• 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!

Varying algorithyms for the 2x2 Fridrich method?

n00bCube

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
128
YouTube
Visit Channel
When looking at Youtube videos and guides online, some of the algorithyms vary from guide to guide.

I was expecting each Fridich guide to be exactly the same as each other. I've also noticed on some guides, that an algorithym for a particular move, will be shorter than the algorithym used for that exact same move on another guide.

Why don't all of the shortest algorithyms that can be used for all moves just all get put together in one standard Fridich method, and for that method to be what everyone uses?

Or am I missing something here? I guess I am, so go easy on me because I'm still new to cubing. :)
 

Jedi5412

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
381
Location
New Zealand Christchurch
YouTube
Visit Channel
I think it also has to be the alg that suites the cuber best for example

these are some of the algs for the permutation of the 3x3 cube

T perm =[R U R' U'] [R' F] [R2 U' R'] U' [R U R' F'
J jerm = [R' U L'] [U2 R U' R' U2] [R L U']
j perm b = [R U R' F'] {[R U R' U'] [R' F] [R2 U' R'] U'}
F perm = [R' U2 R' d'] [R' F'] [R2 U' R' U] [R' F R U' F]
r perm a and b = very slow awont put algs up


these are the algs used for the ajacent swap at the end. For me i perfer the T perm like most cubers which isnt the shortest but it is the fastest
I use the J perm at times but it is reasonable slower
 

qqwref

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,834
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Fridyrich is extremely slow foyr 2x2, so that's why noboydy bothers to stayndardize the alygorithms for it. Everyone whyo is eyven the least bit seryious about speedsolving 2x2 will learny sometyhing better, like Ortega (which only hyas like 3 extra algs).
 

CubicNL

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
177
Location
Zutphen
WCA
2011WILD01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Fridyrich is extremely slow foyr 2x2, so that's why noboydy bothers to stayndardize the alygorithms for it. Everyone whyo is eyven the least bit seryious about speedsolving 2x2 will learny sometyhing better, like Ortega (which only hyas like 3 extra algs).
This...
But commenting on Jedi5412 : I personally use R U2 R' U' R U2 L' U R' U' L for the adjacent swap
 

maggot

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
543
Location
Phoenix
by fridrich for 2x2 i am assuming LBL method? it is not necessarily slow, given that pll skips happen a lot more than ortega. i think it is also a good transition step for CLL since both methods start with building a layer.

why dont they use the same algs? well, because some people learn how to solve 2x2 from their 3x3 knowledge, using no extra knowledge. just like ben posted above, some people who take 2x2 seriously wouldnt use an adj swap PLL, T perm J perm. the alg is much shorter and faster (if practiced).

it is just like 3x3... there are so many things you can do with fridrich as far as customizing your solve. finding your own fingertricks and what algs are the fastest for you is the best way to get fast. some people are not willing to invest time into 2x2, as it does not interest them or they arent as ambitious. hence why we find methods that are catered toward people who understand how to solve a 3x3 but dont want to learn anything new, and methods that are catered toward people who want to break records.
 

RCTACameron

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
1,597
Location
Melbourne, Australia
WCA
2010STOL01
YouTube
Visit Channel
When looking at Youtube videos and guides online, some of the algorithyms vary from guide to guide.

I was expecting each Fridich guide to be exactly the same as each other. I've also noticed on some guides, that an algorithym for a particular move, will be shorter than the algorithym used for that exact same move on another guide.

Why don't all of the shortest algorithyms that can be used for all moves just all get put together in one standard Fridich method, and for that method to be what everyone uses?

Or am I missing something here? I guess I am, so go easy on me because I'm still new to cubing. :)

The shortest algorithms aren't necessarily the fastest. I use an 11 move algorithm for the adjacent swap, when I know a 10 move algorithm for it, because I find the 11 move faster. Just use the algorithms you see in the tutorial, then switch to others if you find them faster.

I guess I just assumed it'd be the best method since it's supposed to be the best for the 3x3

The reason it is very fast for 3x3, but not 2x2, is that because there are less combinations on 2x2, you can do something that takes 2 steps in Fridrich in just 1 using a more advanced 2x2 method, without having to learn hundreds of algorithms.
 
Top