• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Which BLD Fold method has the highest success rate?

Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
162
YouTube
Visit Channel
I couldn't find a thread on this but if there is one delete this.

I dont want to know which method is the easiest or fastest. I want the one that is most consistant with its solves. If anyone has ideas please give them with links where to find them.

Thanks:)
 

qqwref

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,834
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I guess you'd want one with either few setup moves or few algorithms. Of course, for any method, memorizing wrong is a DNF, but you want to minimize how much you mess up on execution. I think I'd say to go for either Old Pochmann (one algorithm to know, setups usually short) or M2 R2 (setups longer but no real algorithms).
 

blah

brah
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
2,139
Location
.
I guess you'd want one with either few setup moves or few algorithms. Of course, for any method, memorizing wrong is a DNF, but you want to minimize how much you mess up on execution. I think I'd say to go for either Old Pochmann (one algorithm to know, setups usually short) or M2 R2 (setups longer but no real algorithms).

Hmm... I'd say for M2/R2, the setup/setdown(?) moves themselves are the algorithms, so if there's nothing wrong with memo and you know your "algorithms" well enough (it's not like you can do something wrong in the middle of a U perm, nor any perm for that matter, same goes for M2 "algorithms"), you can't possibly go wrong at all, because everything is pretty much "predetermined", there's nothing with which you come up on the fly. (Except, perhaps, PLL parity?)

So I think M2/R2 is safest :D Same goes for Classic Pochmann, only in Classic Pochmann, the setup moves and the Y/J/T perms themselves feel kinda separated, unlike in M2 where they just flow nicely, so you're probably more prone to making setup errors in Classic Pochmann, I think. Yeah.
 

MistArts

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
1,490
I think it depends on your memo method. Direct solving is the safest like 3-cycle freestyle, M2/R2 and Classic Pochmann.

I wouldn't consider 3OP "direct solving" because you have to do more and your success rate goes down.
 
N

nitrocan

Guest
M2 R2, Classic Pochmann, anything that doesn't separate orientation and permutation. Otherwise, you will have to memorise 4 different things and it will get harder.
 

Mike Hughey

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
11,296
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
SS Competition Results
YouTube
Visit Channel
I think the best thing to do is probably look at people with long strings of success rates. What method does Clément Gallet use, for instance? Leyan Lo always used 3OP; I assume he still does, but maybe he's switched to M2 or something else?

Tim Habermaas is pretty deadly accurate, and he uses M2. If you look at the multiBLD event (which focuses more on accuracy, rather than speed), many of us use M2. I think M2 is particularly accurate.

I think you also need to consider: are you talking about accuracy at whatever speed, or are you talking about accuracy at really high speed? The answer might be different for the two cases.

In any event, there are people who are very accurate with each of the popular methods, so it's hard to answer this definitively.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
162
YouTube
Visit Channel
I think the best thing to do is probably look at people with long strings of success rates. What method does Clément Gallet use, for instance? Leyan Lo always used 3OP; I assume he still does, but maybe he's switched to M2 or something else?

Tim Habermaas is pretty deadly accurate, and he uses M2. If you look at the multiBLD event (which focuses more on accuracy, rather than speed), many of us use M2. I think M2 is particularly accurate.

I think you also need to consider: are you talking about accuracy at whatever speed, or are you talking about accuracy at really high speed? The answer might be different for the two cases.

In any event, there are people who are very accurate with each of the popular methods, so it's hard to answer this definitively.

Im talking about accuracy at whatever speed. I'd obviously like it to be faster but id rather sacrafice speed for accuracy.
 

shelley

chang
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Messages
1,683
WCA
2004CHAN04
Success rate depends on the person and memorization ability, not so much the method. All the methods will successfully solve the cube from any position if you do them right.
 

Stefan

Member
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
7,280
WCA
2003POCH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I dont want to know which method is the easiest or fastest. I want the one that is most consistant with its solves.
Then you might try the method called "take your time memorizing and making sure you get everything right". In other words, you can directly influence your consistency simply by taking more time instead of rushing. And that's true for *all* methods. When I do a demo solve at a party or for an interview, I want to make sure I get it right and thus memorize and then walk over the memorization at least once more, and also take my time solving. I don't do that (as much) in competition, where I care less about success and more about speed.

Besides that, I suggest old pochmann or M2 for edges and old pochmann for corners. For 4x4 blind I have trouble executing R2 correctly, that's why I go back to my old method for its corners even though I'm less used to it. Note however that not having much experience with methods other than my own, I'm obviously biased.
 

AvGalen

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
6,857
Location
Rotterdam (actually Capelle aan den IJssel), the N
WCA
2006GALE01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Mike: Clement uses 3OP (Orient first, 3-cycle permute)
Stefan: "Old" Pochmann or "Classic" Pochmann?

And why would you like a high success rate? I think most good blindfolders go for speed instead of success. The event is a speed event and all you need is 1 good one. (Just ask Rowe Hessler, he doesn't seem to care about good/bad as long as its fast)
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
913
Location
Germany
Accuracy is not about any method. if you know the method perfectly, then your accuracy can be perfect, BUT only, if your memo works.
And i dont want to be rude, but i dont think, that Tim is THAT good at accuracy. i LOVE his 24/24 (even if i have to go for a big amount to get WR now:p:D) , but HE told me yesterday, after i told him, that he is always like an idol for me, that his accuracy sucks. I think its quiet good, but not the best. not because of M2, i think, he is just doing some small mistakes, like mixing up some images on one place, so ----> the question has to be: what is the best MEMO-METHOD and not the best solving method for accuracy:D

Greetings..:Dennis;):)
 

AvGalen

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
6,857
Location
Rotterdam (actually Capelle aan den IJssel), the N
WCA
2006GALE01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I disagree Dennis. I once did an experiment with Clement Gallet. I memorised and solved the cube: DNF, I told Clement what I memorised and he solved it succesfully. We repeated this and the result was the same (DNF for me, success for us). That means that memo is not always the problem.

(In these cases I didn't even rememorised the scramble, right after my DNF I told Clement what I memorised and he executed directly)
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
913
Location
Germany
THEN we come to the other point that i mentioned:
You have to know the method perfectly! so you have to know all the moves perfectly and have to be able to execute all of them blindfolded...AND THEN the memo is very important.

Greetings...Dennis;):)
 
Top