Lets learn from Lucas' 4.90 WR solve

Technically, it is an OLLCP but it also a standard alg for that OLL case from that angle.
Why did Lucas use that alg? Because it is the standard alg and most people use that. I also use the same alg from that angle and the other alg for y2 angle.
 
Technically, it is an OLLCP but it also a standard alg for that OLL case from that angle.
Why did Lucas use that alg? Because it is the standard alg and most people use that. I also use the same alg from that angle and the other alg for y2 angle.

Technically it's also just random moves and maybe he just got lucky in solving it?
 
if I do f (R U R' U') f' to solve my OLL but it permutes the corners did I use OLLCP? I would count that as a CP skip but my algorithm wasn't an OLLCP because I had no intent of solving the corners alongside it
 
So if I recognize OLLCP every solve but get the case solved with the standard alg, it's not OLLCP?

I would consider this OLLCP iff Lucas recognized the CP along with the OLL, which I don't think he did.

I assume this is why when reconstructing solves, if it is, say a fat sune, with CP solved, the put OLL(CP) because who knows if it is their normal alg or not? Unless we ask them, we won't know. Or so I assume; but, you know what they say about assuming!
 
Back
Top