Erik
Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2006
- Messages
- 2,661
- Location
- Enschede, Netherlands, Netherlands
- WCA
- 2005AKKE01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
part 2
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice Erik, quite the same as Arnoud's tutorial, however I think using r instead of d is quite interesting.
Yes, you are right about this for the technique that Erik is using.I thinks there are too many awkward cases for 6 at a time on the 5x5 for it to be efficient.
Yes, you are right about this for the technique that Erik is using.I thinks there are too many awkward cases for 6 at a time on the 5x5 for it to be efficient.
There is another approach though:
- solve outer edges using the 4x4 technique (6 2 2 2)
- solve center edges with the outer edges using the 4x4 technique (6 2 2 2)
One bad thing is that if you end up with a parity it is one of the awkward ones.
Have fun,
Ron
I think this idea came from Alexander Ooms, but when I showed him my method he liked it better. The problem with solving outer edges first is that you have to find the matching outer edge, which is 1/23. With my method you only have to find the center edges which are 1/11.Yes, you are right about this for the technique that Erik is using.I thinks there are too many awkward cases for 6 at a time on the 5x5 for it to be efficient.
There is another approach though:
- solve outer edges using the 4x4 technique (6 2 2 2)
- solve center edges with the outer edges using the 4x4 technique (6 2 2 2)
One bad thing is that if you end up with a parity it is one of the awkward ones.
Have fun,
Ron
Ha, I was dismissing that wing-middle approach while suggesting it to qqwref.