Christchin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3
Hey guys.
I'd like to get some more eyes on my thought process here, as I'm relatively new to the cubing community and have a lot to learn. So, I don't have any particular questions, but want to welcome ideas and critiques.
I'm developing my own approach based off a couple of premises. First, as a casual cuber, I like to develop skills that don't quickly perish once I put down the cube for a minute. Second, by keeping things simple and perfecting tools and how I interface with them, skills are more sustainable and increasingly efficient. Hence, what I'm trying to do here is rely on a small, manageable number of algorithms and instead focus on building spatial intuition and mnemonic economy. Make sense?
So, after trying a number of methods, I decided I really like Petrus's approach to the last layer, but I loved the intuition of Fridrich's F2L. So, nothing fancy, I decided to try to marry the two using minimal algs, then focus on reducing or eliminating steps. Here's what I have:
1) White Cross
2) F2L with EO Control
3) Permute the corners with CO Control (below)
4) Orient the corners
5) Permute the edges
So, that's pretty much it. Five steps, as few as 3 algorithms: Niklas (3), Sune (4), and Edge Cycling (5), which I prefer to Petrus's Allen. Originally I had another step--3, Orient the corners--which used some algs from the Layer By Layer method, but I found that using EO control on F2L was faster and much more intuitive.
It's a great Beginner's approach, because, as I said, it focuses on building cube intuition and doesn't overwhelm one with complex algorithms. It also scales well in that you can add in a few more algs and really reap their benefits.
As you develop toward Intermediate, you can learn Bert, R2U2R2U2R2UR2U2R2U2R (Arne Alternative), and Eve. That's only 6 algs.
I'm working on the Advanced below, which will only add one or two more algs. My approach is to control corner orientation in Step 3 using one or two more algs (with mirror/reverse), so by Step 4, you'll either have one corner correctly oriented (Sune layout) or all of them correctly oriented. This is where I could really use some input (see below).
For Expert, you could either develop Step 4 with these Sune algs and general skill enhancement (finger tricks, look-ahead, etc.), go full Petrus (46 algs), or make an easy switch either full CFOP (78 Algs) or Two-Look OLL (28 Algs - skipping the first look thanks to EO control).
Step 3
As I said, my approach here is to either end up with a Sune/Anti-Sune (1 corner correctly oriented) or all corners oriented correctly, which helps you skip or drastically reduce Step 4. It also shoehorns outcomes into just a few distinct possibilities. So, by the time you get to Step 4 you have the following chances and layouts: 66% Sune/Anti-Sune; 22% all corners correctly oriented; and 11% some other layout, which will require two Sunes. That makes Petrus's Sune Solutions extremely helpful, because you can use them 77% of the time and save tons of moves.
So what I've done here is calculate out 72 different algs on the 27 layouts you have for Step 3 swapping two adjacent corners (diagonal swaps will have to wait). After, removing duplicate layouts and redundant/mirrored algs you have 18 unique starting layouts and 30 algs to chose from, reflected in this chart. The X's represent a Sune/Solved outcome, and don't be thrown by my layout names.
The trick is to cover all of the layouts with as few Algs as possible (3 seems to be the minimum). You can find all the Algs along the top here.
Next, the question is which algs are fastest. Number of moves are labeled, but, of course, not always equal. Ergonomics come heavily into play. BH90, for instance, is unique in that it Sunes/Solves 11/18 layouts (all others are 9 or below) and Anti-BH-90 Solves 4/27 cases (all others are 2 or below), but this alg is long, awkward, and easily forgotten.
Here are some alg-combos that I've found that cover all the layouts, but it's not all of them. Solved outcomes are in parentheses.
[Niklas(2),BH90(4),Gx(2)]
[Niklas(2),BH58(2),Anti-BH58(2)]
[Niklas(2),BH54(2),Anti-BH54(2)/Anti-BH58(2)/Dx(2)/Ex(2)]
[Niklas(2),Clix(2),Anti-Bq(2)]
[Buffy(2),BH90(2),BH54/BH58/Anti-Dx/Ex]
[Buffy,Anti-Buffy,BH90(2)/Gx]
[Evelyn(2),Clix(2),BH90(2)/Anti-BH90(4)/Bq]
[BH54,Anti-BH54,BH90(2)]
[Anti-BH54(2),BH90(2),Czeslaw(1)/Anti-Buffy(2)/BH54(2)/BH58(2)/Anti-Dx(2)/Ex(2)]
[BH58(2),Anti-BH58(2),BH90(2)]
[BH58(2),Clix(2),Buffy(2)]
I personally like the second option because I can pretty much do all three without repositioning my hands. But I need to test a lot of the algs for speed/ergonomics.
I could also just try to get away with two algs. BH90 and BH54, for instance, cover 25/27 layouts, the other two could be solved with 2x Sunes. Just a thought.
Anybody else have any algs that swap adjacent corners?
Anyway, that's where I'm at in terms of development. I thought it might be a good idea to hit you guys up for tips and criticism (both are welcome).
I'd like to get some more eyes on my thought process here, as I'm relatively new to the cubing community and have a lot to learn. So, I don't have any particular questions, but want to welcome ideas and critiques.
I'm developing my own approach based off a couple of premises. First, as a casual cuber, I like to develop skills that don't quickly perish once I put down the cube for a minute. Second, by keeping things simple and perfecting tools and how I interface with them, skills are more sustainable and increasingly efficient. Hence, what I'm trying to do here is rely on a small, manageable number of algorithms and instead focus on building spatial intuition and mnemonic economy. Make sense?
So, after trying a number of methods, I decided I really like Petrus's approach to the last layer, but I loved the intuition of Fridrich's F2L. So, nothing fancy, I decided to try to marry the two using minimal algs, then focus on reducing or eliminating steps. Here's what I have:
1) White Cross
2) F2L with EO Control
3) Permute the corners with CO Control (below)
4) Orient the corners
5) Permute the edges
So, that's pretty much it. Five steps, as few as 3 algorithms: Niklas (3), Sune (4), and Edge Cycling (5), which I prefer to Petrus's Allen. Originally I had another step--3, Orient the corners--which used some algs from the Layer By Layer method, but I found that using EO control on F2L was faster and much more intuitive.
It's a great Beginner's approach, because, as I said, it focuses on building cube intuition and doesn't overwhelm one with complex algorithms. It also scales well in that you can add in a few more algs and really reap their benefits.
As you develop toward Intermediate, you can learn Bert, R2U2R2U2R2UR2U2R2U2R (Arne Alternative), and Eve. That's only 6 algs.
I'm working on the Advanced below, which will only add one or two more algs. My approach is to control corner orientation in Step 3 using one or two more algs (with mirror/reverse), so by Step 4, you'll either have one corner correctly oriented (Sune layout) or all of them correctly oriented. This is where I could really use some input (see below).
For Expert, you could either develop Step 4 with these Sune algs and general skill enhancement (finger tricks, look-ahead, etc.), go full Petrus (46 algs), or make an easy switch either full CFOP (78 Algs) or Two-Look OLL (28 Algs - skipping the first look thanks to EO control).
Step 3
As I said, my approach here is to either end up with a Sune/Anti-Sune (1 corner correctly oriented) or all corners oriented correctly, which helps you skip or drastically reduce Step 4. It also shoehorns outcomes into just a few distinct possibilities. So, by the time you get to Step 4 you have the following chances and layouts: 66% Sune/Anti-Sune; 22% all corners correctly oriented; and 11% some other layout, which will require two Sunes. That makes Petrus's Sune Solutions extremely helpful, because you can use them 77% of the time and save tons of moves.
So what I've done here is calculate out 72 different algs on the 27 layouts you have for Step 3 swapping two adjacent corners (diagonal swaps will have to wait). After, removing duplicate layouts and redundant/mirrored algs you have 18 unique starting layouts and 30 algs to chose from, reflected in this chart. The X's represent a Sune/Solved outcome, and don't be thrown by my layout names.
The trick is to cover all of the layouts with as few Algs as possible (3 seems to be the minimum). You can find all the Algs along the top here.
Next, the question is which algs are fastest. Number of moves are labeled, but, of course, not always equal. Ergonomics come heavily into play. BH90, for instance, is unique in that it Sunes/Solves 11/18 layouts (all others are 9 or below) and Anti-BH-90 Solves 4/27 cases (all others are 2 or below), but this alg is long, awkward, and easily forgotten.
Here are some alg-combos that I've found that cover all the layouts, but it's not all of them. Solved outcomes are in parentheses.
[Niklas(2),BH90(4),Gx(2)]
[Niklas(2),BH58(2),Anti-BH58(2)]
[Niklas(2),BH54(2),Anti-BH54(2)/Anti-BH58(2)/Dx(2)/Ex(2)]
[Niklas(2),Clix(2),Anti-Bq(2)]
[Buffy(2),BH90(2),BH54/BH58/Anti-Dx/Ex]
[Buffy,Anti-Buffy,BH90(2)/Gx]
[Evelyn(2),Clix(2),BH90(2)/Anti-BH90(4)/Bq]
[BH54,Anti-BH54,BH90(2)]
[Anti-BH54(2),BH90(2),Czeslaw(1)/Anti-Buffy(2)/BH54(2)/BH58(2)/Anti-Dx(2)/Ex(2)]
[BH58(2),Anti-BH58(2),BH90(2)]
[BH58(2),Clix(2),Buffy(2)]
I personally like the second option because I can pretty much do all three without repositioning my hands. But I need to test a lot of the algs for speed/ergonomics.
I could also just try to get away with two algs. BH90 and BH54, for instance, cover 25/27 layouts, the other two could be solved with 2x Sunes. Just a thought.
Anybody else have any algs that swap adjacent corners?
Anyway, that's where I'm at in terms of development. I thought it might be a good idea to hit you guys up for tips and criticism (both are welcome).
