• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

BindeDSA's Algorithms

Bindedsa said:
Only 9 in full, most of the cases are just random. For example, I know like two OLLCP sets for F (sexy)2 F', and for most OLLs I just know random cases that have nice algs and are easy to recognize.
Click to expand...

Isn't it annoying to have to pause to see whether you know the 1LLL for a certain case, and then discover you don't? As opposed to knowing full OLL sets, where you would immediately know whether or not you know the case just by recognizing the OLL?
 
PurpleBanana said:
Isn't it annoying to have to pause to see whether you know the 1LLL for a certain case, and then discover you don't? As opposed to knowing full OLL sets, where you would immediately know whether or not you know the case just by recognizing the OLL?
Click to expand...

Well it would be about the same as not knowing full PLL or full OLL really.
 
shadowslice e said:
Well, what can you do? Just wait until you finish learning.

Sent from my M1005D using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

My point is that with 1LLL, there IS a way to learn them in such a manner that you know whether you know the case without recognizing the whole case; I suppose this exists for OLL as well (for example, I might know I know the L cases but not the W cases) but it is much less clear-cut.

That said, I suppose that learning full OLL sets would involve wasting a lot of time learning cases which are not useful or hard to recognize, time which would be better spent learning random easy cases from all the OLLs, although Jabari will have to learn those hard cases sooner or later since he does plan to learn full 1LLL.
 
PurpleBanana said:
My point is that with 1LLL, there IS a way to learn them in such a manner that you know whether you know the case without recognizing the whole case; I suppose this exists for OLL as well (for example, I might know I know the L cases but not the W cases) but it is much less clear-cut.

That said, I suppose that learning full OLL sets would involve wasting a lot of time learning cases which are not useful or hard to recognize, time which would be better spent learning random easy cases from all the OLLs, although Jabari will have to learn those hard cases sooner or later since he does plan to learn full 1LLL.
Click to expand...

He and I have discussed more organized approaches to this before. The problem is, as we've realized, when learning large alg sets, the organized approach often gets boring. Learning them at random is less efficient, but often far more fun.
 
supercavitation said:
He and I have discussed more organized approaches to this before. The problem is, as we've realized, when learning large alg sets, the organized approach often gets boring. Learning them at random is less efficient, but often far more fun.
Click to expand...

You're probably right. I wouldn't know, since I can't really comprehend the Herculean task of learning 4000 algorithms under any circumstances.
 
PurpleBanana said:
Isn't it annoying to have to pause to see whether you know the 1LLL for a certain case, and then discover you don't? As opposed to knowing full OLL sets, where you would immediately know whether or not you know the case just by recognizing the OLL?
Click to expand...

Slightly late reply, I never pause in solves if I'm not sure I know the case. It means I miss a good chunk of cases I know, but I'd rather that than wasting the time more often than not,
 
Some time ago when l was interested in ZB l generated all the algorithms for ZBLS, they are very RUL heavy.
 

Attachments

OLLiver said:
I appreciate this. However I really avoid L moves.
Do you know of any R/r U M or F heavy sets?
Click to expand...
Honestly, I could gen the entire set in mostly Rru with a bit of RUF in a day, I just haven't taken the time to. I'll get around to eventually, but the stuff I want to do piles higher and higher and I have... like responsibilities and stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DA_BOY
Tips to learn pll algorithms
Replies
2
Views
246
Tabe
Tabe
Michael Wimberly
When to learn Pyraminx L4E
Replies
8
Views
642
Sub 20 Cuber
Sub 20 Cuber
nbwzx
Neural Algorithm Scorer, a deep‑learning model to score Rubik’s cube algorithms
Replies
1
Views
309
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
PhanPhuocan
A new set of algorithms can permute all the last layer edge while inserting the last slot (EPLS)
Replies
14
Views
1,134
Caleb Valenzuela
Caleb Valenzuela
NickMehr
How algorithms created?
Replies
8
Views
1,188
Michael Wimberly
Michael Wimberly
Back
Top