• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

At last, ZZ-D method has been COMPLETED!

i cant see how this is a solution...
the point was to do it just after the first block, and mehtods for first making the left one, then making half the right one then permute already exists... CPLS...
and the closest thing that exists so far is the kind of ZZD in stachu's site... which is 6-7 moves...
as far as i can tell this is just a weird kind of CPLS?
 
well, thank you for your replies. I got disappointed when I saw every one telling me its too bad to use.

and Again, I should say that I have completed main ZZ-D's idea. which you should build 1 2x2x1 block on each side and then permute corners while creating left side's 3x2x1 block. the algorithms I have inserted are the most optimal one, all of them are 5-8 moves.
but I have changed that idea to permute all the corners during insertion of last f2l pair. It will help you to reduce cases to 6 cases, then its better to recognize, and easier to learn. but there is also 6 parity cases to help you go throw your cube If you have done some thing wrong. well, complete ZZ-Orbit has only 12 algorithms which 6 of them are only mirrored of other 6 ones.

Well, after every thing, I know that I have made some thing interesting as my post's topic, and it was all because that Zborowski has appreciated my method. Cause I am in contact with him using EMail.

And isn't solving a method that no one has done it before, a worthy thing?? No one had a documentation on how to do ZZ-D on fly. but Today after learning full cases of ZZ-D (obviously my own algorithms) I made an average of 20 with my method and I got 21 seconds. its notable that my normal average of 20 was 32 seconds 2 weeks before using a method between Fredrich and CLL+ELL. ( here i say this for those who was talking to me about COLL, My main cube was 2x2x2 for 2 years and I have mastered all of those cases both in 2x2x2 and 3x3x3. well Be sure I have thought about that too. )

I dont say my method is GOOD and I dont say my method worth learning. I only say that my method is completed form of ZZ-D which was an unsolved method. those who said "and the closest thing that exists so far is the kind of ZZD in stachu's site... which is 6-7 moves..." how this method is solved and Zborowski himself doesn't know that his method is solved?? then dont fake. thank some thing like ZZ?? I didn't say there were nothing. just try this algorith: <L U' R' U L' U' R> which is the first algorithm that I have learned in world of Rubik's cube and permute your corners with this. then my first solves was with all edges flipped correctly and all corners permuted correctly, I can give you sample solves, but does it means that my method was ZZ-D??? there is lots of algorithms to permute your corners during each step you want, but This is all I know about ZZ-D "It was done before, but no one could solve it virtually on fly" then it was not fast. but actually the method of recognition that I have released is a method that I use in 2x2x2. and I have added looking ahead tips. then you can do it on a fly same as me. cause now I can do it my self.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this text was written by Zborowski and I have just copied it from my mail box:
When it comes to zz-d there is a small problem - there is a missing link which nobody has solved yet :(
The idea of zz-d is as follows:
1. EOLine
2. 1x2x2 on the left
3. finish 1x2x3 on the left and at the same time remaining six corners permutation (only two additional moves is needed on average - nobody knows how to do that in flight; this is the missing link...); after this step you have two-move-generation situation
4. 1x2x2 on the right
5. finish 1x2x3 on the right (at this point you have got f2l with oriented edges (cross) and permuted corners
6. finish last layer (permute edges and orient corners - these situations are really nice to remember and make)

short characteristic:
1. small number of moves on average - 47 HTM
2. small number of algorithms - 88 for the last step; steps 1-5 intuitively
3. ergonomics is perfect - since step 2 we use RUL moves, since step 4 we use RU moves

When it comes to permute all corners during insertion of last f2l pair, I call this variant zz-e, but I regard this as introduction to zz-d.
I have never prepared algorithms for zz-e :(
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well, every thing is visible for me, I dont know this about you. I can't understand how ZZ-D has been done before me while Zborowski (father of this method) doesn't know about this. (then please dont be faker). and move counts, I have done my example in 56 moves (52 with cancellation) which is only 9 moves more than what Zborowski expect for AVERAGE move counts. when that comes to average it will goes up and comes down. then doing only 5 moves more than what Zborowski expect is great while you are tired of not sleeping for 2 days.

and you are true, Im new to this forum. But I am addicted to forums. I take place in lots of forums on internet. and there is always one rule: "be polite, and think before talking" isn't that rule available in this forum?? I have came here and I have name my post "At last ZZ-D method has been completed". is it fake?? i think nope. it was not complete and I have completed it myself. then this title was 100% real. wasn't?? tell me and I will remove my post and I will remove my document and I will stop speedcubing. just prove your Ideas.

And for those who made me disappointed because of new ideas: "Wait until next year, I have started my hard practices to perform a sub-10 record with my method. after that I think there will be a shame on all of you."
 
Another rule on forums is that you should try to use proper punctuation, grammer and some structure in your posts :)
Your chaotic style of writing doesn't help to get your point across.

I'll have a look later, here at work my PC goes berserk over that upload site...
Don't spend to much time on haters, cubing is supposed to be fun; do what you like.

Just post a series of example solves (a single one is never a good representation) perhaps even comparing some LL methods.
Video would be cool too.

Happy cubing!
 
thank you so much ;) and I am sorry for my English mistakes, because im Persian and I have learned English from books and videos ;) then there are some problems in my English and they are not my willing, they are what I have learned from English. but again sorry for my English. we are human we human can have mistakes.

another solve example: (here its for those who loves few moves in speedcubing)
scramble: D B2 D R2 B2 U L2 U B2 U' L D B2 R F R' B U2 R F2 D' (generated by prisma)
EOLine: D F R' B L2 D (6 moves)
Left 3x2x1 Block: R2 D2 R' U R L' U R' D2 L' (10 moves)
Right 2x2x1 Block: U2 D R D2 L' F2 L D (8 moves)
Set up F2L pair: U2 R U2 R' U2 (5 moves)
corner permutation: R U2 L' U R' U' L (7 moves) (only 4 moves to permute corners. because you need to do at least 3 moves to put that pair inside)
ZZLL: B2 U R L' B2 R' L U B2 (9 moves)

move counts: 45

Is 45 moves good??

here I want to make you laught :) then Im joking in this part.
If you want to solve your cube in few moves then take part in fewest moves tournaments. it will be good for you ;) speedcubing is not a place for few moves. Im not a Fridrich user. I know only 7 PLLs and only 10 OLLs and All the time I used block building and I have never used F2L. (Of-course after mastering the layer by layer method) but I have heared Fridrich's average moves are more than 65. you are using Fridrich method and saying my solve (52 moves) is bad??

Here is a fewest moves for you that I have done 4 or 5 month ago: (It tooks me around 2 month to find this solution for this scramble)
scramble: R F U2 R2 L2 U' D' B2 F2 R' L' F' U D2 F2 D L2 R2 B2 U' R' U' D2 R L' (25 moves)
solution: F B' D2 L2 F2 L' F' R' B U' B2 D' B' U2 L' U2 D2 R2 (18 moves)
then It means I must spend 2 months to solve a rubiks cube with sub-20 moves to solve a cube in tournament?? :D but I was joking.

you no r u 2 gen isn't that good to memeriose and it would b better for one hand

I forgot to tell, He is true. 2-Gen algorithms are not good for some cases. for example if a formula has lots of R2 then its not good for two hand solving. or <R U'> repeatedly. I my self am learning both 2-gen and 3-gen or 4-gen algorithms. it helps me choose best one that fits my hands better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
finish 1x2x3 on the left and at the same time remaining six corners permutation (only two additional moves is needed on average - nobody knows how to do that in flight; this is the missing link...);

People seem to think I'm a 'hater' for pointing out that this is the only new documented thing here. Getting attacked for being realistic is not cool.

By the way, this 'missing link' was already filled in with CPLS.
 
Hi KimOrbit, does this look like it can solve the 'missing link'?

well, It do the same. but it has lots of algorithms (around 80) that cannot be done really fast. I told you that the missing link was solved, but not fast. I have found some new results. you dont need even to learn parity cases. you just need to learn 6 algorithms of normal cases. then you can do CPLL, missing-link, ZZ-D or what every you want to call it. ;)

I think 6 cases are better than even 7 cases. because its easier to recognize. and its my reason that I have changed ZZ-D's idea to this method.

;) so simple. today, I can do corner permutation (or what every you want to call it) really fast. It takes me only 1 second to recognize. well, every thing is getting better for me :)

People seem to think I'm a 'hater' for pointing out that this is the only new documented thing here. Getting attacked for being realistic is not cool.

By the way, this 'missing link' was already filled in with CPLS.

was already filled, but not fast. were you willing to learn CPLS?? i guess nope. because that is slow.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Be careful who you mention “fewest moves” to 
I may hijack your thread.
Currently I cannot check your 18 move solution but I sure will later this week.
If you still have your notes on how you got to this solution please let me know. (Or perhaps just a breakdown on the steps taken)
Looking forward to seeing you compete in the FMC competitions on this forum and on fmc.mustcube.net
In the forum you have the 1 hour time limit but on the 2nd website you can spend up to a week in the “classic FMC” event.

[nitpicking]
It doesn’t matter that your English is not perfect, we’re not all native English speakers anyway.
But using proper punctuation and structuring of content are not related to how good you are at a specific language.
[/nitpicking]

Will try to download you page this weekend and have a look at it.
I think it is always interesting to see something new and then let time be the judge of how good / valuable it is for cubing.
Pun intended :)
 
Where is the evidence that shows that this is fast and that CPLS is slow?

well, there is no evidence on that. that is my personal Idea about that method, since most of my cubing life has been spent on 2x2x2 cube which mean it has only corners, then I can understand every thing about corners really fast. and all I have found about doing CPLS and its recognition was some thing hard to do for me. well, I have spent most of my time understanding corners, and I think at least I should be able to recognize CPLS cases fast. but I couldn't and I can't and Im trying and Im sure I wont be able to do that in the future too.

but now, I am recognizing my 6 cases, in sub-1 second and It means I have all my corners permuted after all of my F2Ls now.

I dont know what do you want, and what can you do. but I can do this step in sub-1 second, which means Its fast.

And I am thinking about making a tutorial video for my method (from EOLine to ZZLL) and I think you can wait until releasing that video, and you will be able to see that I am doing that step fast.
 
Here are my initial thoughts after reading the document and trying a few solves. This is coming from 1) a speedcubing perspective and 2) someone who hasn't gotten used to this sub-method.

*In F2L, I'm required to solve the back blocks first...even if front blocks are already paired they have to be ignored and inevitably broken up.
*Setup appears to take a lot of extra moves. We've mostly concluded that Winter Variation is inefficient because of corner/edge block setup. For orbit you're setting up 2 blocks, which for me required a lot of shuffling and hiding.
*I've gotten pretty quick with ZBLL and 2 side PLL recognition, but this system is entirely different. After setup, you have a reference corner and need to 1) find its opposite 2) find its relationship with another top layer corner. To get good at this you would have to be able to identify corners with only 2 stickers, find and track opposite corners during the setup, and figure out some quick way to determine corner relationship even when the corners are twisted around.

These are the aspects that I'm having difficulty with, which I attempted to state as objectively as possible. It is my opinion that I would be faster with simple OLL+PLL even after lots of practice with orbit.

Sidenote: We'll eventually need to work with kimorbit's wiki entry, but I think that would be better left until this topic settles a bit.
 
well, thank you for attending. In F2L, you dont need to set your back pairs first. Its an experiment that I have earned these days. you need to set your last block up, no matter where it is, and no matter what color your front side is.
well, for me Setup moves takes me only nothing and only changing a turn. while I push last edge inside and set it's corner with algorithms down here:
R U R' U' R U R' U' R <U'> R' (1 move changed)
R U' R' <U'> (1 move reduced)
R U2 R' U R <U'> R' (1 move changed)
well, actually there is no set move for me. I dont know how do you set your pair up. but I have showed you, I have even reduced one move for setting up.
and actually, I agree. recognition is a bit hard. But i have explained how to recognize your corner with 2 sticker, which is exactly what I have done in 2x2x2 and its something good to know for a speedcuber.

I am sure you will be able to recognize it fast, as far as Im doing that in sub-1 second currently. all my solves are ZZ-Orbit solves now, and every thing is fine with me. even recognition.

;) let me know your Idea. please share your experiences with me.
 
Hi everyone,
#KimOrbit, you mentioned about making a video tutorial for your method. Is it still current? If it is, please share with us with your work. ZZ-d(ZZ-Orbit?) seems to be really interesting, but hard to understand for a cubenoob like me.
And by the way, why did the topic died? Four pages of posts in four days, then nothing new in two months. I'm really curious what's the thing. Please answer guys.
Sorry for my english,
Cheers from Poland
 
I noticed a lot of mistakes in your PDF. ZZ-a does not need zbf2l because ZZ-a starts the solve with eo-line. ZZ-b is supposed to use phasing to easily reduce the zbll set into ZZLL, 2gll had nothing to do with it’s development. Also, ZZLL is the subset of ZBLL after phasing and what you are calling ZZLL is 2gll which means the corners are already permuted. Also, ZZ-d is not the most effecient method, ZZ-a is. And 2gll has 80 cases(12 for each sune except H) and you would still need Pll so ZZ-d DOES use more LL algs than OLL/PLL.(page 2)

Corner orientation on right side’s block .
This step was completely made by me, Both Idea and algorithms. In this step you can freely choose which COLL case you want for your last layer. It moves average is 12 HTM. I think it’s not efficient to use this method, because you have to learn 27 algorithms for just orienting corners since there are only 7 COLL algorithms when you have your corners permuted.(pg 33)
This is called winter variation and a bunch of people know it.

Corner permutation: U' R U' R'
And in your posted example of how you fix permutation, the permutation was already correct.

I still have alot of respect for your effort and see how you are using Nikolas while you insert the last f2l pair(it is a realy cool idea), but this is still not as easy as CPLS because of recognition and because you have to reduce the last f2l into a pair. I think just doing a Nikolas after f2l would have the same movecount.Either way, Good luck with your method!
 

File seems to be gone?

I'm really interested how recognition works!

I calculated the 6 algs, too, when I first wanted to improve my Petrus ( 6/12 additional algs sounded much better than 21 (PLL) or 42 (COLL) ).
But I didn't manage to recognize cases fast.


I believe I already asked - but again: Does anybody know to apply ZZ-d on a 2x2x2 ( no EOLINE, missing Link could be solved during inspection,..., just 7 LL cases)


Regarding "missing link" in ZZ-d : I think ORBIT and CPLS both don't fill the gap - because <RU>-right block + <RU>-LL just sounds very different.


ASIDE:
I believe cubing beginners have a greater love for "Do something usefull, while inserting the last corner-edge pair (winter, phasing, ...)" than advanced cubers, maybe because they tend to pause after setting up the pair.
 
ASIDE:
I believe cubing beginners have a greater love for "Do something usefull, while inserting the last corner-edge pair (winter, phasing, ...)" than advanced cubers, maybe because they tend to pause after setting up the pair.

Phasing does not require the corner and edge to be paired. When using phasing algorithms, only one look is necessary.
 
Back
Top