Should We All Relearn PLL?

[dChan]

Last year I had stumbled upon a page in Lucas Garron's site "garron.us" that contained PLL algorithms processed through a cube solving tool. The algorithms reduced many of the usual moves required to solve each PLL case, turning a 13 move algorithm into a 9 move algorithms as well as reducing all the others by several moves. I probably would have taken to learning all of them over to get faster times but I took a break from cubing shortly afterwards and abandoned learning them. Now that I am back and I am thinking about simple ways to reduce your solving time, I thought back to those algorithms and started thinking, "What if we all relearned PLL or even OLL with those shorter algorithms?" Would it make us faster? I would think so.

What do you guys think? Or, more importantly, has this already been thought of while I was gone? I'm sure someone else saw the page which I can no longer find.

Has anyone thought of running every F2L, OLL, and PLL case through a cube solver to see what they got?

 

[ExoCorsair]

Fingertrick-friendly algs are generally better than optimal ones.

 

[Jai]

Most RFU-optimal algs are fingertrick friendly. Opticubes.com has long list of algos that are Optimal, RDU optimal, RFU optimal, and 3x3x2 (?)

 

[Kenneth]

I use mostly RULM optimal algs for PLL and I think my set is one of the shortest anyone has got. Most of them are fast except my R's that are short but horrible to trig

But it's not that important to me, I use COLL and get 8:12 U-PLL 2:12 Z-PLL, 1:12 H-PLL and 1:12 skips... if I not get a corner orientation skip (1:27), then I use all PLL's as ZB's to solve both COLL and EPLL in one go.

 

[dChan]

Ah, I forgot all about finger-trick friendly algs. But are they really better than a short algorithm? Isn't it possible to be way faster with an 8 move algorithm, even if it has odd continuity as opposed to a 13 move algorithm with finger tricks? I mean, if you can turn 2 tps, tha shorter alg will be done in 4 seconds as opposed to the longer algorithm which would take 6.5 seconds and even with the finger tricks, isn't it more work(-2 seconds off but more movement)?

 

[Dene]

Well, seeing as the fastest cubers can already execute their algorithms sub2 seconds, I'm not sure if learning new algorithms will help much...

 

[dChan]

Wouldn't a few less moves to do for each alg, decrease their time a bit though? Maybe instead of sub-2 they'll be able to do it at 1 second flat.

 

[Lucas Garron]

Wouldn't a few less moves to do for each alg, decrease their time a bit though? Maybe instead of sub-2 they'll be able to do it at 1 second flat.

Depends. Those algs are rarely much faster. Most people use quite a few optimals already, and the other algs are pretty close. People don't actually want fast or short algs, only the algs they think are fastest to execute (and are more comfortable with).

watermelon has a better page, you know.

But sometimes I still get grumbly about my algs, and look for different generators in hope of a nicer one...

Here's my best suggestion:
Learn an optimal alg for each case (for linear FMC or so), but every time you find a faster alg, use that as your main speedsolving alg until you find a faster one (and retain all interesting ones).

LU r'u2lU'R' d'R2UR2'UR2

 

[dChan]

Thanks for that page, Lucas. I would not have known about it because I have only just recently been back surfing on the web for cube sites.

Yeah, I have a whole list of different algs for different OLL and PLL cases printed out and I always use it and try out different algorithms for different cases(I like lots of U,F,R,Rw,Fw,Uw moves). I guess it really just depends on the cuber. I think after I completely learn all the OLLs that I havn't learned I'll go back and see if learning those shorter algorithms is faster.

Does anyone use those at all, anyway? I have never heard anyone tell me that they use those shorter algs as opposed to the usual ones.

 

[Jai]

Thanks for that page, Lucas.

I pointed you to the same exact site. But Lucas gave the link to the PLL page
Who uses these algos? I do. I changed my F perm, N perm, and R perm to one of the RFU optimal algos.

 

[dChan]

Sorry, I only did a quick read through of the post and I completely forgot what the name of the site you gave was. When I saw Lucas's post he had a link that was all Blue and Shiny so it immediately attracted my attention, lol.

Does anyone, though, use these algs completely for their PLL?

 

[Speedy McFastfast]

Wow, thanks to everyone who posted the opticubes site, I've never seen it before...

Now the interesting question is, how do you start using a new alg? It's hard to forget the ones I've been using for a year But I do love the T perm I got, I can't believe I didn't see it before... (the reverse of the one I use )

 

[ExoCorsair]

Repeat it over and over again until you can generate it on-the-fly or it's pure muscle memory.

 

[Stefan]

Isn't it possible to be way faster with an 8 move algorithm

Whoa, an 8 moves PLL? Please show me! In HTM, of course, don't be a nitpicker like me.

I find it insulting that with all the time we've spent to find fast algs, you come here and suggest we've all been too blind for the obvious.

 

[Kenneth]

M2 U M E2 M E2 U' M2 ... 8 Stm

 

[watermelon]

Who uses these algos? I do. I changed my F perm, N perm, and R perm to one of the RFU optimal algos.

Would you mind sharing which ones you're using? I've never really taken the time to look through all of those algs before .

 

[Stefan]

M2 U M E2 M E2 U' M2 ... 8 Stm

Dude! Highlight my message you replied to!

 

[watermelon]

How about R2 U (F B') R2 (F' B) U R2 = R2 U S' U2 S U R2 = 7 STM?

Edit:
You can see Jason Baum using this alg here (it might be the inverse but you get the idea):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEt1yRRQ7Mw

 

[dChan]

Isn't it possible to be way faster with an 8 move algorithm

Whoa, an 8 moves PLL? Please show me! In HTM, of course, don't be a nitpicker like me.

I find it insulting that with all the time we've spent to find fast algs, you come here and suggest we've all been too blind for the obvious.

I think that is a little bit off Stefan. If you read my first post I said that I took a cubing break so I had no idea what was going on in the speedcubing world really. Not to mention I did write this, "Or, more importantly, has this already been thought of while I was gone? I'm sure someone else saw the page which I can no longer find."

In my turn I find it insulting that you would think I would be so ignorant as to not know that there has to be people who have done this.

But anyway, has anyone here adopted these algorithms completely? I myself would love to learn all the shorter versions of these PLL cases.

Oh, and to start using a new alg, simply remember it and then use it whenever you can. Whenever I learn a new alg, no matter what, whether I'm in public or at home practicing, I always use it even if it slows my times down in my cube log.

 

[Kenneth]

M2 U M E2 M E2 U' M2 ... 8 Stm

Dude! Highlight my message you replied to!

Ok, I can do that in the future. I normally do not when the post I'm replying is immediately above the one I'm writing.