Matt—
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2018
- Messages
- 83
Well, I tried. Oh wellThe problem with solving the two D-layer edges while solving OLL is 1) too many algorithms and 2) most of those algorithms are going to be bad. I stand by my earlier point.
Well, I tried. Oh wellThe problem with solving the two D-layer edges while solving OLL is 1) too many algorithms and 2) most of those algorithms are going to be bad. I stand by my earlier point.
The algorithm you showed wasn't too bad, but that was quite a lucky case :3Well, I tried. Oh well
YepThe algorithm you showed wasn't too bad, but that was quite a lucky case :3
I just thought of a pretty cool redux Submethod for 4x4, and I hope you like it
Step one: solve all of the centers
Step two: pair the cross edges and two edges for f2l (place them as you make them) also, try to make the solved f2l pairs next to each other
Step 3: use the last two f2l slots to pair the rest of the edges
Solve as a 3x3 after that
I suppose it needs.some work, maybe pair it with yau methodIf you don't pair up one edge at a time it's gonna be really hard and time consuming to control exactly which edges need to be paired in which step. Also, L6E will need at least 6 slices(4 if you are lucky) and that is inefficient compared to Redux for example
Like what Thom S. said, you can't control the edges you pair if you want to pair them efficiently. Variations of this idea have been proposed before, e.g. pair white edges first, solve cross, then do the rest of edge pairing like in Yau; and they're all bad because they're wasting moves for no good reason. (Slightly different story on bigger cubes if you use freeslice edge pairing, but that's off-topic.)I just thought of a pretty cool redux Submethod for 4x4, and I hope you like it
Step one: solve all of the centers
Step two: pair the cross edges and two edges for f2l (place them as you make them) also, try to make the solved f2l pairs next to each other
Step 3: use the last two f2l slots to pair the rest of the edges
Solve as a 3x3 after that
Like what Thom S. said, you can't control the edges you pair if you want to pair them efficiently. Variations of this idea have been proposed before, e.g. pair white edges first, solve cross, then do the rest of edge pairing like in Yau; and they're all bad because they're wasting moves for no good reason. (Slightly different story on bigger cubes if you use freeslice edge pairing, but that's off-topic.)
You might want to look into the OBLBL method, which does 3/4 cross like in Yau, and solves two F2L pairs together with the centres. Using only two free slots for pairing the last six dedges is indeed slightly less move-efficient than using all four slots, but emphasis goes on slightly. It's not a big difference—probably less than 2 moves on average.
I have tried this method and tried to understand it, to be honest it is a good and unique method, it can save alot of time and it can be helpful to maybe intermediate solvers, maybe if you try it, you could like the method, i tried the method and got my first sub 30 seconds.Here is a concept and idea that makes CFOP easier. I called it CEFOP(Cross - Edge Control-F2L-OLL and PLL). Basically it is to introduce edge control after cross. The idea is as follows.
Basically a cube has 12 edges and a scrambled cube has an even number of good and bad edges. If you use ZZ, you need to be proficient to inspect 12 edges and turn them good using F,F' for 4 bad edges in F face and using B or B' move for 4 bad edges in B face.
If 2 bad edges, you can use FUF', FU'F', F'UF,F'U'F' , FU2'F' to turn bad edges in equator from bad to good and similar for back face by replace the F turns with B turns.
But once you done that the whole solve is 2 gen with just R,L, U and D moves. But the EO line is the quite difficult for people who are used to making cross optimally by using all moves including F and B without restriction. What if a CFOP user wants to make a solve 2 gen? It is harder to be color neutral on ZZ and sometimes it feels restrictive
My suggestion for CFOP cubers who are optimal with cross solving, color neutral and extended cross solvers is to do edge control after cross.
This can turn your whole F2L into rotation less solving and get only OLL cross cases. The reason it is easier to focus on finding and fixing bad edges if the cross which is already solved are all good edges. You end up just focussing on 8 edges. You can have zero or even number of bad edges such as 2,4,6 or 8 bad edges.
You can do edge control for just the 4 middles layer edges or all 8 edges to make a F2L solve more seamless. The result is all the difficult F2L case with flipped edges are avoided and dot OLL can be avoided.
Basically after doing the cross, if you have bad edges in UF and FR position, a sledgehammer will change them to good. A reverse sledge hammer will turn UF and UR edges to good.
Changing bad edges to good
1) Use R'FRF' to change UF and RF bad edges to good edges and
LF' L'F for bad edges in UF and LF position
2) Use rUR' URU2r' to change UF and UR bad edges to good edges
or R' (R'FRF') R to change UF and UR bad edges to good
or F (U'RUR')F'
3) Use rU2R'U'RU'r' to change UF and UL bad edges to good edges
or L (LF'L'F)L' to change UF and UL bad edges to good
4) Use F( RUR'U')F' to change UF and UB bad edges to good edge
5) Use RU2R' (Sleghammer) U2(slegehammer) to change UF, UR, UL and UB to good edge
6) Use FBUF'B' for bad edges in UF and UL and FL and BR postions etc.
I like to focus on 1-5 above on fixing bad edges and how to be fast in fixing bad edges with quick look ahead and inspection.
After solving cross, you should focus on the 3 edge pieces (FU,FR and FL) facing you. You should also track any good edge with the top color on the U face(eg. Yellow) , If they are good edges of the top color in the equator make a quick decision to do a Y or Y' turn so you have most Yellow edges that are good in equator. Track the good Yellow edges on top as well. If both edges in equator is good, do a quick d2 turn.
The aim is to quickly have 2 edges in the back of equator to be good. You can quickly use 3 move insert(such R'UR') to put a yellow edge into equator if possible. Use 1-4 method to correct remaining bad edges. Once there are no more edges to fix, the rest of the solve is simply rotationless F2L and OLL. You can either focus on just fixing middle layer edges or both.
If we are fixing only middle layer bad edges, it is important to look at just the middle layer edges on the top layer. Imagine if all the top middle layer edges is on the U layer. Assuming yellow is the top color, you will usually have blue ,green red and orange. If blue and green is dominant color, either blue or green should be the front face to have less rotation. If orange and red is the dominant color, that should be the front face. You need at most one rotation and one sledge hammer to have a rotation less F2l subsequently.
In fact all F2L can be solved with at most one rotation and no F moves to fix bad edges. if we solved by those pairs having F and B colors first and bring bad edges to the U face and rotate 90 degrees about Y axis and solve all remaining pairs. All difficult F2L cases can be avoided. The trade off is solving selected pair rather than solving any pairs you see in usual F2L which may slow you down initially.
Some explaination of the step is in the video below
Middle layer edge control
How are the algorithms for ZBLSE? The M/U ones are already very good.I posted a thread on Reddit a while back about a method variation I developed based on ZB Roux where EODFDB is solved using an algorithm from any move set instead of just limited to MU, and is allowed to destroy CxLL.
I called this derivative of EODFDB "ZBLSE" (deriving from "ZBLS" of ZB method).
I was quick to coin the term "MV" for the method variation as a whole (short for "McWilliams Variation") even though I'm still not sure if anyone ended up learning it.
The steps go as follows:
1.) F2B of Roux
2.) ZBLSE
3.) ZBLL
How are the algorithms for ZBLSE? The M/U ones are already very good.
This is just called Edges First, and is generally considered to be really bad because solving the corners when all the edges are solves is very inefficient...Ah, okay. Thanks.
What about we solve all edges( top cross and bottom cross, or maybe alg subset of M, E, and S moves) Then, we could solve with some a perms or something . Also, if you have some, post your own methods.
Ah, okay. Thanks.
What about we solve all edges( top cross and bottom cross, or maybe alg subset of M, E, and S moves) Then, we could solve with some a perms or something . Also, if you have some, post your own methods.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
The best 4x4 method??? | General Speedcubing Discussion | 8 | ||
Creators Competition: Method-Making Competition No. 1 | Forum Competitions | 10 | ||
Calculating the Number of K4 "PLLs" on the nxnxn Cube | Puzzle Theory | 1 | ||
Calculating Method/Substep Efficiency | Puzzle Theory | 27 | ||
M | What method is this? | Cubing Help & Questions | 24 |