3x3x3 COLL + ELL Worth it?
- Thread starter riffch
- Start date
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
just wanna say
if you do this, don't use coll
use cll, same thing but ignoring the edges.
I think it has potential, but not enough people use it to know completely
if you do this, don't use coll
use cll, same thing but ignoring the edges.
I think it has potential, but not enough people use it to know completely
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
Don’t do it. I know coll, oll, pll, and some ell. Coll is only helpful when you have a cross solved, otherwise recognition would be too slow. Oll and pll are much easier to recognize
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
that's why you're supposed to do CLL
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
No, CLL is the same recognition as COLL, it just has optimized algs that don’t preserve edges, so it’s usually used for 2x2. But the recognition is the same.
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
recognition for cll is honestly not that bad. practising 2x2 helps a ton
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
Yes but my point is that COLL and ELL require you to recognize orientation and permutation twice. With OLL and PLL you can recognize orientation, and then recognize permutation. If you were to do this, I agree CLL would be good assuming non of the algs interfere with middle layer edges, but the point is it’s still worse than doing oll and pll because of the recognition, in which it’s the same for CLL and COLL
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
okay gonna make a pros/cons list for cll/ell
PROS CONS
lower movecount harder recognition
lower algorithms count algs may be longer to execute
most ell's can be done MU gen not as flexible with extra algorithm sets
(feel free to add some)
if you use cll/ell, you can use a winter variation algorithm at f2l-1 every time to guarantee an O case CLL then ELL. It's actually less algs than normal cll/ell
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
Ok, I’m not sure about the lower movecount but I’ll take your word for it. Besides that standard LL has more resources as it is more popular, and then you can add COLL to it to make it even better along with other algsets eventually. As you said standard last layer is easier to recognize, but has more algs. Also I think standard last layer would be easier to transition into, as you can learn some pll and still solve normally, and once you know pll take a while to practice it before learning oll. With the proposed last layer I think you would have to learn the full algset before you could use it for he most part.
But now I am interested enough, and I already know COLL so I will finish learning ELL soon and try solving some with this last layer.
But now I am interested enough, and I already know COLL so I will finish learning ELL soon and try solving some with this last layer.
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
na you don't need to do the full algorithms sets. just do an ocll, then a j/yperm, one of 3 oll's and an epll
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
But that would definitely be slower, and since I posted that I’ve learned 4 algs
2018AMSB02
Premium Member
Sorry for the double post but I have now learned the first 7 ELL algs and here are my thoughts:
- The algs are short but awkward and hard to execute
- Not as difficult to recognize as I previously thought, but I still think COLL is harder than OLL.
- I now think the main issue with learning this last layer method is the transitioning part. Like I said, standard last layer you can learn pll, practice for a while, learn oll, and it all works out, but in order to use this method you pretty much need to know full ELL and full COLL to do.
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
as I said before na just do 2 look corners, one of 3 oll's and then epll. then you can gradually learn full ELL and then full CLL
LukasCubes
Veteran
COLL is good because it highers your chances for a PLL skip is you have a cross case for OLL. Otherwise it is useless. I haven't learned full ELL yet but if you do and geta case where all the corners are solved, it can be good to use ELL. Otherwise, that is useless as well.
Do you got any source for 3x3 CLL alg?
PetraPine
Veteran
No.
You save im pretty sure zero efficiency and you have much more limited tps, theres a reason we stopped using this in the 80s
You save im pretty sure zero efficiency and you have much more limited tps, theres a reason we stopped using this in the 80s
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
Username: Username:
Veteran
Nope just don't, OLL and PLL recognition definitely trumps CLL and ELL recog and you only save 1 or 2 moves, ELL might be MU gen but better hardware exist for a reason.
