# LBL for any cube above 3x3

#### caters

##### Member
Here is what my rubiks cube instructions look like:

Solve the green cross. Use this algorithm if an edge piece is not oriented correctly: Ri U Fi Ui

Solve the green corners. once a corner piece is directly below its correct spot do this algorithm 1,3, or 5 times: Ri Di R D

Solve the middle layer with either of these algorithms: U R Ui Ri Ui Fi U F or Ui Fi U F U R Ui Ri

Solve the blue cross(just getting a cross). If you already have it great. Otherwise do this algorithm: F R U Ri Ui Fi

Solve the blue edges. Hold red in front. if red blue and red yellow are both matched than hold white in front and do this algorithm: R U Ri U R U U Ri U If not than do this algorithm to position the yellow blue edge correctly: R U Ri U R U U Ri and than do the same thing as described before with the white in front.

Get the blue corners in the correct places. find a corner piece in the correct spot. Put that above your right thumb if you find one and do this algorithm once or twice: U R Ui Li U Ri Ui L Otherwise do that 1 time before you look for a corner in the right spot again

Orient the blue corners correctly. Turn the top layer so that you have a corner that needs to be flipped in the upper front right corner. Make sure red is in front during this step. Do this algorithm 2 or 4 times for every corner piece that isn't in the correct orientation: Ri Di R D

Now for 4x4, 5x5 etc. would I do the middle layer algorithms more than once like this

4x4: twice
5x5: thrice(not commonly used anymore but means 3 times)
6x6: 4 times
7x7: 5 times
8x8: 6 times
all the way to
11x11: 9 times?

Also would I do the cross algorithms more than once?

And what about the permutation and orientation of edges algorithms?

Basically I am wanting to know how to use these algorithms on any size cube above 3x3(In case I am one of those that can't use the fredrick method).

Last edited:

##### Member
Generally, put the cube in the 'shape' of a 3x3 first, and then solve it exactly as they would a 3x3. So, this means on a 4x4, first making the 2x2 centres, and putting them in the right position, and then putting the 2 halves of all the edge pieces together without mucking up the centres. This can all be done intuitively (i.e. without learning algorithms). After this, you just solve like a 3x3, i.e. using the algorithms you already know. There are little foibles, which we call parity issues (2 distinct types on even layer cubes like the 4x4, only 1 on the odd cubes). If you search for "reduction method" on these forums, there are loads of useful threads on the topic. Equally, youtube has lots of good videos on the subject.

Hope that helps.

#### caters

##### Member
yeah but that isn't really LBL because of the reduction first. true LBL on a 4x4 would be like this:

do the cross twice(centers than dedges)

oreint the edges if you have to

corner algorithm

middle layer algorithms twice(once for each layer)

Cross algorithm twice

Orientation and permutation of edges

Orientation and permutation of corners

Thats true LBL

the centers first method is sort of like the fredrick method on a 3x3

Than of course there is the sexy method(using only the sexy move to solve the whole cube) and other methods

but that step by step up there is true LBL on a 4x4 not centers first like they often teach you. I even saw that same exact method done on an 11x11

that helps avoid parity errors that true LBL

Last edited:

#### soup

##### Member
By far the least intelligent posts of all time.

Thats true LBL

the centers first method is sort of like the fredrick method on a 3x3

Than of course there is the sexy method(using only the sexy move to solve the whole cube) and other methods

but that step by step up there is true LBL on a 4x4 not centers first like they often teach you. I even saw that same exact method done on an 11x11

that helps avoid parity errors that true LBL

err, no. Once the last layer edges are paired off correctly, there's still odds you'll catch either oll or pll parity.

Now for 4x4, 5x5 etc. would I do the middle layer algorithms more than once like this

4x4: twice
5x5: thrice(not commonly used anymore but means 3 times)
6x6: 4 times
7x7: 5 times
8x8: 6 times
all the way to
11x11: 9 times?
You should stick to the reduction method. It'll save you plenty of time.

Last edited:

#### caters

##### Member
but the reduction method has much higher chance of parity than LBL does and also there have been record times for LBL on a 3x3(as low as 20 seconds) and 3 hours on an 11x11(most cubers take much longer on that even with faster methods). That is why I am saying LBL helps avoid parity is because of that higher chance of parity in the reduction method. also LBL is much easier for me to do on a 3x3 than any other begginer method(in fact I have tried others and can't do them). I do get pretty fast in my LBL since I know most of the algorithms for LBL by heart. I bet a 4x4 wouldn't add a lot of time to my LBL. Just a couple more algorithms and doing the same algorithms for more than 1 layer.

#### brian724080

##### Member
but the reduction method has much higher chance of parity than LBL does and also there have been record times for LBL on a 3x3(as low as 20 seconds) and 3 hours on an 11x11(most cubers take much longer on that even with faster methods). That is why I am saying LBL helps avoid parity is because of that higher chance of parity in the reduction method. also LBL is much easier for me to do on a 3x3 than any other begginer method(in fact I have tried others and can't do them). I do get pretty fast in my LBL since I know most of the algorithms for LBL by heart. I bet a 4x4 wouldn't add a lot of time to my LBL. Just a couple more algorithms and doing the same algorithms for more than 1 layer.

First, 20 seconds on a 3x3 is not impressive at all, neither is 3 hours on an 11x11. Next, [WIKI]parity[/WIKI] on a 4x4x4 cube happens when two adjacent wing edges are interchanged with each other, so the chances of getting that is the same as solving it with the reduction method. Not only that, LBL is impractical and inefficient, and I'm sure you are well aware of that when you say that you have to do the "same algorithms for more than 1 layer."

#### kcl

##### Member
but the reduction method has much higher chance of parity than LBL does {Provide mathematical proof for this.}and also there have been record times for LBL on a 3x3(as low as 20 seconds) {the world record average is 6.54 seconds. Who knows what you're smoking. I average like 11 and even that isn't considered fast.}
and 3 hours on an 11x11(most cubers take much longer on that even with faster methods){most people who practice 11x11 get sub 1 hour at least.}
That is why I am saying LBL helps avoid parity is because of that higher chance of parity in the reduction method.
{still no proof of this?}
also LBL is much easier for me to do on a 3x3 than any other begginer method(in fact I have tried others and can't do them).
{that is purely subjective.. I find CFOP easier than LBL.}
I do get pretty fast in my LBL since I know most of the algorithms for LBL by heart.
{Everybody denies their algs "by heart"}
I bet a 4x4 wouldn't add a lot of time to my LBL.
{Show me a sub 50 average with LBL and you might convince me.}
Just a couple more algorithms and doing the same algorithms for more than 1 layer.
{No, no, no. Doing a couple SLOW algorithms MULTIPLE times for MORE layers=slow}

#### brian724080

##### Member

I think his definition of "fast" on a 4x4 might be something like 5 minutes

#### kcl

##### Member
I think his definition of "fast" on a 4x4 might be something like 5 minutes

Oh... That's not even considered fast on 7x7

#### sneaklyfox

##### Member
Err... I want to make a comment but I won't because of this golden rule: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."

#### kcl

##### Member
Err... I want to make a comment but I won't because of this golden rule: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."

But THAT gets replaced by the PLATINUM RULE!

"Always tell the truth"
I just did. He seems to be horribly misinformed.

#### tx789

##### Member
Switch to redux. Get over parity and that you can't use CFOP learn. If you want to be a decent speed use what the wrold record holder use. Rather than try and use something bad that seems easier. Some things that help you get fast is hard you just have to live with it.

Also there are video's of 20 min solve for 11x11.

If you don't care about speed muck about with lbl for big cubes. And "true lbl" as you call it doesn't make the chances of parity decrease. How?
There's K4.
Where you solve 2 opposite centers

a 2x3x4 block on left.
L4C
finish first layer.

Finish F3L

And for last solve
CLL
ELL uses coms

#### sneaklyfox

##### Member
But THAT gets replaced by the PLATINUM RULE!

"Always tell the truth"
I just did.
Har har... but not all truths need to be told.

He seems to be horribly misinformed.
No kidding.