M2 "Pair Solving" Parity Options...

Toad

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,536
Location
UK
WCA ID
2009SMIT06
YouTube
Visit Channel
I've pretty much finished learning all the cases for M2 method using pairs, learnt from here.

Using this method you don't have to worry about the position of the M-Slice when solving UF and DB edges which I like a lot about it.

Unfortunately by using Old Pochmann for corners I only have "U' F2 U M2 U' F2 U" as my parity alg which offsets the M Slice.

Just wondering if some of you more experienced BLD cubers could give me some options as to other things I could do as I'm not sure if this can work with my method or not...

Thanks in advance,
Toad
 
Eric Limeback‘s tutorial said something about using R perm as parity alg, not sure if this is what you’re talking about…
 
I've pretty much finished learning all the cases for M2 method using pairs, learnt from here.

Using this method you don't have to worry about the position of the M-Slice when solving UF and DB edges which I like a lot about it.

Unfortunately by using Old Pochmann for corners I only have "U' F2 U M2 U' F2 U" as my parity alg which offsets the M Slice.

Just wondering if some of you more experienced BLD cubers could give me some options as to other things I could do as I'm not sure if this can work with my method or not...

Thanks in advance,
Toad

I've been in the exact same situation, and this is what I did.

Every time I noticed that I had an odd number of corners, I knew I had parity. Then I always memoed UB as the first piece to shoot to.

That meant that I started with a M2, and then started to do my ordinary memo, that now had to be an even number of pieces.

This meant that every piece were exactly where it should be! the UB and DF-piece is att their right place, but UF and DB are at their wrong place, which is what I did memorize

"Oh, one more extra piece to memorize sucks!" No it doesn't since, you don't have to remember it, since you know that your memo always start with UB if you have parity.


I don't understand why people keep using that parityalgorithm? D' L2 D M2 D' L2 D must be faster? I guess L'U'LU M2 U'L'UL is faster to.. I was using U'D R' U' R U R U R U' R' D'. 2+2 move setup to U-perm, with 3 move cancellation. Use it if you want, but I'm not saying it's the best, 'cause I don't know.
 
I use Eric's method too.

Solve corners, do R perm, solve edges, do the U'F2UM2U'F2U, then R perm.

You can also do edges first, U'F2UM2U'F2U and solving corners will fix the parity without need for R perm.
 
Back
Top