How I devised my own Rubik's Cube method in 1980

I am repeatedly asked about my solving method so I decided to make a video explaining it. The method has no place in the speedcubing world but it might help people come up with their own solution or part solution.

Thats awesome!

I'm gonna learn this method.

I've been cubing since 1980, and only know 3 people from that time who devised their own method. All 3 of them came up with a corner-first method, despite the fact that nearly everyone (including me) tried to solve it the 'most obvious' way, layer-by-layer. The fact that there were LBL solutions being passed around (supposedly "Russian") meant that, even then, people were content to simply speedcube.

Very intuitive aproach, I like it!

really cool

I like it.

I remember the days of solving one side and very occasionally fluking another, usually adjacent, side. I don't know anyone who got further than that but we were only 9.

NeilH said:

I'm gonna learn this method.

Click to expand...

Use a similar approach to create your own. It's incredibly satisfying and you can usually adapt it for other puzzles because you are understanding the logic behind the moves. If you're only interest however is getting faster then it's highly unlikely you would discover anything to help that.

Looks like it could have been a forerunner to Roux

obelisk477 said:

Looks like it could have been a forerunner to Roux

Click to expand...

yeah thats what i thought! the part where he moves the 1x3 red bar to the bottom right and does LR edges is really cool.

PenguinsDontFly said:

yeah thats what i thought! the part where he moves the 1x3 red bar to the bottom right and does LR edges is really cool.

Click to expand...

Haha same I posted a comment about it on his YouTube. Roux is like an optimized version of this

plot twist: we now have to call Roux the Fisher method. or maybe Fisheroux (fisheroo)

obelisk477 said:

plot twist: we now have to call Roux the Fisher method. or maybe Fisheroux (fisheroo)

Click to expand...

I'm gonna use that now. FISHEROO its official!

obelisk477 said:

plot twist: we now have to call Roux the Fisher method. or maybe Fisheroux (fisheroo)

Click to expand...

I have looked up the Roux method and it is very different to mine. Apart from a short time when a side and middle row is being used I don't see much similarity.

Tony Fisher said:

I have looked up the Roux method and it is very different to mine. Apart from a short time when a side and middle row is being used I don't see much similarity.

Click to expand...

Humble man

Did an example solve to see how it worked out. It's better than most LBL solves, efficiency-wise, and very similar to Waterman (far more so than it is to Roux).

TheOneOnTheLeft said:

Did an example solve to see how it worked out. It's better than most LBL solves, efficiency-wise, and very similar to Waterman (far more so than it is to Roux).

Click to expand...

Fisherman then? or Waterfish

Tony Fisher said:

I have looked up the Roux method and it is very different to mine. Apart from a short time when a side and middle row is being used I don't see much similarity.

Click to expand...

First layer=inneficient block
Last layer corners=cmll and beginning of second block
Placing of last layer/block edges using U2 R2 and then M moves= finishing second block using LR edges technique
Finishing M layer=edge permutation without first orienting them.

It is still a little different, but I think roux just did things in a different order, which constrained less movements of the cube. (eg. Doing opposite blocks instead of layers) and finishing with 2 gen MU that (in almost all cases) doesnt lead to that disgusting 2-flip.

TheOneOnTheLeft said:

Did an example solve to see how it worked out.

Click to expand...

That's really cool. Obviously it was just one solve and I didn't show all the moves I would use in all situations. Some of those moves are pretty awful and I am tempted to clean them up a bit. I would for example do certain moves twice instead of just reversing them which would achieve the same result. Kind of down to habit.

The method is very nice and intuitive