[Help Thread] Waterman Discussion

[Chris_Cube]

I had a conversation with WarriorCatCuber and we both have the opinion that you can reach sub 10 with Waterman. So I hope to achieve this goal one day ... at competitions this will be interesting

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Try to one look your First layer minus one edge, and if you can't, only one-look a roux fb#

 

[Chris_Cube]

Yeah this is my approach at the moment. But I am not really good at one look fb Roux ;D i will practice it. At the momemt I know every orientation alg for the Midges and some 1 last redge + orientation midges. This seems to be the fastest approach at the moment

 

[efattah]

Waterman is an insanely fast method, speed potential is very close to Roux. Unfortunately no one (since Waterman himself) has ever come close to mastering the method and there is lots of room for developments and improvements. I used most of Waterman's method in my LMCF method, and you can see the LMCF document for modernized Waterman algorithms. Original Waterman has around 300 algorithms.

Waterman actually uses fewer moves than Roux by a small amount, however, Waterman on average requires more rotations and regrips, and it is minimizing rotations and regrips that is the key to getting top level.

Try to solve the first step without rotations (fairly challenging). Then after solving the corners and doing a Z rotation, remember that once you are down to the last 2 redges, or last redge, or last redge+ledge, you solve those while simultaneously orienting the midges. That step has the most algorithms but is also key to maximum speed.

Modernized Waterman variants have you solve the first face on the L side, then solve CLL on the R face, allowing a rotationless solve. Another modernized variant is to solve two corners swapped in the first face then use specialized EG1 algorithms to solve the corners. In the most advanced case, you do that rotationless.

The fastest Waterman singles I have heard of were around 8 seconds but it is for sure possible to average around 7 seconds.

 

[Chris_Cube]

It's always good to read from you @efattah and your LMCF Documentation is my place from which I learn thr algs from but why don't believe a lot of people that waterman is a fast method?

 

[efattah]

The nature of most human beings is to assume something is impossible until it is proven possible. That is the path of the follower, which is 99% of people. The innovator assumes things are possible regardless. People would only believe Waterman is a fast method if they saw someone winning championships with it. What they don't realize is that Waterman himself held the world record average of 17 seconds and change from 1988-2004, even at the 2003 world championships after 20 years of CFOP development people could not beat the Waterman record average. In the end, the only way they were able to beat the average is by using more modern cubes that Waterman didn't have access to. If you watch Waterman's 17 second solves, his lookahead isn't good, he wastes half the time looking at the cube, and spends about 9 seconds turning the cube, and since his cubes are original rubiks that can't be finger-tricked, his TPS would more than double with a fast cube, putting his average to about 5 seconds of turning and maybe 1-2 seconds of lookahead. So yes it has already been proven a fast method, but people don't know, or want to forget, and no one is good at the method and the original document is really hard to understand-- there are no good youtube video tutorials and most people need someone to teach them step by step.

 

[Chris_Cube]

So @efattah thats very interesting for sure. But I want to know if there was ever someone on the Forums here who got a sub 10 waterman solve

 

[efattah]

somerandomkidmike has had 8 second waterman solves. I've had several 8 second LMCF solves which is a very similar method. And that, despite my TPS being extremely slow (3.2).

 

[Chris_Cube]

Did he know the full Waterman Sets and CLL for this? And are there somewhere recordings from that?

 

[efattah]

somerandomkidmike knew CLL but didn't know even 1/3rd of the other algorithms like solving two redges while orienting the midges.

 

[Chris_Cube]

So that sounds amazing, maybe I can reach this goal too. I think the most complex part is really building the first layer minus one edge and doing then the redges + midges. In my test solves this took the most time

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Waterman Speedsolving method tutorial

I've made a waterman method tutorial. I might also make a doc explaining the method if I have time. My video tutorial : More example solves : Doc tutorial : coming soon I would recomment you watch the tutorial first, then the example solves. Woody does some advanced stuff for first layer...

www.speedsolving.com

I thought I'd just post this here.

And also, did you see that Alex Lau once considered Waterman ? (the vid is removed)

[Unofficial] - Petrus/Waterman 21.28 avg12

After an afternoon of experimenting/practice, I got this: Yes I'm switching. I hope to eventually use all three methods equally however. Just that I'll put Roux aside for a while. Who knows, I might wanna stick with waterman!

www.speedsolving.com

Lol and do you realize how much kirjava hated Alex Lau ? Lol he didn't see how good he was for roux.

 

[Chris_Cube]

your vid back then helped me a bit to learn this method. I also thought of doing a bunch of tutorials explaining for example how to build the first layer and how to improve the complex waterman step or how to recognize the Waterman CLL and all this stuff... after I got it myself respectively

 

[Deleted member 51471]

your vid back then helped me a bit to learn this method. I also thought of doing a bunch of tutorials explaining for example how to build the first layer and how to improve the complex waterman step or how to recognize the Waterman CLL and all this stuff... after I got it myself respectively

This vid's also good :

 

[Chris_Cube]

So I did my practice and got only sub-35 avg and this is really frustrating. Is more Practice the Kexword? Or am I doing somerhing wrong? My first layer takes like 6 Secs but the rest is maybe too slow... how can I improve?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

So I did my practice and got only sub-35 avg and this is really frustrating. Is more Practice the Kexword? Or am I doing somerhing wrong? My first layer takes like 6 Secs but the rest is maybe too slow... how can I improve?

I can critique if you send an Ao5 video. Or send some solutions right here.

 

[Chris_Cube]

I will possibly do an ao5 vid. But my hands are really big and when I tried to film these solves, I always end up seeing only my wrists .

 

[Chris_Cube]

I think my fault was the last redge + orienting the midges. I did it with intuitively inserting the last redge + last ledge and that makes recognition (as efattah mentioned in his documentation) harder. So I started to learn the algs which is a little bit hard because the M and Us are in every alg a little bit changed

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Do you guys agree we can rename waterman CLL CELL ? It ignores the e-slice, just like CMLL ignores the M slice.

 

[ProStar]

Do you guys agree we can rename waterman CLL CELL ? It ignores the e-slice, just like CMLL ignores the M slice.

Agree