# Petrus Or Fridrich?



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 4, 2007)

I just now recently learned how-to solve the cube using the Petrus method, i still get around 1min with it, but I stall and take my time. 
Here are benefits of the Petrus, that Fridrich doesn't have:
**more freedom of movement
**Only 7 OLLs
**faster moves(a whole segment where you can ONLY use R moves and U moves)

Less algs faster movement, seems better to me!

--
A cubist, unsure to use the petrus or fridrich.


----------



## Theromy (Oct 4, 2007)

Where did you learn to solve using petrus? I'd be quite interested in learning more about it.


----------



## ExoCorsair (Oct 4, 2007)

Lotsofsloths said:


> Here are benefits of the Petrus, that Fridrich doesn't have:
> **more freedom of movement
> **Only 7 OLLs
> **faster moves(a whole segment where you can ONLY use R moves and U moves)



F2L tricks (alternative insertions, empty slot, multi-slotting) allow for some freedom. However, in Petrus, you need be able to execute the optimal solutions (or close to them) to get your lower move counts.

You only need 3 (maybe 2) OLLs for Fridrich, honestly. Most people that I know that use Petrus and are really fast use OLL/PLL anyway... Besides, you can combine LL steps to do LL in fewer looks, and combine all 3 steps for the ZBLL algs.

My entire F2L (minus cross) is done with R's and U's too (with x rotations or l moves, of course). Most of my PLLs are also two-gen algorithms.


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 4, 2007)

> Where did you learn to solve using petrus? I'd be quite interested in learning more about it.


Lars Petrus's Site; lar5.cube.com



> My entire F2L (minus cross) is done with R's and U's too (with x rotations or l moves, of course). Most of my PLLs are also two-gen algorithms.


Hmm!
thats interesting, guess that you could position the cube to make that so..


----------



## pjk (Oct 5, 2007)

I'd recommend Fridrich out of the two. However, I suggest you work on Roux.


----------



## annon (Oct 5, 2007)

I'd been using Petrus until about a week ago when I decided to switch to Fridrich. The reason being that I hit a 35.xx average wall 9 months ago and haven't improved since. The problem with Petrus is that you have to spend so much extra time looking. It's a great method for fewest moves, but not so great for speed. I mean, Lars Petrus's best average with his own method is 21.xx, and he's been using it for _decades._ I want sub-20 averages, so I'm switching to Fridrich.


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 5, 2007)

To become a good programmer, you need to know many (different) languages. Similarly, I think that you need to know several methods (Petrus, Roux and Fridrich at the very least) to become a good cuber. And by "knowing a method" I mean averaging sub-20 and understanding it well (low move count).

If you want to learn only one method (there's "or" in the title), then it's up to you to decide which one. But I hope you realize that almost everybody's advice is biased towards their favourite method or the only method they know (which, on average, is Fridrich).



annon said:


> The problem with Petrus is that you have to spend so much extra time looking.


Simply not true. Please don't use such lame excuses and say it's the method's fault just because you can't do it.



annon said:


> Lars Petrus's best average with his own method is 21.xx, and he's been using it for _decades._


Lars is just one of the many people using it. I'm sure there are cubers who've been using Fridrich for a long time and average above 20.



Lotsofsloths said:


> lar5.cube.com


lar5.com/cube



ExoCorsair said:


> However, in Petrus, you need be able to execute the optimal solutions (or close to them) to get your lower move counts.


I'd say that below 55 is easy, and from what I've heard that's already less than typical Fridrich solves. But getting down to 45-50 requires some skill.



ExoCorsair said:


> Most people that I know that use Petrus and are really fast use OLL/PLL anyway...


That sounds a bit misleading, because they only use 7 OLL algs (EO is done already). I prefer calling that OCLL to avoid confusion.


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 5, 2007)

> I suggest you work on Roux.


ROUX!
yay!
i've always wanted to learn that method wheres a link to all the tuts on it, i didn't understand the one on his site(giles roux)...

im also deciding to TRY blindfolded solving 
but i guess this goes in the other forum lol


----------



## badmephisto (Oct 6, 2007)

Fridrich is the way to go if you want to get really quick.
I might be wrong... but please point me to someone using pure Petrus with averages below 15 seconds? I haven't seen something like that... where as there is plenty of people in their low 10's using Fridrich

Also I hear lots of things about Roux... I looked at the method and it looks pretty nice actually, but are there any people out there currently that use it to get very good times? A quick search of this only reveals a couple of people in the 20's averages, and a few lucky solves in 12's or so. But its a new method, so maybe that is a factor. 

anyway, I use Fridrich and I find it very good... but Roux looks promising as well...


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 6, 2007)

badmephisto said:


> but please point me to someone using pure Petrus with averages below 15 seconds?


Anthony Hsu and I average sub-15 with Petrus F2L. He doesn't use COLL as far as I know, though, but it doesn't really matter.



badmephisto said:


> Also I hear lots of things about Roux... I looked at the method and it looks pretty nice actually, but are there any people out there currently that use it to get very good times?


Gilles Roux.


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 6, 2007)

I went to gile site, and looked at his tut, i dont get step 4 though, that where i get stuck...


----------



## h3ndrik (Oct 7, 2007)

this might help you.

the tutorials are really good. they are made from a member of this forum, you can contact him at [email protected]. for specific questions you can also ask me


----------



## badmephisto (Oct 7, 2007)

h3ndrik said:


> this might help you.
> 
> the tutorials are really good. they are made from a member of this forum, you can contact him at [email protected]. for specific questions you can also ask me



thx for the link its a good tutorial... Now if i only weren't totally horrible at M/M'/M2 moves, i'd even think of trying to switch


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 8, 2007)

thanks also, i looked at those already and still dont get them lol..
step 4a is incredibly confusing


----------



## Protest (Oct 8, 2007)

yea i can only do step 1 ad 2, and cant do the COLL or whatever it is, thought i havent looked at any algs yet.


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 8, 2007)

i mean, i just plain out dont get step 4.


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 9, 2007)

Lotsofsloths said:


> i just plain out dont get step 4.


What's so difficult?

Step 4a: Frist create a ce-pair, and the use it to build a 1x2x2 block (a.k.a. square).
Step 4b: Finish F2L by solving the final ce-pair.


----------



## braineater (Oct 9, 2007)

> Step 4a: Frist create a ce-pair, and the use it to build a 1x2x2 block (a.k.a. square).
> Step 4b: Finish F2L by solving the final ce-pair.


I think he's talking about the Roux method.


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 9, 2007)

braineater said:


> I think he's talking about the Roux method.


He was talking about "step 4a" a couple of posts earlier, so I thought it's about Petrus.

Edit: Hmm, I didn't know that Roux has 4a, too.


----------



## h3ndrik (Oct 9, 2007)

Protest said:


> yea i can only do step 1 ad 2, and cant do the COLL or whatever it is, thought i haven't looked at any algs yet.



for the start you can learn the seven fridrich OLLs where all edges are correctly oriented. after that you can switch the corners using A, Y or T PLLs.
adds a step, but you can achieve good times with this variation (which I'm using as well ) kind of a 2 look coll.


----------



## Dirk BerGuRK (Oct 9, 2007)

Lotsofsloths said:


> step 4a is incredibly confusing



Gilles described it best when he refers to it as an "iterative process." It took me a while to truly understand it as well; however, Gilles' tutorial is probably the best around when it comes to orienting the edges for the Roux method. If you want to understand it, really try to follow what he is saying. Once you understand it, there are many shortcuts you can learn that make the process even easier. 

http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_4.html


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 10, 2007)

i still find it confusing.


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 10, 2007)

i mean, i just got it where i got the corners permed and i got the whole top layer, but uhh..6 edges arte outta place.


----------



## h3ndrik (Oct 10, 2007)

thats the easiest step of the method besides brute force alg memorization & execution for COLL. what exactly don't you understand?

i made a short list of the algs for the possible combinations which can occur. i can send it to you if you want, but i don't think it'll help you at all.
step 4a is quite intuitive, once you take the time to make yourself a training cube for step 4. do this by taking a cube without stickers on it and place 6 stickers on it, representing the 6 remaining edges in an disoriented stage (the stickers should be at the following positions: FU, LU, BU, RU, FD and BD) now with only using U/U' and M/M' turns try to flip the edges. thats how i learned it. 
by now the whole step 4 takes me between 7-15 seconds (worst case, 6 edges incorrectly flipped and the 'dot case'). 
Gilles Roux says "Using this rather intuitive technique (...), you can solve the last 6 edges and 4 centers in less than 5 seconds on average (...)." 
i average about 45 seconds, where the last 5-7 seconds are step 4 (yeah, I still suck at block building (step 1&2)  )

just watch Richard's Videos with a cube (preferably the 'training cube' for step 4) in your hand, look what he does, use the pause button a lot, think about what he says, try to set up the cases he's showing you (you can see what he does to set up a specific case) and finally repeat till you understood it.


----------



## Joël (Oct 10, 2007)

Lotsofsloths said:


> I just now recently learned how-to solve the cube using the Petrus method, i still get around 1min with it, but I stall and take my time.
> Here are benefits of the Petrus, that Fridrich doesn't have:
> **more freedom of movement



More freedom of movement is NOT necessarily beneficial! You can also have too much freedom.

I think the good thing of Fridrich is that you have a lot of Fridrich, but also enough restrictions.

That's just how I see it


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Oct 10, 2007)

lol, ok, i kind of get it..


----------

