2x2 Statistics and Method Comparison | HD-G Now Competitive!!

[Silky]

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
1st Layer	0	4.03	6.03
CLL	40	9.25	12.65
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	14.78	20.18

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	2.97	4.97
EG-1	40	9.67	12.72
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	14.14	19.19

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	4.03	6.03
EG-2	40	9.62	14.75
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	15.15	22.28

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3.32	5.32
CLL/EG-1/EG-2	120	9.59	13.04
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	120	14.41	19.86

Step	Algs	Movecount	MCC
Guimond Layer	0	0.16	0.16
Guimond CO	15	4.13	5.11
NLL-1	36	7.41	10.79
AUF	0	2.25	2.25
Total	51	13.95	18.31

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
Guimond Layer	0	0.16	0.16
Guimond CO	15	4.13	5.11
NLL-2	36	7.71	11.5
AUF	0	2.25	2.25
Total	51	14.25	19.02

Step	Alg	Move Count	MCC
Guimond Layer	0	.16	.16
Guimond CO	15	4.13	5.11
NLL-1/NLL-2	72	7.56	11.14
AUF	0	2.25	2.25
Total	87	14.1	18.66

Notes:

All of these stats are based off of Cubestuff's average movecount distribution for 1st step per method. Algs were taken from speedcube database for CLL/EG-1/EG-1. NLL algs have be redeveloped by me which will be released shortly.

MCC was not developed for 2x2 algs so that calculation may be subject to change. A good amount of NLL algs have double turns so I'm not sure if that is considered good or bad.

For CLL/EG-1/EG-2 I did not go through to find the most ergo-optimal algs for each case unlike I've done with the NLL re-development. The CLL/EG algs are chosen off of the first alg listed on speedcube database. For CLL/EG MCC could be subject to change. Also of note is that I have no way of calculating the MCC of a CLL/EG face so I just added a +2. I feel that is relatively fair but you guys can let me know if I need to change that.

Based off the current calculations HD-G is statistically both the most efficient and ergonomic. Again I would take the MCC with a grain of salt although I am rather confident of the movecount stats.

Thoughts:

Overall this has been a rather exciting comparison of methods. It has confirmed my suspicions that HD-G is a competitive with CLL/EG-1/EG-2. Another large advantage of HD-G is the ease of 1-looking as the average movecount of the first step is only 0.16 moves and at most 2 moves. This allows you to consistently look farther into the solve during inspection. There is of course also the fact that HD-G boasts only 51 algs compared to 120 of CLL/EG-1/EG-2 combination.

I am rather surprised that not only HD-G held up well against the top level method but also that it surpassed it in both movecount and ergonomics. The good news for all cubers that hate learning algs is that there is now confirmed a highly competitive method that has a much fewer algs to learn!!

Though, criticism, input are welcome. Let me know your thoughts!!

Cheers!

 

[OreKehStrah]

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
1st Layer	0	4	6
CLL	40	9.25	12.65
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	14.75	20.15

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3	5
EG-1	40	9.67	12.72
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	14.17	19.22

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3	5
EG-2	40	9.62	14.75
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	40	14.12	21.25

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3.33	5.33
CLL/EG-1/EG-2	120	9.51	13.37
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	120	14.34	20.2

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
Guimond Layer	0	0.16	0.16
Guimond CO	15	4.13	5.11
NLL	36	7.5	10.23
AUF	0	2.25	2.25
Total	51	14.04	17.75

Notes:

All of these stats are based off of Cubestuff's average movecount distribution for 1st step per method. Algs were taken from speedcube database for CLL/EG-1/EG-1. NLL algs have be redeveloped by me which will be released shortly.

MCC was not developed for 2x2 algs so that calculation may be subject to change. A good amount of NLL algs have double turns so I'm not sure if that is considered good or bad.

For CLL/EG-1/EG-2 I did not go through to find the most ergo-optimal algs for each case unlike I've done with the NLL re-development. The CLL/EG algs are chosen off of the first alg listed on speedcube database. For CLL/EG MCC could be subject to change. Also of note is that I have no way of calculating the MCC of a CLL/EG face so I just added a +2. I feel that is relatively fair but you guys can let me know if I need to change that.

Based off the current calculations HD-G is statistically both the most efficient and ergonomic. Again I would take the MCC with a grain of salt although I am rather confident of the movecount stats.

Thoughts:

Overall this has been a rather exciting comparison of methods. It has confirmed my suspicions that HD-G is a competitive with CLL/EG-1/EG-2. Another large advantage of HD-G is the ease of 1-looking as the average movecount of the first step is only 0.16 moves and at most 2 moves. This allows you to consistently look farther into the solve during inspection. There is of course also the fact that HD-G boasts only 51 algs compared to 120 of CLL/EG-1/EG-2 combination.

I am rather surprised that not only HD-G held up well against the top level method but also that it surpassed it in both movecount and ergonomics. The good news for all cubers that hate learning algs is that there is now confirmed a highly competitive method that has a much fewer algs to learn!!

Though, criticism, input are welcome. Let me know your thoughts!!

Cheers!

This is pretty cool. This method completely went under my radar. How developed are the algs?

 

[hyn]

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3.33	5.33
CLL/EG-1/EG-2	120	9.51	13.37
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	120	14.34	20.2

I'm pretty sure u wouldn't just average the move count for CLL, EG-1 and EG-2 layers
don't think that would make sense logically
Same for MCC

 

[OreKehStrah]

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3.33	5.33
CLL/EG-1/EG-2	120	9.51	13.37
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	120	14.34	20.2

I'm pretty sure u wouldn't just average the move count for CLL, EG-1 and EG-2 layers
don't think that would make sense logically
Same for MCC

MCC was developed for 3x3 so I would completely ignore how it evaluates algs and steps for 2x2

 

[Silky]

This is pretty cool. This method completely went under my radar. How developed are the algs?

I just re-genned them using the MMC calculator. As I said this may create a bias do to the fact that CLL/EG weren't genned with MCC in mind.

Step	Algs	Move Count	MCC
EG Layer	0	3.33	5.33
CLL/EG-1/EG-2	120	9.51	13.37
AUF	0	1.5	1.5
Total	120	14.34	20.2

I'm pretty sure u wouldn't just average the move count for CLL, EG-1 and EG-2 layers
don't think that would make sense logically
Same for MCC

Well why not? I get that probability wise the chances of getting a optimal CLL/EG-1/EG-2 layer are most likely not the same but how should I correct this? There will also be the bias of the fact that you're going to option select based on the best solution which on average should be EG-1

 

[hyn]

Well why not? I get that probability wise the chances of getting a optimal CLL/EG-1/EG-2 layer are most likely not the same but how should I correct this? There will also be the bias of the fact that you're going to option select based on the best solution which on average should be EG-1

This: 'There will also be the bias of the fact that you're going to option select based on the best solution which on average should be EG-1'
Using full eg doesn't mean doing 100 solves with only cll, then 100 with only eg-1 and so on
No idea how to correct it tho

Also, I taught guimond to my brother since his layers were a bit long and would take up a lot of the solve time

 

[Silky]

This is pretty cool. This method completely went under my radar. How developed are the algs?

Here's the NLL algsheet

 

[Silky]

This: 'There will also be the bias of the fact that you're going to option select based on the best solution which on average should be EG-1'
Using full eg doesn't mean doing 100 solves with only cll, then 100 with only eg-1 and so on
No idea how to correct it tho

Also, I taught guimond to my brother since his layers were a bit long and would take up a lot of the solve time

Agreed. When I was comparing Guimond to CLL ( before these calculations ), my first layer was averaging around 6 moves (?). The CLL/EG stats also assume you are optimally solving the first layer which is of note. And as I said before planning out Guimond/HD-G is a lot easier tracking and efficiency wise.

 

[OreKehStrah]

Here's the NLL algsheet

oof lots of D moves

 

[Silky]

oof lots of D moves

I'm guessing this is a bad thing? This is a result of DR in general. I based most of the algs off of MCC so there are most likely better algs out there. If there was an optimization of MCC for 2x2 that would be nice.

Would also recommend testing out the algs. You have to look at the Ds in context

 

[OreKehStrah]

I'm guessing this is a bad thing? This is a result of DR in general. I based most of the algs off of MCC so there are most likely better algs out there. If there was an optimization of MCC for 2x2 that would be nice.

Would also recommend testing out the algs. You have to look at the Ds in context

even in context D moves are bad on 2x2.

 

[Silky]

even in context D moves are bad on 2x2.

What's the reason behind this?

 

[OreKehStrah]

What's the reason behind this?

it affects your grip and reduces the TPS possible on the alg

also here are a couple new algs I find to be nicer than the ones provided in your sheet:

R U2' R' U' F2 R U' R' U2 F - Op Adj BBar - start right thumb on bottom
R' U R U2' R2' F2 R F' R' F2 - Op Adj LBar - start right thumb on top

 

[Silky]

it affects your grip and reduces the TPS possible on the alg

also here are a couple new algs I find to be nicer than the ones provided in your sheet:

R U2' R' U' F2 R U' R' U2 F - Op Adj BBar - start right thumb on bottom
R' U R U2' R2' F2 R F' R' F2 - Op Adj LBar - start right thumb on top

Will have to regen using just RUF. I'm also a Squan solver so I'm not afraid of D moves, lol

 

[OreKehStrah]

R' U2' R F U' R2' F U R - SameAdj BOp - regrip thumb on top for R2' during U'

 

[Silky]

R' U2' R F U' R2' F U R - SameAdj BOp - regrip thumb on top for R2' during U'

Appreciate the help with algs, keep em' coming I'll update the algs in a bit and also add a CO sheet. Exciting stuff!!

 

[OreKehStrah]

Appreciate the help with algs, keep em' coming I'll update the algs in a bit and also add a CO sheet. Exciting stuff!!

Sure. I’ll work one some more later!

 

[trangium]

NLL only includes the cases where there's a V on the bottom layer. Wouldn't that increase the movecount or alg count?

 

[Silky]

NLL only includes the cases where there's a V on the bottom layer. Wouldn't that increase the movecount or alg count?

No? The V is set up during CO ( the last R move cancels into making the V ) so there aren't any moves lost except if there is a rotation. Same number of cases for 6CP but only V cases which is why it's reduced to 36. If you were to account for the different placements of the V then the algs would increase obviously.

 

[Imsoosm]

What's the reason behind this?

On a 3x3, squan, or 4x4+ cube, you usually put your thumb on the middle layer for homegrip. Doing D moves on those cubes wouldn't require a regrip. On a 2x2 you usually put your thumb on the D layer for homegrip. So if you want to do D moves on a 2x2 you have to move your thumb and all other fingers for homegrip onto the U layer, then do the D move. I generally wouldn't use algs with D moves unless it's the only good alg out there because it transitions really badly and affects your tps a lot when you turn at high speed.

With that said, I think HD-G is actually a great method in terms of alg number and movecount. I would love to try this method out and learn it properly when I have time. The only bad thing about the algs are the D moves as Orekehstrah mentioned. Also, is it possible to make a picture for each of the 36 cases? I'm kinda dumb so I don't know which case is which based on only the text descriptions.