Random Cubing Discussion

[TDM]

CF sounds like it would be pretty hard, but I'll give it a shot.

I find this method to be fastest, especially if you use Roux:
1- Corners like 2x2, 5 seconds
2- Fix two centres (Rouxblock colours), <one second
3- Three edges on L to make a Roux (preserving corners), ~6 seconds
4- Three edges on R, leaving just LSE, ~5 seconds because easier lookahead
5- LSE, ~3 seconds

Total = 20

 

[penguinz7]

I find this method to be fastest, especially if you use Roux:
1- Corners like 2x2, 5 seconds
2- Fix two centres (Rouxblock colours), <one second
3- Three edges on L to make a Roux (preserving corners), ~6 seconds
4- Three edges on R, leaving just LSE, ~5 seconds because easier lookahead
5- LSE, ~3 seconds

Total = 20

Hmm that might work, I'll try it out. thanks!

 

[IRNjuggle28]

Feliks got a 6.88 official OH solve when his unofficial PB was 5.93. That's roughly equivalent to him getting a 4.05 official 2H solve, considering that his PB is 3.52.

I'll add to that, actually:
(6.88/5.93) x 3.52 = 4.049, which is what his official 3x3 single would be if it was as fast relative to his unofficial 3x3 single as his official 3x3 OH single is to his unofficial 3x3 OH single.
(6.88/11.72) x 6.54 = 3.839, which is what his official 3x3 single would be if it was as fast relative to his 3x3 average as his 3x3 OH single is in relation to his 3x3 OH average.

We already knew, but this gives us some numbers to back up just how good that 3x3 OH single is, and just how bad his 3x3 single is given how good a 3x3 solver he is.

 

[DeeDubb]

http://cubecomps.com/live.php?cid=984&cat=3&rnd=1

17.90 4x4 WR? Must be a mistake, right?

 

[Berd]

http://cubecomps.com/live.php?cid=984&cat=3&rnd=1

17.90 4x4 WR? Must be a mistake, right?

Must be. Surely. ....

 

[bobthegiraffemonkey]

http://cubecomps.com/live.php?cid=984&cat=3&rnd=1

17.90 4x4 WR? Must be a mistake, right?

Going by the average, it's a typo. It happens a lot.

 

[Isaac Lai]

http://cubecomps.com/live.php?cid=984&cat=3&rnd=1

17.90 4x4 WR? Must be a mistake, right?

Yup it is a mistake

 

[qqwref]

Very silly "method": misorient all edges, do a ZZ solve, apply superflip algorithm. I got a 29.63 avg5. Trying to do 3gen blockbuilding (or even F2L pairs) with all the edges wrong is a total mind*******.

 

[cashis]

curious ab posts per day
~660 posts/ 330 days
exactly 2 kek

 

[qqwref]

3x3x3 + intermediate minesweeper in 30.84

 

[cashis]

3x3x3 + intermediate minesweeper in 30.84

UWR!!!

 

[guysensei1]

UWR!!!

GET GUINESS IN ON THIS

 

[joshsailscga]

wat my best intermediate time is like 45ish without 3x3. That's fast :O

 

[qqwref]

It wasn't a particularly great intermediate time (17 something), it just took several tries to get an intermediate done on the first try, so I stopped there

 

[Berkmann18]

What a weird method, but why would someone do the superflip alg after doing a ZZ ? It should before and also the superflip alg isn't the most efficient to orient all the edges as it's 36 HTM compared to a 6 mover.

 

[Isaac Lai]

http://cubecomps.com/live.php?cid=981

UHHHHHHHHHHHH... I really don't know whether this is an error, because since he is sub-10, one would think that such a single is perhaps(?) possible, but anyway...

EDIT: nvm it's an error

 

[qqwref]

What a weird method, but why would someone do the superflip alg after doing a ZZ ? It should before and also the superflip alg isn't the most efficient to orient all the edges as it's 36 HTM compared to a 6 mover.

It's a silly method, not intended for speed, but as a fun challenge.

 

[cashis]

So, for 2x2, is EG-1 bar on right and EG-1 bar on front a thing? If not, would it be worth it to learn? I wouldn't think so, but it would save a D move/rotation, which might (maybe) cut a fraction of a second off of your average.
Also, TCLL EG-2 could be a thing, since it would be just as many cases as TCLL because it's symmetrical
TCLL EG-1 would be a nightmare tho

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

So, for 2x2, is EG-1 bar on right and EG-1 bar on front a thing? If not, would it be worth it to learn? I wouldn't think so, but it would save a D move/rotation, which might (maybe) cut a fraction of a second off of your average.
Also, TCLL EG-2 could be a thing, since it would be just as many cases as TCLL because it's symmetrical
TCLL EG-1 would be a nightmare tho

No, the bar is held on back or left. IMO, different algs for front and right are not very useful. If you one look the solve (isnt hard with eg1), you can almost always make the face and do the alg rotationless.

 

[cashis]

No, the bar is held on back or left. IMO, different algs for front and right are not very useful. If you one look the solve (isnt hard with eg1), you can almost always make the face and do the alg rotationless.

okie thx. you could just mirror algs for bar on right if you wanted to. I think it would still be useful, although maybe im speaking out my rear bc I don't know eg-1 yet