Status
Not open for further replies.
I solve with Fridrich for over 5 years now, averaging 20sec, would it be a good move for me to learn and move to Roux? Would I get any faster or there's no point after 5 years of having my mind set on Fridrich?

I switched to Roux when I averaged about 25 sec. Now after a couple months, I'm sub-20. It's up to you, though you might find blocks hard and LSE of course, to grasp. CMLL should be easy and you'll prob be used to memorizing algs.
 
When solving the void cube using Roux, is it worth it to count the edge cycles after solving both blocks and CMLL and fix parity in the edges with a single M layer quarter turn? Or should I wait until solving the M layer at the end and use parity algs designed for the M slice edges?

I think it's faster to just solve normally, and then do an M' and re solve for parity.
 
How does one recommend going about learning COLL?

There are 7 subsets; Pi, H, T, L, U, Sune, Antisune (each with 6 different permutation cases) and OLL skip

Due to mirrors and corner orientation skips, there are a total of 42 algs to learn.

Find websites and videos that you can use to get algs and learn how to recognise the cases. I recommend boca and just experimenting with alternative OLLs.

H set has only 4 algs and is easy to recognise. Some disregard the sune and antisune subsets as the algs aren't the best.
 
There are 7 subsets; Pi, H, T, L, U, Sune, Antisune (each with 6 different permutation cases) and OLL skip

Due to mirrors and corner orientation skips, there are a total of 42 algs to learn.

Find websites and videos that you can use to get algs and learn how to recognise the cases. I recommend boca and just experimenting with alternative OLLs.

H set has only 4 algs and is easy to recognise. Some disregard the sune and antisune subsets as the algs aren't the best.

Sorry for the nooby question, but what is the point of COLL? Does it fix the PLL case somehow?
 
When all LL edges are oriented, COLL is used to both orient and solve corners(whilst preserving the LL edges' orientation, so you only get an EPLL or a better chance at a PLL skip.

Better chance of PLL skip (I think it is 1 in 12? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) And the EPLLs are usually among the fastest PLLs there are (H, Ua, Ub, Z).

Alright, thank you very much. Is this method generally worth it? I'd imagine that the COLL-Case recognition is hard and could actually slow the solve down instead of speeding it up. Am I wrong with this assumption? Is learning COLL-recognition comparable to learning e.g. PLL recognition?
 
Alright, thank you very much. Is this method generally worth it? I'd imagine that the COLL-Case recognition is hard and could actually slow the solve down instead of speeding it up. Am I wrong with this assumption? Is learning COLL-recognition comparable to learning e.g. PLL recognition?

It's different. It can be just as fast.
 
Alright, thank you very much. Is this method generally worth it? I'd imagine that the COLL-Case recognition is hard and could actually slow the solve down instead of speeding it up. Am I wrong with this assumption? Is learning COLL-recognition comparable to learning e.g. PLL recognition?

Most people use COLL/EPLL for some of the best cases and OLL/PLL for the rest, rather than specifically choosing between one method or the other. "Nobody" uses Sune/Antisune COLLs, for example.
 
Alright, thank you very much. Is this method generally worth it? I'd imagine that the COLL-Case recognition is hard and could actually slow the solve down instead of speeding it up. Am I wrong with this assumption? Is learning COLL-recognition comparable to learning e.g. PLL recognition?

The recognition is the same as CLL on 2x2...which people are really good at.

I only came into implementing COLL in 3x3 after I knew CLL on 2x2 and I think CLL is easier to learn first. Some OCLLs are a little slow, so learning COLL is quite useful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top