# New Blind Method (3EF)

#### webyou

##### Member
This method is invented by my self and i call it 3EF (3Cycle Easy and Fast)
This method is based on 3cycle pieces together. And we can say it’s a Combination of Classic Pochmann, Turbo and BH.
In 3EF , algorithms take the form of a commutator. A commutator takes the form:
X[YZY’Z’]X’
In Turbo method, the two pieces that are going to be placed on their own position should be moved to U layer and then we execute the algorithm and after that we return the pieces to their own place But in this method we move only one piece to the U layer.
For solving corners we must move one of the corners to DFR (like old pochmann) and then use the BH’s method algorithms.
But the description: (Edges)
Our Buffer is UF.
As I told you this method is based on 3cycle pieces so first we should move the third piece to UL (X) and then we execute the related Moves (YZY’Z’) and then we return the piece that we brought to UL.(X’)
Let me explain it on an example solve:
SCRAMBLE = U' B' L B' L F2 L U' L F D2 L' U2 L' U' L2
Starting with the Buffer we have this cycle : ( using the BH’s algorithms)
UF -> DR -> BR = R' U R U R U R' U' R' U'
But I change the cycling by this way:
UF -> DR -> UL (BR) = B2 L [ r2 U M U2 M’ U r2 ] L’ B2
This means that the we take the position of the BR edge to UL and then instead of first cycle we execute the new cycle. And in the end we return the position of the BR (that was brought to UL ) to its own place.
In this method we Move all the third cycles to UL (like BR in my example) and we execute the algorithm and we return the piece. In this scenario the second piece which is cycling goes to its own place. (like DR in the example)
Now I solve the corners of my example
Our Buffer is ULB
If we start from the Buffer we have this cycling:
ULB -> UFL -> DRB
I change it this way:
ULB -> UFL -> DFR (DRB) = D’-X'[L' U' L, D2] X –D
This means that we Move the DRB position to DFR position and instead of first cycle we execute this cycle.
In order to solve the Corners we move all the third pieces to DFR position and we execute the algorithm and we return them to their previous place.
This method has 18 algorithms for the corners and 20 algorithms for the edges. The number of algorithms are very very low for cycling 3 pieces.
It’s true that Turbo has less algorithms But we should move two pieces to U layer so it deserves more thinking.
methods that cycles 3 pieces have many many algorithms.
If the description was poor and you didn’t get the methods please ask questions or give me scrambles to solve them!
By the way algorithms are the same as BH that I took from the site, but i did some changes on them.
here is the link to the algorithms:
http://methods.ir/forum/3EF-CORNER.html
http://methods.ir/forum/3EF-EDGE.html
I’d be happy to hear your ideas.

Last edited:

#### Noahaha

##### blindmod
This is what I did for corners when I was learning BH. If I knew he cycle, I would execute it, but if I didn't, I would set up the sticker to FDR or RDF. I don't think it's as advantageous for edges where there are often better setup moves to make.

#### drewsopchak

##### Member
If you already know how to use commutators, this is kinda not useful if my understanding of the method is correct.

#### Noahaha

##### blindmod
If you already know how to use commutators, this is kinda not useful if my understanding of the method is correct.
Not useful as a method, but perhaps good while transitioning for those tough cases. I think maybe it's meant for people who don't understand comms and would just memorize the algorithms.

#### vd

##### Member
For everyone wanting to simplify BH, my advice is, do not do it! When I was learning BH some month ago, it seemed to me very hard and thus I commonly used 1 moves set-ups instead of doing the case I couldn´t recognize easily. Unluckily, i sticked to these set-up commutators and now, when I do BH almost without thinking, I still use these 10-12 movers instead of 8-10 movers. I try to make my BH better, but it is much harder now, when I average sub 1:20, then in the begining, when you don´t care bout times. And it slows me down. Your idea is indeed nice one, Mohamed, but I reccomend more just learning pure BH instead of any simplification.

#### Noahaha

##### blindmod
For everyone wanting to simplify BH, my advice is, do not do it! When I was learning BH some month ago, it seemed to me very hard and thus I commonly used 1 moves set-ups instead of doing the case I couldn´t recognize easily. Unluckily, i sticked to these set-up commutators and now, when I do BH almost without thinking, I still use these 10-12 movers instead of 8-10 movers. I try to make my BH better, but it is much harder now, when I average sub 1:20, then in the begining, when you don´t care bout times. And it slows me down. Your idea is indeed nice one, Mohamed, but I reccomend more just learning pure BH instead of any simplification.
I have to disagree. If you're doing a blindsolve and you don't know a good way to do a cycle then it's much better to have a quick alternative like this than to struggle with a commutator you don't know well. Then after the solve you can figure out a good comm and use it in the future.

#### vd

##### Member
Yes, of course you are right here, noahaha. I probably wasnt clear enough, but I meant it that its not good to do this with purpose of actually learning it this way first...

#### cubernya

So it's a fail version of Turbo/BH?

#### RyanReese09

So basically just because YOU think BH is too hard, we shouldn't do it?

It took me months and about 4-5 times to fully learn BH. I would go over EVERy case to learn it. If you don't want to put in the work, don't use it. Don't let your laziness rub off on us.

#### Noahaha

##### blindmod
Yes, of course you are right here, noahaha. I probably wasnt clear enough, but I meant it that its not good to do this with purpose of actually learning it this way first...
I agree. It definitely does not hold up on it's own.

#### drewsopchak

##### Member
I have to disagree. If you're doing a blindsolve and you don't know a good way to do a cycle then it's much better to have a quick alternative
Just use BH. BH is intuitive and once you know all the subsets, you can come up with commutators on the spot.

#### Escher

##### Babby
For all the people getting pissy, I think this is perfectly viable if you don't want to spend much time on BLD and want to not totally suck.

Not so sure it has enough of a distinction from other things to deserve being called a method itself, but at least you have compiled a set of algs, which is useful.

#### drewsopchak

##### Member
For all the people getting pissy, I think this is perfectly viable if you don't want to spend much time on BLD and want to not totally suck.

Not so sure it has enough of a distinction from other things to deserve being called a method itself, but at least you have compiled a set of algs, which is useful.
Nobody is getting "pissy". BH may have a steep learning curve but I didn't take too much dedicated time to get used to.

#### Czery

##### Member
Just use BH. BH is intuitive and once you know all the subsets, you can come up with commutators on the spot.
Why learn BH? Why not just use "freestyle"?

#### Escher

##### Babby
Nobody is getting "pissy". BH may have a steep learning curve but I didn't take too much dedicated time to get used to.
I count about 6 posts above mine that seem a bit pissy.

You might not think it was 'too much' dedicated time because you're a dedicated speedcuber and you have a desire to improve as far as you can. If I wasn't already comfortable with freestyle corners (and still cared about cubing) then I'd probably just take this route.

If you just want to solve fairly efficiently with hardly any effort then I don't see what's wrong with taking this path - do people just have problems with it because the guy felt like he created something new?

#### drewsopchak

##### Member
If you just want to solve fairly efficiently with hardly any effort then I don't see what's wrong with taking this path
I guess so, but I still don't think BH takes lots of "dedication".

#### Forte

##### Member
I guess so, but I still don't think BH takes lots of "dedication".
Well without a fair bit of practice, BH sucks lol

#### drewsopchak

##### Member
Well without a fair bit of practice, BH sucks lol
I can only speak of my anecdotal experience. I just did ~5 sighted solves/day for a couple of months and had it down to where I was as fast with it as I was with OP/TuRBo.

#### webyou

##### Member
This is what I did for corners when I was learning BH. If I knew he cycle, I would execute it, but if I didn't, I would set up the sticker to FDR or RDF. I don't think it's as advantageous for edges where there are often better setup moves to make.
I created it for the corners at first , but for completing my method i create these algs for the edge .

If you already know how to use commutators, this is kinda not useful if my understanding of the method is correct.
the advantage of this method is that you can have 3 cycles with the least algs .

For everyone wanting to simplify BH, my advice is, do not do it! When I was learning BH some month ago, it seemed to me very hard and thus I commonly used 1 moves set-ups instead of doing the case I couldn´t recognize easily. Unluckily, i sticked to these set-up commutators and now, when I do BH almost without thinking, I still use these 10-12 movers instead of 8-10 movers. I try to make my BH better, but it is much harder now, when I average sub 1:20, then in the begining, when you don´t care bout times. And it slows me down. Your idea is indeed nice one, Mohamed, but I reccomend more just learning pure BH instead of any simplification.
of course my purpose wasn't simplifying BH , i just used its algs.

Yes, of course you are right here, noahaha. I probably wasnt clear enough, but I meant it that its not good to do this with purpose of actually learning it this way first...
surely for a person who wants to start BLD , learning the BH and understanding commutator is not easy at all , doesn't it?

So it's a fail version of Turbo/BH?
why fail version ? why we don't say improve version ?

So basically just because YOU think BH is too hard, we shouldn't do it?

It took me months and about 4-5 times to fully learn BH. I would go over EVERy case to learn it. If you don't want to put in the work, don't use it. Don't let your laziness rub off on us.
i didn't mean it , the people who created the previous method have such a ideas?
i just show the cuber what i created , maybe someone wants to do it , as the people who use Classic Pochmann for competition.
by the way it’s not laziness , it's new and easy and fast way for a solve .

--------
I did not and would not force anyone to use this , but I think it could be used as a method
It was not my intention to give the atmosphere than other methods to create, My only intention was to introduce a method that I have created.

#### vd

##### Member
I am sorry for being pissy, too... I kinda of misunderstood and now i admit, your idea is nice one and good for some beginners to know.