F2L with 0 rotation

[Harris Chan]

Do you think that doing the 4 F2L pairs with no rotation is an advantage?
You might gain time because of no rotation, but can you still see the pairs as easily?

Perhaps there is a way?

For example, if you want to solve the BR slot with this algorithm:

R' U2 R d' R U R'

Instead, with no rotation, you can do:

R' U' F R' F' R U' R

The question is, which algo can you actually do faster with?

 

[joey]

I do think no rotation at all, wouldn't be as fast as some roation. There are easy cases which are just as fast every angle(ie R U R').

One thing I try do is, if I want to rotate the cube, I do it while in the middle of solving the current pair.

I might start trying to use d and d', instead of y. I find double layer-D quite difficult to do though.

 

[AvGalen]

Yes, this is possible, but I wouldn't like do B U B' for example. Gilles van den Peereboom told me that he does this for one-handed. I guess that is a good choice because cube-rotations are slow for one-handed.

 

[dChan]

No matter what I do, I instinctively rotate the cube to see a case, only when I hit PLL do I do a move in order to see the case. So I don't know if F2L with 0 rotations would be fast enough for me.

 

[pjk]

I find it funny that I am trying to answer a question to Harris, one of the quickest speedsolvers in the world, but anyway, I think if you could solve with 0 rotation and still get a look ahead, you could be just as quick, if not quicker. However, I have seen 0 rotation and lots of rotation produce similar, amazing, times.

 

[dChan]

Yeah. I never start with one front color, at the end I have one of four front colors facing, so I have a lot of rotations. I have seen many people with the same thing and they have fast times, so I think you may get only a little bit more speed out of a no rotation F2L.

 

[Erik]

I'm trying to keep the amount of rotations as less as possible but instead of inserting with B moves I have no doubt of doing a healthy cube rotation first

 

[dChan]

I have maybe only 2 algs in my repertoire that require a B turn and I always tilt/rotate my cube to turn them. So if an F2L has B moves, then I'd still be rotating the cube.

 

[AvGalen]

Maybe we should just take the B-face of the cube. That would improve times considerably AND allow for F2L with 0 rotation

Seriously, I never use algs that have rotations in them on the 3x3x3 (that means no Dan Knights Z for example) but I do use a lot of intuitive rotations because I use Keyhole. I think that cube rotations are the most important reason keyhole is slower than intuitive F2L. (the other reason is you need more "looks")

 

[dChan]

Originally posted by AvGalen@Apr 19 2007, 02:38 AM
Maybe we should just take the B-face of the cube. That would improve times considerably AND allow for F2L with 0 rotation

Seriously, I never use algs that have rotations in them on the 3x3x3 (that means no Dan Knights Z for example) but I do use a lot of intuitive rotations because I use Keyhole. I think that cube rotations are the most important reason keyhole is slower than intuitive F2L. (the other reason is you need more "looks")

Well you can rotate the cube using keyhole if you want but personally I just do Uw to insert edges which eliminates most rotations.

 

[pjk]

Definitely quicker for me to rotate and do an R rather than do a B from the front. However, what if you practiced enough to be able to do a B just as quick without moving the cube?

 

[dChan]

How would you do that without rotation the cube even just a bit? You would need to stretch your finger far back whic his a bit hard. Either that or regrip by oputting your thumb on top.

 

[pjk]

You could use your pinky, or index on your left hand, depending on how you hold it normally.

 

[gillesvdp]

Originally posted by AvGalen@Apr 16 2007, 07:41 AM
Yes, this is possible, but I wouldn't like do B U B' for example. Gilles van den Peereboom told me that he does this for one-handed. I guess that is a good choice because cube-rotations are slow for one-handed.

Indeed I am trying to avoid cube rotations, especially when I solve with only one-hand.

It does seem pretty clear that avoiding cube rotations could be an advantage for solving F2L. However, it may force you so use longer algorithms and/or use slower faces like L.
Therefore, speedsolving F2L might be better done through consistancy like solving F2L using only R and U moves (done by Jean Pons at the WC 2005).


THerefore I do not think that avoiding cube rotations is the best solution for speedsolving even though it might help. On the contrary, it is quite useful do avoid these when you solve OH.

Gilles

 

[AvGalen]

This is the second time this happens. Both Michael and Gilles haven't posted here in a long time. Their names get mentioned in a topic and all of a sudden they start posting again.

Are you just lurking/viewing all the time, or do you have a "name-scanner"-bot running in the background

Gilles, I think there is something wrong with your registration for http://www.speedcubing.com/events/gcd2007/. I can't imagine you not participating in 3x3x3, 4x4x4, 5x5x5 and 3x3x3 blindfolded. Or are you only coming on the first day? See you there.

 

[Erik]

Yes he has exams I think

 

[AvGalen]

Gilles always seems to have exams during weekends (especially when there is a competition). Maybe he just can't solve a cube 2-handed

 

[gillesvdp]

Haha, no...no exams this time.
I just have a stupid compulsory course on Saturday.
For the story, it is the same course that forced me to leave the Belgian Open for a few hours earlier this year.

But as you mention, I just can't solve cubes. I prefer to focus on the Magic.

 

[AvGalen]

I recent bought a lot of stuff from http://www.9spuzzles.com/, including many Magic variations. I will bring them with me to Germany.

 

[Hubdra]

Recently, I've been practicing F2L with no rotation. Though it seems like it has inherent problems like awkward hand movements, I believe that this could be solved with just a little more expanded finger exercises when cubing. I'm sure, like algorithms, the movements will become more natural. Just like those F2L algs that are not intuitive (breaking up the cross), these could just be learned.

More Importantly, what I've found was, when I was rotating to do the simple R U R', I temporarily lost where I was for my F2L. This is probably one of my own faults, but sometimes, you just lose where you are (not to mention the actual movement of the rotation). I found that I could look for the next few f2l cases MUCH easier, considering that for the most part, they stayed in the same spot. Also, when I timed myself, I found that I was only a few seconds off my regular times. I'm sure after some practice, this could really shave off those crucial extra seconds.


Of course, this is just my experience, and a relatively short one too. I'm not sure how much it helps, or how effective it is. Just my two cents.