New method to solve the cube..Should i show my discovery to the world?

[Godmil]

He's not combining OLL and PLL into one alg, he's just grouping them into one 'step', or the method would be completely theory (while he's saying he's doing averages with it already).
My guess is the top layer is same as Fridrich, but for the F2L he's probably doing 3 of the cross pieces then doing a 1*2*3 block (either in the space that doesn't have the cross solved, or by completing the cross area to make a 2*2*3, most likely the former, cause then he can do Fridrich F2L for the final two slots). So I'd guess it's just a kinda F2L variant, that fails to utilise the advantages that Fridrich F2L brings.
Sorry for coming across all rude, but the OP just smacks of arrogance.

 

[dabest2500]

He's not combining OLL and PLL into one alg, he's just grouping them into one 'step', or the method would be completely theory (while he's saying he's doing averages with it already).
My guess is the top layer is same as Fridrich, but for the F2L he's probably doing 3 of the cross pieces then doing a 1*2*3 block (either in the space that doesn't have the cross solved, or by completing the cross area to make a 2*2*3, most likely the former, cause then he can do Fridrich F2L for the final two slots). So I'd guess it's just a kinda F2L variant, that fails to utilise the advantages that Fridrich F2L brings.
Sorry for coming across all rude, but the OP just smacks of arrogance.

Sorry for my dumbness, but if F2L is completed, there's still the last layer to do?

 

[Godmil]

Sorry for my dumbness, but if F2L is completed, there's still the last layer to do?

Yeah, his first two steps are about solving the F2L then his third step is the last layer (standard OLL/PLL)

 

[Kirjava]

A few things to note.

It is very likely that this method is some silly variation of CFOP. It's also very likely that it's a useless modification for whatever reason.

This is the reason why nobody really cares about the method being posted or not. They don't think it is anything new or special.

I watched a few of your YouTube videos of you taking over 60 seconds to execute a beginners solution. I don't think you have the knowledge at the moment to sucessfully create a 'good' method.

I don't see why people are speculating at this point either, because this method could be complete vapourware.

So anyway, feel free to post your method where you make an inane change to an existing method and we can talk about how it doesn't work, or don't post it and save yourself the trouble. However, if you plan not to explain your 'fast methods' in future, don't announce them.

 

[dabest2500]

Yeah, his first two steps are about solving the F2L then his third step is the last layer (standard OLL/PLL)

But how would you solve OLL and PLL in one step?

 

[IamWEB]

With an algorithm.

 

[dabest2500]

With an algorithm.

There's many many cases.

 

[AndreasFrom]

But how would you solve OLL and PLL in one step?

With algorithms like ZBLL. http://speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/ZBLL

 

[Godmil]

he's just called it one step, in the same way that I could call 2 Look OLL 'one step'. There is no real definition of what a 'step' must be. People are giving him way too much credit by thinking he has a one look last layer. If you read his first post he says he's just doing OLL and PLL.

 

[dabest2500]

With algorithms like ZBLL. http://speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/ZBLL

493 algs!

he's just called it one step, in the same way that I could call 2 Look OLL 'one step'. There is no real definition of what a 'step' must be. People are giving him way too much credit by thinking he has a one look last layer. If you read his first post he says he's just doing OLL and PLL.

Ah.

 

[JyH]

This could be as fast as the "Double PLL Method"!

 

[DRAGON_RYU]

just say dammit.
if your stingy ebnough not to tell it.......
you're an idiot.

 

[Godmil]

Na, we'll have to let it go. From the tone of his first post he was probably expecting a lot of exciting people really keen to know about his new 'discovery'. He probably knows now that if he tells everyone he'll just make a fool of himself.

 

[BC1997]

Well, after you get good with the method you shouldn't post it, whats your average with the fridrich method?(just asking)

 

[qqwref]

A few things to note.

It is very likely that this method is some silly variation of CFOP. It's also very likely that it's a useless modification for whatever reason.

This is the reason why nobody really cares about the method being posted or not. They don't think it is anything new or special.

I watched a few of your YouTube videos of you taking over 60 seconds to execute a beginners solution. I don't think you have the knowledge at the moment to sucessfully create a 'good' method.

I don't see why people are speculating at this point either, because this method could be complete vapourware.

So anyway, feel free to post your method where you make an inane change to an existing method and we can talk about how it doesn't work, or don't post it and save yourself the trouble. However, if you plan not to explain your 'fast methods' in future, don't announce them.

Exactly this. /thread (unless OP decides to post info in which case there is more to discuss)

 

[wontolla]

I found a method to turn lead into gold. And if you people don't believe me, I'll keep my method to myself. Good luck anyway and bye.

 

[ElectricDoodie]

Aw man, I wanted to see what kind of failure he was going to give us.

 

[Squishypants]

Cool! I just discovered a cure for cancer, do you think I should share it or just keep it to myself?

bye!

 

[JLarsen]

You should keep it to yourself, and then tell us about the method when you get sub 20!

 

[Squishypants]

You should keep it to yourself, and then tell us about the method when you get sub 20!

Just because of that I'm going to keep my cancer cure, and never share it with anyone!

bye!