Solving all corners last

[Cornflake]

I've been trying to work on a method where I solve all edges first. However I am not familiar with corners first solving techniques and I have a feeling much of the skills used there could help me here, but I'm not sure which ones.

If you think of corners first as a cage, my method would be the opposite...solving all the edges (perm and oriented) first, then trying to solve the corners. Does such a thing exist already? If so, how is it done? I just want a way to orient and permute corners and preserve the edges.

For clarification, I can get all the edges solved. I just need to know how to solve the corners afterward.

[StachuK1992]

i actually made this method before...will make tutorial tonight and let you know when it's up
i will just make example solve for now

It's pretty intuitive for the F2l, but the method is NOT good for speedcubing...too much disturbing what's already been done...
by the way, what is your average on what method you use now

and welcome

edit
busy processing

[StachuK1992]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uys4p_94vHw

[Cornflake]

Got it...I dont have to do OLL if I do the corner inserts right.

I was wondering if there was a more elegant way to do it though. I know the corner first guys have a ton of algorithms to pull from in order to solve their corners...why can't it work this way?

EDIT: I have to do OLL, its just the easy ones.

[hawkmp4]

Well, the corners first methods are so quick because they don't care about edges at all... its like solving a 2x2. corners last...well, I've never heard of that being a viable method at all. I suppose you could use A perms and then commutators for the corners...but...why do you need to do corners last? There's no way it will be elegant.

[TMOY]

Well, the corners first methods are so quick because they don't care about edges at all... its like solving a 2x2.

As a corners first guy I agree, most of my algs for corners are unsuitable to an edges first method. If you want to use things like xLLs you will have to find new algs which don't break edges...

[robertpauljr]

I have never been able to solve the cube in less than a minute by any method, but I have had fun learning different approaches to solving the cube. I am not into memorizing lots of algorithms. I can solve the cube: 1. by layers; 2. using F2L; 3. corners first; 4. edges first. Even when I solve the cube by layers and F2L I use the same technique for getting the last 3 or 4 corners as I would if solving the cube edges first. If I was going to solve the cube edges first, after I solved the edges, I would use commutators to cycle the corners into place correctly oriented. Cycle 1 or 2 at a time until you have 5 of them home, then put the final 3 home with the last commutator. I have a booklet on my blog, http://lengtat.us, that explains the commutators I use. It is in the section of the book called Up-Replace-Down 3-Cycles.

Edges first used to be my favorite way to solve the cube because when I was done solving it, I felt like I had actually solved it.

[StachuK1992]

point blank, edges first sucks, unless you would memorize alot of algorithms and had GODLY recognition
that's even to get sub-minute

[robertpauljr]

check out the so-called
"Ultimate Solution to Rubik's Cube"
which goes like this:
Step One: The Cross
Step Two: Center Section Edge Pieces
Step Three: Top Edge Pieces
Step Four: Five Corner Pieces
Step Five: The End Game
might be just what you're looking for.

Peace out.

This is the first Edges First Method I learned. Now, if I were to do an Edges First solve, I would use other means to get the edges, and use a different commutator to get the corners. I have implemented what I learned at
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/corner_3_cycles.html
and like it better than the Ultimate Solution commutators, but either way works.

For those who say that Edges First sucks, I'm guessing what they mean is that it sucks as a speedsolving method. It doesn't necessarily suck as an interesting, challenging, different way to solve the cube.

Cornflake, I am not sure I understand what you are looking for in "a more elegant way to do it." Could you clarify? My dictionary says elegant means "pleasingly simple." What could be more pleasingly simple than solving all 8 corners of the cube with a simple commutator?

The name of this site is speedsolving.com. If you are looking for a better, faster method, I don't know anyone that would use Edges First. But if you want to be able to solve the cube Edges First, just for the fun of being able to do it, go for it!

[somerandomkidmike]

Well.... Something you could do to improve edges first is to combine it with corners first. I like to call this God's Algorithm (optimal solution).