COLL/EPLL vs. OLL/PLL

[BadgerSex]

If I take the time to learn COLL (I already know 7 algorithms), is it worth applying in an LBL solve?

I mean, I would just orient the edges with FRUR'U'F'/FURU'R'F', which takes a second or two and then use the COLL algorithms. Besides, I don't see why people want to memorize hundreds of algorithms with ZB or VH, all just to replace one fast 6-move alg!

 

[MistArts]

OLL/PLL wins over COLL. Because the edges are not solved after COLL

 

[AvGalen]

COLL doesn't replace OLL/PLL. EOLL+COLL+EPLL replaces OLL/PLL.

EOLL cannot always be done with those 6 moves (0 edges oriented)
Orienting edges with VH is (mostly) intuitive (create pair + edge-control)
ZBF2L solves 4th F2L + EOLL optimally so you can save between 0 and 11 moves and 1 "look".

 

[nitrocan]

you might want to do COLL when the case is ready. but still, you might get a z perm when you could have got a t perm.

 

[BadgerSex]

you might want to do COLL when the case is ready. but still, you might get a z perm when you could have got a t perm.

Yeah... I guess that I can still improve my speed by using COLL with OLL...IDK if the fridrich people use this already

 

[Kenneth]

One more thing, OLL is often RUF while COLL is RUL which is faster. VH is wery easy after a few years of practice, recognition is instant and sometimes you can even do corners as well ... R U' R' or R U2 R' inserts a Sune/Antisune or not, it's your choise =)

AVG, 0 edges, pair at UF-URF, do: r U R' U2 M' U M = 7 turns.

One edge, same pair: r U' M U2 (R' M') U' M ... the (R' M') is one turn in practice so this is also 7.

If you do not use M, then these cases are not that funny to solve.

you might want to do COLL when the case is ready. but still, you might get a z perm when you could have got a t perm.

I can do Z-PLL about twice as fast as T-PLL... But of course, I use COLL, not PLL so I newer practice T but I do Z at least 20 times a day

 

[AvGalen]

AVG, 0 edges, pair at UF-URF, do: r U R' U2 M' U M = 7 turns.

One edge, same pair: r U' M U2 (R' M') U' M ... the (R' M') is one turn in practice so this is also 7.

If you do not use M, then these cases are not that funny to solve.

you might want to do COLL when the case is ready. but still, you might get a z perm when you could have got a t perm.

I can do Z-PLL about twice as fast as T-PLL... But of course, I use COLL, not PLL so I newer practice T but I do Z at least 20 times a day

That should be r U r' U2 M' U M = 9 turns
and counting R'M' as 1 turn is just wishfull thinking (but those algs ARE fast, nice and easy)

 

[Kenneth]

R'M' is one turn in practice to me and counted in axis metric it is 7

But OK, HTM is the normal metric, but I can't use that, I do so many M turns.

Look at Roux, what is the turn count in HTM for that?... no one cares as long as you can solve in 45 STM

 

[nitrocan]

I can do Z-PLL about twice as fast as T-PLL... But of course, I use COLL, not PLL so I newer practice T but I do Z at least 20 times a day

I can do the t-perm in 1.3-1.5 seconds , and the z perm in 2.2 seconds on average. What algorithm do you use for z perm?

 

[Kenneth]

One you can't do fast if you are not wery used to slices, but it's really short:

M2 U' M E2 M (E2 U) M2 ... the (E2 U) is done as one turn so this makes seven (hi Arnaud =)

I can actually trig the M E2 part, well, the times I don't lock up that is

 

[nitrocan]

ill just go with my usual R' U' R U' R U R U' R' U R U R2 U' R'
or i might sometimes use M2 U' M U2 M2 U2 M U2 M2 depending on the case (Za or Zb)
and by the way, isnt COLL actually COPLL?

 

[MistArts]

ill just go with my usual R' U' R U' R U R U' R' U R U R2 U' R'
or i might sometimes use M2 U' M U2 M2 U2 M U2 M2 depending on the case (Za or Zb)
and by the way, isnt COLL actually COPLL?

Corner of permutation of last layer? No... COLL orients and permutes corners.

 

[nitrocan]

i mean Corner Orientation & Permutation of Last Layer

 

[AvGalen]

I agree, COLL should be called CLL or COPLL

The following should be the way to describe the steps for last layer

"regular 2 look last layer"
OLL = Orient last layer
PLL = Permute last layer

"Alternative 2 look last layer"
CLL = Corners last layer
ELL = Edges last layer

"Beginners 4 look last layer"
EOLL = Edge Orientation Last Layer
COLL = Corner Orientation Last Layer
CPLL = Corner Permutation Last Layer
EPLL = Edge Permutation Last Layer

 

[Hadley4000]

you might want to do COLL when the case is ready. but still, you might get a z perm when you could have got a t perm.

But, T perm for the lose.

 

[300SpartanX]

why learn COLL

as far as i know, coll solves the corners of the last layer as well as OLL. but how does it make your solve faster?

 

[Shamankian]

I thought COLL solved OLL (only if you got a cross case) and PLL leaving you with having to do U, U', U2 or nothing. Thats what I thought anyway.

 

[otsyke]

I thought COLL solved OLL (only if you got a cross case) and PLL leaving you with having to do U, U', U2 or nothing. Thats what I thought anyway.

that should be ZBLL.
OLL orients the whole last layer, COLL orients and permutes the corners of last layer, leaving you with an edge only permutation (easier) or pll skip (with higher probability than plain oll).

 

[Anonymous]

COLL solves the corners of the last layer while preserving the orientation of the edges. That means that the only time COLL completes OLL is when the LL edges are already oriented. In pure Fridrich, this happens relatively, but is purely luck. Some CFOP users learn COLL as a "backup plan", which they only use when they're lucky enough to get a LL case with all edges oriented.

Other methods use COLL slightly differently, though. Methods like VH, ZZ, and Petrus all complete the F2L in such a way that the LL always has oriented edges. These people sometimes learn COLL as their main LL method- since they have oriented edges every time, it makes sense for them to use COLL every time.

Now to address your question- why is it useful? For some people it is, for others it isn't. Since COLL completes the permutation of corners as well as the orientation, after completing COLL you always have an edge permutation (either a U-Perm, Z-Perm, or H-Perm). For most people, these are among the fastest PLL's to recognize and execute consistently, especially since a COLL user knows in advance that it'll be one of these four. Also, since the last step of a solve employing COLL is solving only edges, there is a much greater chance of a skip- 1/12, in fact. Some people also find COLL recognition to be so easy as to be almost trivial.

These three reasons alone are enough for a lot of people to learn and use COLL (myself included, for the most part). However, COLL does have an additional benefit- it serves as a great stepping stone to either ZBLL or ZZLL.

Of course, as much love as there is for COLL, there's also a lot of criticism. I think that if there's any consensus as to whether learning the ~40 algs in COLL is "worth it", it's that it all comes down to the personal preference of the individual. I personally would suggest learning it. You'll hear from a lot of people that learning more algs makes alg learning easier. As paradoxical as this sounds, it's actually true.

 

[a small kitten]

Most of the time it's faster than OLL+PLL for OH. Same reason as the one given in paragraph 3 in the above post.