[Help Thread] 4x4 Discussion

[TheChaiCuber]

Yeah, OLL parity happens when the wings have odd permutation parity, which happens when the total number of inner layer quarter turns to get to that state from a solved cube is odd.

If you trace out the wing cycles like you would in 4BLD during inspection, you can tell if the scramble did an even or odd number of inner layer quarter turns, and you can use that to ensure that when you finish solving centers the number is even, thus avoiding OLL parity - after centers are solved you can stop caring because then there's no reason to use an alg which has an odd number of inner layer quarter turns unless you're solving OLL parity.

It's been known for years, but it's really difficult and very few people are inclined (or able) to do it.

dang, thats really cool! ill pass tho xD

 

[Cale S]

Since we're talking about parity avoidance, I used it to get my pb's for single through avg25

I didn't always get under 15 seconds but I was just trying to consistently do it correctly, and there was one solve where I was able to check parity and plan first 2 centers in 15 seconds

 

[Dom]

Since we're talking about parity avoidance, I used it to get my pb's for single through avg25

I didn't always get under 15 seconds but I was just trying to consistently do it correctly, and there was one solve where I was able to check parity and plan first 2 centers in 15 seconds

You mean, during the 15-second inspection, you were able to determine if there would be parity and you also planned the first two centers? Where can I find a tutorial on this method? Maybe @bobthegiraffemonkey knows...

 

[guysensei1]

You mean, during the 15-second inspection, you were able to determine if there would be parity and you also planned the first two centers? Where can I find a tutorial on this method? Maybe @bobthegiraffemonkey knows...

Just do a 4bld memo of wings and if there's even letters (no parity), solve the centers with an even number of double layer moves, if there's odd letters (parity), solve centers with an odd number of double layer moves.

 

[obelisk477]

my guess would be that its avoidance if PLL parity, because there are 2 main OLL parities (1 that switches opposite edges and 1 that doesn't). I guess if you can tell from a parity'd OLL whether or not you'll have a PLL parity you can use one of the OLL parities to also prevent PLL parity. Sounds like some serious ZBLL recognition is required though lol

That's not two types of OLL parity, that's just combining PLL and OLL parity into one algorithm

 

[bcube]

To pipkiksass, Dom, TheChaiCuber (and other curious cubers).

Gentlemen, you might find interesting an article about the parity problem.

 

[supercavitation]

Yeah, OLL parity happens when the wings have odd permutation parity, which happens when the total number of inner layer quarter turns to get to that state from a solved cube is odd.

If you trace out the wing cycles like you would in 4BLD during inspection, you can tell if the scramble did an even or odd number of inner layer quarter turns, and you can use that to ensure that when you finish solving centers the number is even, thus avoiding OLL parity - after centers are solved you can stop caring because then there's no reason to use an alg which has an odd number of inner layer quarter turns unless you're solving OLL parity.

It's been known for years, but it's really difficult and very few people are inclined (or able) to do it.

I'm sorely tempted to try learning this.

 

[dskids]

Hey, hopefully this is the right place to ask. I have a question about Yau edge pairing.

I know 3-2-3 is a pretty common approach (it's what I currently use). I came across a Youtuber that does what he calls 6-2 (more like 3-3-2). He positions edges initially so that 3 pairs are formed on the slice forward, and then replaces them so another 3 are formed on the slice back, with the final two edges left to be formed with a slice-flip-slice back approach.

I tried a few solves with that approach and it "feels" like it could be more efficient. I guess what I was wondering is if anyone else pairs edges with that approach, and whether anyone has thoughts on what the best approach is, and why? Or is it just simply down to personal preference?

 

[mitja]

Hey, hopefully this is the right place to ask. I have a question about Yau edge pairing.

I know 3-2-3 is a pretty common approach (it's what I currently use). I came across a Youtuber that does what he calls 6-2 (more like 3-3-2). He positions edges initially so that 3 pairs are formed on the slice forward, and then replaces them so another 3 are formed on the slice back, with the final two edges left to be formed with a slice-flip-slice back approach.

I tried a few solves with that approach and it "feels" like it could be more efficient. I guess what I was wondering is if anyone else pairs edges with that approach, and whether anyone has thoughts on what the best approach is, and why? Or is it just simply down to personal preference?

I prefer 6-2,as it can be faster. Many say that in difficult cases 3-2-3 is better, but I found my way to deal with those cases with 6-2 and for me it is faster. You see, when you need to prepare first 6 pairs it is big probability that one of the edges will be in the diagonaly opposite slot. So on the end you end up with 5 solved edges and a cycle of three that is used with 3-2-3( last 3 pairs). I believe both systems are more or less the same if we talk time efficiency. 6-2 is fast with normal cases( when the edges you search are accessible mostly on the top layer), and many say it is more pleasant and faster to deal with hard cases by 3-2-3 system.

 

[shadowslice e]

Hey, hopefully this is the right place to ask. I have a question about Yau edge pairing.

I know 3-2-3 is a pretty common approach (it's what I currently use). I came across a Youtuber that does what he calls 6-2 (more like 3-3-2). He positions edges initially so that 3 pairs are formed on the slice forward, and then replaces them so another 3 are formed on the slice back, with the final two edges left to be formed with a slice-flip-slice back approach.

I tried a few solves with that approach and it "feels" like it could be more efficient. I guess what I was wondering is if anyone else pairs edges with that approach, and whether anyone has thoughts on what the best approach is, and why? Or is it just simply down to personal preference?

3-2-3 is for faster averages, 6-2 is for faster singles. Depends what you want to be better at.

 

[slowcuber4x4]

Hi Everyone,
I just got my hands on a 4x4x4 cube for the first time and tried to solve it layer by layer. I got stuck on the last two pieces. Does anyone know an algorithm to swap FUr and BUl pieces?

 

[xyzzy]

The K4 page has algs listed for a lot of last-layer-edges cases, and the wiki has a super long list of algs for parity cases.

 

[dskids]

3-2-3 is for faster averages, 6-2 is for faster singles. Depends what you want to be better at.

Hadn't considered this but it does make sense. I find that if I don't get a good 6-2 case, I end up taking longer to sort out the mess. I figured this would improve with practice and recognition but I 3-2-3 does seem to be the "safer" approach.

 

[Dom]

The OLL parity algorithm that I see most people do is:
Rw U2 x Rw U2 Rw U2’ Rw’ U2 Lw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw'

The one I use is two moves shorter and I think it's faster, too.
Below is the algorithm with blue indicating right hand and pink to indicate left hand.
Rw² B² U² Lw U² Rw' U² Rw U² F² Rw F² Lw' B² Rw²
Also a quick video showing how I execute it.

Pretty sloppy on-the-fly video, but usually this alg is lightning fast.
Do y'all like this method better than that first algorithm? Any comments or suggestions?

 

[shadowslice e]

The OLL parity algorithm that I see most people do is:
Rw U2 x Rw U2 Rw U2’ Rw’ U2 Lw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw'

The one I use is two moves shorter and I think it's faster, too.
Below is the algorithm with blue indicating right hand and pink to indicate left hand.
Rw² B² U² Lw U² Rw' U² Rw U² F² Rw F² Lw' B² Rw²
Also a quick video showing how I execute it.

Pretty sloppy on-the-fly video, but usually this alg is lightning fast.
Do y'all like this method better than that first algorithm? Any comments or suggestions?

I use that alg and i like it but i am not fast at 4x4x4 so i don't know how much my opinion is worth.

 

[One Wheel]

The OLL parity algorithm that I see most people do is:
Rw U2 x Rw U2 Rw U2’ Rw’ U2 Lw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw U2 Rw’ U2’ Rw'

The one I use is two moves shorter and I think it's faster, too.
Below is the algorithm with blue indicating right hand and pink to indicate left hand.
Rw² B² U² Lw U² Rw' U² Rw U² F² Rw F² Lw' B² Rw²
Also a quick video showing how I execute it.

Pretty sloppy on-the-fly video, but usually this alg is lightning fast.
Do y'all like this method better than that first algorithm? Any comments or suggestions?

My left hand U2 is slow, so I execute a little differently, but i use the first one mirrored to use Lw moves for 4x4 and 6x6 OLL parity, and inner slice moves for inner wing parity on 6x6. I use the second one for outer wing swap on 5x5 and 6x6, and would use it on 7x7 if I had one, but instead of using F2 moves I do an x rotation and do U2 moves and finish up with D2 Rw2.

 

[CornerCutter]

Hi,

I use the Yau Method and I average about 2:30-3:00.

Do I get faster by just practicing a lot or is there another thing I could learn?

Thx.

 

[One Wheel]

Hi,

I use the Yau Method and I average about 2:30-3:00.

Do I get faster by just practicing a lot or is there another thing I could learn?

Thx.

Somebody's going to suggest Hoya, but I use Yao and averaged around what you are roughly 9 months ago. I really haven't learned anything new, just practice, and figure I average about 1:55 now.

 

[sqAree]

Hi,

I use the Yau Method and I average about 2:30-3:00.

Do I get faster by just practicing a lot or is there another thing I could learn?

Thx.

Build your cross edges on the left (at least the first three). For edge pairing experiment with different inserts depending on edge orientation (sledge, hedge, R U' R', etc.). There are two methods to build the centers, one being the "normal" way where you build one center after the other, the other being "half centers", you'll probably find a tutorial on youtube.

 

[pipkiksass]

Hi,

I use the Yau Method and I average about 2:30-3:00.

Do I get faster by just practicing a lot or is there another thing I could learn?

Thx.

I went from never having solved a 4x4 a month ago to averaging sub 1:30 with Yau by using 3-2-3 edge pairing and Jacob Hutnik's half centres video on YouTube.

I'd recommend trying to completely plan your first centre in inspection, and have an idea about your second. When going from centres to cross edges, try to look ahead where possible, or track an edge or two. For me, this makes the difference between a 1:40 and a 1:15 solve sometimes.

Try not to get frustrated with edge pairing. Sometimes you get horrendous cases, but normally 3-2-3 goes well.

Practice your parity algs and, if necessary, get a better 4x4. You'll know if the cube is holding you back by comparing your 3x3 stage times to the times you get with your main 3x3. If they're miles off, maybe a better cube would help a little too.

But mainly just practice.

Enjoy!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk