Questions about ELL and COLL
- Thread starter hkpnkp
- Start date
Czery
Veteran
COLL and ELL are alternatives to OLL and PLL. Both solve the LL.
COLL solves the corners in one alg while preserving the orientation of the edges.
ELL then solves the edges directly.
It is generally agreed that OLL/PLL is easier to recognize and has more developed algs. When using OLL/PLL you are also more likely to get a skip.
I personally do not know anyone who uses COLL/ELL.
Edit; OAQT pls
Edit2: actually couldn't you have just looked it up on the wiki? it's a great source (although incomplete)
COLL solves the corners in one alg while preserving the orientation of the edges.
ELL then solves the edges directly.
It is generally agreed that OLL/PLL is easier to recognize and has more developed algs. When using OLL/PLL you are also more likely to get a skip.
I personally do not know anyone who uses COLL/ELL.
Edit; OAQT pls
Edit2: actually couldn't you have just looked it up on the wiki? it's a great source (although incomplete)
mark49152
Premium Member
This answer is misleading. If your edges start out oriented and you use COLL to preserve EO then you only need EPLL to finish and have a better chance of a skip. If your edges aren't oriented then CLL/ELL instead. And yes that info is probably on the wiki somewhere...
Czery
Veteran
You don't have to use CLL/ELL with COLL.
mark49152
Premium Member
Eh? That makes no sense. What I pointed out is that if your edges aren't pre-oriented you wouldn't use COLL. If they are pre-oriented, you wouldn't use ELL.
rj
Veteran
Although many experienced cubers will know COLL for cases where their top cross is solved, whereby increasing the chances of a PLL skip.
Czery
Veteran
Sorry, let me clarify.
You are right. It is more advantageous to learn COLL and CLL; however, I assumed that hkpnkp only intended to learn COLL for some reason.
mark49152
Premium Member
You still don't get the point. Sensible combinations are COLL/EPLL or CLL/ELL (or better still, OLL/PLL). Not COLL/ELL as you advised above. Learning both COLL and CLL seems overkill.
OP should ignore this thread and read the OAQT where helpful answers were provided by people who know what they're talking about.
mark49152
Premium Member
Dude, read the thread. Nobody uses COLL and ELL together. Look at reconstructions of Mats' and Feliks' solves and you will see that they use OLL/PLL, mostly.
As you're a beginner, just focus on the basics first.
Last edited:
kottcuber
Member
They do.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sa967St
Not A Moderator
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 3,793
- Location
- Waterloo, ON, Canada
- WCA ID
- 2007STRO01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Feliks uses COLL (and even ZBLL) occasionally.
There's no definite answer whether COLL+ELL is better than OLL+PLL. It depends on the solve. COLL is great to use when you already have the "cross edges" of the last layer oriented after F2L, and especially you have an easy case. It's also better to use COLL for big cubes and OH because it helps to force a nicer PLL, even if it costs several moves when you're doing the last slot.
There's no definite answer whether COLL+ELL is better than OLL+PLL. It depends on the solve. COLL is great to use when you already have the "cross edges" of the last layer oriented after F2L, and especially you have an easy case. It's also better to use COLL for big cubes and OH because it helps to force a nicer PLL, even if it costs several moves when you're doing the last slot.
mark49152
Premium Member
Care to explain how? I assume you mean either EPLL is a subset of ELL, or you can use COLL algs as a sub-optimal CLL when you don't care about EO. Both of which are technically true, but pedantry doesn't make it any clearer an answer to the OP's question, in which it was unclear whether s/he was referring to COLL/EPLL or CLL/ELL.
Dene
Premium Member
mark49152
Premium Member
Correction: OP should no longer ignore this thread now the knowledgeable OAQT answers have been moved into itSo my post counts for nothing?
Similar threads
