• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Tao Yu

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
1,172
Location
Ireland
WCA
2012YUTA01
YouTube
Visit Channel
If M2 is a pretty popular 3BLD edges method, why does no one use R2 for corners?
Maybe because it's harder to learn. The R-slice targets are even more troublesome than M2 M slice targets and you need to learn a few more algs. For most people, who probably don't care too much about BLD, OP is fast enough.

People who do care about BLD probably just go from OP to 3-style directly, which isn't that hard really. R2 is useful though, if you want DFR as you buffer (which is actually a pretty good buffer).

As for people who care about BLD and use R2, well it's like using keyhole F2L because you can't be bothered to learn proper F2L. Really, switch to 3-style already.
 
Last edited:

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Maybe because it's harder to learn. The R-slice targets are even more troublesome than M2 M slice targets and you need to learn a few more algs. For most people, who probably don't care too much about BLD, OP is fast enough.

People who do care about BLD probably just go from OP to 3-style directly, which isn't that hard really. R2 is useful though, if you want DFR as you buffer (which is actually a pretty good buffer).

As for people who care about BLD and use R2, well it's like using keyhole F2L because you can't be bothered to learn proper F2L. Really, switch to 3-style already.

Fine, I'll go learn 3-style :p
 

Sessinator

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
246
WCA
2009CADM01
YouTube
Visit Channel
If M2 is a pretty popular 3BLD edges method, why does no one use R2 for corners?

R2 user here.

Going to go with most of the points made in the post above, but I don't think R2 is hard to learn if you understand M2. I just think if you use OP and want to get faster, your time and effort would be better spent learning 3-style. There are a lot of good resources out there to do that these days. I learned R2 shortly after learning OP because I thought the concept was cool, and there weren't really as many easy to follow resources on BLD as there are now (when I learned BLD, Eric Limeback hadn't even finished up his M2/OP tutorial).



More on R2:

I think people underestimate R2.


I think it also provides a pretty nice transition into corner comms. Quite a few of the corner comms I know are variations of some of the R2 cycles.

DFR -> LBU -> UBR U' L' U R2 U' L U
DFR -> BLD -> UBR U' L U R2 U' L' U
DFR -> DLF -> UBR U' L2 U R2 U' L2 U

For example, they could be performed as a set up to one of these cases:

DFR -> BRU -> UFR
U' U' L' U R2 U' L U R2 U

Or as an L2 variation:

DFR -> LDB -> UFL
y U R' U' L2 U R U' L2 y'

Or from a different angle:

DFR -> BDR -> UFL
y'x U' L2 U R2 U' L2 U R2 x'y

So for me personally, being an R2 user has made it pretty easy to visualize some of the corner comms from an R2 standpoint.

I've also heard that having DFR and DF as buffers (for corners and edges) might make it a bit easier to set up to solve parity with 3-style since they are both on the same face (D).

I still stand by the original underlined point, but just wanted to say a bit about R2 since most of what I see posted about R2 is from people who don't have much (or any) experience using it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CyanSandwich

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Messages
1,615
Location
Wellington, New Zealand
WCA
2013NELS01
YouTube
Visit Channel
^ I thought of you as soon as I saw the R2 discussion :p
I have one more question - how do you deal with an odd number of the middle wing targets?
If you solve corners then midges, and use OP/M2:

Solve corners, do a J(a) perm (i.e L perm)
Solve midges, do U' F2 U M2 U2 (Rw2 Uw2 F2 r2 F2 Uw2 Rw2) U F2 U
Then another J(a) perm
 

goodatthis

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
Messages
841
Location
NY
WCA
2014CAVA01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Oh okay, thanks so much!
Looking to get into bigger BLD? :) just a tip, don't do too much at first. Make sure you do lots of sighted stuff first, and take breaks in between actual blindfolded attempts. I sort of got burned out from doing lots of BigBLD stuff right before nationals, none of which was successful. But BLD is still fun though!

also, 1/2K post!
 

Lacr1m0sa

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
8
M2 Question

Hello all. I am relatively new to blindsolving, and am looking into getting past OP for edges. So, I tried out M2. I like the method, but I've run into a problem multiple times in solves:

So, imagine this: You have two edges left to solve. You are offset by an M2. The last edge you need to solve is at BU. Normally, in a Spefz lettering scheme, you would do the Q parity alg. However, since you are offset by an M2, You must figure out which is opposite to Q. No biggie, it's just- wait... Your buffer.

I'm assuming this is a parity issue, but I have yet to figure it out. I would like to use M2; I do like the method. However, I just can't figure out how to solve it. Normally you would break into a new cycle, but if you do this in the situation I described above (with an M2), you would just get the same situation.

Thanks for your help,

-Nick
 

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Hello all. I am relatively new to blindsolving, and am looking into getting past OP for edges. So, I tried out M2. I like the method, but I've run into a problem multiple times in solves:

So, imagine this: You have two edges left to solve. You are offset by an M2. The last edge you need to solve is at BU. Normally, in a Spefz lettering scheme, you would do the Q parity alg. However, since you are offset by an M2, You must figure out which is opposite to Q. No biggie, it's just- wait... Your buffer.

I'm assuming this is a parity issue, but I have yet to figure it out. I would like to use M2; I do like the method. However, I just can't figure out how to solve it. Normally you would break into a new cycle, but if you do this in the situation I described above (with an M2), you would just get the same situation.

Thanks for your help,

-Nick

First off, what is a Q parity alg? Second of all, targeting BU means that you target Q even if you're offset by M2. This may seem weird, but think about it - the edge at BU or UB never moves when you shoot to any target except for A and Q. Shooting to A and Q never changes, even if you're offset by an M2. I use (y R' F R y' U R2 U' M2 U R2 U' y R' F' R y')
 

Lacr1m0sa

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
8
I use M2 D U R2 U' M' U R2 U' M D'. I didn't think about that; does that mean I only have to think about shooting to the opposite sticker for C/I and SW?
 

Lacr1m0sa

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
8
Ah, derp. I do a B2 and then perform the alg. Didn't feel like learning another one.

Thanks for the help!
 

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Ah, derp. I do a B2 and then perform the alg. Didn't feel like learning another one.

Thanks for the help!

Ah, that's actually not a bad idea for that alg.

No probs. I actually got confused with this stuff when I started M2, too, so I'm glad to help ^_^

EDIT: Wait, where did you find that alg? I just tried it out and it doesn't work. Completely messes everything up. You're best off using the alg I just posted.
 
Last edited:

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Here's a question:

I was messing around M2 cases recently and found that I could create an edge commutator by using M2 and one of the setup moves from M2, i.e. [R' U R U', M2]. Could you make an entire edge method based around using M2 as your interchange, some M2 setup moves as your insertions, and making commutators from that? The only problem I see might be the inner targets and the M-slice targets, but I don't think it's that bad of an idea. It's like Turbo-M2.
 

Cale S

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
2,421
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2014SCHO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Here's a question:

I was messing around M2 cases recently and found that I could create an edge commutator by using M2 and one of the setup moves from M2, i.e. [R' U R U', M2]. Could you make an entire edge method based around using M2 as your interchange, some M2 setup moves as your insertions, and making commutators from that? The only problem I see might be the inner targets and the M-slice targets, but I don't think it's that bad of an idea. It's like Turbo-M2.
That's usually known as advanced M2, and it's really helpful when applied to wings on big cubes. I don't use it for 3BLD very often, though.
 

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
That's called advanced M2, and it's really helpful when applied to wings on big cubes.

Oh. Looks like I have invented something that was already there. :p I was actually about to go back and edit my post, saying that it's not actually that since you need setup moves before and after your commutator, but in that case I guess all of that is addressed.
 

JasonDL13

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
303
Location
Canada
WCA
2014LEWI02
I'm just going to keep this question really short.

Is orienting the corners first a bad thing to do? I orient them and then permute them. And I don't really like it. I feel that it's going to be harder in Multiblind. However my memo system for them is good, but can't be applied to multiblind, 1 word = 1 orient. Average cube is about 4 words. Hard cube is 6 words.
 

slinky773

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
399
Location
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
WCA
2014LEEY01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I'm just going to keep this question really short.

Is orienting the corners first a bad thing to do? I orient them and then permute them. And I don't really like it. I feel that it's going to be harder in Multiblind. However my memo system for them is good, but can't be applied to multiblind, 1 word = 1 orient. Average cube is about 4 words. Hard cube is 6 words.

Um, yes. I'm assuming you're using Old Pochmann. Just use sticker targets. It really shouldn't be that hard to just learn the memo system for that. Orienting before solving is really unnecessary.
 
Top