• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

[Help Thread] Hoya Discussion

Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
1,079
Likes
636
Location
Gauteng, South Africa
WCA
2014GRAY03
What are your thoughts on co-centre building (building two centres at the same time) and (partial) edge pair preservation during L2Ce ?

I'm asking this because, I find myself doing that on 4x4-6x6 (I use Hoya on all three with a particular combination of 3x3 methods) and sometimes it does pay off in terms of move count (especially when the preserved edges are fully paired) but sometimes (especially when I try to preserve 2+ edge pairs) it feels like a waste of time and effort.

Apologies if it was already discussed on this thread.
I build 5 edges before L2C, so the chances of having an extra premade pair to deal with are quite high, and my back slots are always full.

If there's one extra pair, I always try preserve it. If I can, I try to put the pair in FR or FL then use inner slice moves where necessary to finish the centres. Other times, if the pair is in U and I can put the pair in UR so that Rw could hide the pair, then I do an F move to position centres so that I can pair them while hiding the pair.

If there are multiple extra pairs to deal with, I will almost always pick the easiest to preserve and forget about the others. The exception is when L2C can be done with <Rw, U2>, in which case I put the pairs on the sides and preserve them.
 
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
1,234
Likes
258
Location
Portland, OR, USA
WCA
2013BROT01
YouTube
chree55
I build 5 edges before L2C, so the chances of having an extra premade pair to deal with are quite high, and my back slots are always full.

If there's one extra pair, I always try preserve it. If I can, I try to put the pair in FR or FL then use inner slice moves where necessary to finish the centres. Other times, if the pair is in U and I can put the pair in UR so that Rw could hide the pair, then I do an F move to position centres so that I can pair them while hiding the pair.

If there are multiple extra pairs to deal with, I will almost always pick the easiest to preserve and forget about the others. The exception is when L2C can be done with <Rw, U2>, in which case I put the pairs on the sides and preserve them.
Ooooo... that's really clever. So if the pair is on FU or BU, but the L2C alg is Rw U2 Rw', would you instead do like: R U R' U' Rw U2 Rw'?
 
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
1,234
Likes
258
Location
Portland, OR, USA
WCA
2013BROT01
YouTube
chree55
Joey totally ninja'd me on this. I'm working on a video like this... maybe this'll light a fire under me to actually finish it.

Cool video! The 5x5 stuff was pretty illuminating :)

I do, however, disagree with the final assessment on efficiency... using this method for every single case does not save moves in the long run. The basic cases shown are really the only good ones, movecount-wise... and even there, if you count them, the only ones saved are the F setups (still worth it). But with more complicated cases the movecounts get worse. Also, recognition and execution are so much quicker when things are simpler (2 algs vs 1 intuitive concept)... though something like that probably starts to even out with practice.
 
Last edited:

TDM

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
7,009
Likes
319
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
WCA
2013MEND03
YouTube
TDM028
Sorry for bumping an old thread, but there's something which I've seen a few people disagreeing about recently and I thought we should aim to standardise things a bit more.

Currently for 5x5, there don't seem to be standard names for the basic method and any variants. Some people are calling the standard Hoya applied to 5x5 "Hoya5", and others are just calling it "Hoya". There's also a variant of it invented by me and Odder which people call either "Hoya5" or "Hodder". They may be other variants which I don't know about.

Here's my proposal:

1) Name the standard method applied to 5x5 "Hoya". Given that it's the same method as on 4x4, I feel it should have the same name, especially since this is true for Yau and Reduction (neither of which get a -5 suffix when applied to 5x5). This will also make naming new variants more simple, as the core method will have the most basic name, and we can then add to the end of the name.

2) Name the variant proposed by me and Odder "Hoya5". It share similarities to Yau5, so the naming would again be more consistent with other methods. Although Odder did create it, given that he wasn't the only one, I don't think the name "Hodder" should be used. Sorry Oscar!
(to clarify, the steps here are:
  1. First 4 centres
  2. Three cross edges in the back
  3. Back two F2L slots (finishes a 4x4x5 with nothing else solved)
  4. Last two centres+finish cross
  5. Edge pairing (e.g. with AvG)
  6. 3x3 stage with solved XX-cross
The difference between this and Hoya is step 3. It doesn't have to be this restricted - you could pair up any two edges and put them into the back with an R'/L move - but this is just the general idea)


I know this is nothing overly important but it could cause a bit less arguing if we settled on something.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
1,985
Likes
332
Location
Mimal the Elf's boot
WCA
2016PERS01
YouTube
Ordway Persyn
Sorry for bumping an old thread, but there's something which I've seen a few people disagreeing about recently and I thought we should aim to standardise things a bit more.

Currently for 5x5, there don't seem to be standard names for the basic method and any variants. Some people are calling the standard Hoya applied to 5x5 "Hoya5", and others are just calling it "Hoya". There's also a variant of it invented by me and Odder which people call either "Hoya5" or "Hodder". They may be other variants which I don't know about.

Here's my proposal:

1) Name the standard method applied to 5x5 "Hoya". Given that it's the same method as on 4x4, I feel it should have the same name, especially since this is true for Yau and Reduction (neither of which get a -5 suffix when applied to 5x5). This will also make naming new variants more simple, as the core method will have the most basic name, and we can then add to the end of the name.

2) Name the variant proposed by me and Odder "Hoya5". It share similarities to Yau5, so the naming would again be more consistent with other methods. Although Odder did create it, given that he wasn't the only one, I don't think the name "Hodder" should be used. Sorry Oscar!
(to clarify, the steps here are:
  1. First 4 centres
  2. Three cross edges in the back
  3. Back two F2L slots (finishes a 4x4x5 with nothing else solved)
  4. Last two centres+finish cross
  5. Edge pairing (e.g. with AvG)
  6. 3x3 stage with solved XX-cross
The difference between this and Hoya is step 3. It doesn't have to be this restricted - you could pair up any two edges and put them into the back with an R'/L move - but this is just the general idea)


I know this is nothing overly important but it could cause a bit less arguing if we settled on something.
Just a little correction, on normal Hoya steps 2 and 4 are also different (you make all four cross edges in step 2)

I personally feel as if Hoya 5 is not a good name for Hodder, normal* Yau on 5x5 and up is usually called Yau 5, so it makes sense that normal* Hoya is called Hoya 5 (normal may not be quite the right word, as Hoya and Yau work slightly different on 5x5+ due to difference in L8E pairing, this is not the case for Redux). Hodder has more fundamental differences compared to normal Hoya, and should be given a name more indicative of it's difference.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
1,985
Likes
332
Location
Mimal the Elf's boot
WCA
2016PERS01
YouTube
Ordway Persyn
Yup, you're right about the first point.


This is not true - Yau5 is a different method to Yau. But even if it was, calling the method "Hodder" would be like calling CFOP "Fridrich".
I thought that the difference between Yau and Yau 5 were inherent to solving 5x5+, I don't know much about Yau5 so that probably was the biggest flaw in my reasoning.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
103
Likes
14
YouTube
Studio connor
hey guys, i use hoya method to solve 4x4
I am stuck at the moment in progress and i would like some tips to help break the sub 40 barrier
Are there any hoya users who can give some helpful tips?
 

Elf

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
24
Likes
6
Location
Germany
WCA
2013FISC01
Bump.

I was wondering what the best times are that have been reached using Hoya. I could not find anything about this in the forums sadly, but maybe someone here knows something. :)
I currently average around 36 to 37 on 4x4 (single PB 27.95) and around 1:12 on 5x5 (PB 58.xx) and actually consider myself quite high at the hoya ranking.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
24
Likes
6
Location
Western Australia
WCA
2015LANG03
Hey! What would be goal splits for 1:00 and 0:45 seconds on Hoya solves? My current averages are as follows;

First Four Centers: 13.79
Cross Edges: 19.23
Edge Pairing: 14.61
3x3 Stage: 20.26
 
Top