Hi Guys,
With recent surge in excellent Megaminx times posted around the world I thought I would share an unusual Megaminx method from 1983. I got my first Megaminx in '83, and there were no books on how to solve it (nor internet), I came up with a method that finishes differently than the current one, and might be worth investigating for speed solving.
The current (modern) Megaminx method involves just doing F2L style pairs until you reach the last layer; at which point you solve the last layer with a number of looks/algorithms generally based on orienting/permuting the edges, permuting/orienting corners. The problem with this method is that with a last layer comprised of 5 corners and 4 edges, there are horrible number of possible combinations. Even with 4LLL, there are lots of pieces to observe.
The method I developed in '83 starts the same way with F2L style pairs. However, you get to the last layer and you leave one F2L slot unsolved. So at this point you have the last layer unsolved, plus one F2L slot unsolved (at the front of the cube). Now, by intuitive solving using the 'freedom' of the empty F2L slot, you solve the far corner on the last layer along with the edge piece on either side of it. This is generally done by solving that far pair in the front F2L slot and then raising it into the last layer next to its appropriate edge.
At this point, you have a three arm 'cross' that is still unsolved. The cross consists of four corners and three edges. This presents radically fewer combinations than the normal last layer method. In fact, four corners and three edges is less than a 3x3 last layer. So in effect you are now solving the equivalent of a simpler 3x3 last layer.
Furthermore the algorithms are favorable as you turn three slices and easily alter their overlapping area which is the cross.
Now, you can solve the last 'layer' with 3x3 style methods; you can do COLL (42 algs) then ELL (9 algs), or you can do classic OLL/PLL, or orient the edges then do reduced ZBLL. For more ambitious solvers, when solving the far corner on the last layer, you could do some edge control at the same time to guarantee oriented edges, at which point you could finish with a single ZBLL algorithm and no edge orientation.
Anyway I thought it might be of interest as it allows direct solving of the last pieces with far fewer algorithms than the modern method. Unfortunately as we didn't have computer generated algorithms back in '83, the algs I manually created were not very short, but if someone generated them by computer it would be really slick.
Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
With recent surge in excellent Megaminx times posted around the world I thought I would share an unusual Megaminx method from 1983. I got my first Megaminx in '83, and there were no books on how to solve it (nor internet), I came up with a method that finishes differently than the current one, and might be worth investigating for speed solving.
The current (modern) Megaminx method involves just doing F2L style pairs until you reach the last layer; at which point you solve the last layer with a number of looks/algorithms generally based on orienting/permuting the edges, permuting/orienting corners. The problem with this method is that with a last layer comprised of 5 corners and 4 edges, there are horrible number of possible combinations. Even with 4LLL, there are lots of pieces to observe.
The method I developed in '83 starts the same way with F2L style pairs. However, you get to the last layer and you leave one F2L slot unsolved. So at this point you have the last layer unsolved, plus one F2L slot unsolved (at the front of the cube). Now, by intuitive solving using the 'freedom' of the empty F2L slot, you solve the far corner on the last layer along with the edge piece on either side of it. This is generally done by solving that far pair in the front F2L slot and then raising it into the last layer next to its appropriate edge.
At this point, you have a three arm 'cross' that is still unsolved. The cross consists of four corners and three edges. This presents radically fewer combinations than the normal last layer method. In fact, four corners and three edges is less than a 3x3 last layer. So in effect you are now solving the equivalent of a simpler 3x3 last layer.
Furthermore the algorithms are favorable as you turn three slices and easily alter their overlapping area which is the cross.
Now, you can solve the last 'layer' with 3x3 style methods; you can do COLL (42 algs) then ELL (9 algs), or you can do classic OLL/PLL, or orient the edges then do reduced ZBLL. For more ambitious solvers, when solving the far corner on the last layer, you could do some edge control at the same time to guarantee oriented edges, at which point you could finish with a single ZBLL algorithm and no edge orientation.
Anyway I thought it might be of interest as it allows direct solving of the last pieces with far fewer algorithms than the modern method. Unfortunately as we didn't have computer generated algorithms back in '83, the algs I manually created were not very short, but if someone generated them by computer it would be really slick.
Eric Fattah
BC, Canada