Blah: There are 24 buffers you can choose from. The reason that we are listing the URB and UBL as the buffers is because this is an advanced method. Since it's advanced, that means that other experience must have been gained to be able to approach this method. As such, they have created old habits that die hard. A sticker on the U layer is chosen as the buffer for numerous reasons. Orient First Users, well they Orient to the U layer, and why would you change your buffer now? Other methods, such as Pochmann's 2-cycle method use U layer buffers. You are able to see the U layer very easily.
With this method, the buffer is relatively objective, but up until this point you were bound to a standardization of methodology, because of the narrow mindedness of a few algorithms with many setups.
Parity Fixes are best don't with PLLs which again are done on the U layer.
Changing your buffer now, when all these reasons had limited you to a few choices in the past, would be foolish. There is no greater buffer relative to the solving methods. Parity fixes, perhaps are different and better with U layer PLLs, but that's neither here nor there.
The move count and case count is still the same. For all my good algorithms, we found that Chris would have a bad algorithm.
For all my bad algorithms, we found that Chris would have a good algorithm.
We found that a case for me that is good as an AB pure commutator (that is Insert, Interchange, Insert', Interchange': ABA'B'). It could be bad for him.
However, he would have an opportunity for a good BA pure commutator.
Orthogonal Cases and Columns have a lot of freedom to optimize the setups to give you that personal favorite. If you pick a bad setup move that gives you a bad commutator that's your fault.
Since all 24 buffers are arbitrarily equal, it would seem foolish to change your muscle memory, and would hinder your learning process, because the application to blindfolded cubing would be awkward, as you would want to sometimes memorize from your old buffer.
Later,
DB
