[Help Thread] 4x4 Discussion

[jweaver]

You only need 2 extra algorithms for 4x4.
Edge swap(PLL parity): Uu2 Rr2 U2 r2 U2 Rr2 Uu2
Edge flip(OLL parity): r2 B2 U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 F2 r F2 l' B2 r2

There are other algorithms that will do the same, those above are the ones I like to use. Although there are algorithms that solve both parities at once if you are not interested in speed there really is no point learning them as you will have to learn to recognise when both conditions have occurred.

Cheers.. I can live with that.. I will learn both and see how I get on...

Jon

Edit.. I spoke to soon.. I was on the first part of the last face.. I could not get a cross on the bottom, as one of the edges was flipped.. And I tried the "Edge Flip" alg and it didn't work.. Now I have made a mess of it and have to start again.. Hope I can get it back to this state to try out the algs.

BTW.. What at OLL and PLL stand for?

 

[Toddyt1]

BTW.. What at OLL and PLL stand for?

OLL: Orient last layer
PLL: Permute last layer

Edit: the last layer should be positioned on top (u layer) for the edge flip algorithm

 

[jweaver]

OLL: Orient last layer
PLL: Permute last layer

Edit: the last layer should be positioned on top (u layer) for the edge flip algorithm

Ahh.. I think I had it facing towards me..... Right.. I need to try again....

Edit: Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.. I just got the top 3 rows done again and was doing the bottom.. Clearly one of the edges was flipped.. So, I put the last layer on top (and had the flipped piece towards me) and did:

r2 B2 U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 F2 r F2 l' B2 r2

And I messed it up again.. I think I keep missing the 'r' and doing 'R'.. I am right in thinking that 'r' is the inside right layer.. And I guess I should check. l (oh hang on.. thats l not L) is clockwise and l' is anti-clockwise

I think I have worked it out.. I have been doing l as L and probably mixing up r and R too...

Right.. I need to start again...

Can you confirm that to flip an edge, I need the final layer on top, and the edge piece facing towards me? And is this the same for swap too??

Jon

 

[Toddyt1]

Ahh.. I think I had it facing towards me..... Right.. I need to try again....

I left out the it flips the edge facing you in the top layer. But it doesn't particularly matter which edge gets flipped as the cube will still be solvable as long as a single edge got flipped.

 

[windhero]

The Maru is a good cube, but eventually, you're going to have to get a new one because the core will just keep coming misaligned. Get the v2 if you like the Maru feel. Otherwise, just get a ShengShou v5. It's a great cube. 4x4, for me, was the hardest cube to progress with. I was stuck at 1:20 for about 2 years, and just finally jumped down to 1:00 - 1:12. I don't use Yau, I use 32223 reduction. I just find it easier than messing with all those different steps. Maybe I'll switch when I'm down to sub 40, but for now, everyone else got fast with reduction and I will too.

For the OLL parity, most fast people use: Rw U2 x Rw U2 Rw U2 Rw' U2 Lw U2 Rw' U2 Rw U2 Rw' U2 Rw'.

Alright. I might be able to spend quite a bit on this, so would you recommend an X-cube? Some say it's the best there is. Is there anything to it or should I go for a cheap and steady Shengshou? I'm going to train with the maru for now until it breaks on me.

I'm using Yau only because I really do suck at recognizing edge pairs if none are solved. I could start training though since eventually I'll have to get much better in edge recognition if I want to sub 1min during this lifetime. I'll probably buy an X-cube and a big bottle of maru lube during the summer, maybe put some traxxas in the core.

32223 reduction means doing centers, misalign and do 3 pairs and then 2 2 2 pairs and last three pairs, right?

Also how would you lube this? Maru? Lubix? Both?

Thanks for the help!

 

[jweaver]

Noooooo. I just can't get it... I did the top 3 layers again, and on the bottom, had a line, with the the last edge 'flipped'.

So I positioned this flipped edge towards me on the top face and did:

r2 B2 U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 F2 r F2 l' B2 r2

And it came out completely messed up.

I am almost certainly getting an L/l or R/r messed up, but I can't see it.,

Can I just check the steps.

Starting with the U/Top face as the unfinished one.. And the edge which needs flipping towards me.

I do:

- Inner right 180 degrees
- Back 180 degrees
- Top 180 degrees
- Inside left 90 degrees clockwise
- Top 180 degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees anti-clockwise
- Top 180 Degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees clockwise
- Top 180 agrees
- Front 180 Degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees clockwise
- Front 180 degrees
- Inner Left 90 degrees anti-clock
- Back 180 degrees
- Inner Right 180 degrees

Am I reading the notation right? B is back isnt' it? Not Bottom? If I can't get this right on paper, heaven knows how I will remember this one

 

[Toddyt1]

Noooooo. I just can't get it... I did the top 3 layers again, and on the bottom, had a line, with the the last edge 'flipped'.

So I positioned this flipped edge towards me on the top face and did:

r2 B2 U2 l U2 r' U2 r U2 F2 r F2 l' B2 r2

And it came out completely messed up.

I am almost certainly getting an L/l or R/r messed up, but I can't see it.,

Can I just check the steps.

Starting with the U/Top face as the unfinished one.. And the edge which needs flipping towards me.

I do:

- Inner right 180 degrees
- Back 180 degrees
- Top 180 degrees
- Inside left 90 degrees clockwise
- Top 180 degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees anti-clockwise
- Top 180 Degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees clockwise
- Top 180 agrees
- Front 180 Degrees
- Inner Right 90 degrees clockwise
- Front 180 degrees
- Inner Left 90 degrees anti-clock
- Back 180 degrees
- Inner Right 180 degrees

Am I reading the notation right? B is back isnt' it? Not Bottom? If I can't get this right on paper, heaven knows how I will remember this one

When I follow you longhand version on a solved cube I get the edge on the top layer facing me flipped. The rest of the cube stays solved.

B is back.

 

[jweaver]

Last question.. I am making progress now, and can continously do the 4x4 using the 2 algorithms posted above (although not yet from memory)

But I occasionally I still end up with the final face almost done, and the last two corners swapped over.

I realise that I can do Uu2 Rr2 U2 r2 U2 Rr2 Uu2 to swap 2 EDGES and then re-do some of the 3x3 algorithms to fix it... But currently its all a bit of trial and error.

I am pretty sure that if I put the wrong corners to the back or front, this doens't work and I have more success putting them on the the left or right side.. But could someone confirm what orientation I need to allow Uu2 Rr2 U2 r2 U2 Rr2 Uu2 to fix this scenario? I understand that this won't actually fix the corners and I still need to use some 3x3 algorithms to finish, but rather keep doing random moves until I get it right, I would rather get it right first time.


Jon

 

[Toddyt1]

If you put the corners at the back or front you will end up with a t perm. Put them on the left or right you will end up with a another perm (I don't know this one) no matter which edges you swap the cube will be solvable. You will have to repeat some steps in order to solve it though.

 

[jweaver]

If you put the corners at the back or front you will end up with a t perm. Put them on the left or right you will end up with a another perm (I don't know this one) no matter which edges you swap the cube will be solvable. You will have to repeat some steps in order to solve it though.

Hmmm. I tried it twice last night with the corners at the back.. And after swapping the edges, and then repeating the 3x3 Algorithms I know (Dan Browns) I ended up in the same position.. I tried this a few times and just went around in circles, ending up with 2 corners which needed to be swapped.

Jon

 

[Toddyt1]

Hmmm. I tried it twice last night with the corners at the back.. And after swapping the edges, and then repeating the 3x3 Algorithms I know (Dan Browns) I ended up in the same position.. I tried this a few times and just went around in circles, ending up with 2 corners which needed to be swapped.

Jon

I do not understand what could be happening. Perhaps you could post images of the cube before (with only two corners swapped) and after with only two edges swapped. However if you find that you can always solve it after swapping the edges with the corners position on the left or right face perhaps when the situation arises you should just swap the edges like that.

 

[jweaver]

I do not understand what could be happening. Perhaps you could post images of the cube before (with only two corners swapped) and after with only two edges swapped. However if you find that you can always solve it after swapping the edges with the corners position on the left or right face perhaps when the situation arises you should just swap the edges like that.

Thanks.. Let me try to get it back in that state.. And when I do, I will take photos.. Do the alg from each side and then work out whats happening.

I seem to remember that I started with the 2 corners right.. Put them to the back.. Did the edge flip.. Ran through the 3x3 algs and got back to the 2 corners again..

But then I think I put the corners on the right.. Flipped and edge.. Did the 3x3.. Got back to another state.. FLipped (or maybe swapped) an edge.. Ran through the 3x3 algs again and did it.



SO let me put this on hold for now and will try again.

jon

 

[TMOY]

To clarify; The corners can never be in a wrong place because of parity. Parity concers edge pieces only. It might look like everything else is ok except 2 corners, but in reality its actually the edges that are in the wrong places

Wow. You simply have no idea of what you're talking about. It's exactly the converse: the true parity is the corner parity, dedge parity is an illusion of parity created by the fact that the cube looks like a 3^3. The only reason why people solve PLL parity by fixing dedges and not corners is that the alg for dedges is much shorter and simpler.

 

[Rubiksfreak]

Yau

I've always used yau for 4x4, but just recently I've decided I want to average 40. The step that slows me down the most is solving the three edge peices to make the cross. I've practiced this step for days, literally only solving 4x4. All I do is solve the 3/4 of the cross and scramble and do it all over. My times have only slightly improved. Was this a struggle for anyone else? How did you master this step?

Sent from my LG-L38C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dakotajennings]

4x4

I'm starting to get really interested in it. But, where do I start? When I look at tutorials no one ever goes over parity and such. Any help would be great.

 

[Wassili]

This should answer most of your questions:

Spoiler

 

[littlewing1208]

I was doing reduction from the beginning and I never really concentrated on 4x4x4 so my average was close to 3min. I finally decided to learn Yau and in few days I had that down to 2min. I think since then, I have a few 1:20-1:40 solves that weren't timed. This is all on a SS V4 (unmodded) for what it's worth.

I think that Yau is just more fun too, but YMMV.

 

[mark49152]

I'm intermediate and found Yau awkward at first, but fine once I got used to the centers. I don't find the centers inefficient and quite like having a simple constrained method for solving them faster. Edge pairing is then easier than with reduction. I would say persevere with Yau.

 

[1LastSolve]

Try the Yau method, its basically a variation off of reduction, and it really helps with CFOP. You just need practice, and that's really the only thing that will help you.
But seriously, Yau isn't that different from Reduction, if you know Reduction, Yau is a piece of cake to learn.

In Yau you build your cross after the First 2 Centers, at least 3 Parts of your cross. You finish your cross after all the centers are completed, with the last edge. Everything else is basically Reduction

 

[jayefbe]

Hi, can people please post their general thoughts on yau I am debating whether to change to yau or just keep using reduction for 4x4 speedsolving. Yau is clearly faster but I really don't know becuase the move count for centers is a lot higher and it takes AGES to get faster with yau because you have to be so careful with moves you make when solving centres and edge pairing. You have to make sure you don't muck up the cross edges and I would call myself an intermediate cuber and certinaly not a beginner however mastering yau can be really quite difficult if you are used to just good old reduction.

So, What do you think?

Thanks.

P.S. = I average about 2 - 2:30 minutes.........which kinda sucks!.......nontheless! I practise it every day!

I switched to Yau after not doing all that much 4x4 practice. It took a couple days of slower times, but then my times dropped rather quickly. Once you get used to it, the center pairing can be done very quickly, and the increased centers move count is minimal, especially compared to the benefits it provides. And not screwing up the cross edges when edge pairing is dead easy because your cross edges are on the D-layer, which you completely ignore. And the fact that you get to ignore 1/3-2/3 of your cube during edge pairing (depending on which step of 3-2-3 you're on) means that look ahead is much faster. Really, the hardest step to get fast at is the first 3 cross edges, at least for me. Switch to Yau.

Try the Yau method, its basically a variation off of reduction, and it really helps with CFOP.

I'm guessing you mean it helps with the transition to 3x3 stage because the cross is already made?

Yau does help the transition from edge pairing to 3x3, but the time saved at that transition is probably lost during the actual cross edge pairing. Basically, the time it takes to build the cross is simply moved from one part of the solve to another, so there's no net loss in time. In fact, it might be a gain in time for many solvers because the cross edges may take longer to identify and pair compared to normal reduction methods.

The reduction in time in Yau mainly comes from the easier look ahead, at least that's my experience.