• 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!

Will Advanced Blind Methods Become the Best Speedsolving Method for Humans?

abunickabhi

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
3,809
Location
Yo
WCA
2013GHOD01
YouTube
Visit Channel
20 years later, @abunickabhi will have finished documenting and memorizing 12-style edges and 8-style corners and he will be the first person on the planet to get a sub-2 3x3 single and a sub-8 3 bld single.
Even style does not exist. Also 13-style edges will be rare, as there are always flipped edges and cycle breaks. 5-style is a nice sweat spot where the algs are a decent amount and the ROI is good enough, 40% faster exec than 3-style, [R2 U2 F':[U,M]].
 

abunickabhi

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
3,809
Location
Yo
WCA
2013GHOD01
YouTube
Visit Channel
After the original question: "Will Advanced Blind Methods Become the Best Speedsolving Method for Humans?".

I assume you meant for 3x3x3 average of 5 in competition (or ao100/1000 at home, etc), and that "humans" means either most people, or the top 3x3x3 solvers; rather than those who "quit" CFOP to focus only on 3-Style, in which case, they could end up faster with 3-Style method than anything else.

For example, Jack Cai says he's faster at 3-Style method, but I doubt he practises CFOP at all these days so I don't think the "CFOP vs 3-Style" comparison here is quite fair since they're different tools for different jobs. Sure, you could use an old hard drive to hammer in a nail, but on average, a hammer will get the job done better. Similarly, you could use a hammer to record data or basic information in a pinch, but again, the tool that's designed for recording data will be better at it on average.

As for 5-Style, I don't think relatively normal people would care to embark on this journey when CFOP/Roux is almost a guarantee (for many dedicated speedsolvers anyway) to sub-10 given sufficient high-quality training and practice. Is there a course for full 5-Style that people can complete in a finite time while not neglecting other responsibilities or hobbies? No. So until there's evidence of it actually working in practice, maybe it's better to lump it in the "beyond advanced" category, and assume "advanced" means 3-Style and nothing more.

Anyway, there's a simpler way to look at this: Observe the current best 3blders - Tommy, Elliott etc. (apologies for omissions), who of late have gotten really good really quickly. Time how long their exec takes. Is it *consistently* 5, 6 or even 7 seconds? Why not? It's not like they pause all that much amidst all that high tps turning.

It's the move count.
Good summarisation and points.

I agree that doing 5-style grind does make me neglect other responsibilities or hobbies, which is tough. The age at which we realise that we are bored enough of all other events, and 3-style is a quite huge, (I cannot imagine a 15-year old getting bored of 17 events, unofficial events and 3-style). So, the candidates who are willing to take up 5-style seriously are quite a few. And the age at which I started doing 5-style (age 20), is when I started to get busy with my studies and work as well. My day job is as a rocket scientist and that itself takes a mental toll as I have to worry a lot about code and hardware. Doing 5-style to unwind is a tough thing to get used to, but it is possible, [f2 D:[D,S']].
 

Billabob

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2018
Messages
130
I'm amazed you're still working on 5-style abunickabhi, I've seen you on it for years. Godspeed.

Not sure why this thread came back. The answer is pretty cut and dry... 3-style's movecount is far too high to be viable for actual speedsolving, and high level solvers already use lookahead and instant recognition to smoothly execute a solve in one step. What little gain there is from one-looking the solve is lost by the clunky ergonomics and solution length (when I slow solve I average around 40 moves with CFOP/Tripod, and 3-style is too primitive and brute force a method to even come
close to that)
 

TheEpicCuber

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
1,254
Location
Ephrata, Washington
WCA
2022TIND01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I'm amazed you're still working on 5-style abunickabhi, I've seen you on it for years. Godspeed.

Not sure why this thread came back. The answer is pretty cut and dry... 3-style's movecount is far too high to be viable for actual speedsolving, and high level solvers already use lookahead and instant recognition to smoothly execute a solve in one step. What little gain there is from one-looking the solve is lost by the clunky ergonomics and solution length (when I slow solve I average around 40 moves with CFOP/Tripod, and 3-style is too primitive and brute force a method to even come
close to that)
Cherry can solve a cube BLD in around 7-8 seconds, and can memo in that time.
 

Mike Hughey

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
10,742
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Cherry can solve a cube BLD in around 7-8 seconds, and can memo in that time.
Correct. And that is probably not really all that far from the limit. I can see maybe cutting a couple of seconds off with extreme dedication, but the likelihood of ever breaking the average speedsolving WR this way seems very low. Especially considering the current WR will probably be beaten substantially with normal methods in the future.
 

abunickabhi

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
3,809
Location
Yo
WCA
2013GHOD01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Correct. And that is probably not really all that far from the limit. I can see maybe cutting a couple of seconds off with extreme dedication, but the likelihood of ever breaking the average speedsolving WR this way seems very low. Especially considering the current WR will probably be beaten substantially with normal methods in the future.
If Tommy gets this set of algs and this TPS on a 7alg solve, 4 times in a row, he has a shot of breaking the 3x3 2h sighted WR, U R' U' M U S' L F' L' S r.

 

Mike Hughey

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
10,742
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
If Tommy gets this set of algs and this TPS on a 7alg solve, 4 times in a row, he has a shot of breaking the 3x3 2h sighted WR,
That's an awful lot of ifs. This particular solve took 7 seconds (since it was 10 algs).

I suppose it's possible, but the odds are almost impossibly low. Even if he did break the WR this way, it would most definitely not prove that it is the best speedsolving method. He would have simply gotten extremely lucky.
 
Top