Algorithm repetition.

[DaijoCube]

I was wondering. Do your ''style'' of cubing (I guess we all have patterns in our solving style) can affect the PLL/OLL rate?

For example, on 12 solve I've got 6 V perms...That's quite weird! It happened 2 days ago too, but with the T perm. Does that happen to you? Or is this only random?

I solved my siamese about 6 to 7 time since I got it. I only got, ONLY got U perms, one H perm and 2 Z perms. No corner swap ever. Is that because of ''luck'' or because of the move possibilities being reduced to less than on a normal 3x3x3?

 

[dillonbladez]

It's not related to cubing style AT ALL. it seems to be pure luck, but that is indeed quite weird (the 6 v perms must suck, if you're using badmeph's alg)

The siamese, however, is probably because you are using 2-gen moves.

 

[joey]

Of course "style" has no effect on the algs you get.

 

[DaijoCube]

Of course "style" has no effect on the algs you get.

I don't mean the way you turn and perform algorithms I'm not that stupid

We all have reflexes on certain situations when cubing, those might lead to the same situations, like the V perm.

 

[dillonbladez]

well, that could be it. i doubt it would effect PLL. OLL definately if you use a ZBF2L/VHf2L/winter variation

 

[Feryll]

You know, I did a ton of solves today, and I swear, every OTHER freakin pll was v-perm. I'm barely even exaggerating. I also didn't get a single z perm during that block. I use R2 U' B2 U B2 R D' R D R' U R U' R Is that a good one, because I always sigh when I see a v perm

 

[joey]

Of course "style" has no effect on the algs you get.

I don't mean the way you turn and perform algorithms I'm not that stupid

We all have reflexes on certain situations when cubing, those might lead to the same situations, like the V perm.

Stupid enough to think that PLL would be affected by stuff that happens before it

 

[DaijoCube]

My V perm alg is pretty tasty, I found good finger tricks for it :
r'F RF' rUr' F R' F' r 2U R 2U R'

I think there a ''y'' at the beginning, or another rotation, I don't know.

 

[DaijoCube]

Of course "style" has no effect on the algs you get.

I don't mean the way you turn and perform algorithms I'm not that stupid

We all have reflexes on certain situations when cubing, those might lead to the same situations, like the V perm.

Stupid enough to think that PLL would be affected by stuff that happens before it

It is not? They can teleport when the OLL is finished? They are ONLY affected by what happened before, but it's freaking hard to know in advance, that I'm obligated to say.

 

[kunz]

well if your doing it intuitively then im sure there are tendencies that occur so its mostly chance but im sure the way you do it does change the odds

 

[joey]

Of course "style" has no effect on the algs you get.

I don't mean the way you turn and perform algorithms I'm not that stupid

We all have reflexes on certain situations when cubing, those might lead to the same situations, like the V perm.

Stupid enough to think that PLL would be affected by stuff that happens before it

It is not? They can teleport when the OLL is finished? They are ONLY affected by what happened before, but it's freaking hard to know in advance, that I'm obligated to say.

Yeah, I meant they aren't affected in any predictable way. Obviously they're only affected by the stuff that comes before it

 

[Escher]

It is not? They can teleport when the OLL is finished? They are ONLY affected by what happened before, but it's freaking hard to know in advance, that I'm obligated to say.

It's perfectly possible to consciously control PLL type at OLL by learning one or two more algs for an OLL case. I guess if one learnt full OLL+CP for say, adjacent oriented edges OLL cases you could force those cases during last slot or even 2nd to last slot, in which case you'd be using f2l to help influence PLL.

Otherwise, no, if you are not consciously altering OLL or PLL type during preceding steps it's no different to rolling a 58/22 sided dice.

 

[liljthedude]

OLL's do affect the PLL. Do a OLL on a solved cube. The pieces will be permutated around.

 

[Kirjava]

OLL's do affect the PLL. Do a OLL on a solved cube. The pieces will be permutated around.

*whoosh*

 

[LewisJ]

It is not? They can teleport when the OLL is finished? They are ONLY affected by what happened before, but it's freaking hard to know in advance, that I'm obligated to say.

It's perfectly possible to consciously control PLL type at OLL by learning one or two more algs for an OLL case. I guess if one learnt full OLL+CP for say, adjacent oriented edges OLL cases you could force those cases during last slot or even 2nd to last slot, in which case you'd be using f2l to help influence PLL.

Otherwise, no, if you are not consciously altering OLL or PLL type during preceding steps it's no different to rolling a 58/22 sided dice.

Actually yea it is because PLL probabilities arent 1/22 and OLL probabilities arent 1/58.

anyway, the base idea is this
Since OLL precedes PLL, OLL in part determines what PLL you get; however, since F2L precedes OLL, F2L determines what LL (OLL+pre-OLL-PLL) you will get. Generalize this to "since a precedes b, a determines in some way what b will be like" and then go all the way down to the point of the scramble. The scramble is random; when you go back up the chain, your OLLs and PLLs are affected by the scramble which is random and thus the occurrence rates of OLLs and PLLs are probability-based, not based on which alg you have learned for some OLL case.

 

[Escher]

Actually yea it is because PLL probabilities arent 1/22 and OLL probabilities arent 1/58.

:fp
I sometimes make the mistake of thinking that cases = probabilities.

You summed up what I was trying to say better anyway...

 

[Kirjava]

Rowan is correct if he meant it was a biased/imperfect die.

You meant that... right?

 

[4Chan]

Sometimes, I can force certain ZBLLs (I liek T set) subsets, or even force PLL.

I subconciously do VHF2L, I have to make a concious effort not to.

 

[LewisJ]

Sometimes, I can force certain ZBLLs (I liek T set) subsets, or even force PLL.

I subconciously do VHF2L, I have to make a concious effort not to.

That's not based purely off which alg you use for which case, that is based on a decision you make to do something a specific way such that the result will be how you want it to be. Sure you can affect later steps by choosing to do earlier steps a certain way, but if you do a specific case for one step a specific way every time, the case for the following step will be unaffected from simple probability - this is the question daijo is asking, and the answer is no.

 

[qqwref]

R2 U' B2 U B2 R D' R D R' U R U' R

what.

r'F RF' rUr' F R' F' r 2U R 2U R'

You mean U2, not 2U.

Here, try this one:
R' U R' U' y x2 R' U R' U' R2 x' U' R' U R U

Anyway, no, if you just go through F2L and OLL without looking at which LL pieces are where, the PLL algorithms will have the same probability as they will for everyone else. The only way it changes is if you do different F2Ls/OLLs depending on the permutation of the LL pieces (and not just on the F2L/OLL case).

However, any Siamese Cube which doesn't allow F, B, L, or D turns will not allow the corners on PLL to be unsolved. So you can only get U, Z, and H perms.