ECE - New 3x3 Solving Method

[JTWong71]

Is it possible you have the scramble?
I will try to reconstruct the solve to see how efficient it is currently when speedsolving.

 

[crafto22]

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 personally dislike HK, and I am already getting great times with just ECE. I don't think a combination of HK and ECE is a good idea tbh. I'm not saying ECE is better than HK, but if you take a look at the top ECE solvers (aka me lol) vs the top HK solvers, ECE is undoubtedly the better method, unless you can provide us with a video of an HK solve that is faster than my video of ECE.

 

[crafto22]

Is it possible you have the scramble?
I will try to reconstruct the solve to see how efficient it is currently when speedsolving.

I don't think it's visible in the vid, and otherwise, I didn't save it Maybe try reverse-reconstructing to find the scramble? EDIT: After watching in slo-mo, I'm guessing that was around 45-47 moves, but I'm not sure.

 

[JTWong71]

Finished Reconstructing the Example Solve.

U F R2 D' R U' //Partial EO+1, Orient Some Corners
D L' U2 R U R' U2 L //SLS/WV Setup
U' R U R' D2 //SLS/WV
R2 U' R2 //Seperate Corners
y' R2 U R2 U' R2 U R2 U R2 U2' R2 //Permute Corners
y M' U M2 U' M' //BR + BL Edges
y' M' U' M U M' U' M D' //EO + 2 More Edges
R2 U R U R' U' R' U' R' U R' U2 //EPLL

58 STM
4.67 TPS

 

[Shiv3r]

Guys, here is an example of a "fast" solve (12.42). I would like to film an ao12, but I'm just a bit too busy to do anything more.

AWESOME MATE!!!
for a sub 15 solve, it looked like very low tps, but I guess that you need to do half as many moves as you would need to do for a sub-15 CFOP solve.

 

[JTWong71]

Finished reconstructing. 58 STM... That's surprising, might be because it's a speedsolve, but still about 15 moves off from the theoretical average moves for the EZD Variant.

 

[wir3sandfir3s]

I personally dislike HK, and I am already getting great times with just ECE. I don't think a combination of HK and ECE is a good idea tbh. I'm not saying ECE is better than HK, but if you take a look at the top ECE solvers (aka me lol) vs the top HK solvers, ECE is undoubtedly the better method, unless you can provide us with a video of an HK solve that is faster than my video of ECE.

Alex Maass got some awesome times on an HK variant after he learned it just a few minutes before. He has a video, compare this to his other times.
You are a much faster solver than any of the HK users (and just an amazingly fast Cuber in general), so judging it on time is quite unfair.

Also I would like to point something out...

I'm not saying ECE is better than HK

ECE is undoubtedly the better method,

Hmmm, I'm thinking your statements are slightly lacking in evidence and your views on either method are a little biasedand influenced by opinion rather than truth... What exactly is your honest opinion? Look through the HK thread and point out any flaws that make it worse than ECE or anything that makes it better.
These methods are dead equal, and I at least think it is worth experimenting with a hybrid.

 

[JTWong71]

I think it would help if there were some random solve reconstructions when there is more time to inspect the cube to see if the move count can drop a lot.

 

[adimare]

This could either work so unbelievably well that CFOP disappears, or just fails.

Lol

 

[Rouxkie]

Finished reconstructing. 58 STM... That's surprising, might be because it's a speedsolve, but still about 15 moves off from the theoretical average moves for the EZD Variant.

Thanks for the reconstruction, JTWong71. I have to admit this solve does nothing to convince me, that's 73 moves in SQTM. Even with my basic Roux knowledge this scramble took only 65 moves...

 

[mark49152]

ECE is undoubtedly the better method, unless you can provide us with a video of an HK solve that is faster than my video of ECE.

Thanks for posting the video, but one solve isn't enough. It's silly to point to one solve as evidence of anything, whether it's a fast time or a high move count. With all the effort you're putting in here, I don't believe you're too busy to do more than one solve.

I'm not trying to catch you out, or conclude the merits of the method from one video. I don't care if it's a slow average or higher move count, and that wouldn't prove those things can't be improved. It would just be interesting to see the method being used, and it would enable discussion of things like recognition, ergonomics, etc. based on some input other than theorising and speculation.

It's great to see some method innovation on here actually getting some popular support, as so many ideas are just shot down, but for wider credibility you're going to have to demonstrate it not just talk about it.

 

[crafto22]

Finished Reconstructing the Example Solve.

U F R2 D' R U' //Partial EO+1, Orient Some Corners
D L' U2 R U R' U2 L //SLS/WV Setup
U' R U R' D2 //SLS/WV
R2 U' R2 //Seperate Corners
y' R2 U R2 U' R2 U R2 U R2 U2' R2 //Permute Corners
y M' U M2 U' M' //BR + BL Edges
y' M' U' M U M' U' M D' //EO + 2 More Edges
R2 U R U R' U' R' U' R' U R' U2 //EPLL

58 STM
4.67 TPS

That isn't what I did. What you said was the SLS setup was part of the SV alg. This reconstruction is incorrect, sorry to say

Thanks for posting the video, but one solve isn't enough. It's silly to point to one solve as evidence of anything, whether it's a fast time or a high move count. With all the effort you're putting in here, I don't believe you're too busy to do more than one solve.

I'm not trying to catch you out, or conclude the merits of the method from one video. I don't care if it's a slow average or higher move count, and that wouldn't prove those things can't be improved. It would just be interesting to see the method being used, and it would enable discussion of things like recognition, ergonomics, etc. based on some input other than theorising and speculation.

It's great to see some method innovation on here actually getting some popular support, as so many ideas are just shot down, but for wider credibility you're going to have to demonstrate it not just talk about it.

Thanks for posting the video, but one solve isn't enough. It's silly to point to one solve as evidence of anything, whether it's a fast time or a high move count. With all the effort you're putting in here, I don't believe you're too busy to do more than one solve.

I'm not trying to catch you out, or conclude the merits of the method from one video. I don't care if it's a slow average or higher move count, and that wouldn't prove those things can't be improved. It would just be interesting to see the method being used, and it would enable discussion of things like recognition, ergonomics, etc. based on some input other than theorising and speculation.

It's great to see some method innovation on here actually getting some popular support, as so many ideas are just shot down, but for wider credibility you're going to have to demonstrate it not just talk about it.

Im mainly just too lazy to upload an average, I'll try to get around to it at some point. In the meantime, I'd like to say I didn't quite express myself properly in some previous posts. I don't think ECE is a revolutionary method, I don't think ECE is better than any other methods and I don't really enjoy having to deal with this thread everyday. Although it may not seem like it, I actually don't have that much time to do all this forum stuff, and it's taking up too much time. I'm going to have to drop development of this method for a while, it has become too great if a task to deal with. I encourage others to learn this method and hopefully have as much success as I did.

 

[Shiv3r]

hey guys, if Shadowslice, crafto22, or anyone who knows enough wants to help fill out the ECE method wiki page here than it would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Rouxkie]

crafto22,

It would be nice if you could share your ideas to work around the step3 / layer separation issue. Maybe someone can pick up on them in the meantime.

Thanks!

 

[JTWong71]

That isn't what I did. What you said was the SLS setup was part of the SV alg. This reconstruction is incorrect, sorry to say

I was going to change it once I realized, I was rushing the naming part because it was already late for me and I had school the next day. Other than the naming of what the reconstructed steps had, it was still your solve. If you still don't believe me, you can check the video and see if the moves matched what you did.

Fixed Version:
U F R2 D' R U' //Partial EO+1, Orient Some Corners
D L' U2 R U R' U2 L U' R U R' D2 //Summer Variation
R2 U' R2 //Seperate Corners
y' R2 U R2 U' R2 U R2 U R2 U2' R2 //Permute Corners
y M' U M2 U' M' //BR + BL Edges
y' M' U' M U M' U' M D' //EO + 2 More Edges
R2 U R U R' U' R' U' R' U R' U2 //EPLL

 

[shadowslice e]

hey guys, if Shadowslice, crafto22, or anyone who knows enough wants to help fill out the ECE method wiki page here than it would be greatly appreciated!

https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/SSC_(Shadowslice_Snow_Columns)

 

[JTWong71]

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.

Tried combined the 2 methods somewhat, got the STM down to around 30.

y2 //Inspection
R2 U2 R2 D F' r' //First Block
B D' R' D L F2 B U' B' L' //EO+Some Edges
U' R2 U R2 U' F2 D' L2 D' L2 D2 F2 //CP+EP

28 STM, if somehow someone learns all the final permutations for the last step.

y2 //Inspection
R2 U2 R2 D F' r' //First Block
B D' R' D L F2 B U' B' L' //EO+Some Edges
U F2 D' L2 U L2 U F2 D //CP + BR Edge Placement Skip
M2 U M U2 M' U M2 //EPLL

32 STM, Seperating CP and then doing EP.

Not sure if this was just lucky, although I combined the E-Slice Edges with the Orientation step, while also placing a couple edges for a 2x2x3.

Did the same scramble using ECE:

x //Inspection
F R' L d' B //EOLine
R' U R' U' B2 R U' R //E-Slice Edges + CO
U2 D' L U2 L D L D' L D L' D' L2 U2 L' //CP
D' M S' D' M D2 M U' S' M U //L8E

39 STM, it could've dropped to 28 STM but that is only if someone learns CP+EP combined when only 4 pieces are solves as a minimum.

Same scramble using HK:

y //Inspection
D' F' R2 B' L D2 F2 D2 //2x2x3
F' U F U' F' U2 F //EO+F2L-1C
R' F R F' R' F R F' R F R' F' R //AB3C
F' U' f R F R' B' R //L3C

36 STM

 

[wir3sandfir3s]

Tried combined the 2 methods somewhat, got the STM down to around 30.

y2 //Inspection
R2 U2 R2 D F' r' //First Block
B D' R' D L F2 B U' B' L' //EO+Some Edges
U' R2 U R2 U' F2 D' L2 D' L2 D2 F2 //CP+EP

28 STM, if somehow someone learns all the final permutations for the last step.

y2 //Inspection
R2 U2 R2 D F' r' //First Block
B D' R' D L F2 B U' B' L' //EO+Some Edges
U F2 D' L2 U L2 U F2 D //CP + BR Edge Placement Skip
M2 U M U2 M' U M2 //EPLL

32 STM, Seperating CP and then doing EP.

Not sure if this was just lucky, although I combined the E-Slice Edges with the Orientation step, while also placing a couple edges for a 2x2x3.

Did the same scramble using ECE:

x //Inspection
F R' L d' B //EOLine
R' U R' U' B2 R U' R //E-Slice Edges + CO
U2 D' L U2 L D L D' L D L' D' L2 U2 L' //CP
D' M S' D' M D2 M U' S' M U //L8E

39 STM, it could've dropped to 28 STM but that is only if someone learns CP+EP combined when only 4 pieces are solves as a minimum.

Same scramble using HK:

y //Inspection
D' F' R2 B' L D2 F2 D2 //2x2x3
F' U F U' F' U2 F //EO+F2L-1C
R' F R F' R' F R F' R F R' F' R //AB3C
F' U' f R F R' B' R //L3C

36 STM

Eyy nice work, should definitely be tested on more scrambles before any wide generalizations are made, but I think this does at least prove that this should be tested more. Thanks for this
Can you explain what the steps are as well? I would like to test this too.

 

[JTWong71]

The steps will probably be slightly altered later if it works well.
I used a hybrid Petrus HK Variant by building part of the 2x2x3, then finishing the 2x2x3.
Then, in more specified steps, orient the edges, corners, and solve the E-Slice. The steps can be combined by using algorithms such as the usual WV, SV, CLS, SLS. Then solve CP, and then EP.
I just thought of some quick things that I thought would reduce the move count from Petrus HK.
I still think the steps can be improved if it works out.

 

[crafto22]

I was going to change it once I realized, I was rushing the naming part because it was already late for me and I had school the next day. Other than the naming of what the reconstructed steps had, it was still your solve. If you still don't believe me, you can check the video and see if the moves matched what you did.

Fixed Version:
U F R2 D' R U' //Partial EO+1, Orient Some Corners
D L' U2 R U R' U2 L U' R U R' D2 //Summer Variation
R2 U' R2 //Seperate Corners
y' R2 U R2 U' R2 U R2 U R2 U2' R2 //Permute Corners
y M' U M2 U' M' //BR + BL Edges
y' M' U' M U M' U' M D' //EO + 2 More Edges
R2 U R U R' U' R' U' R' U R' U2 //EPLL

Yes that is correct nice job!