[Help Thread] ZBLL Discussion and Help

[thelargeman2048]

thanks

 

[CornerTwisted]

When did y'all finish ZBLL?
I mean in terms of speed.

 

[Timona]

Does anyone have a link to short ZBLLs, like 7-12 STM or where can I find them?

 

[Imsoosm]

Does anyone have a link to short ZBLLs, like 7-12 STM or where can I find them?

Here is a github page by Sebastiano Tronto, but only for 6-10 HTM. I haven't found any 7-12 HTMs though.

 

[xyzzy]

Does anyone have a link to short ZBLLs, like 7-12 STM or where can I find them?

I haven't found any 7-12 HTMs though.

You used to be able to search for stuff like that with Birdflu but the database has been offline for quite a long time now…

 

[mencarikebenaran]

this is one of the reason why CFOP will always the best and fastest method for 3x3.
u can solve last layer with regular OLL and PLL, or ZBLL or ELL
CFOP has 3 possible last layer = OLL skip, PLL skip, LL skip.
Roux only have two possibilities = CMLL skip, and EO skip.
LSE skip, really really rare, even if EO already oriented, u still to do a few moves (the fewest moves are M' and M)

 

[efattah]

Has any top cuber actually mastered full ZBLL in the sense that each alg flows with perfect speed, optimized execution and near instant recognition? It seems like a great set, but for the most part (from what I have heard), most top cubers know some ZBLL and *might* use a ZBLL if they quickly recognize & remember the case. It is insanely hard to maintain such a large algorithm set, even if you know it, I mean you are looking at about 2 hours per day to drill it, and I'm wondering if anyone actually puts in the time to fully maintain it. Many people have demonstrated they know the full set, but few who have demonstrated that have shown they can actually execute it at competition speed under stress, consistently.

 

[OreKehStrah]

Has any top cuber actually mastered full ZBLL in the sense that each alg flows with perfect speed, optimized execution and near instant recognition? It seems like a great set, but for the most part (from what I have heard), most top cubers know some ZBLL and *might* use a ZBLL if they quickly recognize & remember the case. It is insanely hard to maintain such a large algorithm set, even if you know it, I mean you are looking at about 2 hours per day to drill it, and I'm wondering if anyone actually puts in the time to fully maintain it. Many people have demonstrated they know the full set, but few who have demonstrated that have shown they can actually execute it at competition speed under stress, consistently.

Tymon has insanely good ZBL usage. Tymon used ZBLL in 3 out of the 5 solves of the first sub5 wr avg. Also modern tools like TrainYu make maintaining it a lot easier.

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

Tymon has insanely good ZBL usage. Tymon used ZBLL in 3 out of the 5 solves of the first sub5 wr avg. Also modern tools like TrainYu make maintaining it a lot easier.

The key word in his question was "Full" ZBLL. It's well known that Tymons is the best user of ZBLL, however, he does not know it in its fullness.

 

[PiKeeper]

this is one of the reason why CFOP will always the best and fastest method for 3x3.
u can solve last layer with regular OLL and PLL, or ZBLL or ELL
CFOP has 3 possible last layer = OLL skip, PLL skip, LL skip.
Roux only have two possibilities = CMLL skip, and EO skip.
LSE skip, really really rare, even if EO already oriented, u still to do a few moves (the fewest moves are M' and M)

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Almost every single thing you said is wrong.

 

[Imsoosm]

CFOP has 3 possible last layer = OLL skip, PLL skip, LL skip.
Roux only have two possibilities = CMLL skip, and EO skip.

Have you even done any research on the probabilities for the skips? LSE skips are more common than LL skips... CMLL skips are also more common than OLL skips......

 

[mencarikebenaran]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Almost every single thing you said is wrong.

i just realised that what i am saying is wrong.
full LSE skip with M' or M or M2 to finish the cube, is just like LL skip with AUF.

 

[zzcuberman]

this is one of the reason why CFOP will always the best and fastest method for 3x3.
u can solve last layer with regular OLL and PLL, or ZBLL or ELL
CFOP has 3 possible last layer = OLL skip, PLL skip, LL skip.
Roux only have two possibilities = CMLL skip, and EO skip.
LSE skip, really really rare, even if EO already oriented, u still to do a few moves (the fewest moves are M' and M)

There are many options for most methods last layers

 

[efattah]

It is interesting that if you really had mastered full ZBLL, you could be method neutral between CFOP-ZBLL, ZBRoux and ZZ, all of which finish with ZBLL.

 

[Timona]

It is interesting that if you really had mastered full ZBLL, you could be method neutral between CFOP-ZBLL, ZBRoux and ZZ, all of which finish with ZBLL.

I dont think that's how that works. All those methods have different starts from each other.

 

[efattah]

I dont think that's how that works. All those methods have different starts from each other.

That's the definition of method neutral-- you examine the cube during the inspection, and choose which method to start with, based on what the cube looks like, since each method will have a 'start' that is of a different difficulty. You choose the easiest start. I am saying that these three methods start differently, but all finish with ZBLL.

 

[zzcuberman]

That's the definition of method neutral-- you examine the cube during the inspection, and choose which method to start with, based on what the cube looks like, since each method will have a 'start' that is of a different difficulty. You choose the easiest start. I am saying that these three methods start differently, but all finish with ZBLL.

its not a great idea anyway. you should stick to one so you can be as quick and familiar with your method as possible

 

[Timona]

its not a great idea anyway. you should stick to one so you can be as quick and familiar with your method as possible

There's nothing wrong with method neutrality. If you have the time and willpower to learn and improve with multiple methods, then theres nothjng wrong with it. Theres no speedcubing rule that says stick to one method.

 

[zzcuberman]

There's nothing wrong with method neutrality. If you have the time and willpower to learn and improve with multiple methods, then theres nothjng wrong with it. Theres no speedcubing rule that says stick to one method.

No, and im not tryna be that guy. I love all methods, but you will never be 100 percent in one method if you main multiple

 

[Thom S.]

but you will never be 100 percent in one method if you main multiple

Same thing is true about colour neutrality but that one gets loved by every CFOP user ever.