Do we mind AUFs in PLL time attack?

[Pusha]

Do we count AUFs in PLL time attack?
We have the same discussion on the russian forum. So, the question is: Do we mind AUFs in PLL time attack? For example, if I do Jb-perm somewhere in the middle, do I've to do the last U'?

 

[CRO]

I do it, but only because it's in my muscle memory..

 

[JyH]

I don't.
I want to know if it's allowed to switch which LL I do during one. For example, my first three are AAE. So am I allowed to do both A perms, then not do the x2 and just start E perm from there, or do I have to do x2 E perm?

 

[Jaycee]

I don't.
I want to know if it's allowed to switch which LL I do during one. For example, my first three are AAE. So am I allowed to do both A perms, then not do the x2 and just start E perm from there, or do I have to do x2 E perm?

I would say it's not allowed. But trust me, I wish it was. >.<

 

[antoineccantin]

I don't.
I want to know if it's allowed to switch which LL I do during one. For example, my first three are AAE. So am I allowed to do both A perms, then not do the x2 and just start E perm from there, or do I have to do x2 E perm?

I also do AAE, but for the transition between A and E, I do Lw2 instead of R2.

 

[Litz]

I don't see a point in doing it if you're not going to do it as you would while in a normal solve (or even worse, if you're going to alter or cancel moves to transition into other algorithms) so I do the rotations and the U's at the end if any (I assume there would be no AUF in the solve). It's not an official event though so to each his own.

 

[Enter]

I agree with Litz!
only if you not complete the algorithm than it is not allowed!

 

[Godmil]

I think they're important... but I wouldn't call them AUF's, they're part of the alg. In a real solve an AUF may cancel them out, but if you say miss out the final U' in the popular Jb perm think of the arrow diagram of what you're actually doing, it's certainly not just swapping two corners and two edges.

 

[Sa967St]

I wouldn't mind them.
Imo, R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' is still a J perm, R' U2 R U2 R' F R U R' U' R' F' R2' is still an R perm, and R' U' R U' R U R U' R' U R U R2 U' R' is still a Z perm.

I think they're important... but I wouldn't call them AUF's, they're part of the alg. In a real solve an AUF may cancel them out, but if you say miss out the final U' in the popular Jb perm think of the arrow diagram of what you're actually doing, it's certainly not just swapping two corners and two edges.

I disagree. The arrows are to show people what pieces are swapped to get an image of what case it looks like, but what matters is what the PLL actually looks like.
Of course AUFs matter in solves, but for the sake a PLL time attack I don't think they should be necessary because they're a trivial part of a PLL case.

 

[riffz]

AUFs DO NOT MATTER in PLL time attacks.

/thread

 

[Godmil]

Hey I got a cool new alg for Y-perms: R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
It's one move shorter than the more popular one. It usually starts with a AFF, but that shouldn't count in PLL attacks should it?

 

[Forte]

What Riffz said. How could you NOT count R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' as a J perm lol

 

[Godmil]

What Riffz said. How could you NOT count R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' as a J perm lol

Because it doesn't swap two edges/corner. Do I seriously need to open a paint package and show you what that alg actually does? You can't arbitrarily say that because an alg ends with a certain face then it isn't actually part of the alg.

 

[Sa967St]

Hey I got a cool new alg for Y-perms: R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
It's one move shorter than the more popular one. It usually starts with a AFF, but that shouldn't count in PLL attacks should it?

What's your point? That doesn't permute the last layer.

Because it doesn't swap two edges/corner. Do I seriously need to open a paint package and show you what that alg actually does? You can't arbitrarily say that because an alg ends with a certain face then it isn't actually part of the alg.

Who says a Jb perm swaps 2 corners and 2 edges? It's the thing that looks like this:

 

[Jostle]

Hey I got a cool new alg for Y-perms: R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
It's one move shorter than the more popular one. It usually starts with a AFF, but that shouldn't count in PLL attacks should it?

Are you high?

 

[stricgoogle]

Hey I got a cool new alg for Y-perms: R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
It's one move shorter than the more popular one. It usually starts with a AFF, but that shouldn't count in PLL attacks should it?

This can't be used in a solve as a Y perm, without a setup F. But, I use R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' as often as U, U' and U2 at the end. Same for R perm, Z perm, whatever else. Why should you use the algorithm with the same AUF in PLL time attacks, if you actually don't always use it in a solve?

 

[Godmil]

I was showing by example how crazy it is to arbitrarily remove turns from an alg just because in an actual solve it would sometimes cancel out and not be needed. Sarah, I get the point your making, but really everywhere we learned PLL's from says that a J perm is swapping two adjacent corners and two adjacent edges (where one of the edges is between the two corners), the very name comes from the image of the layer with those pieces affected. I think I've made my point, curious if anyone else agrees with that logic.

 

[Sa967St]

everywhere we learned PLL's from says that a J perm is swapping two adjacent corners and two adjacent edges

[citation needed]

the very name comes from the image of the layer with those pieces affected.

Really? You can still see the "J shape" in the above images.

 

[riffz]

I was showing by example how crazy it is to arbitrarily remove turns from an alg just because in an actual solve it would sometimes cancel out and not be needed. Sarah, I get the point your making, but really everywhere we learned PLL's from says that a J perm is swapping two adjacent corners and two adjacent edges (where one of the edges is between the two corners), the very name comes from the image of the layer with those pieces affected. I think I've made my point, curious if anyone else agrees with that logic.

A PLL algorithm is one that permutes pieces on the last layer while preserving their orientation. Your example created an algorithm that does not do this.

 

[Godmil]

[citation needed]

I did have links for the wiki and Fridrich's site, but I didn't think I needed them, alternatively we could both make a list of every site we can find that describes the PLL's. I'll include ones that show diagrams swapping two corners and two edges, and you show ones that describe them by the colour patters around the outer edge. Then we could see what the popular consensus is in the cubing community. I'd love for someone like Kirjava to jump in now and agree with me, but I fear my tone has been too arrogant/sarcy in these posts so I'm probably on my own now Also I'd be curious to see what Breandan does since he's kinda the king of PLL attacks.