CFCE Help

[2180161]

Ok, so I couldn't find one of these, so I decided to make one. I know CFCE isnt as popular as Roux, ZZ, or CFOP, but I feel it is just as good.

So straight into the first question, is it possible to be sub-15 with 2 look corners? I currently use 2-look corners and average about 18 seconds, with 2 look ELL (OLL, EPLL, or if I know the case, then ELL)

 

[cashis]

I wouldnt think so. CFCE is not used as much because recognition is more difficult. If you really think you can get good at it, id say learn all the algs for corners, because 2 look makes recognition even worse.

 

[mDiPalma]

I think CFEC is better than CFCE because it's easier to control the LL edges during F2L than the LL corners.

Both are more efficient than CFOP.

 

[TDM]

I agree, CFCE is a good method. I average ~14 with it using mostly 2-look ELL and mostly 1-look CLL.
I think trying to get sub-15 with 2-look CLL and 2-look ELL would be like getting sub-15 with 4lLL. Definitely possible - I just got an Ao25 of 15.51, so sub-15 is doable - but you're making it hard for yourself. CLL isn't too bad to learn (there are a lot of algs which are the same for CMLL and COLL, and others are even easier).

[post=1078271]relevant[/post]

I think CFEC is better than CFCE because it's easier to control the LL edges during F2L than the LL corners.

Both are more efficient than CFOP.

It's easier to influence the LL, but L4C isn't very good compared to L4E (unless you force a solved corner?)

 

[cashis]

(unless you force a solved corner?)

This sounds like something that could be explored a lot more.
Regarding my first post, sorry for being so negative. Maybe recognitions just difficult for me seeing as I'm not used to it. I've done maybe 200 CFCE solves with 2 look COLL, and only about half of them were sub 15. However this shouldn't mean anything, because my ability isnt relevant to yours or how comfortable you are with the cases.
Regardless, the earlier you learn one look, the better off you'll be, but sub 15 averages and maybe sub 10 are definitely possible.

Both are more efficient than CFOP.

Is this a fact?

 

[2180161]

Is this a fact?

Yes this is a fact, however, only if you use STM as the Turning Metric.

 

[Ranzha]

I think CFEC is better than CFCE because it's easier to control the LL edges during F2L than the LL corners.

Pls no.

I think if people really tried, ELL would be an awesome step with regard to recog AND execution (which is already pretty good). But L4C, though it can be easy to recog, is god-awful to execute in my experience.

CLL is a great step imo, and can be explored a lot more just like ELL-before-L4C with regard to solving more pieces or forcing easy cases.

 

[kschiew]

Quick question here, where do you guys learn CLL? I have found a complete set of ELL algs on algdb.net, but there are just CLL alg sets for 2x2... I'm currently using COLL for corners, but I know there are more easier cases in terms of CLL, thanks very much!

 

[irontwig]

Forcing a solved corner is just Snyder. And yes some L4C cases are among the worst ZBLL cases, at least movewise.

 

[TDM]

Quick question here, where do you guys learn CLL? I have found a complete set of ELL algs on algdb.net, but there are just CLL alg sets for 2x2... I'm currently using COLL for corners, but I know there are more easier cases in terms of CLL, thanks very much!

Many of my CLLs are just CMLLs, with a few COLLs where my CMLL would destroy the F2L. CMLLs are better than COLLs (they solve the same thing but don't restrict you to keep the edges oriented), so looking at CMLL websites like algdb.net and waffo's site are good places to find CMLL algs. If the algs don't preserve the F2L then use a COLL. You could also generate algs with cube explorer if you want.