# Guess the percentage of cubers who use different methods! (POLL)



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

So basically, out of 100, how many people do you think will be using CFOP? How many to be using Roux? Etc. After a little bit, we can do a poll on our method, and whoever is the closest wins the right to redo my location, ‘about’ and my Facebook description to one of these: The Wuest, The Euest, The Suest for a month. (I have no idea why I’m doing these kind of things)
Edit: I don’t have facebook :/, I mean the description @Etotheipi . I put N/A a while back to make my box look more filled out, but decided it was pointless.


----------



## Etotheipi (Feb 18, 2020)

70 CFOP, 15 Roux, 5 ZZ, 2 Petrus, 8 others.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

75 CFOP
15 Roux
5 ZZ
4 Other
1^9473838464828284758568383947584847578383748579292037828184749 Petrus


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 18, 2020)

78.78% - CFOP
10.20% - Roux
6.12% - ZZ
2.04% - Petrus
2.86% - Other


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

Ok wait, clarification, guess the percentage of cubers on the speedsolving forums that use different methods.


----------



## Duncan Bannon (Feb 18, 2020)

85% CFOP
7% Roux
2% ZZ
6% Other


----------



## ProStar (Feb 18, 2020)

78.78% - CFOP
10.20% - Roux
6.12% - ZZ
2.04% - Petrus
2.86% - Other


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 18, 2020)

Found this on the SS chat :


----------



## ProStar (Feb 18, 2020)

WarriorCatCuber said:


> Found this on the SS chat :
> View attachment 11415



According to those stats:

78.78% - CFOP
10.20% - Roux
6.12% - ZZ
2.04% - Petrus
2.86% - Other

I'm actually surprised by these, CFOP is way lower than I expected and ZZ, Petrus, and Other are higher than I anticipated. Roux is about what I thought it would be.


----------



## Etotheipi (Feb 18, 2020)

ProStar said:


> According to those stats:
> 
> 78.78% - CFOP
> 10.20% - Roux
> ...


He said guess. Using actual stats is cheating. (Jk lol)


----------



## ProStar (Feb 18, 2020)

Etotheipi said:


> He said guess. Using actual stats is cheating. (Jk lol)



Blame @Kit Clement, he taught me statistics(unknowingly)


----------



## efattah (Feb 18, 2020)

The 'poll' is hopelessly inaccurate because this forum is absolutely not a good random sampling. If you were to go to a big competition with 500 cubers, I can pretty much guarantee that 490+ are using CFOP. Recent interest in Roux might very slowly decrease the CFOP fraction. Probably 3 years ago the number would have been 498/500 (for CFOP).

Personally I find the most interesting (on-going) statistic is the number of users that have achieved sub-10 official averages, using methods *other* than Roux or CFOP. The number is very small, but any 'new' updates on that front are always welcome. I think something like 2 people have sub-10 ZZ averages, and I believe that's it, I don't think anyone has ever recorded a sub-10 average with Petrus, corners-first, ZBRoux, or other?


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

Its not meant to be very accurate, just for fun 



efattah said:


> The 'poll' is hopelessly inaccurate because this forum is absolutely not a good random sampling. If you were to go to a big competition with 500 cubers, I can pretty much guarantee that 490+ are using CFOP. Recent interest in Roux might very slowly decrease the CFOP fraction. Probably 3 years ago the number would have been 498/500 (for CFOP).
> 
> Personally I find the most interesting (on-going) statistic is the number of users that have achieved sub-10 official averages, using methods *other* than Roux or CFOP. The number is very small, but any 'new' updates on that front are always welcome. I think something like 2 people have sub-10 ZZ averages, and I believe that's it, I don't think anyone has ever recorded a sub-10 average with Petrus, corners-first, ZBRoux, or other?


Tao Yu and 2180161 have sub 10 Petrus averages I believe.


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 18, 2020)

efattah said:


> The 'poll' is hopelessly inaccurate because this forum is absolutely not a good random sampling. If you were to go to a big competition with 500 cubers, I can pretty much guarantee that 490+ are using CFOP. Recent interest in Roux might very slowly decrease the CFOP fraction. Probably 3 years ago the number would have been 498/500 (for CFOP).
> 
> Personally I find the most interesting (on-going) statistic is the number of users that have achieved sub-10 official averages, using methods *other* than Roux or CFOP. The number is very small, but any 'new' updates on that front are always welcome. I think something like 2 people have sub-10 ZZ averages, and I believe that's it, I don't think anyone has ever recorded a sub-10 average with Petrus, corners-first, ZBRoux, or other?


There a about 5 sub-10 ZZers. I think some guy who's username is a random number has sub-10 Petrus averages.


----------



## ProStar (Feb 18, 2020)

efattah said:


> The 'poll' is hopelessly inaccurate because this forum is absolutely not a good random sampling. If you were to go to a big competition with 500 cubers, I can pretty much guarantee that 490+ are using CFOP. Recent interest in Roux might very slowly decrease the CFOP fraction. Probably 3 years ago the number would have been 498/500 (for CFOP).
> 
> Personally I find the most interesting (on-going) statistic is the number of users that have achieved sub-10 official averages, using methods *other* than Roux or CFOP. The number is very small, but any 'new' updates on that front are always welcome. I think something like 2 people have sub-10 ZZ averages, and I believe that's it, I don't think anyone has ever recorded a sub-10 average with Petrus, corners-first, ZBRoux, or other?



@Tao Yu has a sub-10 Petrus Ao12s on YouTube, and a sub-9 Ao5.


----------



## brododragon (Feb 18, 2020)

75.7% CFOP
12% Roux
6.3% ZZ
5% Petrus


----------



## Owen Morrison (Feb 18, 2020)

76% CFOP
18% LBL
2%Roux
1%petrus
3% other

This is what I usually see when I go to competitions.


----------



## Tao Yu (Feb 18, 2020)

efattah said:


> The 'poll' is hopelessly inaccurate because this forum is absolutely not a good random sampling. If you were to go to a big competition with 500 cubers, I can pretty much guarantee that 490+ are using CFOP. Recent interest in Roux might very slowly decrease the CFOP fraction. Probably 3 years ago the number would have been 498/500 (for CFOP).



Considering the fact that the poll is to decide who gets the right to set his location and Facebook summary, I don't think the accuracy of it is a really big concern .



efattah said:


> Personally I find the most interesting (on-going) statistic is the number of users that have achieved sub-10 official averages, using methods *other* than Roux or CFOP. The number is very small, but any 'new' updates on that front are always welcome. I think something like 2 people have sub-10 ZZ averages, and I believe that's it, I don't think anyone has ever recorded a sub-10 average with Petrus, corners-first, ZBRoux, or other?


If ZB counts as different to CFOP, I have a sub 10 average in comp and Anthony Brooks has a sub 8. I could probably get a sub 10 Petrus average in comp pretty easily, but I don't really see what point it would prove, and would rather not waste my official solves as I don't go to a lot of comps at the moment.


----------



## Etotheipi (Feb 18, 2020)

Why do you have Facebook if your 11, that seems fishy to me. =P


----------



## brododragon (Feb 18, 2020)

Etotheipi said:


> Why do you have Facebook if your 11, that seems fishy to me. =P


How is he supposed to do things like this without Facebook?


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

Etotheipi said:


> Why do you have Facebook if your 11, that seems fishy to me. =P


I don’t actually. Although I have a YT account. (No content soz)


----------



## Etotheipi (Feb 18, 2020)

brododragon said:


> How is he supposed to do things like this without Facebook?


idk, but still, I think its weird that he has it.



PetrusQuber said:


> I don’t actually. Although I have a YT account. (No content soz)


ok, why did you say you did then? =P


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 18, 2020)

Etotheipi said:


> idk, but still, I think its weird that he has it.


I don’t lol, but you can still put a description 



Etotheipi said:


> ok, why did you say you did then? =P


I’m trying to get the thing as public as possible, location is obvious, facebook, ‘about’, etc.
Ok mods r gonna be all over us now talking about how we are disrespecting the home page and how we should merge posts and not go off topic lol.


----------



## Chris_Cube (Feb 19, 2020)

I would be interested why nobody uses the old and forgotten Methods from the 80s when Speedcubing occured. For example, the Waterman Method has a lot of Potential with modern Algsets or Salvia (Sub 20). What are your Thoughts on it? My Idea is, when i can get Sub 20 with Roux or even Sub 15 i want to try Salvia and get Sub 10


----------



## Wish Lin (Feb 19, 2020)

I only know that out of all the people who went to Asian Championship 2018(~400 people), I saw only a handful using Roux. Not sure about the rest.


----------



## DerpBoiMoon (Feb 19, 2020)

99% CFOP

in perth


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 19, 2020)

Chris_Cube said:


> I would be interested why nobody uses the old and forgotten Methods from the 80s when Speedcubing occured. For example, the Waterman Method has a lot of Potential with modern Algsets or Salvia (Sub 20). What are your Thoughts on it? My Idea is, when i can get Sub 20 with Roux or even Sub 15 i want to try Salvia and get Sub 10


Quite a lot of methods have potential, but the problem is most people learn beginner’s first, then gravitate naturally towards CFOP, since it’s the easiest to progress to, and also most popular. Not to mention they see people like Max and Feliks and go ‘Oh! What methods do they use? CFOP? Ok I’ll go learn CFOP!’ If they get past that, they find videos of the Big 3, then usually stop there. Most people will never stumble onto say, Waterman, Petrus, LEOR, etc until they’ve already learnt another method. And there is a lack of resources for those methods, so it’ll be a lot harder to progress than with a well known method everyone uses :/. So it’s left to people who are dedicated with their method and everything to make YT videos, websites, alg sheets, etc for the people who might come before them. And then you have to be kind of famous.


----------



## ProStar (Feb 19, 2020)

Chris_Cube said:


> I would be interested why nobody uses the old and forgotten Methods from the 80s when Speedcubing occured. For example, the Waterman Method has a lot of Potential with modern Algsets or Salvia (Sub 20). What are your Thoughts on it? My Idea is, when i can get Sub 20 with Roux or even Sub 15 i want to try Salvia and get Sub 10



Mostly because no one ever used them and no resources exist


----------



## Wish Lin (Feb 19, 2020)

PetrusQuber said:


> Quite a lot of methods have potential, but the problem is most people learn beginner’s first, then gravitate naturally towards CFOP, since it’s the easiest to progress to, and also most popular. Not to mention they see people like Max and Feliks and go ‘Oh! What methods do they use? CFOP? Ok I’ll go learn CFOP!’ If they get past that, they find videos of the Big 3, then usually stop there. Most people will never stumble onto say, Waterman, Petrus, LEOR, etc until they’ve already learnt another method. And there is a lack of resources for those methods, so it’ll be a lot harder to progress than with a well known method everyone uses :/. So it’s left to people who are dedicated with their method and everything to make YT videos, websites, alg sheets, etc for the people who might come before them. And then you have to be kind of famous.


Yeah so that’s the problem: 

Because CFOP is popular, many people use it, so it has more resources, more algs, more fast people using it whose “remarkable accomplishment” attract more new cubers learning CFOP and make it more popular, etc, etc.


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 19, 2020)

Chris_Cube said:


> I would be interested why nobody uses the old and forgotten Methods from the 80s when Speedcubing occured. For example, the Waterman Method has a lot of Potential with modern Algsets or Salvia (Sub 20). What are your Thoughts on it? My Idea is, when i can get Sub 20 with Roux or even Sub 15 i want to try Salvia and get Sub 10


Waterman HAS resources. I made a video on it, I am working on an advanced tutorial, and I'm working on full documentation.


----------



## ProStar (Feb 19, 2020)

I think you should change the about page to:

"helo im Kehre and i lik roobix cubs im lehvin yers old i kan salve uh thre bi thre in ninten sekuhnds i yooz a vulc powr m and yooz petrus i wont tew be suhb ate wun da"


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 19, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I think you should change the about page to:
> 
> "helo im Cary and i lik roobix cubs im (how old you are) yers old i kan salve uh thre bi thre in ninten sekuhnds i yooz a vulc powr m and yooz petrus i wont tew be suhb ate wun da"


Do you know how long that took me to understand ?


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 19, 2020)

What does wun da mean????


----------



## Etotheipi (Feb 19, 2020)

One day.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 19, 2020)

Oh yeah. Plus, how come you get my name from the WCA ID, but fail to get my age @ProStar ?


----------



## ProStar (Feb 19, 2020)

PetrusQuber said:


> Oh yeah. Plus, how come you get my name from the WCA ID, but fail to get my age?




Better?



ProStar said:


> I think you should change the about page to:
> 
> "helo im Cary and i lik roobix cubs im *lehvin* yers old i kan salve uh thre bi thre in ninten sekuhnds i yooz a vulc powr m and yooz petrus i wont tew be suhb ate wun da"


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 19, 2020)

ProStar said:


> I think you should change the about page to:
> 
> "helo im Cary and i lik roobix cubs im lehvin yers old i kan salve uh thre bi thre in ninten sekuhnds i yooz a vulc powr m and yooz petrus i wont tew be suhb ate wun da"


Write Cary as "Kerri"


----------



## ProStar (Feb 19, 2020)

WarriorCatCuber said:


> Write Cary as "Kerri"




Better?



ProStar said:


> I think you should change the about page to:
> 
> "helo im *Kehre* and i lik roobix cubs im lehvin yers old i kan salve uh thre bi thre in ninten sekuhnds i yooz a vulc powr m and yooz petrus i wont tew be suhb ate wun da"


----------



## brododragon (Feb 19, 2020)

I always read it as “I lick Rubiks Cubes”


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 21, 2020)

By the way, poll is up. I predict myself to be closest lol.


----------



## WarriorCatCuber (Feb 21, 2020)

PetrusQuber said:


> By the way, poll is up. I predict myself to be closest lol.


Why no ZZ ? There are more ZZ users than petrus users.


----------



## Sion (Feb 21, 2020)

I’m bad method neutral.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 21, 2020)

Weird, I meant to put ZZ. I changed it.


----------



## GAN 356 X (Feb 21, 2020)

Cos it said POLL, I though it was a P-O-L-L, not poll


----------



## brododragon (Feb 21, 2020)

GAN 356 X said:


> Cos it said POLL, I though it was a P-O-L-L, not poll


Same


----------



## PetrusQuber (Feb 22, 2020)

GAN 356 X said:


> Cos it said POLL, I though it was a P-O-L-L, not poll


Stands for Permute and Orientate Last Layer.


----------



## ProStar (Feb 22, 2020)

PetrusQuber said:


> Stands for Permute and Orientate Last Layer.



No, Pure OLL


----------

