Search results

You could rotate and execute them as U moves, I simply didn't show that in the example solve. In terms of ergonomics this method isn't actually too bad.

Nope example solve works. Also the block isn't the problem, the problem is CMLL recog and L6E recog, although I've been able to improve that quite a bit. For now I've been orienting all edges as if the second block matched and then I simply imagine that that edge is a different. Is sorta hard to...

A super efficient method with a ton of freedom but very difficult recognition: 1. Solve two 2x2x1 blocks on B like Roux blocks without the front pairs, but they don't have to match in colour in any way 2. Solve the front corners and then the U layer corners using CMLL 3. Solve 2x3x1 blocks like...

That's a horrible idea. Inserting it oriented takes the same number of moves as inserting it unoriented. You're adding an extra look

You'd have a better grip if you did r2 R'

R2 M2 can be executed as r2.....

As I colourblind person I can confirm that red is often confused with green when one has a red-green deficiency.

First of all I got a CP skip, and the method I was describing wouldn't have a much higher movecount without a skip. Also, why are you considering STM rather than ATM? In terms of speedsolve execution 't that what matters? Also I am certain it would be near if not under 40 moves quite often. You...

18.3x or something

Yes but normally an alg of similar length would solve CP and ULUR so the movecount would be similar. Plus, my SB was really inefficient.

Okay here is an example solve of the latest variant of this method: Scramble: R L2 B' L' B R2 D2 R' U' R2 B' L2 D' L2 U' R2 U D F2 z2 B L2 D' F R U2 L' // EOLine (7/7) R' U2 // 1x1x2 + 1x1x3 (2/9) R D2 // Setup for OL5C (2/11) R2 D R // OL5C (3/14) (U' D) R' // Belt + CO (2/16) (U' D) M2 D' //...

That isn't as efficient. Also, your idea doesn't work, you forgot to include separating and permuting the corners.

Yes, EO is already done. One would simply use PLL algs to get an easy L4E case, so the whole step could be one-looked. So these are the steps: 1. Belt + CO 2. Roux blocks 3a. PLL alg to solve UL and UR and influence other edges 3b. M' U2 M, M U2 M' or M2 U2 M2 to solve the cube

Good idea, that sounds way better.

Okay I have a new idea for a better solution after Belt + CO: 1. Solve Roux blocks whilst preserving CO, which is about 10 or 12 moves on average 2. CPETL, so permute the corners and get the D-layer edges to D, which is about 11 moves average I think 3. Solve the cube with a 7-9 move alg So...

I know but I don't use Roux specifically because of the block. I know others can easily solve a Roux block in inspection but I'd say as a CFOP user my blockbuilding skills aren't exactly on point. anyway, I have a new idea involving this method, l'll post about it after dinner.

Huh, so it seems that this could be like ZZ as oppose to CFOP. Not necessarily extremely efficient, but ergonomic for the most part, and seemingly good general execution. I'll have to check it out. The only thing I don't like is that nasty first step, it's sorta weird.

I posted the algs I have in the SSC thread

Here are my best times: Average: 18.14 1. 23.83 L D2 R D F' L F' R2 U D2 R F2 U2 R2 U2 D2 R' D2 L B2 2. 15.35 U D2 R D2 L2 U2 F2 L' U2 R2 F2 U' F' L R2 B2 L2 R B D2 (EO, CP skip) 3. 19.91 D2 R2 U' L2 F2 D2 F2 R2 D' U' R2 B' D' F L U' B' L' B2 R' U2 4. 18.65 F R2 U' D' L' B2 R U F2 U L2...

The Petrus variant is literally just Petrus but you don't insert the RD edge, which isn't move-efficient or good for lookahead. Sure it can give you 20 second times, but what could regular Petrus get you? Certainly better. The Petrus variant is literally just a worse Petrus (worse lookahead...