• 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!
Joined
Jun 26, 2016
Messages
5
DISCLAIMER: I do not know if this methord has been came up with before I did, but if It was I am sorry person who created it before me.

First of all you need to make f2l minus 1, which is intuitive and there is a million tutorials for. Using this empty slot you can orient and permute the edges. You have to play around with this, if you need help with this ask me to explain some more. You should have a cross solved and permuted on the top layer.

Hold the puzzle so that you have 3 incorect corners facing you. Have 1 corner in the top and 2 on bottom. Choose the corner that would go straight down if held in the top left hand corner If it is on the left do this alg (L' U' L) D' (L' U L) D. If it is on the right do the mirror. (R U R') D (R' U' R) D'. The orientation doesn't matter. You need to do this twice. Next we need to do the Final lbl alg. Hold an incorect corner in the top right hand position. Repeat this trigger until it is oriented correctly, ignore the rest of the cube apart from the top layer. (R' D' R D). Adjust the U face so another corner is in that position, and adjust until the corner is oriented. When the entire U layer is oriented keep doing the trigger until the rest of the cube goes back to the original position the by doing some sort of move without moving the other missoriented corner take the bottom missoriented corner onto the top layer. Now do the repeated step again on the last two corners.


Note: There will be an update for an advanced methord once I have created the algs.
 

MadQuiter

Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
3
Ok. So I just created a method based off 8335 method. Plus a new Possible concept.

Let me explain. First, L2335

Why the name?
L Because Of a few reasons. For 1 it helped me remember to keep it the right side to use the buffer to solve. Plus, it's the first initial to my name.
2 you guessed it, 2x2 cube. Also the two possible "parity" cases that can only happen on 2x2. Also the Two Regular Cases that happen. Ironically, make 2x2.
And 335 to honor its origins of [[8335]]

NOTE: THERE IS A FEW CASES I HAVE FIGURED OUT Yet.
By the way the steps are quick overview. I will make complete tutorial and post soon.
Brief
Steps Include:
1. Make White bottom except for one piece
2. Turn cube over With white on top.
Empty piece on right.
3. Do the R U R' U' buffer until bottom layer is solved. Then turn the bottom layer until you either see L or backwards L And continue buffer. If you have one side solved in front of you. You have parity. Algorithm: U' z' U2 R' U' R2 U' R' U' R U' R' U'
Also if you get a weird case which you will get, do the Buffer until you get previous case.
4. IF YOU DONT HAVE "Parity" You will have two pieces that need to switch Yellow Closest to white and White closest to yellow. Look for one do a z or z' look for one solid side. If solid side is on right do the sexy R U R' U' four times than D (towards white). Than Sexy Twice. If the White is on left side, do the anti-sexy L' U' L U than do a D' (towards white) Anti-sexy twice.

Concept Part.
This will be a COMPLETELY new method come out very very soon.
 

tx789

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
2,009
Location
New Zealand
WCA
2010HUNT02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Solving a three quaters of a face and rotating is awfully inefficent. 2x2 is such a simple puzzle that adding unnessary rotations is much more costly than on 3x3.

LBL isn't hard to learn for 2x2 it takes 7 algs that you all ready know if you know 2 look OLL, add 2 more algs and you know Ortega. There isn't a lot of variety for what you can do on 2x2 in terms of methods. It a simple puzzle.
 

Teoidus

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
573
Location
Char
So today I wrote up a joke method called ZZ-ghost which essentially boils down to freeblockbuilding Roux.

It got me thinking about post-F2B continuations though and I had an idea: can we use LSE techniques to solve up to phasing and finish the solve with ZZLL?

~9 STM Phasing + ~12 STM ZZLL = 21 STM continuation

vs ~9 STM CMLL + ~15 STM LSE = 24 STM continuation

You don't need to look at corner permutation to solve phasing either, which makes lookahead easier. The larger portion of the solve is algorithmic/can be drilled, and drilled <R,U,F> has a higher tps potential than drilled <M,U>. The portion that is <M,U> has very few half turns, which also have higher tps potential. Obviously, the alg count is much higher, but that doesn't seem to be too big a price to pay.

So lower average movecount, easier lookahead, and higher potential tps? What do you guys think?

Some example solves:

Example

The same scramble using standard Roux continuation

Note that F2B + Phasing (and this phasing took quite a lot of moves, usually I get around 9-11 STM) in the first solve took as many moves as F2B + CMLL in the second solve, and the rest of the solves are comparing drilled tps spam to intuitive <M,U> of similar movecounts.
 
Last edited:

wir3sandfir3s

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
537
Location
yuh yuh
So today I wrote up a joke method called ZZ-ghost which essentially boils down to freeblockbuilding Roux.

It got me thinking about post-F2B continuations though and I had an idea: can we use LSE techniques to solve up to phasing and finish the solve with ZZLL?

~9 STM Phasing + ~12 STM ZZLL = 21 STM continuation

vs ~9 STM CMLL + ~15 STM LSE = 24 STM continuation

You don't need to look at corner permutation to solve phasing either, which makes lookahead easier. The larger portion of the solve is algorithmic/can be drilled, and drilled <R,U,F> has a higher tps potential than drilled <M,U>. The portion that is <M,U> has very few half turns, which also have higher tps potential. Obviously, the alg count is much higher, but that doesn't seem to be too big a price to pay.

So lower average movecount, easier lookahead, and higher potential tps? What do you guys think?

Some example solves:

Example

The same scramble using standard Roux continuation

Note that F2B + Phasing (and this phasing took quite a lot of moves, usually I get around 9-11 STM) in the first solve took as many moves as F2B + CMLL in the second solve, and the rest of the solves are comparing drilled tps spam to intuitive <M,U> of similar movecounts.
Interesting idea, may try this out.
So, if I understand correctly the steps are F2B -> Finish F2L + phase -> LL?
 

wir3sandfir3s

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
537
Location
yuh yuh
I've had this idea for a while, but I'm not sure that it would be exactly viable. Basically solve CP In The beginning instead of EO.
1. Inspection: recognize case. Simp,e.
2. 1L CP
3. Using M (and maybe E) moves to move edges and two faces at a time (before re-solving cp) to block build to a specific point, probably F2L.
4. LL, probably 2GLL
Just thought it was interesting, especially the CP part.
 

Sion

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
1,067
Location
New York
Heres a wierd idea: ZZ-R.

It's pretty much roux +ZZ:

don't create the line formation, but orient edges

create the two blocks minus one pair

winter variation since there are no edges where the eoline would be.

Corner permutation

lse.

the idea is more of brute force and recognition, although i'm starting to question if zz should even be a method or a name for a collective type of orientation methods.
 
Last edited:

Teoidus

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
573
Location
Char
Heres a wierd idea: ZZ-R.

It's pretty much roux +ZZ:

don't create the line formation, but orient edges

create the two blocks minus one pair

winter variation since there are no edges where the eoline would be.

Corner permutation

lse.

the idea is more of brute force and recognition, although i'm starting to question if zz should even be a method or a name for a collective type of orientation methods.

People have looked into EO First Roux (which is what this is) and I *think* the general consensus is that a FB is a better use of inspection time and EO is better left for LSE when recog is faster and everything is <M,U>.

Interesting idea, may try this out.
So, if I understand correctly the steps are F2B -> Finish F2L + phase -> LL?

Yes, but do not finish F2L + phase by solving DF and DB and then orienting and then permuting. Solve it as you would in LSE. You can always form at least one pair of phased edges while doing EO, and the other can be formed 4 moves later, completing the step in like max 13 STM

I've had this idea for a while, but I'm not sure that it would be exactly viable. Basically solve CP In The beginning instead of EO.
1. Inspection: recognize case. Simp,e.
2. 1L CP
3. Using M (and maybe E) moves to move edges and two faces at a time (before re-solving cp) to block build to a specific point, probably F2L.
4. LL, probably 2GLL
Just thought it was interesting, especially the CP part.

This is a fun idea to think about, hopefully it goes somewhere interesting.

Importantly note that if you scramble the cube entirely <R,U>, then scramble it entirely <L,U>, then solve the left ZZF2L Block using only <L,U>, the cube is still in a 2-gen state, as the 2-gen scrambles "stack" on top of each other in a way (hope this explanation is clear)
 

AlphaSheep

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
1,083
Location
Gauteng, South Africa
WCA
2014GRAY03
I've had this idea for a while, but I'm not sure that it would be exactly viable. Basically solve CP In The beginning instead of EO.
1. Inspection: recognize case. Simp,e.
2. 1L CP
3. Using M (and maybe E) moves to move edges and two faces at a time (before re-solving cp) to block build to a specific point, probably F2L.
4. LL, probably 2GLL
Just thought it was interesting, especially the CP part.
Recognise one of 40 thousand cases. Simple ;)

Have you looked at Briggs2? It's the only kinda viable CP first method I've seen and even it isn't so great.
 

Teoidus

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
573
Location
Char
Well, yes, it is pretty simple. Build a CP face (ignore orientation), then do a Niklas or any diagonal permutation to solve.

People do this all the time, and even manage to solve orientation with it!

It's called 2x2
 

JTWong71

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
251
Location
East Coast of the US
I was thinking that if there was to be a 'Ghost' type of ZZ Variant, it would end with L4E, with UL/UR solved, because the average movecount (STM) is pretty low, lower than EPLL.
 
Top