[Unofficial] 15.827 Ao12 using ZZ-CT: The LL-Skip Method.

[wir3sandfir3s]

So, I've been thinking, and this is what I've been thinking about. First of all, this method is cool and I'm gonna learn everything. So here we go:
TSLE is basically just LS but only with an edge. And it's also basically WV, but with an extra corner to pay attention to. Literally, by doing this, you are saving 3-6 moves to pair the edge with a corner at the cost of TONS more Algs (27 compared to 90 something, and 21 for LL compared to over 100 I think?), meaning that in this perspective, WV is way better... And it isn't even that great.
But prove me wrong

 

[4Chan]

I disagree, this is significantly better than WV.

it's also basically WV, but with an extra corner to pay attention to. Literally, by doing this, you are saving 3-6 moves to pair the edge with a corner

There's no "pairing" any sort going on in the method. It's a simple look at the orientation of the top layer.

It's also not just 3-6 moves being saved.

Not only does WV have to form the pair, it also has to insert the pair without damaging the aforementioned pair.

TSLE ignores that requirement, which permits the use of a shorter alg for the given orientation.

WV requires 2 looks.
TSLE requires 1 look.

Additionally, setting up the pair for WV leads to redundant moves, esp when R U R' is the slot case.

It's completely apples to oranges.

 

[AlphaSheep]

So, I've been thinking, and this is what I've been thinking about. First of all, this method is cool and I'm gonna learn everything. So here we go:
TSLE is basically just LS but only with an edge. And it's also basically WV, but with an extra corner to pay attention to. Literally, by doing this, you are saving 3-6 moves to pair the edge with a corner at the cost of TONS more Algs (27 compared to 90 something, and 21 for LL compared to over 100 I think?), meaning that in this perspective, WV is way better... And it isn't even that great.
But prove me wrong

I don't think comparing ZZ-CT to WV is appropriate. I think it should be compared to ZZ-c.

WV is a 3 look LSLL method which can be seen as a beginner's ZZ-c. ZZ-c has a 2 look LSLL but has major imbalance between the two steps. It involves a really difficult to recognise 300+ alg step followed by easy 21 alg PLL. By just ignoring the colours of U and D stickers, ZZ-CT removes this imbalance by evening out the recognition and alg count between the two steps without introducing any new difficulties. I feel this actually makes it not just superior to WV but even superior to ZZ-c.

 

[shadowslice e]

I think the two things it is actually most comparable to are M-CELL and MGLS though I admit I haven't looked into ZZ-CT that much though it does look like a very good ZZ variant.

 

[PhillipEspinoza]

I just want to say how much I absolutely love this method. I'm actually focusing more on ZZ practice because of it. I'm planning to use it exclusively for OH but who knows, I might get so good with ZZ that I'll start sub 10 avging and switch to ZZ for 2H.

I got my first LL skip with ZZCT today, I will post the solve. I suck at block building so the move count wasn't too low (41?) but the LL skip was awesome, it's like, magic. I swear, the average move count for this has got to be between 40-45.

For a 4LLL what I am doing is focusing on learning TLSE first, because that's where the lure of the LL skip lies, not to mention the triviality, then for TLL I'm just doing R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 then PLL for now.

Love love LOVE this!

3x3 ZZCT
L F' B2 L R' D2 F' D' U2 L2 F' B' R2 B2 U2 R F2 R' L U2 B D R B R'

Eo line:z2 x' L' R U' x F' U F z r x D' L (9/42)
U2 R U2 R2 U' R U R' U' (9/42)
R2 U' R' U R' D R2 D (8/42)
U' R2 U R U' R' U (7/42)
TLSE: z' U R U R' U R U R' (8/42)
LL: U' (1/42)

 

[OLLiver]

lol don't tell me ZBLL is gonna become *mainstream/standard/boring.

Seriously I LOVE THE probabilities of this method. I can see some really sick singles with this method.

 

[sub20oneday]

with this method cant you just rotate to solve any pair and does anyone except the creator use this method yet

 

[Cale S]

with this method cant you just rotate to solve any pair

that's one of the characteristics of ZZ in general

 

[sub20oneday]

that's one of the characteristics of ZZ in general

no id dont think you understand, zz is surposed to be rotaionless and if you for exmaple whatch colorfull pockets vid on it he sasys that a disadvantage is you have to leave a slot open or learn more algs inverses and mirrors what ima skingis cant you just roate rather than learn the entire set of algs again

 

[Hssandwich]

With ZZCT, you can't rotate to solve pairs due to the fact that you need edge orientation solved for TLSE.

 

[4Chan]

Ahh, yes, that's an option indeed. I've explored rotations a little bit.

So, if you rotate, you can use various ZBLS algs, or specialized RUF TSLEs which will work in those scenarios.

It's not worth it to me, because you don't really save as many moves, as compared to just saving one slot you're accustomed to, and then the alternate cases aren't as nice.

Alternately, if the edge is already placed, then you can rotate freely to solve multiple cases with one alg due to the rotational symmetry.

I believe that with practice, the pieces in your slot almost become invisible.

Like, when I practice, my eyes are starting to skip over my TSLE edge, and I only pay attention to the other blocks.

That being said, ZZ-CT is also just an option, and when those really nice blocks do occur, you can just slot it and go into ZBLL/COLL/OLL etc etc.

Hope that helps!

 

[ZZer]

Hi ZZer's.
Could you tell me what is avg move count for TTLL and TSLE ?