[Help Thread] ZZ and ZB Discussion

[aznanimedude]

this keeps reminding me of Phil Yu who only solves it Yellow on U face, and Blue on F because it makes it easier to lookahead and plan blockbuilding for F2L

 

[immortalchaos29]

I've always been full CN in CFOP, Roux, and ZZ. I just don't worry about getting the most out of it by over-inspecting to find the most optimal move count solution. The real benefit to CN in speed solving is not saving a few moves by inspecting every possibility, but to avoid awkwardness. When inspecting, you realize right away when you're dealing with an awkward inspection, or that you're going to have awkward finger tricks with the scramble at hand, and you're forced to just deal with it if you always do the same color. As CN, you can just go "not dealing with this" and switch to another orientation. For example, in CFOP, I would rather do a seven move cross that is smooth physically and easy to figure out than one that is six moves but awkward. CN is not about saving moves. It's about intuitively zeroing in on the least awkward starting color for whatever method you're using. In the end, it's really just preference.

This has been exactly my experience with cfop.

if I see more than six bad edges, I switch to another axis

3 questions:

Can you inspect edges just as fast on every axis? Are there tricks for knowing something about the orientation from another axis based on what you learned from the first axis? Is it really that much more beneficial to have 4 or 6 bad edges than 8 in general?

Once the solve starts, I don't notice the think about colors because I've been CN with CFOP for years since I started cubing.

Me too. But it just seems easier in cfop because you can just look for every pair that doesn't have the top color included. Can you recognize left/right blocks as easy as someone who is used to looking for the same pieces every time?

If you just care about getting fast and the idea of being CN isn't too appealing, then don't bother.

It is very appealing. That's why I'm asking so many questions. This will greatly effect how I start learning ZZ. This questions are coming from Dominate's post but anyone who has any insight I would love to hear it.

 

[aznanimedude]

to your first question, i'd prefer 4/6 to 8 because i've found that in general those cases are less awkward to orient than 8 edge cases and thus easier to plan and execute. although i'm guilty of not really keeping conscious of how many there are, just how i'd orient them, because i'm really more focused on tracking where the line edges are than the bad edges, since i've alraedy planned out how to orient i'm worried really on just where the line edges are so i can smoothly just form the line after i'm done with the moves i've thought out beforehand.

happy ZZ though, i hope you enjoy it

 

[Zeotor]

this keeps reminding me of Phil Yu who only solves it Yellow on U face, and Blue on F because it makes it easier to lookahead and plan blockbuilding for F2L

As has been mentioned in CN vs. non-CN discussions: is it easier for him because he always uses one orientation or because of practice and experience? I think that it's more related to practice and experience.

I'm thinking of be a CN ZZ solver so I can deal with the difficult situations consistently. If someone isn't CN with ZZ, they will encounter EOLines that are hard to plan. But they will be encountered again, and then they won't be so hard later on. Someone who's CN with ZZ might not do so well when he gets a bad scramble and can't find an easy EOLine.

 

[elrog]

I wasn't so sure about sacrificing move count to increase turn speed when I first tried this method, but I've found that rather than get the cross and then the F2l pairs, just get the Eo line and go about solving the sides more with a blockbuilding approach. Then I got the idea of just orienting the edges and starting blockbuilding right off the bat. It saves some moves while still retaining turn speed, but you need to have good recognition time to keep up with yourself. To get the front/bottom and back/bottom edges, I would just have to use a few D moves or do a double layer move and U2 and undo the first move. Getting the Eo line edges does'nt really hinder turn speed as much as you might think. As for inspection time, rather than finding the Eo line edges, just find a corner that will match easily with an edge while you solve the bad edges. Since your on the topic of color nuetrality, this may work well with it because you just find any corner that matches with an edge easily. You do of course have to use the top/bottom sides as the top/bottom depending on if the corner has the top or bottom color. Personaly, I am just opposite color neutral. I always use the same top/bottom colors.

 

[omer]

I wasn't so sure about sacrificing move count to increase turn speed when I first tried this method, but I've found that rather than get the cross and then the F2l pairs, just get the Eo line and go about solving the sides more with a blockbuilding approach. Then I got the idea of just orienting the edges and starting blockbuilding right off the bat. It saves some moves while still retaining turn speed, but you need to have good recognition time to keep up with yourself. To get the front/bottom and back/bottom edges, I would just have to use a few D moves or do a double layer move and U2 and undo the first move. Getting the Eo line edges does'nt really hinder turn speed as much as you might think. As for inspection time, rather than finding the Eo line edges, just find a corner that will match easily with an edge while you solve the bad edges. Since your on the topic of color nuetrality, this may work well with it because you just find any corner that matches with an edge easily. You do of course have to use the top/bottom sides as the top/bottom depending on if the corner has the top or bottom color. Personaly, I am just opposite color neutral. I always use the same top/bottom colors.

This would make the method really simple:
1) Orient all edges so they can all be solved by RLUD moves
2) Solve the first 2 layers intuitively using RLUD moves (block building)
3) Solve the last layer however you want to

I personally wouldn't wanna do that for 3 reasons:
1) Solving the EOLine instead of just orienting edges rids me of using DBU moves while block building which I really hate, and not just BU moves.
2) Too much looking, there are too much invisible spots where pieces I need can hide without solving the EOLine.
3) Edge orientation and the EOLine can be done together very well and planned from inspection after some practice, so why skip the EOline?

 

[aznanimedude]

Re: ZZ/ZB Home Thread

I guess that could work but then you kinda lose the ergonomic advantage of eoline imo which is <RUL> move group and no rotation advantage for lookahead.

 

[elrog]

I did mention in my porst that doing a few D moves doesn't really hinder turn speed. I also mentioned the problem of look ahead, which you would just need alot of practice just as you said you would with the EO line. I also start building a block with inspection rather than the EO line, so it is not like I'm solving any less in the first step. While the look ahead may give you troubles, having various options for blocks may halp color nuetral solvers. It is just a matter of preference. I'm not saying you have to do it.

 

[aznanimedude]

Re: ZZ/ZB Home Thread

I'm not shutting down your idea, its not a bad one. In the context of CN though its OK. Your basically talking about forming xeoline

 

[MWilson]

Can you inspect edges just as fast on every axis? Are there tricks for knowing something about the orientation from another axis based on what you learned from the first axis? Is it really that much more beneficial to have 4 or 6 bad edges than 8 in general?

There is a trick, yes.

Me too. But it just seems easier in cfop because you can just look for every pair that doesn't have the top color included. Can you recognize left/right blocks as easy as someone who is used to looking for the same pieces every time?

I can't know this because I have only ever been color neutral with every method I've learned, but when solving I don't even think about colors, the correct pieces just pop out at me from practice. I think this is how it happens with all CN solvers eventually, whatever method they use.

It is very appealing. That's why I'm asking so many questions. This will greatly effect how I start learning ZZ. This questions are coming from Dominate's post but anyone who has any insight I would love to hear it.

It's probably a lot easier to switch from CN than to it, so go for it if it's appealing to you. Again, I'm not sure of the real benefits, and you'll have to learn how to deal with difficult cases anyway. I've read in a lot of CN discussions that by taking the easier orientations a CN solver won't be as good with difficult scrambles that don't have any easy orientations. That's hooey. There's nothing stopping a CN solver from practicing difficult cases. When I was getting myself used to CN first block in Roux, I just forced myself to figure out a solution for all 24 possible blocks. The only potential downsides of CN arise from poor practice, not from something inherent.

 

[mDiPalma]

I like the idea of inspecting for bad edges...and then selecting to do either a z', z2, or z rotation to find the best line pieces.

However, eolines are <7 moves on average, so I don't really consider trading a move or two for "foreignized" recognition to be reasonable at all.

It might be better to look for the best xeoline or eoline+1 on all axes.


In the end, I don't think color neutrality will make you any faster than maintaining a standard orientation.

But if it's more fun, then go for it!

 

[immortalchaos29]

@ Dominate

Thanks so much. It helps a lot. I will take your advice and start CN.

 

[TheNextFeliks]

I think I might switch back to zz. I am having another method crisis. I can't decice between zz and CFOP. I like that zz is not as popular and the easy ll. I have slowed at CFOP and I love zz besides the blockbuilding. But blockbuilding will come with time.

 

[Ezy Ryder]

You can always solve EO+Cross and then rotationless CFOP-style F2L, though it'll probably be better to switch to more optimal block-building at some point...

 

[omer]

I think I might switch back to zz. I am having another method crisis. I can't decice between zz and CFOP. I like that zz is not as popular and the easy ll. I have slowed at CFOP and I love zz besides the blockbuilding. But blockbuilding will come with time.

Block building really isn't that bad, especially in ZZ if you use a fixed color orientation:
1. Since you always use the same colors you can know exactly where a piece needs to go when you see it, you also know what you can connect it with.
2. All the edges are already oriented which reduces the number of cases a lot.
3. You already know CFOP: you know how pieces pair up, block building is pretty much the same. You join 2 pieces, find the third piece and insert them all together.
4. watch the ZZ tutorial by asmallkitten, just youtube "ZZ tutorial" it should be the first one to come up, he explains how to do block-building in ZZ in a very simple way to understand. The tutorial covers EOLine and LL as well.

 

[aznanimedude]

Re: ZZ/ZB Home Thread

And we have cool people you can ask

 

[TheNextFeliks]

And we have cool people you can ask

Like you, Mdipalma, and uva.

 

[Xyphos]

Anyone has any links for OH COLLs and OH PLLs and also 2H COLLs ?

 

[mDiPalma]

Anyone has any links for OH COLLs and OH PLLs and also 2H COLLs ?

go to boca.bee.pl

click 3x3

a) click COLL for COLL algs

b) click Fridrich > PLL for PLL algs

try out all the algorithms to find which ones are best for you.

 

[Xyphos]

thanks and wow some really cool algs I found there , looks like I have to test each one xD