3 Blind Method Debate Thread

[Silky]

A thread to debate 3 Blind Methods. To preface, this thread will be mainly to debate intermediate blind methods ( e.g. Orozco, Eka, TuRBo, Ayam, ZBLD, Boomerang, etc. ), since there is an overwhelming general consensus that BH/3-Blind is the best method. Likewise it should be done looking at these methods as independent, stand alone methods not as stepping stone methods ( how they relate to advanced methods ).

I'd also like to facilitate discussion on whether or not intermediate methods which solve two pieces at a time ( specifically Eka, Aaym, and ZBLD ) could be viable alternatives to BH/3-Style.

 

[Username: Username:]

I don't think intermediate methods is that worth it tbh, just jump from M2/OP to 3 style even if it's hard, it's like F2L, you'll be really slow at first with F2L but you will eventually get used to it, anyway, I'll say Eka is the best intermediate method, let it begin now lol.

 

[tx789]

Ocrozco could work for a stepping stone to 3 style but really jump to 3 style and understand comms. If you want to learn Ocrozco don't learn the comps like algs. They're comms and you should understand them.

Use UF/UFR as buffers.

 

[Silky]

I don't think intermediate methods is that worth it tbh, just jump from M2/OP to 3 style even if it's hard, it's like F2L, you'll be really slow at first with F2L but you will eventually get used to it, anyway, I'll say Eka is the best intermediate method, let it begin now lol.

That is a hot take. I think learning an intermediate method is pretty important since learning comms right of the bat is pretty difficult/intimidating. Orozco works as a solid introduction to comms and advances quickly to Eka and Eka to 3-style. However it's a pretty long process that way, I suppose, which could be better spent just learning comms (?).

 

[Username: Username:]

That is a hot take. I think learning an intermediate method is pretty important since learning comms right of the bat is pretty difficult/intimidating. Orozco works as a solid introduction to comms and advances quickly to Eka and Eka to 3-style. However it's a pretty long process that way, I suppose, which could be better spent just learning comms (?).

Lol yeah, maybe Orozco could be good as an introduction to comms.

 

[Silky]

I'll say Eka is the best intermediate method, let it begin now lol.

What's you rationale for Eka being the best ?

 

[Username: Username:]

What's you rationale for Eka being the best ?

Firstly, TuRBO and Ayam is less efficient than Eka since they setup like two pieces at a time and uses a long commutator between the conjugates, which makes the ergonomics ew, Eka is a *bit* like Orozco, but you solve 2 pieces at a time.
3OP is dead, like I think most people here can probably agree with that.
For ZBLD, hmm, seems good but I don't know enough about it to comment.

 

[Silky]

Firstly, TuRBO and Ayam is less efficient than Eka since they setup like two pieces at a time and uses a long commutator between the conjugates, which makes the ergonomics ew, Eka is like Orozco, but you solve 2 pieces at a time.

Yeah but Ayam better integrates freestyle which is really nice. Plus A-perm is really fast. For edges I'd say Eka is probably the best, not so sure for corners though. ZBLD also looks like it has quite a bit of potential.

 

[tx789]

That is a hot take. I think learning an intermediate method is pretty important since learning comms right of the bat is pretty difficult/intimidating. Orozco works as a solid introduction to comms and advances quickly to Eka and Eka to 3-style. However it's a pretty long process that way, I suppose, which could be better spent just learning comms (?).

It isn't a hot take most too blders recommend going straight into 3 style with intuitive comms.

It isn't that hard.


Ayam is awful. To be honest there really is only two types of blind methods. 2e2c swaps and 3 cycles.

Ayam, Tubro and Eka are kind of the some. A set up move to a comm. So you reduce the comms you learn compared to 3 style

 

[Tao Yu]

I'd also like to facilitate discussion on whether or not intermediate methods which solve two pieces at a time ( specifically Eka, Aaym, and ZBLD ) could be viable alternatives to BH/3-Style.

To first answer the part which is unarguable, the answer to this is no. People use 3-style in order to become as fast as they possibly can, without being afraid of having to do a lot of work. Eka, Ayam, and ZBLD can't be used for the same goal.

Eka and Ayam work by setups to a limited set of 3-cycles. 3-style in a sense, is the same except you're not limited to what kind of 3-cycles you set up to. Pretty much by the definition of 3-style, you set up to the fastest ones, and thus it must be superior to Eka and Ayam (for the goal specified above).

ZBLD, as described in the Speedsolving wiki is absolute trash and the only reason I can think of that people would think it's good is because they don't know the steps:

1. Preorient edges
2. Simultaneously permute edges and orient corners by setups to 2GLLs
3. Permute corners

The fact that you have to do preorientation should be enough of a deal breaker (why not just do 3-style which does orientation and permutation at the same time?), but the second step is just hilarious. You've got to do all of the following at the same time:

1. Remember your memo corner orientation memo
2. Remember your edge permutation memo (note that you will have to go back and forth between edge and corner memo)
3. Visualize what a couple of setup moves do to corner orientation
4. Remember the correct 2GLL (remember this is completely non-intuitive).

I often get the feeling that when people talk about ZBLD they are thinking of something else because this method is just not good. If you're thinking of a different ZBLD, let me know.

A thread to debate 3 Blind Methods. To preface, this thread will be mainly to debate intermediate blind methods ( e.g. Orozco, Eka, TuRBo, Ayam, ZBLD, Boomerang, etc. ), since there is an overwhelming general consensus that BH/3-Blind is the best method. Likewise it should be done looking at these methods as independent, stand alone methods not as stepping stone methods ( how they relate to advanced methods ).

I think you really can't discuss intermediate methods without considering the goals of a person who might use them. It doesn't make sense to ask how fast one of these methods would be if someone optimized the method and practiced it to the limits of its potential, because in practice, that someone would probably have switched to 3-style long before reaching that stage. And wanting to switch to 3-style eventually is not something that can be simply ignored imo, it's very common that people will want to leave that option open.

If you're definitely not interested in using a intermediate method as a stepping stone, then I guess the goal has to be to get to a 40-60 average without much effort? I think this goal could be achieved with any of the listed methods, (although I wouldn't recommend any of the ones using preorientation: 3OP, Boomerang, and of course ZBLD). I would say Orozco, Eka and M2/OP probably have the best tradeoffs between speed and ease of learning, and I guess the slightly different levels of trade-off might satisfy different people's work ethic.

That is a hot take. I think learning an intermediate method is pretty important since learning comms right of the bat is pretty difficult/intimidating. Orozco works as a solid introduction to comms and advances quickly to Eka and Eka to 3-style. However it's a pretty long process that way, I suppose, which could be better spent just learning comms (?).

Difficult/intimidating is not a valid criticism and I'm not sure it's a hot take anymore since I've seem a few fast BLDers agree that it's at least a decent option. I can see the use of Eka and Orozco being useful for some people, but what I would say is if I had to train someone to get sub 30 3BLD as quickly as possible, I would absolutely go straight into intuitive 3-style at an appropriate time. My reasoning is based on a point I made above: 3-style is like Eka except you aren't limited to the 3-cycles you can set up to. If someone can learn to set up algs to Eka's set of 3-cycles, why can't they learn to set up to any 3-cycle?

 

[Lilas ma]

Woohoo that's alot

 

[Username: Username:]

Woohoo that's alot

Dude, that isn't contributing anything to the discussion xd

 

[Silky]

Eka and Ayam work by setups to a limited set of 3-cycles. 3-style in a sense, is the same except you're not limited to what kind of 3-cycles you set up to. Pretty much by the definition of 3-style, you set up to the fastest ones, and thus it must be superior to Eka and Ayam (for the goal specified above).

Well I guess I'm primarily thinking about TPS. Since 3-Style is intuitive is there are more pauses due to the fact that it requires more thinking but with Eka and Ayam you can spam higher TPS due to the fact you're using pre-memorized algs and in general it just takes less thinking which would equate to less pauses. Is the differential in movecount so large that high TPS wouldn't make up for it ? And, correct me if I'm wrong, to my knowledge no one has memorized all of BH so you're not always using the most optimal algs.

 

[Username: Username:]

Well I guess I'm primarily thinking about TPS. Since 3-Style is intuitive is there are more pauses due to the fact that it requires more thinking but with Eka and Ayam you can spam higher TPS due to the fact you're using pre-memorized algs and in general it just takes less thinking which would equate to less pauses. Is the differential in movecount so large that high TPS wouldn't make up for it ? And, correct me if I'm wrong, to my knowledge no one has memorized all of BH so you're not always using the most optimal algs.

Uhm, almost all of the top BLDers memorized all of 3 style dude, also, I used to be in the less thinking > intuitive 3 style gang, but as I have said, learning 3 style is very beneficial in the long run and you get used to comms like you get used to F2L.

 

[Silky]

Uhm, almost all of the top BLDers memorized all of 3 style dude

Isn't, by definition, 3-Style intuitive, as in not having pre-memorized algs? Or I'm I just wrong here and people are memorizing all 818 algs for BH.

 

[Username: Username:]

Isn't, by definition, 3-Style intuitive, as in not having pre-memorized algs? Or I'm I just wrong here and people are memorizing all 818 algs for BH.

People come up with speed optimal algs intuitively and put them into spreadsheets. Other people learn the 818 gradually by those spreadsheets.

 

[Silky]

People come up with speed optimal algs intuitively and put them into spreadsheets. Other people learn the 818 gradually by those spreadsheets.

Well dang, I learned today.

 

[sqAree]

It doesn't really matter if you start out by learning 3-style intuitively, the end goal is obviously to have all 818 speed-optimal algs memorized (and by the way, the top BLDers memorized optimized algs for every other buffer too which equates to ~2700 comms/algs, as well as many many other algs).

Being intuitive helps of course, but that doesn't mean that you can't TPS the hell out of it, it just means that it's easier to learn initially.

 

[Tao Yu]

Isn't, by definition, 3-Style intuitive, as in not having pre-memorized algs? Or I'm I just wrong here and people are memorizing all 818 algs for BH.

The terminology is a bit confusing to be fair. The definition of 3-style is speed optimal 3-cycles, which means you use the fastest possible alg for each 3-cycle. There isn't technically a requirement to use commutators, nor understand your algs intuitively - speed is the only thing that matters. After all, the timer records nothing else. In practice, pretty much all 3-style algs can be written as commutators, and that turns out to be the simplest way to memorize them, so that's why 3-style is thought of as an intuitive method. Starting with commutators you come up with yourself is also a common way to start off with 3-style, but the goal is always to find and learn the fastest possible algs for each case, either by finding them on spreadsheets or discovering them by yourself.

There are some (not many) 3-style algs which aren't very intuitive: I think your average 3-style user probably would not be able to explain to you how R2 f2 R2 U' R2 f2 R2 U' works, or how to write it as a commutator.

All top cubers use 3-style at this stage, so you should watch some of their solves and see for yourself that they can use 3-style while turning both quickly and pauselessly.

BH is supposed to mean using move (HTM) optimal algs for every case. This is really easy to learn since it's only about 30 cases or so after symmetry, but it's a bit of a weird term to have since there isn't really any practical application to using move optimal algs. Nevertheless, this is how it is defined on the speedsolving wiki, and how I've always seen it used.

 

[tx789]

If you want to be good at BLD. Learn 3-style if you don't want to be good stick with m2/op.


What is the purpose of an intermediate method? A stepping stone to more advanced methods.

Also how do intermediate methods have higher tps? 3-style should feel like algs too when your fast. Like f2l pairs.

Thinking of BLD as pruely algs means you don't really understand what your doing. Comms are quick to learn if you understand them. Learning Orozco comms as algs means you don't understand your method and it'll take you longer. You'll feel like you have to learn twice as much since inverses will feel like a whole new alg.