[Unofficial] Mike Hughey square-1 multiBLD 10/10

[Faz]

Now do it faster.

 

[SixSidedCube]

Hahaha, Feliks, I reckon you should give this a go....

 

[amostay2004]

Now do more.

fixed

 

[Shortey]

That is absolutely incredible! You never fail to surprise us with your amazing creativity and skill! How many ideas have you got in your sleeve?

Also, thank you for making us better! With your world class performance, the "average" cuber will also be better.

(Now, I HAVE TO make it to US nats this year!)

Good luck.

 

[StachuK1992]

Seriously - try it first by learning the method without memorizing the matrix - "open notes". Very close to an actual solve: (once you've learned the method and tried a few step-by-step while looking at it) scramble the puzzle, then look at my page to get the memorization for the particular case. It won't take very long to commit that temporarily to memory, or even write it down on a piece of paper. Then do the rest of the solve normally. Once you can do that, it's just a matter of memorizing the matrix - you have the rest of the method entirely learned.

Please feel free to ask me questions. Remember that this is the first time anyone has actually tried to learn it from my instructions - I wouldn't be surprised if I have some big holes or even errors in it; I'm the only one who's ever proofread it at all. I can guarantee my method works, but I can't guarantee the instructions until someone else consistently succeeds from them!

Oh yes, I definitely plan on doing a few sighted solves before anything else, getting the algs down, and finally deciding on my pace of memo.
It's about time I do something cool with BLD, so why not Sq-1?

I'll be sure to notify you of any gaps in the tutorial that I may find.

 

[Stefan]

Pfft. Give me 10 trivial shapes and a day to memo, and I can do that, too

I see your matrix explicitly covers all 90 shapes. Have you considered reducing that using one setup move? If I remember correctly, one shape is one move away from 19 other shapes, so you wouldn't need to memorize the matrix for those 19 shapes if you can look ahead for one move. That's the extreme case, not all are adjacent to so many others and there are overlaps, but you could still save a lot overall. Maybe Lucas or Bruce or so could determine the smallest set of shapes so that each shape is either in the set or just one move away from a shape in the set. I'd very much like to see this determined. And also for using up to two setup moves.

Btw, a suggestion: When you do something like this, take before and after pictures. Would be cool to see a large photo of the ten scrambled square-1 puzzles (so small in the video).

 

[Toad]

Mike you really are an inspiration to us all. This is an incredible feat, however "easy" it was. You're the first person to even get close, I look forward to your next ridiculous accomplishment.

How about sq2 bld

 

[da25centz]

So what else do you have to do before you're ready for that rediculous BLD relay?

 

[Enter]

Mike Hughey you are a computer with 1000gigs of ram
just wow!

 

[joey]

Mike you make me want to teach my dad BLD just so I can have a badass BLD dad like you.

 

[Jukuren]

Awesome - that's the best prize anyone could have given me for this.

im actually pretty stoked...
im pretty slow at initially getting to square shape so this will help my speed solves too!
so i think im going to jump into the matrix right away lol...
ill prolly memo the matrix in sub groups like im doing with COLL
like all the cases that have T shape on bottom first or something like that
or move count starting from closest

 

[bluecloe45]

wut.

 

[Mike Hughey]

(Now, I HAVE TO make it to US nats next year!)

I hope you really will - it would be an honor to meet you!

I see your matrix explicitly covers all 90 shapes. Have you considered reducing that using one setup move?

Actually, yes, I very much considered it. If you learn all of the cases 1 move away from square (just 1 case), 7 moves away from square (again, just 1 case), and 4 moves away from square (22 cases), you just need 24 total cases to cover it all. But for me, there's really not a lot of difference between learning 24 cases and learning 90 cases; it really didn't make much sense for me to do that. I think it would be significantly harder (and significantly slower) to do it this way - you have a whole extra thing to worry about, and it's already pretty bad having to juggle the matrix with your new memorization in your head. When I've gotten the 1 move away case (which has happened several times, but not in this multi - for this multi I even only had one two-move case, if I remember correctly), I always wonder if I should just do the speedBLD solve instead, but I never do, because it just seems easier to always do the same thing. The already square case actually throws me a bit - I have to remember to just do the easy thing and memorize the pieces directly.

Btw, a suggestion: When you do something like this, take before and after pictures. Would be cool to see a large photo of the ten scrambled square-1 puzzles (so small in the video).

I never thought about this before, and it certainly would have been nicer for square-1 in particular. I'm sorry I didn't think of it before - I'll be sure to do it for whatever big attempt I do next.

 

[Chuck]

Wonderful...!!!

Great job!!!

As for the matrix memorization, it's about like committing 60 3x3x3 cubes worth of memorization to permanent memory.

Only 6 cubes more than I've ever memorized, this really made me want to start learning it. Haha.

Thank you, Mike

 

[Stefan]

If you learn all of the cases 1 move away from square (just 1 case), 7 moves away from square (again, just 1 case), and 4 moves away from square (22 cases), you just need 24 total cases to cover it all.

I doubt that's optimal, though. Will send Lucas+Bruce PMs, just in case they miss this.

 

[HaraldS]

wat!

 

[EricReese]

If you had bought more sq 1's would you have done possibly a bigger multi BLD?

 

[irontwig]

If you had bought more sq 1's would you have done possibly a bigger multi BLD?

No, 10 is clearly the human limit.

 

[LearningCode]

No, 10 is clearly the human limit.

Sarcasm alert!

 

[DavidWoner]

Hey Mike what's your average memo-solve breakdown for a single solve?