Skyler Variation (SV)

[CubicNL]

What specifically are you talking about when you say other pairs and other algs?

For other pair insertions i mean things like sledgehammer or RU2R' instead of RU'R'.
And for the other algs I mean that instead of learning 180 SV cases, I'd rather invest my time in learning other (more) useful algs, such as coll, ollcp etc.
I may, however, use a couple of nice SV cases, but just not the full thing.

 

[jskyler91]

MGLS works every solve, this only works for 40% of last slot cases.

NO, as Aronpm counted it works 72 percent of the time at a min if you utilized every open slot, which most people do not so it would be more like 80% of the time and this is without edge control. And the only difference here is that I am not going to waste moves doing ELS and i just accept that I will do LS + OLL sometimes.

 

[Kirjava]

NO, as Aronpm counted it works 72 percent of the time at a min if you utilized every open slot, which most people do not so it would be more like 80% of the time and this is without edge control. And the only difference here is that I am not going to waste moves doing ELS and i just accept that I will do LS + OLL sometimes.

Where did you get 80% from ?! You're literally just making up numbers.

Here's the math for the last slot;

5*5*3*2 = 150 cases
6 cases where both pieces are in the slot
-1 for solved = 5
14*4 = 56 cases with setups
5+56 / 150 = 40%

It's a 40% chance.

 

[jskyler91]

For other pair insertions i mean things like sledgehammer or RU2R' instead of RU'R'.
And for the other algs I mean that instead of learning 180 SV cases, I'd rather invest my time in learning other (more) useful algs, such as coll, ollcp etc.
I may, however, use a couple of nice SV cases, but just not the full thing.

How is COLL or OLL CP more useful? BOth of them come up far less often then SV and neither of them actually skip a step, then just half permute things. I used to want to learn COLL/ OLLCP, but if you think about it it really isn't worth it as they often take more moves and only produce a slightly better case. SV actually aves moves, can be used almost all of the time and actually skips steps as opposed to just making the next step better. Also, my PLL ranges from 1.6 seconds to .75 seconds with the .75 being an a perm not a u perm My u perms are about 1 second. this means at most i save .6 seconds using COLL or OLLLCP whereas with SV I save .6 at the very least. and around 1 second at the higher end. Also, COLL algs are longer than regular OLL so you have to account for the time wasted doing them which is like .1 or.2 seconds so really COLL/ OLLCP only really saves like . 4 or .5 seconds and doesn't come up that often whereas SV saves about .8 seconds and comes up very often.

 

[Bob]

Where did you get 80% from ?! You're literally just making up numbers.

Here's the math for the last slot;

5*5*3*2 = 150 cases
6 cases where both pieces are in the slot
-1 for solved = 5
14*4 = 56 cases with setups
5+56 / 150 = 40%

It's a 40% chance.

It's less than that. This method is for when you do not have all edges unoriented, right? That happens 1/8 of the time.

 

[jskyler91]

Where did you get 80% from ?! You're literally just making up numbers.

Here's the math for the last slot;

5*5*3*2 = 150 cases
6 cases where both pieces are in the slot
-1 for solved = 5
14*4 = 56 cases with setups
5+56 / 150 = 40%
It's a 40% chance.

I am going off of Aron's post:

total cases for 1,2,3,4 open slots: 150, 216, 294, 384
n open slots has n+4 corners, n+4 edges, so (n+4)(n+4)*3*2=6(n+4)^2 cases

I've been told that the probability of getting 4 move insertion for SV in LS is 41%, 28% for 2 slots, 21% for 3 slots and 16% for 4 slots. Probability of not getting SV = (1-.41)*(1-.28)*(1-.21)*(1-.16)=.28, so probability of getting at least 1 SV is 72%

If you have issues bring it up with him.

It's less than that. This method is for when you do not have all edges unoriented, right? That happens 1/8 of the time.

No all edges are not unoriented, only one and you can set up the cases as well. This gives you a much larger chance of creating an SV case and you have 4 slots in which to do this so 4 different tries to do this. Also seeing as how I do not use every open slot I actually have a larger proportion of cases where i can to where I can't.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

How is COLL or OLL CP more useful? BOth of them come up far less often then SV and neither of them actually skip a step, then just half permute things. I used to want to learn COLL/ OLLCP, but if you think about it it really isn't worth it as they often take more moves and only produce a slightly better case. SV actually aves moves, can be used almost all of the time and actually skips steps as opposed to just making the next step better. Also, my PLL ranges from 1.6 seconds to .75 seconds with the .75 being an a perm not a u perm My u perms are about 1 second. this means at most i save .6 seconds using COLL or OLLLCP whereas with SV I save .6 at the very least. and around 1 second at the higher end. Also, COLL algs are longer than regular OLL so you have to account for the time wasted doing them which is like .1 or.2 seconds so really COLL/ OLLCP only really saves like . 4 or .5 seconds and doesn't come up that often whereas SV saves about .8 seconds and comes up very often.

You can use COLL and OLLCP in every solve, and the recog is faster than LS recog.

 

[jonlin]

I am not going to claim to know the answer to this question,nor am I going to try and figure it our. All I was saying is that if we are just talking about LS then 42 sounds about right. Sure there are like 4 positions for the AUF, but if you had the alg AUFed it would be 42 right? what other cases am I missing assuming all 3 slots are filled?

42: The answer to life.
Honestly, I think that's how he chose it.

 

[Kirjava]

I am going off of Aron's post:

If you have issues bring it up with him.

My figure was for the last slot, and his was for all slots. I said the figure was for the last slot, and you said it was wrong.

YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MATHEMATICS INVOLVED IN THIS, PLEASE STOP MAKING UP NUMBERS AND USING THEM AS IF THEY HAVE ANY KIND OF MEANING

 

[jskyler91]

You can use COLL and OLLCP in every solve, and the recog is faster than LS recog.

Please provide a citation for this because COLL only occurs when every edge is oriented which does not occur that often even if you do use basic edge control and OLLCP is a very broad term so saying it is or isn't usable every solve really depends on what type/ what cases you use for OLLCP. Also, Hyper orientation is not easier than simply edge/ corner orientation. Hyperoreintation require that you do edge/ corner orientation first lol, so it is by product more time consuming and arguably harder.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

Please provide a citation for this because COLL only occurs when every edge is oriented which does not occur that often even if you do use basic edge control and OLLCP is a very broad term so saying it is or isn't usable every solve really depends on what type/ what cases you use for OLLCP. Also, Hyper orientation is not easier than simply edge/ corner orientation. Hyperoreintation require that you do edge/ corner orientation first lol, so it is by product more time consuming and arguably harder.

No, COLL is solving the corners of the Lase layer while Preserving edge orientation, you can the do ELL to finish Last layer.
OLLCP=CO+EO+CP so solve all LL leaving EPLL. If you learn all OLLCP algorithms you can use them in every solve.
Also, since when did I mention Hyperoritentations?

 

[jskyler91]

My figure was for the last slot, and his was for all slots. I said the figure was for the last slot, and you said it was wrong.

YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MATHEMATICS INVOLVED IN THIS, PLEASE STOP MAKING UP NUMBERS AND USING THEM AS IF THEY HAVE ANY KIND OF MEANING

PLEASE STOP TYRING TO BE A PEDANT AND MISREADING MY STATEMENTS. I specifically said the chances of getting an skyV IN A SOLVE, not just for LS, please reread the OP if you need proof of that.

 

[Cool Frog]

Please provide a citation for this because COLL only occurs when every edge is oriented which does not occur that often even if you do use basic edge control and OLLCP is a very broad term so saying it is or isn't usable every solve really depends on what type/ what cases you use for OLLCP. Also, Hyper orientation is not easier than simply edge/ corner orientation. Hyperoreintation require that you do edge/ corner orientation first lol, so it is by product more time consuming and arguably harder.

You could learn all the OLLCP cases...

you also don't have to use hyperorientation to recognize permutation of corners.

 

[Kirjava]

PLEASE STOP TYRING TO BE A PEDANT AND MISREADING MY STATEMENTS. I specifically said the chances of getting an skyV IN A SOLVE, not just for LS, please reread the OP if you need proof of that.

I said LS is 40% and you said it was wrong.

By the way, calling me a pedant for being correct is an ad hominem attack.

 

[jskyler91]

No, COLL is solving the corners of the Lase layer while Preserving edge orientation, you can the do ELL to finish Last layer.
OLLCP=CO+EO+CP so solve all LL leaving EPLL. If you learn all OLLCP algorithms you can use them in every solve.
Also, since when did I mention Hyperoritentations?

Full OLLCP is 330 algs which is far more difficult than 100 with mirrors and in order to recognize coll you do hyperorientation which requires you look at corner permutation at a minimum and edge permutation if you want to have an HZU after your alg.

 

[jskyler91]

I said LS is 40% and you said it was wrong.

By the way, calling me a pedant for being correct is an ad hominem attack.

True and true, I am wrong here sorry, I we were saying different things and I thought you were trying to contradict me,but you were stating unrelated facts.

 

[MaeLSTRoM]

Full OLLCP is 330 algs which is far more difficult than 100 with mirrors and in order to recognize coll you do hyperorientation which requires you look at corner permutation at a minimum and edge permutation if you want to have an HZU after your alg.

Not necessarily. I would say that learning OLLCP would actually be easier, because if you can recognise CP, then you can add them into your normall OLL solves slowly over time, which is less effort.
Also, I don't use hyperorientations for COLL recog. And edge permutation is irrelevant in COLL, since you do EPLL afterwards anyway.
I can actually recog COLL cases faster than some PLL cases and about half OLL cases.

 

[Bob]

Full OLLCP is 330 algs which is far more difficult than 100 with mirrors and in order to recognize coll you do hyperorientation which requires you look at corner permutation at a minimum and edge permutation if you want to have an HZU after your alg.

What? Why would you have to look at EP during OLLCP? You won't have to look at that until after OLLCP. They will leave you with H, Z, U, or solved no matter what.

Edit: MaeLSTRoM beat me to it.

 

[Kirjava]

but you were stating unrelated facts.

I was explaining the differences between MGLS and SV, it was quite related.

 

[CubicNL]

I leave this discussion; for me, it's not worth learning the 180 cases.