• 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!

Journey to ZBLL + Why ZBLL is so important

Will you learn ZBLL?


  • Total voters
    51

hexacuber

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
115
Hello fellow cubers!

I average around 12s on 3x3 and I know 2LLL. I've pretty much fully optimized my OLL's and PLL's, and I think I'm ready to learn another alg set. I know a lot of you will try to discourage me from going straight from OLL/PLL to learning ZBLL, but I honestly I think ZBLL something that I should learn early, so that when I'm averaging sub 9 or sub 8 (hopefully) I will have a firm grasp on ZBLL.

There several other alg sets, but I don't think it's worth learning any of them in their entirety. Of course it's important to know some of the easy cases of these alg sets, but learning more than just the easy cases is pointless imo.

- WV is not very useful if you know ZBLL bc you can just insert the pair normally then do ZBLL
- COLL is pointless if you know ZBLL
- OLLCP is not that great. Except for the easy cases, doing OLLCP+EPLL is about the same speed as OLL+PLL
- Most of the VLS algs aren't that much faster than inserting the pair then doing OLL
- BLE and CLS cases don't show up very often

Here are some pros/cons for ZBLL.

Pros
1. Only needs 1 look
2. Can be much more efficient than OLL/PLL
3. CP recognition actually is really easy if you use some sort of CXLL (for example CLL on 2x2)
4. EO control can increase your chances of getting a ZBLL case

Cons
1. EP recognition
2. ZBLL cases don't always pop up. And using EO control to increase the chances requires more brainpower
3. omg which of the 493 algs is this one. omg i did the wrong alg. omg why am i learning this alg set


I'm going to be starting by learning the T set, probably will take me around three months.
 

Nir1213

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
881
Location
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FveF-we6lcE
I totally agree that ZBLL is REALLY important. I know somewhere around the high-70s in terms of how many ZBLL algs I know and look to turn that into 90 by thanksgiving.
its important if you want to get efficient and faster. Top solvers like max park and feliks zemdegs know zbll already, i think feliks knows half of zbll, and max is learning zbll still.
 

Silky

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2020
Messages
152
I totally agree that ZBLL is REALLY important.
I don't think that it's really that important.
Top solvers like max park and feliks zemdegs know zbll already
You have to understand that Feliks and Max were already ridiculously fast before learning ZBLL stuff. ZBLL isn't what makes them fast is just makes them faster, if that makes sense. And it only makes them fast for singles not really for averages.
Pros
1. Only needs 1 look
2. Can be much more efficient than OLL/PLL
3. CP recognition actually is really easy if you use some sort of CXLL (for example CLL on 2x2)
4. EO control can increase your chances of getting a ZBLL case

Cons
1. EP recognition
2. ZBLL cases don't always pop up. And using EO control to increase the chances requires more brainpower
3. omg which of the 493 algs is this one. omg i did the wrong alg. omg why am i learning this alg set
I think that there are a lot more cons than this, at least when used with CFOP.

The problem with ZBLL with CFOP is that you utilize ZBLL far less often than with ZZ/Petrus. The probability of getting four oriented LL edges is 26/216 which is roughly a 12% chance to use just one ZBLL that you may know (obviously if you know all of them this is less of a problem but you still are only using it 12% of the time after learning almost 500 algs). This makes both recognition and execution much harder since you aren't regularly getting cases. In edition to this you're not executing it very often which means the efficiency is offset by a lower TPS and recognition. This is not to say it isn't useful but it seems much more like a crutch than anything. It would be better to focus on predicting OLL, faster recognition and execution, smoother solving, etc. Generally it would just be better to focus on your weak points than relying on learning tons of algs.
 

Nir1213

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
881
Location
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FveF-we6lcE
I don't think that it's really that important.

You have to understand that Feliks and Max were already ridiculously fast before learning ZBLL stuff. ZBLL isn't what makes them fast is just makes them faster, if that makes sense. And it only makes them fast for singles not really for averages.


I think that there are a lot more cons than this, at least when used with CFOP.

The problem with ZBLL with CFOP is that you utilize ZBLL far less often than with ZZ/Petrus. The probability of getting four oriented LL edges is 26/216 which is roughly a 12% chance to use just one ZBLL that you may know (obviously if you know all of them this is less of a problem but you still are only using it 12% of the time after learning almost 500 algs). This makes both recognition and execution much harder since you aren't regularly getting cases. In edition to this you're not executing it very often which means the efficiency is offset by a lower TPS and recognition. This is not to say it isn't useful but it seems much more like a crutch than anything. It would be better to focus on predicting OLL, faster recognition and execution, smoother solving, etc. Generally it would just be better to focus on your weak points than relying on learning tons of algs.
ok, i will start from top to bottom.

(1) its IMPORTANT for speed, like what you suggested, as in singles.

(2) yea it makes them faster thats what im talking about
only for singles, but faster nontheless.

(3) 12% is not too bad tbh, taking the fact that speedcubers do hundreds of solves everyday, which means around 50 solves that are ZBLL. So if you did this for a week, it would be around 400 solves with zbll.
for the fact that you arent practicing much zbll since cases dont really pop up, there are zbll trainers out there, which you can practice everyday.
you can do other stuff as well, while maintaining ZBLL algs in your big brain lol.

Feliks does around hours doing solves, which vary to 3 - 6 seconds. At an average, it is 4 - 6 seconds, so he does maybe around 500 - 1000 solves a day.
so that means around a 100 solves with ZBLL, not too shabby.
 
Last edited:

Silky

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2020
Messages
152
ok, i will start from top to bottom.

(1) its IMPORTANT for speed, like what you suggested, as in singles.

(2) yea it makes them faster thats what im talking about
only for singles, but faster nontheless.

(3) 12% is not too bad tbh, taking the fact that speedcubers do hundreds of solves everyday, which means around 50 solves that are ZBLL. So if you did this for a week, it would be around 400 solves with zbll.
for the fact that you arent practicing much zbll since cases dont really pop up, there are zbll trainers out there, which you can practice everyday.
you can do other stuff as well, while maintaining ZBLL algs in your big brain lol.
(1) Singles don't make you fast, averages do.
(2) See (1)
(3) 12% only after learning ALL of ZBLL. If you were to learn all of the T cases you're only getting it 1% of the time. Sure you can use a trainer but recognition in a solve is very different than recognition in a vacuum. The point I'm trying to make is that ZBLL is a huge time investment for marginally better times versus investing in reducing your weaknesses. It's the issue of diminishing returns. Like spending 5 hours spamming PLLs to get like .3 seconds faster is less worth it than spending 5 hours practicing slow solves to save 2-3 seconds during F2L.
 

hexacuber

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
115
Thanks for your feedback!

You have to understand that Feliks and Max were already ridiculously fast before learning ZBLL stuff. ZBLL isn't what makes them fast is just makes them faster, if that makes sense. And it only makes them fast for singles not really for averages.
I understand that you don't need ZBLL to be very fast. However ZBLL does improve your average times slightly, and also helps you get very good singles. Imagine you're about to break the WR but you don't know the ZBLL alg and you just do OLL/PLL which makes your solve slightly slower, which results in a WR fail. Personally I care about singles almost as much as average.

I think that there are a lot more cons than this, at least when used with CFOP.

The problem with ZBLL with CFOP is that you utilize ZBLL far less often than with ZZ/Petrus. The probability of getting four oriented LL edges is 26/216 which is roughly a 12% chance to use just one ZBLL that you may know (obviously if you know all of them this is less of a problem but you still are only using it 12% of the time after learning almost 500 algs). This makes both recognition and execution much harder since you aren't regularly getting cases. In edition to this you're not executing it very often which means the efficiency is offset by a lower TPS and recognition. This is not to say it isn't useful but it seems much more like a crutch than anything. It would be better to focus on predicting OLL, faster recognition and execution, smoother solving, etc. Generally it would just be better to focus on your weak points than relying on learning tons of algs.
First of all, you can often control EO during F2L which increases the chances to more like 25%. I probably will only learn around 300 ZBLL algorithms, also. All of TUL, and some of the cases from sune/antisune and pi/h. I'm not planning on learning all of sune/antisune because the standard alg (R U R' U R U2 R' and its inverse) are already quite fast. As for pi/h, their COLL's are pretty fast already and I probably will only learn the ZBLL algs for the cases where doing the COLL ends up in a z perm. Finally, recognition and execution both will come with practice. There is a reason why I'm learning ZBLL early on.
 

hexacuber

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
115
ZBLL will make you faster, but some might find that the amount of work might not be worth it.
I think a good general advice is to learn ZBLL only if you like learning algorithms (like me).
Otherwise it might be better to work on other things.

I said that ZBLL is important in the title because I think it is the most important alg set BESIDES oll/pll
 

Silky

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2020
Messages
152
I understand that you don't need ZBLL to be very fast. However ZBLL does improve your average times slightly, and also helps you get very good singles. Imagine you're about to break the WR but you don't know the ZBLL alg and you just do OLL/PLL which makes your solve slightly slower, which results in a WR fail. Personally I care about singles almost as much as average.
I mean it's subjective after all. Generally I think having a fast average is much more impressive that having a fast single. Fast singles are far more about luck than skill. The WR single is really lucky outside of just having a ZBLL.

An example is Jakub Kipa who has the 8th fastest single but isn't even top 100 in average.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
399
This is going to be highly controversial, but I would say go through and learn all the ZBs with easy recognition first. If you PM me I can send you a list later. That’s what I’ve been doing since it’s probably the better approach to practically implementing ZBs into solves over time.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
399
That's an interesting suggestion. I might actually try learning that way.
Do it. If you go through each set, you’ll notice there are cases with super easy recognition, such as T32, Which was the first ZB I learned because I kept seeing it in solves and got tired of not knowing an alg for a case I recognize instantly.
 

LukasCubes

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
325
Location
West Virginia
Whoever thinks ZBLL sucks, you are wrong. I still use CFOP right now but sometimes I could pull a ZB solve up and ZB will be my main method once i finish ZBLL
 

Nir1213

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
881
Location
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FveF-we6lcE
(1) Singles don't make you fast, averages do.
(2) See (1)
(3) 12% only after learning ALL of ZBLL. If you were to learn all of the T cases you're only getting it 1% of the time. Sure you can use a trainer but recognition in a solve is very different than recognition in a vacuum. The point I'm trying to make is that ZBLL is a huge time investment for marginally better times versus investing in reducing your weaknesses. It's the issue of diminishing returns. Like spending 5 hours spamming PLLs to get like .3 seconds faster is less worth it than spending 5 hours practicing slow solves to save 2-3 seconds during F2L.
(1) once in a while you get lucky solves in a row, that can lead to fast averages if ZBLL is included

(2) see "(1)

(3)
First of all, you can often control EO during F2L which increases the chances to more like 25%. I probably will only learn around 300 ZBLL algorithms, also. All of TUL, and some of the cases from sune/antisune and pi/h. I'm not planning on learning all of sune/antisune because the standard alg (R U R' U R U2 R' and its inverse) are already quite fast. As for pi/h, their COLL's are pretty fast already and I probably will only learn the ZBLL algs for the cases where doing the COLL ends up in a z perm. Finally, recognition and execution both will come with practice. There is a reason why I'm learning ZBLL early on.
anyway even if you dont learn all of ZBLL, maybe the ones that appear the most will help. And the ones that are actually good.
 

Nir1213

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
881
Location
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FveF-we6lcE
Whoever thinks ZBLL sucks, you are wrong. I still use CFOP right now but sometimes I could pull a ZB solve up and ZB will be my main method once i finish ZBLL
zb is basically CFOP but the last layer has like 700 algs.
You have to learn ZBLS, or the just the easy version, VHLS, and then ZBLL.

yes the method is better than CFOP but it will take a long time to learn all 700 algs, let alone keep them in your head.
Jabari Naruddin though, has learned around 5,000 algs, He knows i think full zbls, zbll, and alot others.

 

LukasCubes

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
325
Location
West Virginia
zb is basically CFOP but the last layer has like 700 algs.
You have to learn ZBLS, or the just the easy version, VHLS, and then ZBLL.

yes the method is better than CFOP but it will take a long time to learn all 700 algs, let alone keep them in your head.
Jabari Naruddin though, has learned around 5,000 algs, He knows i think full zbls, zbll, and alot others.

CIt is CFOP but once you get to the last slot, you solve the last pair while orienting edges (ZBLS). Then you do ZBLL (493 algs).
 
Top