DNF_Cuber
Veteran
I think @shadowslice e is pretty fast at 42, and @Zubin Park said he was only 2 seconds slower with LEOR and he is sub 8 CFOP
(Sorry for mentions)
-
Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!
You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.
Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.
Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.
Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.
Uncommon Method Competition | Payout and an Apology
(Sorry for mentions)
Look at you talk big game ! Fine then, no you can't use ZBRoux ! No ZB either ! You have to you a method you haven't used before since you're so cocky and clearly need a challenge. Put your money where your mouth is big guy.
Sub1Hour
Veteran
This is about to get very VERY interesting!
BenChristman1
Legend
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2019
- Messages
- 3,600
- Location
- in my room doing math
- WCA
- 2019CHRI11
How should I submit my results, and how many solves should I do?
That's the idea ! This thread is now @Tao Yu versus the world !!
Submit to this thread your fastest average of 5 and or average of 12 using an uncommon method. It's on rolling basis so you can update as you get faster times but edit your original submission instead of clogging the thread with tons of videos.
Tao Yu
Veteran
lol I wrote my post that way because I figured the fastest way to find out who my competitors are is to claim that none exist.
Your takeaway really should have been that I'm lazy and would rather use a method that I know already and would take at most one hour to record the required results. If winning this competition will require work, you can count me out
You better believe I'll be back to gloat though if you guys can't beat my ZBroux times. Maybe you can use that for motivation.
Your takeaway really should have been that I'm lazy and would rather use a method that I know already and would take at most one hour to record the required results. If winning this competition will require work, you can count me out
You better believe I'll be back to gloat though if you guys can't beat my ZBroux times. Maybe you can use that for motivation.
Batsy_who_laughs
Regular
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2020
- Messages
- 104
can i use FreeFop?
No because FreeFOP is a variant of CFOP.
You're no fun, mate ! If you end up taping some ZBRoux make sure to post it here. If you don't compete you don't get bragging rights, just means you're a copout
Cubing Forever
Veteran
I think I'll make a submission for PCMS or a Corners first method (Probably LMCF or Waterman if I can learn them in the next 2 weeks or a method that I "Invented"(a roux spinoff lol)). Is corners first allowed?
PapaSmurf
Veteran
I'm not bothered for the prize money, but I'd compete using LEOR or Hexagonal Fransisco or keyhole LBL (HF but you solve everything but a corner) for fun.
MichaelZRC
Regular
Can we use beginners LBL? If so, I'd be down to compete.
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Is tripod allowed?
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Sweet. I’ve been thinking about learning tripod for a while so I might actually do it then!
Go for it, now's a better time than ever ! Gotta love a Ryan Heise method. Speaking of Heise methods... where you at @Username: Username: ??
I had a concern about this:
Some quirky methods are novel only in-part, while some are completely novel.
Heise for example shares no steps with the big-4;
Tripod starts off like petrus upto 2x2x3, then deviates quite a bit;
Something like 42 is very close to Roux except instead of LS+CMLL+EO, you do corner+c-CMLL+EOedge
So if someone who has done lots of Roux does 42, s/he's going to get close to their Roux times with little practice because they already have FB, SB-square, and LSE down, and know CMLL algs. But no matter which of the big four you main, you'll have considerable trouble getting close to your times with Heise because you're doing something completely new on all steps. Tripod falls somewhere in the middle.
So going by solve-times alone is probably not a fair way to compare entires.
If there was a way to factor in the novelty of the method compared to big-4, like "somehow" separating the methods into 2-3 catagories depending on how similar they are to a big-4 variant, or some other way, it would be considerably more fair and the results could potentially even be useful.
Not sure how practical this is though.
Some quirky methods are novel only in-part, while some are completely novel.
Heise for example shares no steps with the big-4;
Tripod starts off like petrus upto 2x2x3, then deviates quite a bit;
Something like 42 is very close to Roux except instead of LS+CMLL+EO, you do corner+c-CMLL+EOedge
So if someone who has done lots of Roux does 42, s/he's going to get close to their Roux times with little practice because they already have FB, SB-square, and LSE down, and know CMLL algs. But no matter which of the big four you main, you'll have considerable trouble getting close to your times with Heise because you're doing something completely new on all steps. Tripod falls somewhere in the middle.
So going by solve-times alone is probably not a fair way to compare entires.
If there was a way to factor in the novelty of the method compared to big-4, like "somehow" separating the methods into 2-3 catagories depending on how similar they are to a big-4 variant, or some other way, it would be considerably more fair and the results could potentially even be useful.
Not sure how practical this is though.
DNF_Cuber
Veteran
What if I did 42 but my main method is CFOP?
Similar threads
