Is it fast to do COLL for all OLL cases?

[frogmanson]

..

 

[Escher]

I made a thread about this a while ago, and the summary of responses was:
Don't bother.

What you could do would be to learn the COLL case your OLL solves so that you know when you'll get a cpll skip, adj corner swap or diag corner swap. You could perhaps learn a second alg for each OLL to avoid getting any diag corner swaps at all.

 

[miniGOINGS]

Um let me get this. COLL solves the last layer corners while preserving the EO. Why would you do COLL if the edges aren't oriented? Just use CLL. This doesn't make sense to me.

 

[jms_gears1]

he means OLL+ permuting corners right

so CLL for all OLL cases

 

[miniGOINGS]

Oh wow. That would be pointless.

 

[miniGOINGS]

how would it be pointless?

Number of algs and recognition. Why not just pre-orient the edges?

 

[rachmaninovian]

lol, then u are better off finishing zbll.
are u using vhf2l?

 

[deadalnix]

Number of algs and recognition. Why not just pre-orient the edges?

Recognition is not so bad if you already know COLL and OLL. That the point of ROLL.

But learning this many alg for that is really useless.

 

[Cyrus C.]

This is a bit off topic, but wouldn't it make recognition easier for ZBLL if you had all edges flipped incorrectly?

 

[4Chan]

No, that's way different than ZBLL recognition. More like ELL recognition.

 

[Cyrus C.]

>*Facepalm*< I'm an idiot.

 

[frogmanson]

zbll recognition is easy via baum/harris recognition, i never learned COLL and i can recognize the COLL+ edges easily