Hi. So this thread is going to be about trying to develop a Lin approach that both lowers the amount of algs needed for CSP ( either for people that don't like algs or who want an easier transition to full CSP ) and allows earlier implementation of PLL+1. This would be a 2 part approach.
Part 1: CSP
The first part would be to cut the CSP alg in half. The approach would to only learn the non-parity cubeshapes while also still learning to recognize parity in inspection. This would lower the algs from 180 => 90 or 130 => 65 ( The CSP doc list 90 cubeshapes while Jaap's lists only 65 shapes. I'm assuming Jaap's is lowered due to reflections thus only including unique shapes). The steps would to identify Parity in inspection and then take one of 2 routes. (1) If parity is not present, you will execute one of the 90 cubeshape algs and solve as normal or (2) when parity is present solve again the normal cubeshape but solve parity earlier within the solve.
Part 2: Algs
The second part will be focus on pathway (2) from above and it's implementation in using PLL+1. So after following pathway (2) you will solve parity during CP+DF instead of during EPLL. Since parity is found in inspection there is no need to have a different recognition for CP+DF, you'd only need to learn an extra 8 algs. The added benefit of spotting parity in inspection is that you could option select using PLL+1 in 50% of your solves. As previously mentioned, this allows you to learn PLL+1 earlier on. The CP+DF parity alg approach is going to depend on if those algs are better than EPLL parity algs. If this ends up not being the case then you can still option select PLL+1 with this approach. However, if CP+DF parity is not implemented that would end up meaning that half your solves would be VERY good and half would be VERY bad ( Case (1) would be no parity and PLL+1 which saves like 7 moves and case (2) where you both have to use CP+DF which adds moves over PLL+1 and EPLL with parity which also add addtional moves over standard EPLL ), in which case you'd be better of learning all of CSP, thus making this approach moot. This could also be done in Vandenburgh where you solve CP+Parity or Edge Separation + Parity.
If anyone is interested in genning these algs that be really cool or if someone could tell me how to gen Square-1 algs I can do it myself.
anyway,
Cheers!
Part 1: CSP
The first part would be to cut the CSP alg in half. The approach would to only learn the non-parity cubeshapes while also still learning to recognize parity in inspection. This would lower the algs from 180 => 90 or 130 => 65 ( The CSP doc list 90 cubeshapes while Jaap's lists only 65 shapes. I'm assuming Jaap's is lowered due to reflections thus only including unique shapes). The steps would to identify Parity in inspection and then take one of 2 routes. (1) If parity is not present, you will execute one of the 90 cubeshape algs and solve as normal or (2) when parity is present solve again the normal cubeshape but solve parity earlier within the solve.
Part 2: Algs
The second part will be focus on pathway (2) from above and it's implementation in using PLL+1. So after following pathway (2) you will solve parity during CP+DF instead of during EPLL. Since parity is found in inspection there is no need to have a different recognition for CP+DF, you'd only need to learn an extra 8 algs. The added benefit of spotting parity in inspection is that you could option select using PLL+1 in 50% of your solves. As previously mentioned, this allows you to learn PLL+1 earlier on. The CP+DF parity alg approach is going to depend on if those algs are better than EPLL parity algs. If this ends up not being the case then you can still option select PLL+1 with this approach. However, if CP+DF parity is not implemented that would end up meaning that half your solves would be VERY good and half would be VERY bad ( Case (1) would be no parity and PLL+1 which saves like 7 moves and case (2) where you both have to use CP+DF which adds moves over PLL+1 and EPLL with parity which also add addtional moves over standard EPLL ), in which case you'd be better of learning all of CSP, thus making this approach moot. This could also be done in Vandenburgh where you solve CP+Parity or Edge Separation + Parity.
If anyone is interested in genning these algs that be really cool or if someone could tell me how to gen Square-1 algs I can do it myself.
anyway,
Cheers!
