# 2x2 LBL vs Ortega

#### joey

##### Member

ps: PBL recog = PLL recog, because you should know your FL.
Yes, I know I suck at ortega. But, PBL recognition is still more difficult than PLL, even if you know the first layer. You have to first check all the sides on top for a bar, then if you don't find one, if you had a bar on bottom, then you have to find the side on top that aligns with it. Plus sometimes you have to flip the cube upside down to perform your algs, unless you go through all the trouble of learning upside down algs.

With PLL, you pretty much know what you have. 4 out of 6 times, you will just get an adjacent edge swap. Another 1/6 times you get a skip. So there are only 1/6 chance that you will get a diagonal edge swap that can cause you to slip up. You can just always assume the adjacent edge swap, and it wont hurt you that often.
You realise that PLL cases are the same as top layer PBL cases?

#### Escher

##### Babby

ps: PBL recog = PLL recog, because you should know your FL.
Yes, I know I suck at ortega. But, PBL recognition is still more difficult than PLL, even if you know the first layer. You have to first check all the sides on top for a bar, then if you don't find one, if you had a bar on bottom, then you have to find the side on top that aligns with it. Plus sometimes you have to flip the cube upside down to perform your algs, unless you go through all the trouble of learning upside down algs.

With PLL, you pretty much know what you have. 4 out of 6 times, you will just get an adjacent edge swap. Another 1/6 times you get a skip. So there are only 1/6 chance that you will get a diagonal edge swap that can cause you to slip up. You can just always assume the adjacent edge swap, and it wont hurt you that often.
What the hell?

Firstly, you can recognise U layer PLL (as in, PBL) from any two sides very quickly. Position your cube so that you can see F, R and U only;

Perform Y perm: adjacent colours are opposites on R, and F.

Perform T perm (normal AUF): adjacent colours are opposites on R, but on F they aren't.

T perm (U): adjacent colours are opposites on F, but on R they aren't.

T perm (U'): bar on F. Easy.
T perm (U2): bar on R. Easy.

Secondly, PBL algs are some of the easiest algs to learn, excluding things like Sune. It genuinely shouldn't be any 'trouble' to learn them, especially considering you're thinking of learning CLL, which is about 4x as many cases even if you learn lots of different PBLs.

It's really not encouraging me to try and help you when you stubbornly disagree with me and others who know a great deal about 2x2.

#### Kirjava

##### Colourful
You can just always assume the adjacent edge swap, and it wont hurt you that often.

Yah, this is what all the pros do.

#### Zarxrax

##### Member
Stubbornly disagree with you? I merely stately that PBL recognition was difficult for me.

#### DavidWoner

##### The Punchmaster

ps: PBL recog = PLL recog, because you should know your FL.
Yes, I know I suck at ortega. But, PBL recognition is still more difficult than PLL, even if you know the first layer. You have to first check all the sides on top for a bar, then if you don't find one, if you had a bar on bottom, then you have to find the side on top that aligns with it. Plus sometimes you have to flip the cube upside down to perform your algs, unless you go through all the trouble of learning upside down algs.

With PLL, you pretty much know what you have. 4 out of 6 times, you will just get an adjacent edge swap. Another 1/6 times you get a skip. So there are only 1/6 chance that you will get a diagonal edge swap that can cause you to slip up. You can just always assume the adjacent edge swap, and it wont hurt you that often.
shutupshutupshutupshutupshutup

You could not have less of a clue what you are talking about.

#### Zarxrax

##### Member
Ok fine, whatever. I'm done.

#### lilkdub503

##### Member
Hey guys, I'm tired of using Y-perm for diagonal switch in LBL (I am not putting that much effort into a teensy weensy puzzle), so what are some better algorithms? I use T-perm for adjacent as well.

#### Escher

##### Babby
Stubbornly disagree with you? I merely stately that PBL recognition was difficult for me.
I'm talking about 2x2 in general, in this thread and your last regarding you basically seem set on disagreeing with us about how viable Ortega is as a method. PLL recognition IS PBL recognition. There is no bottom layer recognition apart from that which you should see in preinspection.

I know you are stating personal experiences with the method and not disagreeing with the objective aspects, but what I'm basically trying to tell you is that you're being dumb when you apply Ortega.

#### Kirjava

##### Colourful
Plus sometimes you have to flip the cube upside down to perform your algs, unless you go through all the trouble of learning upside down algs.

Yah, no one does that.

#### riffz

##### Member

ps: PBL recog = PLL recog, because you should know your FL.
Yes, I know I suck at ortega. But, PBL recognition is still more difficult than PLL, even if you know the first layer. You have to first check all the sides on top for a bar, then if you don't find one, if you had a bar on bottom, then you have to find the side on top that aligns with it. Plus sometimes you have to flip the cube upside down to perform your algs, unless you go through all the trouble of learning upside down algs.

With PLL, you pretty much know what you have. 4 out of 6 times, you will just get an adjacent edge swap. Another 1/6 times you get a skip. So there are only 1/6 chance that you will get a diagonal edge swap that can cause you to slip up. You can just always assume the adjacent edge swap, and it wont hurt you that often.
Hahahahahahaha!

EDIT: What I wrote before was a bit too harsh. But that was an extremely uninformed post.

Last edited:

#### Anthony

##### Professional Speedcuber
These were my first 12 solves with Ortega in months.
And trust me, I suck at PBL, too.
Only 2.77 was lucky.
3.43, (7.06), 3.59, 3.97, 3.77, 3.55, 4.58, (2.77), 2.84, 3.43, 3.83, 3.36 = 3.64

So yeah, Ortega doesn't totally suck.

Anthony: do LBL

#### Anthony

##### Professional Speedcuber
Anthony: do LBL
2.84, 3.12, 2.32, 2.84, 2.98, 3.94, 2.34, 2.94, 3.54, 3.24, 2.49, 4.12 = 3.03

zomg, 12 PLL skips in a row!

#### riffz

##### Member
Anthony: do LBL
2.84, 3.12, 2.32, 2.84, 2.98, 3.94, 2.34, 2.94, 3.54, 3.24, 2.49, 4.12 = 3.03

zomg, 12 PLL skips in a row!
Wow, that's a fricking awesome LBL average.

EDIT: I'm assuming you're joking and that was just CLL.

#### Anthony

##### Professional Speedcuber
It's still technically LBL.

#### Weston

These were my first 12 solves with Ortega in months.
And trust me, I suck at PBL, too.
Only 2.77 was lucky.
3.43, (7.06), 3.59, 3.97, 3.77, 3.55, 4.58, (2.77), 2.84, 3.43, 3.83, 3.36 = 3.64

So yeah, Ortega doesn't totally suck.
Were you forcing R2 F2 R2?

#### molarmanful

##### Member
Okay... I came REALLY late. (Like 5 years late ).
I was searching for tips on learning CLL, and I somehow stumbled upon this. I read the thread and I found that this relates A LOT to me.

I just began practicing 2x2 WAY more, and I've been practicing a bit. So I was using Ortega for about half a year, and my average was around 6-7 seconds. Then I decided that I really wanted to learn CLL, so I switch over to 'beginner' LBL. Somehow, I get a 5 second average -- on my first try (worst time being 6 seconds). Now I'm easily sub-5 with the help of some CLL algs. In my opinion, doing PLL is way faster than doing PBL -- I mean, who doesn't want a chance of a skip? In fact, I can sub-1.5 my J-Perm effortlessly, and my Y-Perm is a bit above 1.5 (all including recognition). My PBL takes about the same time to execute, but some more time to recognize for some reason.

You might say that I have to practice Ortega more, but I really don't want to -- especially because my LBL average is already better with 2 days of practice! Besides, I'm going into CLL anyway, and I might as well build my FL skills (no pun intended ). However, I still use Ortega sometimes if I really can't see a good first layer during inspection and if a side is really easy to do. But otherwise, I'm sticking with LBL. I can see how Ortega can be fast -- but only for others.

#### PurpleBanana

##### Member
OMG if you were to build one layer and then use ortegaZB you could get a PLL skip everytime!!!!
It's called CLL.