Thread starter
#1

I've had this thought for a few hours already, I'm sure it's not a new idea because there's nothing special about it, but I haven't seen it anywhere, so I'll just post it here and leave it for you guys to criticize

We know there's VHF2L (hereafter known as VHLS). So why not have an LS method that orients all

For the RU'R' case, we already have F2LL a.k.a. Winter Variation (someone mind telling me why it's called this?). For the RUR' case, I don't know of any set of algs that's already been generated, or is already in use, so I've generated my own algs, and I'm (temporarily) calling it the "Summer Variation" for fun, because I really can't think of a suitable name for such a small subset of algs (and because it's fun to call a set of algs Winter/Summer Variations ).

Now, for a little comparison: VHLS requires 32 algs, which all need to be at least RUF 3-gen. COLS requires

HOWEVER...

There's a (1/3)^3 = 1/27 chance of getting an OLL skip with VHLS, but this probability

Besides, I personally don't really like all 3 OLL cases with 2 corners oriented (and all edges oriented too). Yeah, fine, they're short, but they just don't flow well for me. And the combined probability of getting any of these 3 cases is 12/27.

With COLS, however, I can only get 1 OLL alg I don't really like, the one with no edges oriented. Okay, so the probability of getting the rarest OLL case skyrockets from 1/216 to 1/8, but 1/8 is still much lower than 12/27. And I think I just might have that problem solved once I generate a few algs (read on to see what I mean).

We can always end VHLS/COLS with the normal OLL/PLL. But there are always alternatives. For VHLS, we can use COLL + EPLL as an alternative. For COLS, we have 3 different endings to choose from:

1. J perm/Y perm + ELL

2. 14 RUF 3-gen algs that clear the mess and leave you with EPLL (name?) + EPLL

3. 1-look LL (another name?)

With the first approach, you have a 2/3 chance of getting a J perm, 1/6 of getting a Y perm, and 1/6 of skipping straight to ELL.

With the second approach, you have to learn 14 more algs that are gonna be immensely useful for BLD, but that's not really the point here I've generated these algs too, all RUF 3-gen. I'll probably get an RrU list later too

With the third approach, there are far fewer algs than ZBLL I don't know the exact number yet, but I'll update this post once I've calculated it.

So in conclusion... (

Number of algs to learn (including mirrors):

COLS 108

Probability of getting OLL skip:

Probability of getting OLL cases

Number of algs to learn for alternate endings:

COLS still wins if you use J perm/Y perm + ELL (24 ELL algs)

Fun fact:

Probability of skipping from COLS straight to ELL: 1/48

Probability of getting Sune or any one of your favorite OLL,

With good edge control techniques throughout your F2L, COLS might just give you an OLL skip

Final conclusion, going by number of algs, COLS sucks Going by all the other step-skipping probabilities, it's much better than VHLS. Only downside I can think of right now is probably recognition...

Wait, there's still a final final final conclusion I personally won't use COLS. Same reason why many people don't use VHLS: Move count, and an additional step to the pure Fridrich method. Just isn't worth it. Still, if there are supporters of VHLS, there should be some for COLS

And in case you're interested, I've generated all the algs needed. PM me if you want the list.

I bet this thread's only gonna get 2 replies or so...

We know there's VHF2L (hereafter known as VHLS). So why not have an LS method that orients all

*corners*(hereafter known as COLS)? Or should it be OCLS? :confused: Anyone got a better name?For the RU'R' case, we already have F2LL a.k.a. Winter Variation (someone mind telling me why it's called this?). For the RUR' case, I don't know of any set of algs that's already been generated, or is already in use, so I've generated my own algs, and I'm (temporarily) calling it the "Summer Variation" for fun, because I really can't think of a suitable name for such a small subset of algs (and because it's fun to call a set of algs Winter/Summer Variations ).

Now, for a little comparison: VHLS requires 32 algs, which all need to be at least RUF 3-gen. COLS requires

**108**algs And, like CLS, can also all be RU 2-gen (or RUL/RUF 3-gen for shorter solutions).HOWEVER...

There's a (1/3)^3 = 1/27 chance of getting an OLL skip with VHLS, but this probability

**more than triples**to (1/2)^3 = 1/8 with COLS. How would you like 1.5 OLL skips in an average of 12? You get to keep that 0.5 OLL skip as your second fastest time!Besides, I personally don't really like all 3 OLL cases with 2 corners oriented (and all edges oriented too). Yeah, fine, they're short, but they just don't flow well for me. And the combined probability of getting any of these 3 cases is 12/27.

With COLS, however, I can only get 1 OLL alg I don't really like, the one with no edges oriented. Okay, so the probability of getting the rarest OLL case skyrockets from 1/216 to 1/8, but 1/8 is still much lower than 12/27. And I think I just might have that problem solved once I generate a few algs (read on to see what I mean).

We can always end VHLS/COLS with the normal OLL/PLL. But there are always alternatives. For VHLS, we can use COLL + EPLL as an alternative. For COLS, we have 3 different endings to choose from:

1. J perm/Y perm + ELL

2. 14 RUF 3-gen algs that clear the mess and leave you with EPLL (name?) + EPLL

3. 1-look LL (another name?)

With the first approach, you have a 2/3 chance of getting a J perm, 1/6 of getting a Y perm, and 1/6 of skipping straight to ELL.

With the second approach, you have to learn 14 more algs that are gonna be immensely useful for BLD, but that's not really the point here I've generated these algs too, all RUF 3-gen. I'll probably get an RrU list later too

With the third approach, there are far fewer algs than ZBLL I don't know the exact number yet, but I'll update this post once I've calculated it.

So in conclusion... (

**winner**/loser)Number of algs to learn (including mirrors):

COLS 108

**VHLS 32**Probability of getting OLL skip:

**COLS 1/8**VHLS 1/27Probability of getting OLL cases

**(which means this isn't a very reliable stat) don't like:***I***COLS 1/8**VHLS 12/27Number of algs to learn for alternate endings:

**COLS 14 (the thing I mentioned)**VHLS 42 (COLL)COLS still wins if you use J perm/Y perm + ELL (24 ELL algs)

Fun fact:

Probability of skipping from COLS straight to ELL: 1/48

Probability of getting Sune or any one of your favorite OLL,

*any one*: 1/54 or lowerWith good edge control techniques throughout your F2L, COLS might just give you an OLL skip

**every single time**.Final conclusion, going by number of algs, COLS sucks Going by all the other step-skipping probabilities, it's much better than VHLS. Only downside I can think of right now is probably recognition...

Wait, there's still a final final final conclusion I personally won't use COLS. Same reason why many people don't use VHLS: Move count, and an additional step to the pure Fridrich method. Just isn't worth it. Still, if there are supporters of VHLS, there should be some for COLS

And in case you're interested, I've generated all the algs needed. PM me if you want the list.

I bet this thread's only gonna get 2 replies or so...

Last edited: Jan 19, 2009