4x4x4 and 5x5x5 edge pairing

I was wondering if anyone has worked on thisfor 4x4x4 and 5x5x5:

First: Get 2 opposite centers solved.
Second: Get 8 edges solved and place around the two opposite centers.
Third: Solve remaining 4 centers while keeping the 8 solved edges safe.
Fourth: Solve remaining 4 edges.

This is opposed to, getting all centers, then all edges.

I assume this is done, at least by someone? I have been doing this for a while now, and much prefer it to centers first. It makes a lot of sense as 8 edges can be solved very quickly, and then every time you turn a center a half turn, it's just 2 quick finger tricks to get the edges safe again, instead of having to constantly mutilate your solved centers.
Also, particularly for 4x4x4, there is a high chance that after finishing the centers, there will be at least one, sometimes two, of the remaining 4 edges already solved.

Sorry I've been using "solved" instead of "paired" as for a 5x5x5 there are 3 cubies to an edge, not exactly a pair .

I don't think there's any reason to use this over centers-first. Centers can be done very quickly, and then edges can also be done very quickly.

I think however many moves you save in your second step, you'll add at least that many moves in the third and fourth.

I actually used this method for a few weeks on the 5x5x5. I first came up with my own method which was really bad, then I switched to the bigcubes.com method for a while, then I tried a method similar to but not as advanced as Arnaud's method, then I used the method you're describing for a while, then I switched to bigcubes.com method for real for a while, then I switched to Arnaud's method, which I'm still using today.

When I was using this method (2 centers, 8 edges, other centers, other edges), I was averaging about 5 minutes. Which isn't very good. But then, I must admit I didn't develop it very far.

I suspect it might be quite interesting to develop this method a good bit to see how far it can be taken. It's been proven that there are at least 2 different VERY fast ways to solve the 5x5x5 (bigcubes.com method and Arnaud's method), and I suspect there are still others out there waiting to be found. And after having played with this one a while, I suspect this one really can be effective as well. But it will probably take a great deal of work optimizing it before it can be really fast. Good luck with it if you try.

How fast are you with it currently?

I don't speed cube with my 5x5x5 yet, I haven't really had time. I have only just started with 4x4x4. I have done (I think) a total of 3 averages of 12, ever, since I started 4x4x4 properly. I came from around a 5 minute average to what it is now, and am making very quick progress. I think I can get this down under 2 minutes early next year, then we'll see what I can do.

It is an interesting idea and I think a lot of people have considered it, but it requires you to change your mindset (centers/edges/more centers/more edges) a couple of times and look-ahead is more difficult because more pieces remain unsolved for a longer time.

The big advantage should be move-count, but I don't think it actually saves many moves. Could you post your (average) move-count for the 4 stages? Mine is about 60+80 for centers+edges.

ok,
first of all, if you make 8 edges after the first 2 centres you will have a very hard time to make the rest of the 4 centres because you can't use UU' but only U2 turns. Second of all, pairing the edges this way is not even faster, it's actually similair to Ron's/Frank's/Ookusa's edge pairing.
Believe me, I tried

Erik said:

ok,
first of all, if you make 8 centres after the first 2 centres

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware there were 10+ centers in these cubes!

yes yes I changed it

Ah, yes I understand what you mean (sorry, I use E slice, not M slice, I need to change!). Yes you can use U/U', but it means that you have to move your edge pairs back into the safe position, which is not hard, just 2 quick finger tricks.
As for looking ahead, I am working on it now. I still have problems finding the edge pairs, but that is not affected by the particular method, it's just because I need to get used to it. I've found looking for the 4 edge pairs with white on one side are easier to find, and so I do that if possible.


I'll post my average move count at some stage, although I still have a lot of work to do in optimising the method and any average would probably be a bit higher than it will end up. (Bear in mind, that even for 3x3 I probably still average closer to 65 moves in a speedsolve, which is a lot more than would be optimal).

As for changing my mindset, that is something I did a while back, and once recently I tried to do centers first, and really struggled. It is a bit different.

Another thing I should point out that can be useful, is when you see a pair of edges already paired early on, you can keep it safe, and then that's one pair you don't need to worry about. Also, when you are going for the remaining 4 centers, if at some stage you need to do a U/U', but at the same time, a random edge pair has paired itself, it will save you having to do one of the two finger tricks you would normally have to do. (I didn't really explain that very well sorry).

I will work more on this method, and once I get it under 2 minutes I'll try to give a decent explanation of what goes on in my head etc. (although, judging from what I've written here, it will be uninterpretable ).