The One-Answer Question Thread [closed]

Cool Frog said:

Wait what? I thought it was a 3x3.

Click to expand...

Yea that's like a straight up ball though. They released a new Square-1 that has a ball core more similar to their 4x4.

freshcuber said:

I just ordered a Square-1 and it's my first one. What is a good method to start with? A tutorial would be great too. I also ordered some 2x2s so I need a good method for that. What would be an equivalent path from beginner's method to speedsolving method for 2x2? Like for 3x3 it may be Beginner's LBL-->F2L with Beginner's LL-->F2L+4-look LL-->F2L+PLL=2LOLL-->Full Fridrich. That's a progression into Fridrich but would 2x2 look something more like Fridrich corners LBL-->Ortega-->????

Click to expand...

Roux is a really good SQ-1 beginners method. For 2x2, learn PBL for ortega. Then i would advise you to learn guimond. After that, it's up to you whether you want to get into SS/CLL/other advanced methods.

freshcuber said:

Yea I know I don't need to learn LBL it's just using OCLL's and a few PLL's. What exactly is CLL?

Click to expand...

It stands for Corners of Last Layer, and it's just where you orient and permute all the LL corners with one alg. I think there are around 41 algs, but don't quote me on that. A lot of people use it for 2x2x2, but it's also used in some other methods.

How long does it take to go from Ortega to something like EG? A few months of decent practice? I also don't know any Roux. I know the concept and the steps but not how to do it or how it applies to a Square-1. I watched TheWestonians Square-1 tutorial and it was pretty simple so I was going to start with that and then advance on.

AvidCuber said:

It stands for Corners of Last Layer, and it's just where you orient and permute all the LL corners with one alg. I think there are around 41 algs, but don't quote me on that. A lot of people use it for 2x2x2, but it's also used in some other methods.

Click to expand...

Do they all apply to 3x3? What are the more common 2x2 intermediate methods? CPLS is one right?

does MF8 make square 2s?

TiLiMayor said:

(video) I was looking around the cubers from my country and found this video of a 4x4 solve.
At 0:25 suddenly the edges and centers are solved and solver proceeds to 3x3 phase.
What method was he solving with?

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that he is cheating. What he did was mix up the cube like a 3x3 and then when scrambled he scrambled it like a 2x2 and solved it like a 2x2 then 3x3. You'll notice that there is no edge pairring.

mr. giggums said:

I'm pretty sure that he is cheating. What he did was mix up the cube like a 3x3 and then when scrambled he scrambled it like a 2x2 and solved it like a 2x2 then 3x3. You'll notice that there is no edge pairring.

Click to expand...

That makes so much sense. As centers finished edge pairing was skipped and the odds of that are(insert insanely high number here). I was suspicious but that does look like the likely explanation.

Does the Mini-Qj 4x4x4 have screws? Currently mine is really loose and I can't find any screws in it. Let me know thanks

ilikecubing said:

What can be considered a good LL average time if you know all (57 + 21) algorithms?

Click to expand...

I know only around half the OLLs and my LL average is 8.34. So i would think 6ish is good. If all of your PLL and OLL are sub2 then 5 would be simple.
5 is my goal.

ilikecubing said:

What can be considered a good LL average time if you know all (57 + 21) algorithms?

Click to expand...

Well I know 2 look OLL and almost all of 1 look PLL and my last layer takes a little under 5 seconds.

xdaragon said:

Does the Mini-Qj 4x4x4 have screws? Currently mine is really loose and I can't find any screws in it. Let me know thanks

Click to expand...

Yes but only one side. Try red? It is in the center of the core, so try cutting centers and you should be able to see it. Make sure to be careful, they break pretty easily.

mr. giggums said:

I'm pretty sure that he is cheating. What he did was mix up the cube like a 3x3 and then when scrambled he scrambled it like a 2x2 and solved it like a 2x2 then 3x3. You'll notice that there is no edge pairring.

Click to expand...

freshcuber said:

That makes so much sense. As centers finished edge pairing was skipped and the odds of that are(insert insanely high number here). I was suspicious but that does look like the likely explanation.

Click to expand...

Ye, that was my second thought I kinda needed to confirm with some of yuu people, the second time I watched it I noticed some editing like mistakes so I insisted in my question, now I know Its not just me.

How exactly are multi blind rankings determined?
I assume it's a combination of time, cubes solved and target.
It just seems strange to me that more cubes solved within the hour can rank lower than less cubes but closer to the target.
WCA multi blind results

half accuracy half time maybe?

EDIT: i think ive worked it out say person x get 10/10 and person y gets 10/11(both with the same tie just for convienience bbut tie does have a say) person x gets 10 points and person y gets only 9 points becuse you subtract the amount person y got unsolved(one) away from the amount he got right (10) and you get 9 points so for example if i got 12/16 i would only get 8 points.


i dont know for sure but its works for the top 50 or so(im too tired to check any more)

cube-o-holic said:

How exactly are multi blind rankings determined?
I assume it's a combination of time, cubes solved and target.
It just seems strange to me that more cubes solved within the hour can rank lower than less cubes but closer to the target.
WCA multi blind results

Click to expand...

Since blakedacuber can barely type English I will answer:

World Cube Association Regulations said:

9f16) For the Rubik's Cube: Multiple Blindfolded event the order in the results is based on number of puzzles solved minus the number of puzzles not solved (higher is better). If the result is lower than 0, the solve is disqualified.
If competitors have the same result, then the order is based on total time (lower is better).

Click to expand...

Is a sub1 R U' R' U x6 possible?
the best I can do is 1.39

Does anyone happen to know a nice alg to twist ULB and UBR? (without cube rotations)

amostay2004 said:

Does anyone happen to know a nice alg to twist ULB and UBR? (without cube rotations)

Click to expand...

(RUR'U')x2 L' (URU'R')x2 L

Cool Frog said:

(RUR'U')x2 L' (URU'R')x2 L

Click to expand...

No, that is for UFL and ULB

amostay2004 said:

No, that is for UFL and ULB

Click to expand...

add a U' beforehand and a U at the end