New ZZ variant?

[grapefruit95]

So my idea is that after EOLine you do the first block on the right, then to a z rotation and do the second block on the right as well, changing your color scheme if that helps you see what I'm saying. If you need a deeper explanation reply and Ill make one, but for those who understand do you think this could be good?

 

[turtwig]

But then you're restricting yourself to only the right block when there might be good cases on the left right? If I'm understanding this correctly, I think the freedom of solving any F2L pair is better than not using L moves... If you watch fast cubers, their L moves are almost as fast as their R moves.
Changing your color scheme mid-solve is also kind of weird, and you would have to be CN for it to work, which a lot of really fast cubers aren't even.

 

[wir3sandfir3s]

If I am understanding you correctly, your just doing a Z rotation during F2L...
How is this a new variant again?

 

[Teoidus]

Dude, it's a variant on ZZ. Calm down about the whole "this has already been done before" thing, I've seen you do this on other method threads as well.

As for the idea, it's interesting, but I'm not sure if <R,U> is worth not being able to take advantage of lucky left blocks. Another similar idea is to finish right block, then z rotation + finish left block COL-style

 

[AlphaSheep]

But the first block is still going to be RU anyway because pieces can be on the left and need to be brought to the right for your method. What I generally do for left block is pair on the right and insert on the left. That minimises the number of L moves needed.

However, over time, I'm starting to find L moves a lot more comfortable than I used to and I'm using a lot more of them in solves so now I do whatever looks shortest.

 

[adimare]

Instead of saying "do the first block on the right, then z, then a second block on the right", which makes this idea more restricted than regular ZZ; you could say "if after the EO line you solve a full a block, then you have the option of doing the second block on the opposite side, or doing a z or z' rotation and solving it on the same side as your first one".

 

[stoic]

When I first read this I thought you were advocating doing second block <R,U> on U and then rotating back; my bad.
If I understand this right, you're basically switching from ZZ to Petrus halfway through the solve?
It's interesting, but by restricting yourself to doing one block at a time you're losing a lot of the freedom and efficiency of ZZ.

 

[TDM]

It's slower since you're more restricted in blocks and can't look ahead, and this also isn't new. It's been suggested multiple times, including within other ZZ variants.

Plus, it would be much better to post this in either the ZZ discussion thread, or the new method thread. They are there for a reason.

 

[wir3sandfir3s]

Dude, it's a variant on ZZ. Calm down about the whole "this has already been done before" thing, I've seen you do this on other method threads as well.

As for the idea, it's interesting, but I'm not sure if <R,U> is worth not being able to take advantage of lucky left blocks. Another similar idea is to finish right block, then z rotation + finish left block COL-style

It's slower since you're more restricted in blocks and can't look ahead, and this also isn't new. It's been suggested multiple times, including within other ZZ variants.

I only do this when it HAS been proposed before or sounds too similar to the base method...
I don't think that is a problem.

 

[grapefruit95]

Instead of saying "do the first block on the right, then z, then a second block on the right", which makes this idea more restricted than regular ZZ; you could say "if after the EO line you solve a full a block, then you have the option of doing the second block on the opposite side, or doing a z or z' rotation and solving it on the same side as your first one".

Yes, this was my thought because I understand that lucky left blocks should be taken advantage of.