Big Cube Centers

[MasterofRubix]

I remembered reading somewhere that instead of doing: first center, opposite center, etc. you could do: first center, adjacent center, etc and the the center opposite the first one would automatically solve itself. I tried that recently and found it quicker and more effective, for me of course. I was wondering if this method worked for all big cubes. What do you guys think of this method and does it work well for you guys?

 

[pjk]

I use the first center, opposite, etc. If you think about it, normall that would be easier as you can twist the other centers without a problem. If you do center than adj., you have to preserve from doing any moves really.

 

[MasterofRubix]

Technically it would almost be the same as doing first center, opposite, then adjacents. It would be center, and four adjacents. The last one solves itself so one less to make and the algs would be the same as solving adjacents. What I do is make one layer of each adjacent center then fill in the blanks. Any thoughts?

 

[pjk]

Well basically, if you do one center, it is the easiest because you don't have to preserve anything. When you do the opposite center, you can still rotate left and right without messing anything up, and that second center will go faster. This is very hard to explain online, but yeah, if you think about it, doing opposites first is the quickest.

 

[MasterofRubix]

I finally figured out where I got this information from!

Stefan Pochmann 4x4 centers

 

[pjk]

Interesting. I guess it is more personal preference, but in theory, it would be quicker to do opposites, any other, adjacent, etc.

 

[MasterofRubix]

Originally posted by PJK@Aug 24 2006, 10:23 PM
Interesting. I guess it is more personal preference, but in theory, it would be quicker to do opposites, any other, adjacent, etc.

Agree with personal perference. but it is worth a try. i recently got interested again in the 4x4 (ever since i got sub-2 min) and have been experimenting with both methods. i guess it really depends on which method you prefer and are willing to improve.

 

[CraigBouchard]

Well, I was too lazy to read all the posts but:

If you do 1, then adjacent, then you gotta do funky stuff for the last one, no? No, I'm wrong...You just get 1 more face without freedom. The first face is total freedom, the second (opposite) face you get as much as you need pretty much, and then the 3rd you get as much as you need cuz theres nothing in the other 2 layers. With your method, you get 1 face free, 1 adjacent with adsolutely anything, but stuff can be in that opposite layer. And then the rest of them you are restricted...

Craig