What Layers do you store 4x4 Edges?

[byu]

4x4 reduction method question.

Do you store your paired edges on the U/D layers, or L/R layers? I was wondering, because I store them on U/D layers, and I've seen Robert Yau on hi-games do L and R layers (I think, he turns so fast it's hard to tell).

 

[fanwuq]

I don't think about storing. I just pair and replace. Naturally, they go into the L and R layers because I use M layers to pair.

 

[Ellis]

I don't think I would consider "storing" 4x4 edges. Are you really asking the difference between vertical and horizontal slicing? I switch the edges out for whatever edges I need (with vertical slicing), so I guess you would say that I "store" edges in the L and R layers... but some of those happen to also fall under the U and D layers. I also use 6-2-2-2 so my back edges are always filled will solved edges, which would be in the U/D layers.

 

[Robert-Y]

Lol, thanks, but I don't store I think it wastes moves.

 

[byu]

Um, this doesn't make any sense.

I haven't really studied 4x4 speedsolving methods, I use the one Dan Harris teaches in his book Speedsolving the Rubik's Cube, or whatever it's called, I don't exactly remember.

What is 6-2-2-2? Sorry if this is a really obvious question, I've heard of it before, but I don't really get it.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

I don't really "store" edges...I just solve the edges...and then they somehow end up stored all over the cube when I am done pairing

6-2-2-2 is Replace 3 edges, slice to solve, replace with 3, slice back to solve (that's the 6) 2-2-2 is just simple pair one edge, replace and slice back to make a second edge pair...and you do that 3 times.

 

[Sa967St]

I just pair 2 edges at a time in 4x4x4, so I don`t really store edges anywhere.
For 5x5x5 I store edges on the L and R layers. I don`t understand why so many people use U and D, IMO M moves are faster then E moves.

 

[Ellis]

^yes (emerson)... Byu, I think what you really mean to ask is which slice is used during edge pairing. With 6-2-2-2 (I use m slice, or r I guess you'd say) the only edges that I actually store are UB and UD, which are usually automatically stored just by how its solved... but I do all my edge insertions to pair using the R and L layers.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

I just pair 2 edges at a time in 4x4x4, so I don`t really store edges anywhere.
For 5x5x5 I store edges on the L and R layers. I don`t understand why so many people use U and D, IMO M moves are faster then E moves.

I guess so people just perfer that...it's hard for me to use L/R since I learned Syuhei's method with U/D, so I can't really switch. Also, the way that Nakajima pairs, it seems ideal to only use the U layer, then z2, and then the rest...if you ask me, he likes his pairing because it is somewhat like F2L. Just wanted to point that out.

 

[not_kevin]

I just pair 2 edges at a time in 4x4x4, so I don`t really store edges anywhere.
For 5x5x5 I store edges on the L and R layers. I don`t understand why so many people use U and D, IMO M moves are faster then E moves.

I agree with you that M-slice is faster than E-slice tps-wise, but I still use the E-slice because I suck:
1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

I just pair 2 edges at a time in 4x4x4, so I don`t really store edges anywhere.
For 5x5x5 I store edges on the L and R layers. I don`t understand why so many people use U and D, IMO M moves are faster then E moves.

I agree with you that M-slice is faster than E-slice tps-wise, but I still use the E-slice because I suck:
1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

P.S. - U/L combo moves are difficult for me because of my disability.

 

[Ellis]

1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

1) But having to check the D layer totally sucks for look ahead (for me at least).
2) Why? I use the F face all the time for insertions. Also x > y, that's just fact [;

 

[Sa967St]

1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

1) But having to check the D layer totally sucks for look ahead (for me at least).
2) Why? I use the F face all the time for insertions. Also x > y, that's just fact [;

I have to agree with all of Ellis's points. Also, I find that lookahead is easier with storage on R/L since you can see both faces evenly, whereas with U/D you have a better view of U over D.

 

[not_kevin]

I just pair 2 edges at a time in 4x4x4, so I don`t really store edges anywhere.
For 5x5x5 I store edges on the L and R layers. I don`t understand why so many people use U and D, IMO M moves are faster then E moves.

I guess so people just perfer that...it's hard for me to use L/R since I learned Syuhei's method with U/D, so I can't really switch. Also, the way that Nakajima pairs, it seems ideal to only use the U layer, then z2, and then the rest...if you ask me, he likes his pairing because it is somewhat like F2L. Just wanted to point that out.

1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

1) But having to check the D layer totally sucks for look ahead (for me at least).
2) Why? I use the F face all the time for insertions. Also x > y, that's just fact [;

I have to agree with all of Ellis's points. Also, I find that lookahead is easier with storage on R/L since you can see both faces evenly, whereas with U/D you have a better view of U over D.

Although that's very true, I find that for U/D, I can see all 4 tredges (or whatever they turn out to be depending on the puzzle) clearly, and I can generally remember which pieces are on top. I can normally track edge pieces (if one can call them as such) easier due to solving F2L on D and therefore my continuity is better.

And I just can't do F inserts. I'm not sure why; my tps goes uber-slow, and lookahead vanishes for the next .5s after doing it (which ruins rhythm, which destroys solve).

 

[Ellis]

Although that's very true, I find that for U/D, I can see all 4 tredges (or whatever they turn out to be depending on the puzzle) clearly, and I can generally remember which pieces are on top. I can normally track edge pieces (if one can call them as such) easier due to solving F2L on D and therefore my continuity is better.

And I just can't do F inserts. I'm not sure why; my tps goes uber-slow, and lookahead vanishes for the next .5s after doing it (which ruins rhythm, which destroys solve).

Ok well, if you have a really good memory as to what's on top, then I guess that the look ahead wouldn't be terrible, but I still think D moves are rather annoying to be looking for and setting up edges... of course thats just opinion.

As for F insertions, I think I may have misunderstood what you said originally. But don't you still use F insertions with E slice pairing? I remember coming to the conclusion when debating whether to use M or E slice that there was generally no difference in the amount of F face insertions between the two methods.

 

[not_kevin]

Although that's very true, I find that for U/D, I can see all 4 tredges (or whatever they turn out to be depending on the puzzle) clearly, and I can generally remember which pieces are on top. I can normally track edge pieces (if one can call them as such) easier due to solving F2L on D and therefore my continuity is better.

And I just can't do F inserts. I'm not sure why; my tps goes uber-slow, and lookahead vanishes for the next .5s after doing it (which ruins rhythm, which destroys solve).

Ok well, if you have a really good memory as to what's on top, then I guess that the look ahead wouldn't be terrible, but I still think D moves are rather annoying to be looking for and setting up edges... of course thats just opinion.

As for F insertions, I think I may have misunderstood what you said originally. But don't you still use F insertions with E slice pairing? I remember coming to the conclusion when debating whether to use M or E slice that there was generally no difference in the amount of F face insertions between the two methods.

It's not quite as much really good memory, but rather that I can track. And I have an excess of z2's in my solves, so I can still pair the same.

Sorry; let me clarify this a little bit. With M-slice, if there's an F insert, I have to do an x to move it into the U face and deal with it there. With E-slice, I use a y/y' to move any F-insert into L/R. For some reason (not sure why) I can do y/y' better to preserve my lookahead, which is challenged enough as is.

 

[ISuckAtCubing]

i pair 6 at a time, so i do 6,4,2 so i never really store them

 

[mrbiggs]

I agree with you that M-slice is faster than E-slice tps-wise

Is it faster overall?

What do the good people use? As pointed out in this thread, Robert Yau uses M slice for his ridiculous higames results, but how is it reflected in the competition standings?

 

[DavidWoner]

1. No lookahead, so I use E-slice so I can see stuff earlier.
2. No ability to insert through the front face (liek FRF' to put pairs in position), and I don't like x as much as y (I'm not sure why... I think it's because of how I do F2L).

1) But having to check the D layer totally sucks for look ahead (for me at least).
2) Why? I use the F face all the time for insertions. Also x > y, that's just fact [;

I have to agree with all of Ellis's points. Also, I find that lookahead is easier with storage on R/L since you can see both faces evenly, whereas with U/D you have a better view of U over D.

Yet neither of you solve cross on left. *smacks Ellis and pokey with a large trout*

 

[Ellis]

Sorry; let me clarify this a little bit. With M-slice, if there's an F insert, I have to do an x to move it into the U face and deal with it there. With E-slice, I use a y/y' to move any F-insert into L/R. For some reason (not sure why) I can do y/y' better to preserve my lookahead, which is challenged enough as is.

ahhh... now I'm confused. How would you normally set up the UFl edge while using y rotations with no F turns?

Yet neither of you solve cross on left. *smacks Ellis and pokey with a large trout*

lol. How do you know I don't solve with cross on Left? Well, I don't but I don't think there's any reason that you would know that. But the reason for that is because it makes my head hurt. More than getting slapped with a large trout.