guysensei1
Member
The WCA website has changed.
Indeed.
The WCA website has changed.
Hypothetical scenario:
If we got a young child (current youngest solver is 2 years old so let's say he's 2) and taught him how to solve a cube at a young age, then taught him 1LLL algs and recognition, he would be done with all of them before his teenage years. If we trained his lookahead and TPS along the way, then he would truly be the fastest solver... Right?
or we could teach him roux, require him memorize all CLLEO and PL6E for a more reasonable number of algs...
Hypothetical scenario:
If we got a young child (current youngest solver is 2 years old so let's say he's 2) and taught him how to solve a cube at a young age, then taught him 1LLL algs and recognition, he would be done with all of them before his teenage years. If we trained his lookahead and TPS along the way, then he would truly be the fastest solver... Right?
or we could teach him roux, require him memorize all CLLEO and PL6E for a more reasonable number of algs...
Not necessarily. 1LLL wouldn't improve times more than 1 second....
Hypothetical scenario:
If we got a young child (current youngest solver is 2 years old so let's say he's 2) and taught him how to solve a cube at a young age, then taught him 1LLL algs and recognition, he would be done with all of them before his teenage years. If we trained his lookahead and TPS along the way, then he would truly be the fastest solver... Right?
I think 1LLL has about 4000 algs if my math is correct, 72 EP+CP cases per OLL, minus some for symetric OLLs (e.g. OLL 20, doublesune, etc)its one thing to be able to 1-look your last layer, its another to be able to muscle memory a gazillion algs with quick recognition and actually get any practice with any of them, even over 10 years because a lot of time is spent learning them. ollpll has 78 cases while 1LLL has 15000+? I don't think u can get every single alg to flow if you know that many. having sub-1 oll + sub-1 pll + recognition for both should be faster or the same speed as 1LLL
I think 1LLL has about 4000 algs if my math is correct, 72 EP+CP cases per OLL, minus some for symetric OLLs (e.g. OLL 20, doublesune, etc)
A rough counting of roux CLLEO give me 1376 while PL6E give me 720, a total of 2096, which is around half of 1LLL, and recognition seems easier to me, but probably I am wrong on that one.
Lol. PL6E is only 60 algs. 6!/6/2
If you do a 1-2 move setup (3 in some cases, but usually by choosing R vs r in SB you can avoid this) you can halve the number of CLLEO cases. Basically you make it so you have M2/solved centers, and an even number of flipped edges on U and D. This way, you basically just have OLLCP (D edges oriented) and the other, where both D edges are misoriented. Less than 600 algs. Not sure if anyone has thought of this but just an idea.A rough counting of roux CLLEO give me 1376 while PL6E give me 720, a total of 2096, which is around half of 1LLL, and recognition seems easier to me, but probably I am wrong on that one.
lol I'm so far off, 2 is probably for parity right? what's the 6 for?
I think 1LLL has about 4000 algs if my math is correct, 72 EP+CP cases per OLL, minus some for symetric OLLs (e.g. OLL 20, doublesune, etc)
The 2 is parity. The 6 is for circular permutations. Basic explanation: UF->UR->UL is the same as UR->UL->UF. So it is really (n-1)! or n!/n
Lol. PL6E is only 60 algs. 6!/6/2
Has anyone ever attempted GigaminxBLD?
In terms of number of pieces, it should be comparable to 8BLD or 9BLD. Not sure how the execution would go.
Parity means that the states with an odd number of swaps are unreachable, eg if you just swapped 2 edges, then that is one swap and the case is unreachable (without disassembly)First of all, does parity mean you can switch the case with a U2 or something? I don't really get it.
Anyway, there's no such thing as PL2E that's why there's less than 1 algorithm.
And PL3E would only have 2 cases anyway, I guess I could explain this one if I knew the parity thing.