Hawaiian Kociemba 3x3x3 TUTORIAL - Method of Michael H.

adimare said:
Seems to me that in doing so you've completely deviated away from the proposed method and are currently rediscovering FMC techniques while giving false hope to people who have faith in this method.
Click to expand...
The basis of this method is freedom, is completely okay that he is doing this, as there will always be new variants and new ideas. Here he is just using a different way to finish cube.
 
Trying to combine with ECE/SSC:
I. 2x2x2 Block (In BL)
II. EO + Extend to 2x2x3 Block (Full block at DL)
III. 2x2x1 Block + CP (Not sure if CP is worth doing)
IV. Solve last E-Slice Edge while Orienting Corners
V. Solve LL + F2L Corner (2G, CP+EO Solved, along with a 2x2x3 Block)

31 STM Example Solve (Somewhat lucky):
R U2 D' F' D' //2x2x2
F2 R U2 F2 R U R2 //EO + 2x2x3
y' U2 R' U2 F U R' U' R F' U' R2 //2x2x1 + CP + F2L Skip
U M2 U M' U2 M U M2 //EPLL

Edit:
Maybe combining like:
I. 2x2x2 Block
II. EO + Extend to 2x2x3 Block
III. E-Slice + CO
IV. CP+EP (Not sure exactly how many algorithms there would be... All pieces oriented, 5 Edges, 6 Corners left to solve)

Same Scramble 38 STM Solve:

R U2 D' F' D' //2x2x2
F2 R U2 F2 R U R2 //EO + 2x2x3
y' R U R U2 R' U R U2 R2 //E-Slice + EO (Cancelled 'R' Move)
D' R' U2 R' U R2 U' R D R U R' U D' R D R' //CP+EP

The second combination looks less efficient, but easier to execute.
 
Last edited:
wir3sandfir3s said:
Lol you seem to have this thought in your head that you absolutely have to not solve an edge piece for this method to work...
Click to expand...
It's in the description of pretty much every variant of the method in the OP... also, if you remove that and say that you should solve that piece, then this method is just ZZ if you orient the edges in the first step, or CFOP if you don't...

wir3sandfir3s said:
I am not exactly sure where your argument is, what you have against the method, and why. You are just repeating yourself.
Click to expand...
How am I repeating myself? My arguments should be clear from my posts: 1) The main idea of this method (which seems to be extra freedom in the F2L by ignoring one of the cross pieces) is terrible and 2) The so-called variants of the method have absolutely nothing to do with the original ideas and bring nothing new to the table, they're just regular Heise or Petrus solves.

wir3sandfir3s said:
The basis of this method is freedom, is completely okay that he is doing this, as there will always be new variants and new ideas. Here he is just using a different way to finish cube.
Click to expand...
You're basically saying that any solve can be counted as HK. Take a look at this HK-NISS variation solve I did a few days ago for the FMC weekly competition:

Scramble: D2 F2 B' U' F' D' U2 R2 L' D' F L' R2 D' F' L' U' L B2 F
{F U L} // EO
U' L2 F' R2 D' L2 U2 L2 // 2x2x3
{U' * F'} // F2L-1
{F' B U B' U B U2 F B'} // AB3C
*: [R', U L' U']

23 htm!!! Imagine how great this will be for speedsolving
 
adimare said:
It's in the description of pretty much every variant of the method in the OP... also, if you remove that and say that you should solve that piece, then this method is just ZZ if you orient the edges in the first step, or CFOP if you don't...


How am I repeating myself? My arguments should be clear from my posts: 1) The main idea of this method (which seems to be extra freedom in the F2L by ignoring one of the cross pieces) is terrible and 2) The so-called variants of the method have absolutely nothing to do with the original ideas and bring nothing new to the table, they're just regular Heise or Petrus solves.


You're basically saying that any solve can be counted as HK. Take a look at this HK-NISS variation solve I did a few days ago for the FMC weekly competition:

Scramble: D2 F2 B' U' F' D' U2 R2 L' D' F L' R2 D' F' L' U' L B2 F
{F U L} // EO
U' L2 F' R2 D' L2 U2 L2 // 2x2x3
{U' * F'} // F2L-1
{F' B U B' U B U2 F B'} // AB3C
*: [R', U L' U']

23 htm!!! Imagine how great this will be for speedsolving
Click to expand...
Alright I think I finally see what you mean, sorry. Correct me if I am wrong.
So we are talking about two different things: FMC and Speedsolving. For FMC, you are totally correct then. I haven't really done FMC too much so don't quote me on this, but the steps kind of tend to mold together and it the methods are really free (thinking of getting into FMC, seems fun). So, it is basically impossible to make variations or hybrids of a method, because it would be too one sided, so you are definitely correct there.
For this method in Speedsolving, I am not trying to take any FMC technique and apply it to Speedsolving. Speedsolving methods are more restricted which help look ahead and you always know what to do next. Because of this, it is better to make variations, and that's what i have been doing with this method - creating Speedsolving variations. I corrected myself a little while ago (a few pages back in the thread replies) and said this method wasn't good for FMC quite yet and I would work on a variation for it (and am still doing so). I thought JTWong71 was actually doing Speedsolving reconstructions and just using different LL techniques, but you have helped bring to my attention that this is incorrect (thanks). Now, the variations/hybrids are HK variations/hybrids because they share traits with both HK and whatever else.
So this argument has gotten quite off topic from where it started, so if I still haven't made a valid argument for anything please tell me. Also, if this goes on any longer, I think we will have to agree to disagree (lol).
Perspective matters, sorry. My bad
 
JTWong71 said:
The only time where I will use Cube Explorer is when there is something that isn't always the easiest to solve intuitively with close to optimal moves for the step.
Click to expand...
Unless you generally use Cube Explorer during speedsolves, an example solve you did with Cube Explorer is not an accurate representation of the potential of a method during a speedsolve.

How about you do some speedsolves with this method, post the video, and let someone else reconstruct them. Then we'll see how efficient this method really is.
 
JTWong71 said:
I don't have anything to film my solves or to upload it on, as my parents don't want to me put things on Youtube.
Click to expand...

JTWong71 said:
but do you think I wouldn't already have a channel if I am able to get 12 second averages? One of the solves was also a couple days before I posted it on the forums.
Click to expand...

PurpleBanana said:
Unless you generally use Cube Explorer during speedsolves, an example solve you did with Cube Explorer is not an accurate representation of the potential of a method during a speedsolve.

How about you do some speedsolves with this method, post the video, and let someone else reconstruct them. Then we'll see how efficient this method really is.
Click to expand...

Out of all of the example solves I did, only 1 of them I used Cube Explorer for 1 of the steps. All of the other ones I used without the aid of software.
 
U2 F2 L2 U' F2 D R2 U L2 D' U' B U B2 U L U F2 L' F R

R' L2 F' U' B U B' F2 B2 y2 //EOarrow
R U2 R L' U2 L
R' U' R U R' U' R
U' L U L' U2 L U L'
U R U2 R' U R U' R' //F2L-1 Edge
z D' R U' R2 D R' U D' R U' R2 D R' U z' //HKOLL + preserving blocks
R U R' U' R' U' R' U R U //HKPLL

60HTM, where is the efficiency in this method? I can see how it might work if you did the petrus 'variant'.
 
Hssandwich said:
U2 F2 L2 U' F2 D R2 U L2 D' U' B U B2 U L U F2 L' F R

R' L2 F' U' B U B' F2 B2 y2 //EOarrow
R U2 R L' U2 L
R' U' R U R' U' R
U' L U L' U2 L U L'
U R U2 R' U R U' R' //F2L-1 Edge
z D' R U' R2 D R' U D' R U' R2 D R' U z' //HKOLL + preserving blocks
R U R' U' R' U' R' U R U //HKPLL

60HTM, where is the efficiency in this method? I can see how it might work if you did the petrus 'variant'.
Click to expand...

Was the last two things you did in that solve just a normal PLL and HKEP?

I pretty much just think of this method as a subset type thing.
Leaving one unsolved F2L-Piece is pretty much the idea of this method.
I don't really like the Non-Variant HK as much as the Variants.
 
JTWong71 said:
I can try to help you with that.
I am currently trying to find a method other than CFOP that has the potential to be fast.
Click to expand...
yea, this seems like it has potential to be fast. What's the most algorithm-efficient version? and also what do the EHKPLL algorithms do and what are the cases(It means edges Hawaiian kociemba Pll right?)
 
Shiv3r said:
yea, this seems like it has potential to be fast. What's the most algorithm-efficient version? and also what do the EHKPLL algorithms do and what are the cases(It means edges Hawaiian kociemba Pll right?)
Click to expand...
The most alg efficient variation is the CP+EO variation, some people say it's complex to learn but I found it pretty easy to pick up. EHKPLL are the edge HKPLLs, like EPLLs. HKPLL is Hawaiian Kociemba PLL. So yes, you are correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
NEW Guide to Choosing a Speedcubing Method (Speedcubing.org)
5 6 7
Replies
126
Views
17,713
PetraPine
PetraPine
TheSlykrCubr
ZZ-CT vs Hawaiian Kociemba
Replies
4
Views
916
Username: Username:
Username: Username:
S
Hawaiian Kociemba
Replies
8
Views
1,742
Kaneki Uchiha
Kaneki Uchiha
Username: Username:
Quest to become sub-10 Hawaiian Kociemba (ditching CFOP, HK is better & we have pineapples)
2
Replies
21
Views
4,410
Username: Username:
Username: Username:
Cubingcubecuber
  • Poll Poll
Quest For Sub 10 Hawaiian Kociemba | New Directions
6 7 8
Replies
154
Views
25,710
zed zed
zed zed
Back
Top