I just did a Google search for "2-gen notation" hoping to find some useful resources on how to abbreviate sequences such as:
(R U2 R' U) R2 U2 (R' U' R U') R2
The repetition of "R" and "U" in such a sequence seems useless and distracting to what the meaning of the sequence truly conveys. The solver KNOWS to alternate between R and U faces, but needs to know only the direction in which to turn each face.
To my amazement, the Google search did not yield any results. 2-gen algorithms are fairly common (at least nowadays they are), so I would have expected someone to think of a better scheme for conveying them.
I think for sure this needs to be done. A new notation would not only make such 2-gen algorithms take up less space on a page, but they would also be easier to memorize. I NEVER memorize 2-gen algorithms by thinking "AHR YEW TWO AHR INVERTED YEW AHR TWO YEW TWO......" This is just silly. I always end up relying on following corner-edge pairs, like I do for most winter variation algorithms, or I do the algorithm over and over until it makes a bond in my finicky muscle memory. Muscle memory is my least favorite kind, since the SLIGHTEST amount of conscious thought about the sequence results in its failure. In order to let your muscle memory work, you have to turn your brain off and trigger a reflex, and the reflex is not guaranteed to turn out correctly.
As I have started to learn CLS, I have learned that many of the algs break up and manipulate corner-edge pairs in ways that I cannot easily follow. For this reason my WV strategy of memorization becomes ineffective. I intend to use my proposed notation for learning CLS...
In addition, I don't think about turning faces in terms of clockwise and counterclockwise rotation. Although I understand the principle of clockwise versus counterclockwise, I typically think of individual moves as "turn the right side up", "turn the top side left", etc etc: a face plus the DIRECTION in which to turn that face. When I see "L", it translates in my head to "turn the left side down" because I MEMORIZED how to translate it. I know it really means "turn the left side clockwise", but when I think that way I can't quickly find out which way to turn the face. This preference of mine may originate from the first notation I learned (a face-direction notation), or it may be that I find clockwise/counterclockwise to be more awkward. Again, I don't know if you all find the same to be true, but from my experience it is more natural to think of moves like "turn the bottom face left" instead of "turn the bottom face counterclockwise".
So to summarize the problem:
1. Standard notation conveys a lot of useless information about 2-gen algorithms.
2. Such a clunky notation may force the cuber to rely on muscle memory which is not always reliable.
3. For at least SOME people, the notion of clockwise/counterclockwise is awkward.
So here is my proposal for a 2-gen algorithm notation system.
- Each algorithm consists of a sequence of characters.
- Each character represents a face, either U or R, and the direction in which to turn that face.
- The characters are:
R = turn the top side to the RIGHT (= U')
L = turn the top side to the LEFT (= U)
U = turn the right side UP (= R)
D = turn the right side DOWN (= R')
2 = turn the right or top side TWICE (= R2/U2); the face depends on whether the preceding face was R or U.
As an example, the clunky algorithm:
(R U2 R' U) R2 U2 (R' U' R U') R2
becomes:
(U2DL)22(DRUR)2
This is, at least for me, much easier to memorize than the original, and is much more useful for capturing what I need to know to perform the 2-gen algorithm. Again, I KNOW I am alternating between the R and U faces (because it is 2-gen, after all), so all I need is the direction in which to turn each face, which the condensed form succinctly gives me.
I know it is possible to condense the notation further by including more letters of the alphabet, but then the problem becomes decompressing a memorized code into moves, which takes time for the solver. I also know that using the letters U, D, R, and L to represent directions may seem confusing, since they are normally used to represent a face, but this is simply my preference.
I want your feedback- what kind of 2-gen notation would you propose? How do you like to memorize 2-gen algorithms? The sky's the limit.
(This message should provide people a lengthly read! XP)
(The example algorithm is used for solving a CLS case. I found it at: http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/)
(R U2 R' U) R2 U2 (R' U' R U') R2
The repetition of "R" and "U" in such a sequence seems useless and distracting to what the meaning of the sequence truly conveys. The solver KNOWS to alternate between R and U faces, but needs to know only the direction in which to turn each face.
To my amazement, the Google search did not yield any results. 2-gen algorithms are fairly common (at least nowadays they are), so I would have expected someone to think of a better scheme for conveying them.
I think for sure this needs to be done. A new notation would not only make such 2-gen algorithms take up less space on a page, but they would also be easier to memorize. I NEVER memorize 2-gen algorithms by thinking "AHR YEW TWO AHR INVERTED YEW AHR TWO YEW TWO......" This is just silly. I always end up relying on following corner-edge pairs, like I do for most winter variation algorithms, or I do the algorithm over and over until it makes a bond in my finicky muscle memory. Muscle memory is my least favorite kind, since the SLIGHTEST amount of conscious thought about the sequence results in its failure. In order to let your muscle memory work, you have to turn your brain off and trigger a reflex, and the reflex is not guaranteed to turn out correctly.
As I have started to learn CLS, I have learned that many of the algs break up and manipulate corner-edge pairs in ways that I cannot easily follow. For this reason my WV strategy of memorization becomes ineffective. I intend to use my proposed notation for learning CLS...
In addition, I don't think about turning faces in terms of clockwise and counterclockwise rotation. Although I understand the principle of clockwise versus counterclockwise, I typically think of individual moves as "turn the right side up", "turn the top side left", etc etc: a face plus the DIRECTION in which to turn that face. When I see "L", it translates in my head to "turn the left side down" because I MEMORIZED how to translate it. I know it really means "turn the left side clockwise", but when I think that way I can't quickly find out which way to turn the face. This preference of mine may originate from the first notation I learned (a face-direction notation), or it may be that I find clockwise/counterclockwise to be more awkward. Again, I don't know if you all find the same to be true, but from my experience it is more natural to think of moves like "turn the bottom face left" instead of "turn the bottom face counterclockwise".
So to summarize the problem:
1. Standard notation conveys a lot of useless information about 2-gen algorithms.
2. Such a clunky notation may force the cuber to rely on muscle memory which is not always reliable.
3. For at least SOME people, the notion of clockwise/counterclockwise is awkward.
So here is my proposal for a 2-gen algorithm notation system.
- Each algorithm consists of a sequence of characters.
- Each character represents a face, either U or R, and the direction in which to turn that face.
- The characters are:
R = turn the top side to the RIGHT (= U')
L = turn the top side to the LEFT (= U)
U = turn the right side UP (= R)
D = turn the right side DOWN (= R')
2 = turn the right or top side TWICE (= R2/U2); the face depends on whether the preceding face was R or U.
As an example, the clunky algorithm:
(R U2 R' U) R2 U2 (R' U' R U') R2
becomes:
(U2DL)22(DRUR)2
This is, at least for me, much easier to memorize than the original, and is much more useful for capturing what I need to know to perform the 2-gen algorithm. Again, I KNOW I am alternating between the R and U faces (because it is 2-gen, after all), so all I need is the direction in which to turn each face, which the condensed form succinctly gives me.
I know it is possible to condense the notation further by including more letters of the alphabet, but then the problem becomes decompressing a memorized code into moves, which takes time for the solver. I also know that using the letters U, D, R, and L to represent directions may seem confusing, since they are normally used to represent a face, but this is simply my preference.
I want your feedback- what kind of 2-gen notation would you propose? How do you like to memorize 2-gen algorithms? The sky's the limit.
(This message should provide people a lengthly read! XP)
(The example algorithm is used for solving a CLS case. I found it at: http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/)