[Help Thread] ZZ and ZB Discussion

Hey all y'all, I'm thinking of switching to ZZ. I've got it down except for the bad edge recognition. I can identify a bad edge, but it takes a long time. After, I have trouble tracking the bad edges during the solve. Any help?

molarmanful said:

Hey all y'all, I'm thinking of switching to ZZ. I've got it down except for the bad edge recognition. I can identify a bad edge, but it takes a long time. After, I have trouble tracking the bad edges during the solve. Any help?

Click to expand...

Practice! The only way you can get good at something is doing it over and over. Eventually you'll get the hang of it.

molarmanful said:

Hey all y'all, I'm thinking of switching to ZZ. I've got it down except for the bad edge recognition. I can identify a bad edge, but it takes a long time. After, I have trouble tracking the bad edges during the solve. Any help?

Click to expand...

The thing that helped me get it right is to take a long time and mentally plan out my entire EO and then try do it with my eyes closed. After a while, you notice certain patterns of bad edges that show up all the time, and you start to become familiar with where the other pieces move to. I don't plan EO in terms of moves, but rather pick a combination of 3-4 move triggers that I'm familiar with, so I don't have to track the bad edges, because I already know where each trigger will move them to.

Also, once you're starting to get the hang of that, then you can start thinking about picking F/B vs F'/B' to keep the line edges on opposite sides of the cube.

What is the typical movecount for ZZ solves?

MarcelP said:

What is the typical movecount for ZZ solves?

Click to expand...

A few moves less than CFOP. I think my movecounts are around 55 for ZZ speedsolves and 60 for CFOP, but I'm not too sure.

molarmanful said:

Hey all y'all, I'm thinking of switching to ZZ. I've got it down except for the bad edge recognition. I can identify a bad edge, but it takes a long time. After, I have trouble tracking the bad edges during the solve. Any help?

Click to expand...

Hi! When I switched to ZZ I did it like this (I moved onto the next step when I felt comfortable with the current one):
1. Started out by planning simpler cases of EO, ignoring the line. Checking after each time that it was done correctly.
2. I practiced the same thing, but blind, tracking the EO pieces in my head. Needless to say, there were quite a few fails in this part, but just keep at it!
3. Move onto planning simpler cases EO, but this time including the line segment as well.
4. Then I practiced the same thing blind. Here there were fails too of course, but practice makes perfect.
5. Moved onto the more difficult cases at this point, including the EO line, as now you should be comfortable with all the steps.
6. Every day after this I practiced about 20 EO-Lines BLD each day. At first I had about a 40% success rate, but it quickly went up to aboout 60%. Now I am at around 90%.

I hope this helped.

TDM said:

A few moves less than CFOP. I think my movecounts are around 55 for ZZ speedsolves and 60 for CFOP, but I'm not too sure.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I can see the upside of ZZ if you are a ninja at EOLine. Because the rest leaves easier F2L. I tend to do 12 (or more) moves F2L in CFOP when the case is not simple..

How is it with color neutral? Is it hard to be CN with ZZ? I am CN with CFOP but not with Roux. Roux has a similar kind of good/bad edges which makes it impossible for me to be CN. Is it just as hard with ZZ?

MarcelP said:

How is it with color neutral? Is it hard to be CN with ZZ? I am CN with CFOP but not with Roux. Roux has a similar kind of good/bad edges which makes it impossible for me to be CN. Is it just as hard with ZZ?

Click to expand...

Full CN with ZZ would take way too much inspection to be practical. I think y-axis CN is a good option. I use yellow top with either red or blue front.

willtri4 said:

Full CN with ZZ would take way too much inspection to be practical. I think y-axis CN is a good option. I use yellow top with either red or blue front.

Click to expand...

This. Full CN isn't worth it; having one colour on D and two on F can let you change the number of bad edges by up to 8 depending on the scramble, and it's easy. Imo, this is the best type of neutrality to have.

However... I'm 99% sure there are only three possible ways to change EO: having blue/green on F, having red/orange on F, and having white/yellow on F. So if you could get used to having a third orientation, then that would allow you maximum control over how many edges you need to orient. However, this would require you to have a different colour on D, which would be very bad for lookahead for most people. If you're already CN with CFOP then it could be possible, but I think for most people it's not going to be worth it. It would also make inspection a little harder (though I don't think it would be that much harder? I'll practise this a bit and see how it goes).

willtri4 said:

Full CN with ZZ would take way too much inspection to be practical. I think y-axis CN is a good option. I use yellow top with either red or blue front.

Click to expand...

I disagree that the inspection time would be the limiting factor.

You can inspect the number of bad edges in 1-2 seconds per orientation. And you only have to inspect 3 orientations (as TDM said). So in 6 seconds, you narrow it down to the orientation with the best EO.

Then you pick the best EO strategy for that orientation, and inspect the effect on all 4 pairs of line edges. Pick your D-color based off that.

I really can't see that taking more than 15 seconds, especially with practice.



I think the real disadvantage to CN ZZ is that there is literally no point. EOLines are only 6 moves anyway.

MarcelP said:

How is it with color neutral? Is it hard to be CN with ZZ? I am CN with CFOP but not with Roux. Roux has a similar kind of good/bad edges which makes it impossible for me to be CN. Is it just as hard with ZZ?

Click to expand...

I'm also CN for CFOP but I do "y z2" for ZZ, just like I do for Roux.

Whilst y2 and z2 don't affect edge orientation they may provide more finger-tricky options or an easier line.

There are a couple of threads somewhere on here which describe an approach to choosing your y orientation.

Ok, I have been playing with ZZ for a few hours now. I will start non CN. Just x2. I have watched some of Phil Yu's video's. I understand how to recognize bad/good egdes.. I takes me 5 minutes inspection and a few more to make all edges good (really..LOL). But then.. F2L.. What I do not understand..., you are supposed to finish F2L and get an OLL with all egdes oriented right? Is it so that you can not do F and B moves during F2L? For example take a solved cube. Do F' U' F U. How would you solve that pair without F and B?

MarcelP said:

Ok, I have been playing with ZZ for a few hours now. I will start non CN. Just x2. I have watched some of Phil Yu's video's. I understand how to recognize bad/good egdes.. I takes me 5 minutes inspection and a few more to make all edges good (really..LOL). But then.. F2L.. What I do not understand..., you are supposed to finish F2L and get an OLL with all egdes oriented right? Is it so that you can not do F and B moves during F2L? For example take a solved cube. Do F' U' F U. How would you solve that pair without F and B?

Click to expand...

You shouldn't have to if all the edges are oriented. If so, that F' U' F U wouldn't come up, or it could be solved with R U L

cashis said:

You shouldn't have to if all the edges are oriented. If so, that F' U' F U wouldn't come up, or it could be solved with R U L

Click to expand...

Ah. that means, I mess the orienation up with my first few F2L's.. because many times I have an OLL with not all edges oriented.. I am going to look for the sample solve thread Thanks for your answer.

MarcelP said:

Ah. that means, I mess the orienation up with my first few F2L's.. because many times I have an OLL with not all edges oriented.. I am going to look for the sample solve thread Thanks for your answer.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't recommend that thread. Many of the solutions just don't work, and many of them aren't really practical ZZ solutions you could apply for speedsolving but FMC attempts based on ZZ. One thing you can do to practice F2L without having to do EO every time is scramble the cube using only RUL (you'll get a solved EO Line if you do this), then solve the F2L making sure you limit your moves to RUL.

adimare said:

I wouldn't recommend that thread. Many of the solutions just don't work, and many of them aren't really practical ZZ solutions you could apply for speedsolving but FMC attempts based on ZZ. One thing you can do to practice F2L without having to do EO every time is scramble the cube using only RUL (you'll get a solved EO Line if you do this), then solve the F2L making sure you limit your moves to RUL.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I did about 50 R U L scrambled cubes. Solving F2L like that is really nice and comfertable. I could het used to that.. Now only if I could become fast at planning Eoline. It takes me minutes at a time now. Where would I be able to find goog Eoline examples?

MarcelP said:

Thanks. I did about 50 R U L scrambled cubes. Solving F2L like that is really nice and comfertable. I could het used to that.. Now only if I could become fast at planning Eoline. It takes me minutes at a time now. Where would I be able to find goog Eoline examples?

Click to expand...

Cube.crider.co.uk ;D

MarcelP said:

Now only if I could become fast at planning Eoline. It takes me minutes at a time now. Where would I be able to find goog Eoline examples?

Click to expand...

JARCS is a useful website if you want to improve your EOLines. You can input a scramble (by applying moves, "painting" each individual sticker, or it can generate one for you!) and then go to the EOLine tab and click "Solve". It will give you all optimal solutions for every possible EOLine. You won't be interested in most of them, so look for the ones that correspond to the EOLines you use. It could be helpful to rotate the cube (by applying moves) so that you are already in solving orientation when you click Solve.

theROUXbiksCube said:

Cube.crider.co.uk ;D

Click to expand...

Thanks!

TDM said:

JARCS is a useful website if you want to improve your EOLines. You can input a scramble (by applying moves, "painting" each individual sticker, or it can generate one for you!) and then go to the EOLine tab and click "Solve". It will give you all optimal solutions for every possible EOLine. You won't be interested in most of them, so look for the ones that correspond to the EOLines you use. It could be helpful to rotate the cube (by applying moves) so that you are already in solving orientation when you click Solve.

Click to expand...

Amazing website. Being a developer myself I can highly appreciate stuff like this What are your ZZ times Louis? It seems you are knowledgeble at more than a few methods Are you allready faster at Roux than CFOP?