# OH equivalent to sub 10



## a small kitten (Sep 24, 2010)

So I was looking at http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?20505-How-many-cubers-have-already-achieved-sub10 

Just wondering what time people felt the OH equivalent to a sub 10 average would be?

And then my next question would be something like: "How many cubers have already achieved sub xx?"


----------



## Mike Hughey (Sep 24, 2010)

My quick opinion:

There are about 7,500 people with 3x3x3 averages (of 5) in competition. There are only 5 who have done sub-10 averages (of 5) in competition.

There are about 2,500 people with 3x3x3 OH averages (of 5) in competition. There are 2 who have done sub-17 averages (of 5) in competition.

So I'd say sub-17 is probably not a bad guess. But it's obviously just a quick guess.

(So yeah, I think you belong in a similar group for OH.)


----------



## Gabriel Dechichi (Sep 24, 2010)

yeah, I'd say a sub-17 in OH would be like a sub-10 in 3x3
aswell
there are people who did sub-16 avg of 12, what would be a sub-9 avg
and there are two people who did sub-15 avg of 12 OH too, what would be like a sub-8 at 3x3


----------



## a small kitten (Sep 24, 2010)

There are normally less rounds of OH. Should we consider that?


----------



## cyoubx (Sep 24, 2010)

It shouldn't matter if we use percentages of each rather than absolute values.


----------



## Rpotts (Sep 24, 2010)

well the other thread is unofficial results, i think WCA doesn't really matter. Just how many people can you find who have done subxx at home and then edit the OP to fit


----------



## Mike Hughey (Sep 24, 2010)

a small kitten said:


> There are normally less rounds of OH. Should we consider that?


 
I could see where that makes a bit of a difference. Perhaps it should be more like 16 seconds instead of 17. I doubt it would affect it more than that.

So I still suspect you belong in that group.

(For my events (big cubes BLD), the sample size is sufficiently small that it's probably safe to say no one belongs in the group. Except that Ville is so good, he's in there anyway. )


----------



## Forte (Sep 24, 2010)

I think sub17 OH is easier than sub10 3x3 (with respect to singles, at least)

I've done a couple sub17 OH singles but never a sub10, and the sub17 OH singles don't really feel that special to me, even though it's way faster than my average.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 24, 2010)

I'd say ~10 = ~16

Yay math.

But the thing is, far less people practice OH, and OH has the unfortunate disadvantage of wearing out one's hands quite quickly.


----------



## kinch2002 (Sep 24, 2010)

Mike Hughey said:


> (For my events (big cubes BLD), the sample size is sufficiently small that it's probably safe to say no one belongs in the group. Except that Ville is so good, he's in there anyway. )


With bigcubebld, there are very few people on the database compared to with other events, but the 'sample size' should not be considered to be e.g 22 for 5bld. This would, as you say, mean that Ville would be the only one ever on the lists. The reason most people haven't got a 5bld in comp is because they simply can't do it (yet). Of course with some it's because they've made small mistakes in comps and with others just because they can't be bothered to try for one. I'm 7th for 5bld, but I like to think that equates to an achievement greater than 7th/22, whereas I think my ~800/8000 ranking for 3x3 is certainly not underrating me.

EDIT: On topic! sub-16 sounds about right to me equating for sub-10. Just make the list and then figure it out


----------



## Weston (Sep 24, 2010)

What's the 2h equivalent of OH sub 10?
I was wondering that yesterday.


----------



## a small kitten (Sep 24, 2010)

> What's the 2h equivalent of OH sub 10?
> I was wondering that yesterday.



I would think 5.5? I would love to see OH go sub 10 avg =D


----------



## Weston (Sep 24, 2010)

a small kitten said:


> I would think 5.5? I would love to see OH go sub 10 avg =D


 
I would love to see that too. Especially if it was me doing it 
I don't see why it wouldnt be possible for someone to do it.


----------



## vcuber13 (Sep 24, 2010)

a small kitten said:


> There are normally less rounds of OH. Should we consider that?



Not in Toronto, we have 3 rounds of 3x3, 2x2, and OH. And 1 for everything else.


----------



## Weston (Sep 24, 2010)

So how many cubers have done a sub 15 avg12 OH?
I need to hurry up and do that.


----------



## Shortey (Sep 24, 2010)

Weston said:


> So how many cubers have done a sub 15 avg12 OH?
> I need to hurry up and do that.


 
Rowe, Faz and Jai? Maybe Moritz. Dunno.


----------



## a small kitten (Sep 25, 2010)

> Not in Toronto, we have 3 rounds of 3x3, 2x2, and OH. And 1 for everything else.



Toronto is 1 competition. It doesn't define what is normal.



> So how many cubers have done a sub 15 avg12 OH?



Not me. Too many 19s. Sometimes 20 :/


----------



## Joker (Sep 25, 2010)

sub 16.5
EDIT
And I was wondering what the OH equivalent of 2H sub 13...because I consider sub 13 2H to be expert level


----------



## Cyrus C. (Sep 25, 2010)

Joker said:


> And I was wondering what the OH equivalent of 2H sub 13...because I consider sub 13 2H to be expert level


 I'd say sub-20.


----------



## Joker (Sep 25, 2010)

I thought around sub 20 also


----------



## Weston (Sep 25, 2010)

What about piti?


----------



## aronpm (Sep 25, 2010)

I think sub-15 OH is about the same as sub-8 2H. So sub-16 is sub-9, and sub-17 is sub-10.


----------



## Joker (Sep 25, 2010)

Lol, you can't just add 1 sec to OH and 2H like that...


----------



## aronpm (Sep 25, 2010)

Joker said:


> Lol, you can't just add 1 sec to OH and 2H like that...


 
Says who?


----------



## PhillipEspinoza (Sep 25, 2010)

I don't think you can base the equivalent on "in-competition" data. Because given that, there are only a handful of official sub-10 avgs but at-home there's like, over 100 people with sub-10 avgs of 12. Also, 3x3 > OH in terms of popularity amongst people and in competitions. 

Maybe a better comparison would be to take the number of people who claim to have a sub-10 avg of 12, and find the same number of people who have achieved a certain OH avg time. Like how many people do you think have achieved a sub-17 avg at home? Sub-18? What about sub-20? Would that be anywhere close to the amount of people who claim sub-10 avg?


----------



## Joker (Sep 25, 2010)

aronpm said:


> Says who?


 
Using that logic, someone that averages 8:10 2H is equivalent to 8:17 OH. You need to use something like percentages, not just add seconds like that.


----------



## Weston (Sep 25, 2010)

Are there really more than 100 people with sub 10 averages of 12?
I thought it was just a little over 50.


----------



## aronpm (Sep 25, 2010)

Joker said:


> Using that logic, someone that averages 8:10 2H is equivalent to 8:17 OH. You need to use something like percentages, not just add seconds like that.


 
If you're turning that slow for 2H you probably could turn that speed in OH too.


----------



## Joker (Sep 25, 2010)

aronpm said:


> If you're turning that slow for 2H you probably could turn that speed in OH too.


 
LOL
Comeback win


----------



## a small kitten (Sep 25, 2010)

> If you're turning that slow for 2H you probably could turn that speed in OH too.



This is me.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 25, 2010)

aronpm said:


> Says who?


 
okay. 0s 2H solves = 7s OH solve. Totally.


----------



## JeffDelucia (Sep 25, 2010)

When this happens he will be wrong.


----------



## aronpm (Sep 25, 2010)

Stachuk1992 said:


> okay. 0s 2H solves = 7s OH solve. Totally.


 
Now you're just extrapolating to absurd limits


----------



## AnsonL (Jan 6, 2011)

i think 'sub 10 in OH' is easier much than sub 10 in 3x3


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 6, 2011)

aronpm said:


> Now you're just extrapolating to absurd limits


 
But isn't the point that whatever system your using to calculate equivalents should work for all numbers, even extremes?

EDIT: sorry, just realized how long ago that post was.


----------



## TheMachanga (Jan 6, 2011)

AnsonL said:


> i think 'sub 10 in OH' is easier much than sub 10 in 3x3


:confused:


----------



## aronpm (Jan 6, 2011)

MichaelP. said:


> But isn't the point that whatever system your using to calculate equivalents should work for all numbers, even extremes?
> 
> EDIT: sorry, just realized how long ago that post was.


 
Says who?


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 6, 2011)

aronpm said:


> Says who?


 
You want a consistant system because an inconsistent system would be inaccurate (2H 0 seconds = OH 7 seconds).

Now debate my point, because the answer "says who?" doesn't work as I've explained my logic.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 6, 2011)

Why does an approximate model (which was only specified for a few values) need to apply for ALL values?

I suppose meteorologists should get new models because their predictive models don't work very well on long-range forecasts.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 6, 2011)

aronpm said:


> Why does an approximate model (which was only specified for a few values) need to apply for ALL values?



So in your original post, you aren't saying that the pattern continues. You think there is some barrier between OH 17 and OH 18 that doesn't exist between 2H 10 and 2H 11, so the pattern would stop. Is that correct?


----------

