) refute the idea that it's impossible to get sub-3 with Ortega. I'll admit that it is probably easy to get sub-3 with CLL (which I can sort of attest to from experience), but getting sub-3 with Ortega is hardly more difficult. I think that a lot of people bash Ortega and think that it's a crappy method, which is absolutely not true. That is the point of the video.

On top of that, getting sub-3 with Ortega teaches you a lot of skills that are going to be incredibly useful for when you start using EG, and to a lesser extent, CLL.
 
JustinJ said:
that's from 2009? D:

I still use the other one you gave me, R U' R' U' R' F2 U' R U R and I love it.
Click to expand...

Did I give you that one for sure?

I literally have no recollection of it. Nice alg though ;)

On-topic: Ortega is usable to get sub-3, but tbh if you're going down the PBL road, it's best to start using tricks from Guimond/SS/OFOTA/SNAP to get a 3ish Ortega user to sub 2.5, rather than going 'deeper' into Ortega.
 
Escher said:
Ortega is usable to get sub-3, but tbh if you're going down the PBL road, it's best to start using tricks from Guimond/SS/OFOTA/SNAP to get a 3ish Ortega user to sub 2.5, rather than going 'deeper' into Ortega.
Click to expand...

I think you're over-estimating how hard it is to get sub-3. Every tip in here, other than OLL prediction, is actually really easy to learn and abuse. On the other hand, I can't really speak about sub-2.5, I've started incorporating more CLL into my solves, which is what has gotten me closer to sub-2.5.

cxinlee said:
Your algs really helped a lot. I was averaging 9 seconds but now I've cut 2 seconds immediately by watching this. Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...

Great! I'm glad to have helped!
 
yoshinator said:
I think you're over-estimating how hard it is to get sub-3. Every tip in here, other than OLL prediction, is actually really easy to learn and abuse. On the other hand, I can't really speak about sub-2.5, I've started incorporating more CLL into my solves, which is what has gotten me closer to sub-2.5.
Click to expand...

More I mean that it's easier to progress to sub 2.5 using more advanced methods even though they take more learning/work initially. If you only care about getting sub-3, I would advocate doing your route :)
 
Escher said:
More I mean that it's easier to progress to sub 2.5 using more advanced methods even though they take more learning/work initially. If you only care about getting sub-3, I would advocate doing your route :)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I agree. The things that you learn about 2x2 by working and getting "deeper" into Ortega (imo) are really valuable when it comes to, as you say, getting sub-2.5. Making really efficient faces, keeping track of your first layer permutation, OLL prediction, are all things that are going to make you better at 2x2 overall.
 
yoshinator said:
I'm not sure that I agree. The things that you learn about 2x2 by working and getting "deeper" into Ortega (imo) are really valuable when it comes to, as you say, getting sub-2.5. Making really efficient faces, keeping track of your first layer permutation, OLL prediction, are all things that are going to make you better at 2x2 overall.
Click to expand...

None of those things are exclusive to using Ortega, though. In fact I would say you learn to do them better when you're going for 3/4 faces that also happen to cancel with an SS alg etc, rather than going for an efficient face that gives you a decent OLL or ensures a nice PBL. Perhaps its just me but I consider the former more difficult and requiring further lookahead than the latter, because the options are wider and more varied.

Honestly, in terms of pure moves, Ortega will always be behind a lot of the other PBL methods, and that's why it's a lot harder to get sub 2.5 with it. That being said, I remember I have gotten a 2.4x avg with Ortega before, so it is possible.
 
Some nice tips in the video and some nice algs in the thread, I sometimes use Ortega when I can't find a good layer for CLL.

Do most people use that alg with the y rotation for adj-adj? I've never liked the rotation much. I messed around and found R2 U' R2' [(U' z) L'] U2 L' U2, which is weird but no regrips (the middle bit is a little odd, I've tried to clarify as much as possible with brackets).
 
bobthegiraffemonkey said:
Some nice tips in the video and some nice algs in the thread, I sometimes use Ortega when I can't find a good layer for CLL.

Do most people use that alg with the y rotation for adj-adj? I've never liked the rotation much. I messed around and found R2 U' R2' [(U' z) L'] U2 L' U2, which is weird but no regrips (the middle bit is a little odd, I've tried to clarify as much as possible with brackets).
Click to expand...
If you don't like the rotations R2' U' R2 U2' F2 U' R2 is always an option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Ortega Method Times Stalling
Replies
1
Views
462
acrystal
acrystal
OldSwiss
Ortega based beginners method
Replies
1
Views
1,444
OldSwiss
OldSwiss
A
How fast is 2x2 Ortega method
Replies
9
Views
2,684
qwr
qwr
GAN 356 X
  • Poll Poll
What 2x2 method do you use?
Replies
8
Views
2,148
TipsterTrickster
TipsterTrickster
Space
[Help Thread] Should I learn CLL.
Replies
4
Views
1,329
Duncan Bannon
D
Back
Top