# Rowe's 2x2



## Faz (Nov 2, 2008)

This is Rowe Hessler's unofficial 2x2 WR average!

2.80 2.56 3.05 3.61 2.55 3.25 2.19 3.40 3.46 (1.00) (3.71) 2.55. Average was 2.94
ridiculous! i use CLL and i had easy cases on almost every solve. the 2.19 was unlucky and the 1.00 was a one move layer but it canceled into a sune ). im normally about 3.3 on 2x2x2 now


Pretty neat.


----------



## Rubixcubematt (Nov 2, 2008)

wow, that is just amazing rowe.


----------



## Escher (Nov 3, 2008)

i am actually speechless.

he is incredible.


----------



## ThePizzaGuy92 (Nov 3, 2008)

dang, i need to finish learning those CLLs. it's currently the method of the fastest unofficial average? sheesh


----------



## Jai (Nov 3, 2008)

fazrulz said:


> This is Rowe Hessler's unofficial 2x2 WR average!
> 
> 2.80 2.56 3.05 3.61 2.55 3.25 2.19 3.40 3.46 (1.00) (3.71) 2.55.
> ridiculous! i use CLL and i had easy cases on almost every solve. the 2.19 was unlucky and the 1.00 was a one move layer but it canceled into a sune ). im normally about 3.3 on 2x2x2 now
> ...



You never actually mentioned what the average was  (2.94).


----------



## *LukeMayn* (Nov 3, 2008)

O.O *speechless through amazement*


----------



## joey (Nov 3, 2008)

It's cool, but I don't think you needed to post it from the UWR.


----------



## Erik (Nov 3, 2008)

Why not make a sticky where we discuss new records? New records always have been there and always will be here. And we all know that this thread will tumble down the list in a few days because everyone 'oooooh-ed' and 'aaaah-ed' on it then. Maybe at that time there is a new record and that can then be posted again in the thread


----------



## Kenneth (Nov 3, 2008)

That from using CLL, if he learned EG he could cut another 0.5 seconds or so because of easier starts on average.

(I think I shall make it a habit to put wiki links for the keywords I use in my posts. There is no page there about EG yet, else I would had linked that one too)


----------



## DavidWoner (Nov 4, 2008)

Kenneth said:


> That from using CLL, if he learned EG he could cut another 0.5 seconds or so because of easier starts on average.
> 
> (I think I shall make it a habit to put wiki links for the keywords I use in my posts. There is no page there about EG yet, else I would had linked that one too)



I agree that the fast CLL users could drop a good amount of time by switching to EG. Also, there does need to be a wiki page for EG, since just today I had another person ask for the algs for the 3rd case. I think it would be nice if the work I did was on display somewhere and actually being used by someone.

also, new record sticky is a fantastic idea.


----------



## pjk (Nov 4, 2008)

Erik said:


> Why not make a sticky where we discuss new records? New records always have been there and always will be here. And we all know that this thread will tumble down the list in a few days because everyone 'oooooh-ed' and 'aaaah-ed' on it then. Maybe at that time there is a new record and that can then be posted again in the thread


Isn't that what the accomplishment thread is for?


----------



## fanwuq (Nov 4, 2008)

pjk said:


> Erik said:
> 
> 
> > Why not make a sticky where we discuss new records? New records always have been there and always will be here. And we all know that this thread will tumble down the list in a few days because everyone 'oooooh-ed' and 'aaaah-ed' on it then. Maybe at that time there is a new record and that can then be posted again in the thread
> ...



But this is for discussing records, not your own accomplishments.


----------



## Faz (Dec 19, 2008)

Rowe takes the title back from Lukasz Cialon

1	2.71 seconds	Rowe Hessler	2.36 (4.56) (1.86) 1.97 2.45 3.19 3.16 2.78 2.58 3.06 2.59 3.00.
 lucasz will beat this. very fast CLL cases and some EG. I will know full EG in about a month

Whoa! full EG!


----------



## Rubixcubematt (Dec 19, 2008)

noob question, but what exactly is eg?


----------



## Faz (Dec 19, 2008)

EG is a mixture of ortega and CLL.

You make a face, then you solve the cube - requires about 120 algs I think.


----------



## JohnnyA (Dec 22, 2008)

That's actually an amazing average. Well done - I'll never solve a 2x2x2 that fast.


----------



## Faz (Jan 9, 2009)

1	2.67 seconds	Rowe Hessler	2.10 2.37 (1.50) 2.62 2.45 3.28 3.11 2.94 (11.97) 2.33 2.78 2.70
EG really pays off ) i have so many one look solves now. ill know full EG very soon. this was the best RA of a 3.15 avg of 100	

2	2.72 seconds	Phil Thomas	01.57 2.42 3.00 1.66 3.06 3.31 3.22 3.38 (03.47) 3.03 2.55 (01.43)
I think this had three lc so I feel a bit guilty but I'll take it! Sub-3 in comp here i come.	




New top 2. Wow 2.67 of 12...................... speechless.......


----------



## Tomarse (Jan 9, 2009)

Am I the only person that sucks at 2x2? Mine broke today, couldn't get one of the core pieces in so i wacked it on the table to sort it and it snapped ¬_¬ nvm, but yeah, I average like 13 sec, and 17 on the 3x3. So not much of a difference.


----------



## TMOY (Jan 12, 2009)

At least you're not faster at 3^3 than at 2^3. Look at Jean Pons' averages at Nantes Open 2008


----------

