• 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!

Idea for CFOP users learning ZBLL

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,777
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
So it struck me that Lars Petrus' approach[1] of combining two COLL/EPLL algs is also usable with OLL algs, eg: Pi7: f R U R' U' f' F R U R' U' F' (P+T OLL). Since there's quite a number of 6-8 move OLL that a CFOP user would know I think this approach has got some potential, but it would probably take a computer search like the one Lars did to prove that.

Because I couldn't find any trace of said method in the ZBLL list on the wiki I guess this could possibly be a somewhat new idea. Hopefully someone will find learning ZBLL slightly easier with this idea.

[1] http://lar5.com/cube/270/index.html
 

Kirjava

Colourful
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
6,122
WCA
2006BARL01
YouTube
Visit Channel

S'

Anyway, another popularly considered approach is simply learning the OLL/PLL combos for all cases.

I imagine that many of the 'pure' ZBLL algs that can be created from two OLL algs are simply two OLL algs anyway.

Also, are you sure you can cover all the ZBLL cases with the short OLL algs? I have doubts.
 

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,777
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Well, that's just a matter on how you would prefer to execute it, besides with "f' F" it is more obvious that it's just two algs back-to-back.

Anyway, another popularly considered approach is simply learning the OLL/PLL combos for all cases.

I imagine that many of the 'pure' ZBLL algs that can be created from two OLL algs are simply two OLL algs anyway.

Also, are you sure you can cover all the ZBLL cases with the short OLL algs? I have doubts.
Yeah, alot of fast OLLs are unfortunately Sune-variations who doesn't affect corner permutation and the 6 movers swap diagonally. So that's not too good, but even a small part of ZBLL is probably a lot of cases anyway, and I doubt only one approach is the best one for all cases. Anyway, anything that makes ZBLL easier to learn is IMO quite welcome.
 

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,777
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Joey brings up a very good point. If you're going to learn 500 algorithms you better learn 500 good algorithms or your really wasting your time.
But what do you think is faster executing 2 algs you know by heart or executing one you "kinda know" since you've learnt so many? A lot of people use two OLLs to solve T and/or Y perm, so there's probably at least a few cases that are quite decent.
 
Last edited:

MiloD

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
319
Location
NY
Petrus' alg combos are only 2-3 moves above optimal on average and all the algs are pretty easy to execute.

How many people are using all optimal ZBLL algs anyway? And how fluent is their execution?
 

Cride5

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Scotland
WCA
2009RIDE01
I really like Lars's idea of a 1-look 2-alg system. To me it makes all sorts of sense. Minimum alg approaches are great because the amount of time practising each one is maximised, which really makes a difference to execution speed. The benefits of using only one-look are obvious. I'm already learning this kind of thing with separation prediction in the first step of Guimond, and it really is quite a bit faster!

The main thing which is missing from Lars's page is the combination of algs which can be used to solve each ZBLL case. He possibly hasn't actually figured all of them out himself yet.

Certainly this system is capable of solving both ZBLL, or a completely scrambled LL (CFOP users). However, applying it to CFOP will create major recognition issues! I'm not sure if this applies to all ZBLL cases, but I haven't yet found a set which isn't recognisable by looking at only the U-face and two specific sides. I doubt the same would apply to full LL recognition.

Anyway, cheers for the inspiration irontwig, I think I'm going to dig deeper into this 1-2 LL approach...
 
Last edited:

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,777
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I really like Lars's idea of a 1-look 2-alg system. To me it makes all sorts of sense. Minimum alg approaches are great because the amount of time practising each one is maximised, which really makes a difference to execution speed. The benefits of using only one-look are obvious. I'm already learning this kind of thing with separation prediction in the first step of Guimond, and it really is quite a bit faster!

The main thing which is missing from Lars's page is the combination of algs which can be used to solve each ZBLL case. He possibly hasn't actually figured all of them out himself yet.
Just click on the COLL cases and it will bring you that a page with cases

Certainly this system is capable of solving both ZBLL, or a completely scrambled LL (CFOP users). However, applying it to CFOP will create major recognition issues! I'm not sure if this applies to all ZBLL cases, but I haven't yet found a set which isn't recognisable by looking at only the U-face and two specific sides. I doubt the same would apply to full LL recognition.
What do you mean "applying it to CFOP"? Full 1LLL or what? I think 1LLL will only be mastered if people are able to make a living out of cubing and even then I kinda doubt anyone will use it, but then again people used to doubt that people would do sub-10 avg in competition. 1LLL recog would be something like OLL, CLL and then look at two edges, fortunately with non-ZBLL there's always at least two non-U edge stickers on U.

Anyway, cheers for the inspiration irontwig, I think I'm going to dig deeper into this 1-2 LL approach...
Thanks, I try to make the forum a bit more interesting than "speedcubin".
 

Cride5

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Scotland
WCA
2009RIDE01
I really like Lars's idea of a 1-look 2-alg system. To me it makes all sorts of sense. Minimum alg approaches are great because the amount of time practising each one is maximised, which really makes a difference to execution speed. The benefits of using only one-look are obvious. I'm already learning this kind of thing with separation prediction in the first step of Guimond, and it really is quite a bit faster!

The main thing which is missing from Lars's page is the combination of algs which can be used to solve each ZBLL case. He possibly hasn't actually figured all of them out himself yet.
Just click on the COLL cases and it will bring you that a page with cases
Ah right, thanks. So that covers each of Bernhard Helmstetter's 177 cases?

I think it would still be useful to generate more options for each case, and also to cover mirrors/inverses separately.


Certainly this system is capable of solving both ZBLL, or a completely scrambled LL (CFOP users). However, applying it to CFOP will create major recognition issues! I'm not sure if this applies to all ZBLL cases, but I haven't yet found a set which isn't recognisable by looking at only the U-face and two specific sides. I doubt the same would apply to full LL recognition.
What do you mean "applying it to CFOP"? Full 1LLL or what? I think 1LLL will only be mastered if people are able to make a living out of cubing and even then I kinda doubt anyone will use it, but then again people used to doubt that people would do sub-10 avg in competition. 1LLL recog would be something like OLL, CLL and then look at two edges, fortunately with non-ZBLL there's always at least two non-U edge stickers on U.
Yup, I mean full 1LLL (any number of edges oriented/disoriented). Remember, 1LLL includes ZBLL, so any disadvantage of ZBLL is also in 1LLL.

For ZBLL recognition I start with the COLL case, and then figure out the edge permutation case by looking at patterns of blocks/opposite colours in F and R (similar to PLL recognition). Having random edges flipped would make this sort of recognition system unusable.

I think developing a good recognition system for 1LLL would be quite a challenge!


Anyway, cheers for the inspiration irontwig, I think I'm going to dig deeper into this 1-2 LL approach...
Thanks, I try to make the forum a bit more interesting than "speedcubin".
Speedcubin?
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
1,680
Location
Almelo, Holland
WCA
2008SMIT04
YouTube
Visit Channel
Speedcubin.

I know about 90 ZBLLs. All the algs I know are either speed-optimal or very very nearly speed-optimal. A few things I want to note:

- You are overreacting. Learning ZBLL isn't nearly as hard as people make it sound. The point is to take your time and rehearse your algs a lot. Rushing it won't work.
- People who are learning ZBLL are surely already very much motivated to learn algs, and fast ones. Using slower, easy to learn algs just doesn't contribute to the whole point of ZBLL, which is turning a 2-look LL into a 1-look LL, not into a 2-alg LL.
 

Kirjava

Colourful
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
6,122
WCA
2006BARL01
YouTube
Visit Channel
- People who are learning ZBLL are surely already very much motivated to learn algs, and fast ones. Using slower, easy to learn algs just doesn't contribute to the whole point of ZBLL, which is turning a 2-look LL into a 1-look LL, not into a 2-alg LL.

The point is that 1 look 2 alg LL is probably faster than 2 look 2 alg LL.
 

Tim Reynolds

Premium Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
995
Location
Boston, MA
WCA
2005REYN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Speedcubin.

I know about 90 ZBLLs. All the algs I know are either speed-optimal or very very nearly speed-optimal. A few things I want to note:

- You are overreacting. Learning ZBLL isn't nearly as hard as people make it sound. The point is to take your time and rehearse your algs a lot. Rushing it won't work.
- People who are learning ZBLL are surely already very much motivated to learn algs, and fast ones. Using slower, easy to learn algs just doesn't contribute to the whole point of ZBLL, which is turning a 2-look LL into a 1-look LL, not into a 2-alg LL.
This. Learning 72 ZBLL algs wasn't all that difficult, and just like OLL/PLL or any other alg set you know, each alg is distinctive. I'm not sure I have the time to continue learning ZBLL algs, but I'll try to move to the next set of 72 soon. Also, at least for the U cases, recognition isn't actually all that hard. I use mostly block recognition, just like for PLL, and when I've been practicing ZBLL recently it's not that hard.

Incidentally the ones I have the most difficulty with are the ones that are two "short algs" put together. I can never remember what moves I do in between the two algs, and it makes it flow not-so-well. I like the other algs I've found way more, and they flow better. I used to have Allan+Bruno as one of my algs for four cases, but then I found something way nicer and switched.

Right now I have a text file with algs for each of the T cases in RU (when possible), RUL, RUF, and RULF. At some point soon I'll go through and pick out the good algs. But I generated them a while ago and haven't been motivated enough to bother yet, so...we'll see.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
1,680
Location
Almelo, Holland
WCA
2008SMIT04
YouTube
Visit Channel
- People who are learning ZBLL are surely already very much motivated to learn algs, and fast ones. Using slower, easy to learn algs just doesn't contribute to the whole point of ZBLL, which is turning a 2-look LL into a 1-look LL, not into a 2-alg LL.

The point is that 1 look 2 alg LL is probably faster than 2 look 2 alg LL.
No, the point is that a 1 look 1 alg LL is probably faster than a 1 look 2 alg LL.
 

Kirjava

Colourful
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
6,122
WCA
2006BARL01
YouTube
Visit Channel
- People who are learning ZBLL are surely already very much motivated to learn algs, and fast ones. Using slower, easy to learn algs just doesn't contribute to the whole point of ZBLL, which is turning a 2-look LL into a 1-look LL, not into a 2-alg LL.

The point is that 1 look 2 alg LL is probably faster than 2 look 2 alg LL.
No, the point is that a 1 look 1 alg LL is probably faster than a 1 look 2 alg LL.

Yes, I fully understand the point you're trying to make and do not disagree with it.

However, it'd be nice if you tried listening to the point I'm making.
 
Last edited:

irontwig

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
1,777
Location
Sweden
WCA
2010JERN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
You are overreacting. Learning ZBLL isn't nearly as hard as people make it sound.
So that's why there's so many people that know part of ZBLL, but almost no one that knows full ZBLL. Oh wait, that would point more towards people thinking it would be easier than it is. Is it that hard to agree that memorizing and keeping 100s of algs fresh is hard work? One can only speculate on what the best way of learning ZB would be, since no one's mastered it, and besides; different ways are probably better suited for different people.
 

Cride5

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Scotland
WCA
2009RIDE01
You are overreacting. Learning ZBLL isn't nearly as hard as people make it sound.
So that's why there's so many people that know part of ZBLL, but almost no one that knows full ZBLL. Oh wait, that would point more towards people thinking it would be easier than it is. Is it that hard to agree that memorizing and keeping 100s of algs fresh is hard work? One can only speculate on what the best way of learning ZB would be, since no one's mastered it, and besides; different ways are probably better suited for different people.
I have to agree with this. I think whether ZBLL 'feels' easy isn't just down to experience, but also the type of mind you have.

I personally find it quite difficult to remember infrequently used algorithms. Of the hundred or so algs I've learned and use, the most difficult ones to maintain are the ZBLL algs. Unlike any other alg sets, I have to periodically set aside time to practice just ZBLL's because they don't appear in my solves often enough. Perhaps if I had more time to dedicate to cubing this wouldn't be the case. Regardless, remembering ZBLL's isn't easy for me.
 
Top