• 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.

ECE - New 3x3 Solving Method

Shiv3r said:
Please, don't add all those algorithms. It may just be like 1-look LSE: no one uses it because it can be solved just as fast intuitively and the algorithm count is fairly high.
One of the main lures to this method is the total alg count even when you max the algorithms you need to learn is still much less than CFOP, enough to make a large difference in the time spent on algorithm memorization vs time spent actually lowering your time.
Please don't make it essential to the solution, or people will be turned off by the algorithm count.
Im not saying don't make it, I'm saying keep the original ECE method, its very useful and maybe the best new method ive learned, due to the low alg count yet I can still get within 10 seconds of my main method times.
Click to expand...
You don't have to learn the algs, but I STRONGLY recommend you do. With the algs, lookahead is undisputably better, the movecount goes way down and the overall speed of the method is greater. This isn't anything like 1-look LSE, this is combining multiple steps with only a few algs. If you think 49 algs is a lot you don't know what a lot is.
 
crafto22 said:
You don't have to learn the algs, but I STRONGLY recommend you do. With the algs, lookahead is undisputably better, the movecount goes way down and the overall speed of the method is greater. This isn't anything like 1-look LSE, this is combining multiple steps with only a few algs. If you think 49 algs is a lot you don't know what a lot is.
Click to expand...
for a roux solver, anything more than CMLL is a lot of algs.
But yes, I agree, maybe I should learn them, but please keep the original variation of it.
 
I say let's try and generate algs as necessary and see how far we can push this method. Consistently sub-40 sounds pretty insane.
 
Teoidus said:
I say let's try and generate algs as necessary and see how far we can push this method. Consistently sub-40 sounds pretty insane.
Click to expand...
Consistently sub-40? I'm consistently sub-14 with this method XD

bobthegiraffemonkey said:
How exactly would this affect people wanting to do the normal version? And 49 algs doesn't sound bad, that's less than full OLL! I'm curious about what the alg set does.
Click to expand...
What is does is a secret for now, but it doesn't cut out any other alg sets. The total alg count for the most move optimal and fast method is 76, less than CFOP but I will concede it is still quite a few.
 
I am currently trying to look for a new method that could potentially be a speedsolving method averaging around 40 moves or less. I am thinking of trying either a Petrus variation or ECE(SSC). What do you guys think the limits are for the ECE(SSC) method.
 
crafto22 said:
Consistently sub-40? I'm consistently sub-14 with this method XD


What is does is a secret for now, but it doesn't cut out any other alg sets. The total alg count for the most move optimal and fast method is 76, less than CFOP but I will concede it is still quite a few.
Click to expand...

I was thinking move count, not times :P but yes, it seems potentially very good
 
Shiv3r said:
yes, this method is INSANELY efficient.

Hey regulars to this thread:
I wrote a promotion for this method with a link to here on the new method/concept/substep/ideas forum so we will likely get more visitors to this thread.
Click to expand...
I agree, very similar to the average move count of Hawaiian Kociemba (40 or less garunteed if used correctly), check out the thread or wiki page. Would a combination be viable, and is one even possible? They are very different methods. This could either work so unbelievably well that CFOP disappears, or just fails.
 
wir3sandfir3s said:
I agree, very similar to the average move count of Hawaiian Kociemba (40 or less garunteed if used correctly), check out the thread or wiki page. Would a combination be viable, and is one even possible? They are very different methods. This could either work so unbelievably well that CFOP disappears, or just fails.
Click to expand...
the difference between it suceeding or failing is publicity. Tell all your cubing friends about it! we gotta get word of this method around!
 
Shiv3r said:
the difference between it suceeding or failing is publicity. Tell all your cubing friends about it! we gotta get word of this method around!
Click to expand...
No I'm talking about ECE combined with HK, probably the two most efficient methods in this thread.
 
Shiv3r said:
yes, but ECE as a whole was what I was talking about. More algorithm and move-efficient than CFOP??? i mean who wouldn't want to switch?
Click to expand...
Lol you are ignoring HK...
Constant high 20s is possible with HK after practice, but most example solves are 30-40, like ECE...
Again, you are ignoring HK in everything I say...
Some people are switching to HK as well
 
I am wanting to switch methods, even after learning full OLL and PLL, some COLL, VHLS, WV, and VLS. Most people don't want to switch because of the speed at which you can achieve and being able to just recognize and perform quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Burrito
Delta Chat Cubing Group
Replies
3
Views
1,286
qwr
qwr
Z
Can you send a invite to 3x3 solvers discord server
Replies
2
Views
65
Powstick
P
Jared Burkhart
Race me in 3x3
Replies
0
Views
144
Jared Burkhart
Jared Burkhart
acrystal
The 3x3 Permutation Example Solve Thread
2
Replies
31
Views
633
acrystal
acrystal
mdcuber9
[ER] Teodor Zajder WR8 4.37 3x3 Average
Replies
13
Views
464
SpeedCubingLord
SpeedCubingLord
Back
Top