elrog
Veteran
I have come up with 2 variants (one of the orient first method, and one of the columns first method) of potential speedsolving methods, and I am not sure which I should use.
The first, is a mix between HTA and Orient First. Its steps go as follows: orient edges (4.6 moves), get all middle layer edges in the middle layer (4 moves), orientate the corners (60 algs, 8.5 moves), solve F2l with R2 L2 B2 F2 U and D moves (about 15-20 moves avg), finish with Pll (21 algs, 11.8 moves)
The first and possibly second step can be planned out during inspection. Not sure on 3rd step recognition time and need to learn algs. 4th step recognition time is better as it goes on/ many times you have it partially solved already. Pll has good recognition time and, I know algs.
The second method is a columns first method where you orientate edges first. The steps are as Follows: orientate edges (4.6 moves), Solve 4 F2l pairs and line them up (5-6 moves avg per pair), solve top corners (10 moves), Match centers up and sollve 3 edges on top or bottom face (about 4-5 moves avg), L5E (about 6.8 moves).
First step planned during inspection. 2nd step has iffy recognition time and first pairs take very few moves while last ones can take several. 3rd step has 42 algs with decent recognition time and I don't know algs, 4th step can be done in 4 moves most of the time but may take up to about 7 and has good recognition time, 5th step has 16 algs with good recognition time and I don't know algs.
I have tried and liked both of these methods. I used commutators to solve the parts I didn't know algs for. I would like to know which one sounds more practical considering inspection, move count, recognition time, easyily preformed moves, and alg #. The first option has more double moves, slightly less move count, slightly better recognition time, and 60 algs to learn while the 2nd option has 58.
The first, is a mix between HTA and Orient First. Its steps go as follows: orient edges (4.6 moves), get all middle layer edges in the middle layer (4 moves), orientate the corners (60 algs, 8.5 moves), solve F2l with R2 L2 B2 F2 U and D moves (about 15-20 moves avg), finish with Pll (21 algs, 11.8 moves)
The first and possibly second step can be planned out during inspection. Not sure on 3rd step recognition time and need to learn algs. 4th step recognition time is better as it goes on/ many times you have it partially solved already. Pll has good recognition time and, I know algs.
The second method is a columns first method where you orientate edges first. The steps are as Follows: orientate edges (4.6 moves), Solve 4 F2l pairs and line them up (5-6 moves avg per pair), solve top corners (10 moves), Match centers up and sollve 3 edges on top or bottom face (about 4-5 moves avg), L5E (about 6.8 moves).
First step planned during inspection. 2nd step has iffy recognition time and first pairs take very few moves while last ones can take several. 3rd step has 42 algs with decent recognition time and I don't know algs, 4th step can be done in 4 moves most of the time but may take up to about 7 and has good recognition time, 5th step has 16 algs with good recognition time and I don't know algs.
I have tried and liked both of these methods. I used commutators to solve the parts I didn't know algs for. I would like to know which one sounds more practical considering inspection, move count, recognition time, easyily preformed moves, and alg #. The first option has more double moves, slightly less move count, slightly better recognition time, and 60 algs to learn while the 2nd option has 58.
