ZZ speedcubing method

[*LukeMayn*]

hay guys, after you do the f2l, the corners are meant to ALL be permuted? I get cases where the corners arn't permuted but I don't know why (also another person with the same colour scheme but sometime I have green in-front) avg of 5= 1:17.42 >.< room for improvement

 

[yurivish]

As I understand it, if you do that "phasing" step as/before you insert the last F2L pair (the step that swaps two opposite edges*), then you get all of the corners permuted correctly. I'm not sure what exactly to do for that step, and the article said that a better description was coming soon. For now I just use a cross OLL/PLL for the last layer.

 

[fanwuq]

What are the optimal move counts for EOline? How to If there are 4 misoriented edges on S slice, how do you orient them? I think this is an ugly case.
I see D L R’ B2 U2 F
Or U F’ L’ F B’ R’ B
Any better ways?
2 misoriented edges and 12 are very easy cases. This is the only one I don’t like for 4. I don’t think 6 is very pretty. I’ll probably have to be doing 2 and 4. 8 can be very nice (just F B), haven’t considered any bad cases yet. 10 isn’t so bad: misorient the 2 that are right, then mindlessly flip all 12.
What is the best way to flip all 12? I see F B then flip 4 in S slice. (I hope I’m getting the correct idea for EO.)

 

[yurivish]

From the article:

EOLine optimal average move count is calculated as 6, there are 8 move cases and one 9 move case, though.

On here (caution, lots of polish and java applets), there is an optimal EOLine solver (I think) at the bottom, under the heading 2.3 Narzędzia.

www.speedcubing.com.pl/nooks_zz.htm

 

[blah]

How come everyone is responding to this like it's a new idea? If I understood the method correctly, it was posted in the Yahoo! group ages ago, I can't find the link now, but it's somewhere in Macky's website. I think it was suggested by Ron van Bruchem and I really don't know why no one adopted it. I personally have tried it for a while (about 2 weeks or so), but didn't like it because of some weird reason that I can't seem to recall now

 

[fanwuq]

I agree that this idea was vaguely familiar. I had read about some sort of pre-orient before, I just never found it appealing. Now, I’m trying out Petrus, this is a bit similar, so I will see which will go better. I’m skeptical about the EOline step. Would orienting really make F2L easier? Would EO line take more time than cross? How many moves will it save in an average speedsolve compared to Petrus or Fridrich? Would CP recognition be convenient and easy?

 

[yurivish]

I haven't heard of this method until this thread. After reading the article, I did come up with some information from a while ago, so yes, it's not new. It is for me, though, and it seems like a good idea.

Orienting makes the F2L easier because you don't have to make any cube rotations – every single F2L case you run into is solvable using just R, U, and L turns.

I think EO line has the potential to be the same speed as the cross, but with a lot more practice. You have to determine misoriented edges and figure out a way to orient them all during the preinspection time, so you're keeping track of many more pieces. It takes roughly an equal amount of moves, however.

 

[Lofty]

It appears to me corners were only permuted in the first variant and then after that it was dropped as permuting corners while doing the first 2x2x3 block would have terrible recognition. After the first variant either VHLL or ZBLL was used except in the methods including phasing which worked on permuting 2 edges to reduce the cases rather than permute the corners.
I know that it is not a new method since it was started in 2006. I had heard about it before but abadoned it as pre-orient is kind of annoying, the only resources on the method were in polish and at the time I didn't want to learn so many algs, now I pretty much already know VHLL and have 2GLL generated i just have to learn them.

 

[MHordecki]

@Swordsman Kirby: The point of my thought is that correctly oriented edges is always an advantage (versus both fridrich and petrus), just because it's IMHO much faster to solve the cube without any rotation + using only RUL.

A variation with correctly permuted edges (ZZ-d) as I said in article is incomplete. I've probably made a mistake putting the incomplete method as the first described

There are two variants currently in use:
ZZ-b, where you do phasing, which permutes two opposite LL edges, therefore leaving you with ~80 cases (+ their inversions and symmetries = ~167).

ZZ-VH, which you do EOLine, finish the F2L as you like (without phasing or anything), and then you do VHLL (COLL + EPLL).

@fanwuq: With all S slice edges flipped I do the former alg you proposed, I just use U instead of D. With 6 misoriented edges it varies. There are nasty cases, but usually I orient 4 edges while placing remaining two on the F/B. Then, in example, with two edges on F I do something like this: R' F R F'.

Move count of ZZ is various: somewhere in 40's for ZZ-b and 50's for ZZ-VH.

Yes, EO-first is not so new idea, it was mentioned at Euro 2004 by Ron.

 

[fanwuq]

I just tried my first 5 solves. I sucked. Best was 1:03. It takes me forever to recognize EO. 10seconds of pre-inspection was not enough for me. F2L without rotations felt really awkward. But With lots of practice, I believe this method can be very fast.

Edit: Yes! 42.70, 7th try
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/record.cgi?db=single&name=WF+ZZ
It was a really awkward solve. EO was certainly not optimal, but I saw it faster than my other attempts. LL was the BLD pure corner flip. I realized that half way through the OLL, so I undid it and did the flip.
The F2L was badly made. I need new 2gen algs for some of the cases.

Edit2: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3649
This is so much better than that orient first method! Lofty knew about this before! Why didn't he tell us?!

 

[Lofty]

Haha, Well I mentioned it all you guys had to do was ask lol... I think i heard about it on the TP forums I go there sometimes i just dont post.
But like the OP said this is the first time any resources for the method are in english so I didn't know all the details just what I could gather from the java applets on the polish site.

 

[LarsN]

Edit2: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3649
This is so much better than that orient first method!

You can't compare those two methods. They are not the same at all !

 

[fanwuq]

Edit2: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3649
This is so much better than that orient first method!

You can't compare those two methods. They are not the same at all !

You are right. I should have said, " The EO step is so much easier in this method." I thought they were pretty similar at first.

Anyway, just got a 29.89!

 

[MHordecki]

I'm in the process of reorganizing & expanding my article, now I'm waiting for proper copyright permissions to translate some fragments from ZZ-related polish texts.
I've already reorganized things so incomplete ZZ-d isn't so highlighted, now variations come in order of difficulty (i.e. ZZ-VH -> ZZ-b -> ZZ-d). I'm also in the process of making some explanatory solves for each of the variants.

And, I've got a question for you: what do you want expanded the most (so I can focus on it deeper)?

 

[fanwuq]

I'd like to see some examples for solving the EO line (is there some nice cases with special cases, or bad cases, where memorizing an alg is suggested?)
Also solving the 2x2x3. I'm so used to using F moves when solving such a block. And I don't want to just solve like Fridrich F2L.

 

[Lofty]

I think EOline, the phasing and the LL.
The block building stuff doesnt need to be explained too much as blockbuilding is similar to other methods but EOline, phasing and ZZLL are unique to this method.

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

Why not expand on variant d? It has a 2 gen LL, that's a lot easier than the ZZ LL.

 

[*LukeMayn*]

To MHordecki (or anyone who can help with this part:
I have a question for you... I really can't get all of the corners permuted and I don't really understand the phasing part, please help me!!!
also where can I get 2GLL algs from?

 

[yurivish]

Why not expand on variant d? It has a 2 gen LL, that's a lot easier than the ZZ LL.

I think the problem is that nobody has been able to find the missing link step – after the left block, before the right side – it's some sequence of moves that changes the cube from RUL-solvable to RU-solvable.

If I understand everything right, the phasing bit towards the end is sort of a replacement. It allows for the LL to be solved in one algorithm, although I'm not sure if it's 2-gen or not.

 

[*LukeMayn*]

Why not expand on variant d? It has a 2 gen LL, that's a lot easier than the ZZ LL.

I think the problem is that nobody has been able to find the missing link step – after the left block, before the right side – it's some sequence of moves that changes the cube from RUL-solvable to RU-solvable.

If I understand everything right, the phasing bit towards the end is sort of a replacement. It allows for the LL to be solved in one algorithm, although I'm not sure if it's 2-gen or not.

argh! NOOOOOO I so badly want the missing link to be found and published
also what are the TP forums?