stinkocheeze
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 453
IT'S OVER 9000!
Method idea
- Thread starter nlCuber22
- Start date
IT'S OVER 9000!
nlCuber22
Veteran
You're doing it wrong.
The number of cases for that step is not even high, so you just basically,
what is,
what is this I don't even.
ManasijV
Veteran
Ok this is what I thought. (comparing it to CFOP in each step)
1) I did an average of 12. 4 moves. CFOP 7 moves.
2) Same as CFOP.
3) I think this makes up for the moves lost during the cross. R' F R F' is not the only algorithm required by the way.
4) Orient edges. CFOP orient LL
5) COLL. Permute LL
6) Well CFOP is already done.
1) I did an average of 12. 4 moves. CFOP 7 moves.
2) Same as CFOP.
3) I think this makes up for the moves lost during the cross. R' F R F' is not the only algorithm required by the way.
4) Orient edges. CFOP orient LL
5) COLL. Permute LL
6) Well CFOP is already done.
qqwref
Legend
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 7,834
- Location
- a <script> tag near you
- WCA ID
- 2006GOTT01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Interesting idea, but I can't see any way this would be an improvement over a Fridrich-type version (i.e. cross, 3 F2Ls, VHF2L, COLL, EPLL). Recognizing the two separate EPs is icky - especially considering you can't do it by just looking at two faces, like you can for PLLs - and I really doubt you'll be finding any good algs for most cases. I think you'd be much better off just wasting the extra ~2 moves to make a proper cross, and then doing EPLL at the end, which is really fast.
nlCuber22
Veteran
Mostly what I was meaning for it to be was something useful to know so you can take advantage of easy cases. I will still probably be developing algs and learning the full method for that very purpose.
Plus, bragging rights.
Plus, bragging rights.
4Chan
Premium Member
Lol, since the recent Cube Explorer with slice moves came out, making edge perm algs should be easier than back in the day. xD xD
nlCuber22
Veteran
Haha, yeah.
Anthony
Professional Speedcuber
Mostly what I was meaning for it to be was something useful to know so you can take advantage of easy cases. I will still probably be developing algs and learning the full method for that very purpose.
Plus, bragging rights.
I highly doubt that you're going to generate all the algs and actually learn this method and use it. You may start, but you won't pull through.
The main reason people have been coming up with all these spinoff methods lately is simply for "bragging rights", which is silly. You guys aren't really trying to come up with something good, just something that is a bit different so you can call it your "own method."
Although, you could prove me wrong.
nlCuber22
Veteran
Mostly what I was meaning for it to be was something useful to know so you can take advantage of easy cases. I will still probably be developing algs and learning the full method for that very purpose.
Plus, bragging rights.
I highly doubt that you're going to learn this method and actually use it. You may start, but you won't pull through.
The main reason people have been coming up with all these spinoff methods lately is simply for "bragging rights", which is silly. You guys aren't really trying to come up with something good, just something that is a bit different so you can call it your "own method."
Although, you could prove me wrong.
I'm going to at least try to learn it. I was going to learn COLL anyway.
Notice the wink emoticon after bragging rights. I'm not about to brag about something as insignificant as this. Also, I posted this because I thought it would be an interesting idea. It's different than any other (decent) 3x3 method that I've seen, anyway. Plus, I'm sure at the very least sub-12 averages are attainable with it. I've been playing around with it all day, it really is fun.
Anthony
Professional Speedcuber
It's still CFOP, so it's really just a Fridrich spinoff.
ianini
Veteran
As are most of these new methods.
Anthony
Professional Speedcuber
That's my point.
No one's really thinking of anything new. The majority of people posting these methods are doing it simply because they want to be able to say they have their own method.
nlCuber22
Veteran
I decided to compose some freeform poetry, just for you.
Code:
oh
look it's
ianini he's
a cool cat
doin
it wrong on
forums
and doesn't
afraiding of
anything
you're
trying too hard
especially to
agree
with Anthony
in this thread
it's ianini
Last edited:
ianini
Veteran
But that's not to say that there aren't some good, experimental methods. But the majority are just CFOP variations.
Anthony
Professional Speedcuber
ianini
Veteran
I wasn't insulting your method, I was just stating that most of these new methods are variations of CFOP.
nlCuber22
Veteran
Swordsman Kirby
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2006
- Messages
- 1,802
Shut up, seriously.
riffz
Veteran
Well seeing as the cross can be solved with proper permutation in usually 6 moves or less, I don't think I'll bother learning a bunch of cases with tougher recognition and more algorithms to drop my cross times.
Ton
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 738
- Location
- Den Haag, The Netherlands
- WCA ID
- 2003DENN01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
I see that you can do edge in like 4-5 move where I normally use 6-7 moves
That's why I do not think do the edges last will be very beneficial
But still interesting concept. Why not extend this with also the corner of the first layer, e.g. do F2L but do not care about corner orientation
That's why I do not think do the edges last will be very beneficial
But still interesting concept. Why not extend this with also the corner of the first layer, e.g. do F2L but do not care about corner orientation
