# Flipping algorithms?

#### SaMn37

##### Member
So, I was thinking, is it beneficial to fit algorithms to your own logic so the pieces are facing you in a favored position for the way you've learnt stuff, or am I just doing harm to my learning if I do this?

I'm not really a pro so sorry if this is doesn't make sense or is useless.

So here is an example of an algorithm for solving last two edges. In my edit it's first rotated Z X, then the algorithm modified to work in that position. I think my edit makes more sense (maybe because it's alike some of the algorithms I've learnt before.)

If making changes like this makes a difference in speed and ease of rotations, would it be possible to gain speed by modifying the algorithms? Kind of like optimizing the algorithms for ease and speed.

#### Sub1Hour

##### Member
So, I was thinking, is it beneficial to fit algorithms to your own logic so the pieces are facing you in a favored position for the way you've learnt stuff, or am I just doing harm to my learning if I do this?

I'm not really a pro so sorry if this is doesn't make sense or is useless.

So here is an example of an algorithm for solving last two edges. In my edit it's first rotated Z X, then the algorithm modified to work in that position. I think my edit makes more sense (maybe because it's alike some of the algorithms I've learnt before.)

If making changes like this makes a difference in speed and ease of rotations, would it be possible to gain speed by modifying the algorithms? Kind of like optimizing the algorithms for ease and speed.
View attachment 12254
If you really don't want to rotate to do an alg then go ahead but a Z takes much less time then doing a moved alg with D moves

#### xyzzy

##### Member
It's not a bad idea per se to modify algs like what you did, but this is usually not necessary if you're learning the method and algs from a good tutorial/source to begin with.

When doing edge pairing with the reduction method on big cubes, the two main styles are E-slice edge pairing (primarily use Uw and Dw moves to match edge pieces) and M-slice edge pairing (primarily use Lw and Rw moves). Neither style is clearly better than the other on modern hardware (*), but most people use E-slice and if you want to use M-slice edge pairing, you'll have to adapt the algs meant for E-slice accordingly.

(*) I see in your member intro post that you're using V-Cubes, which are very much not modern hardware. I suspect that on bad cubes, M-slice may be better than E-slice due to lower reliance on fingertricks.

#### SaMn37

##### Member
It's not a bad idea per se to modify algs like what you did, but this is usually not necessary if you're learning the method and algs from a good tutorial/source to begin with.

When doing edge pairing with the reduction method on big cubes, the two main styles are E-slice edge pairing (primarily use Uw and Dw moves to match edge pieces) and M-slice edge pairing (primarily use Lw and Rw moves). Neither style is clearly better than the other on modern hardware (*), but most people use E-slice and if you want to use M-slice edge pairing, you'll have to adapt the algs meant for E-slice accordingly.

(*) I see in your member intro post that you're using V-Cubes, which are very much not modern hardware. I suspect that on bad cubes, M-slice may be better than E-slice due to lower reliance on fingertricks.
Yeah, slices are near impossible with the V-cubes, I really should get a better 5x5 at the very least. I'm sure I'm missing out a lot. At least I'm going to get some wrist workout now that I'm about to do the V-cube 7 a bit now

I just tried out mirroring the Ri Di R D alg to L D Li Di and using that to solve the last corners, it's fun experimenting this way, but is there any benefit? :thinking:

#### SaMn37

##### Member
Sorry bro, we don't have that emoji yet, although I have heard that @pjk is working on adding more.
I thought the point would come across even though it didn't work :shrug: