pglewis
Member
And that's my go-to when I want to flip a couple edges.
-
Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!
You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.
Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.
Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.
Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.
Older cubers discussions
- Thread starter MarcelP
- Start date
And that's my go-to when I want to flip a couple edges.
pglewis
Member
And since we're on the topic of F2L tricks, I came up with this one to deal with solved corner in BR, edge in U face. It's functionally equivalent to the sledge/R U' R' solution in the FR: Lw U' R' U Lw' U' R
Avoids B face turns and rotations only downside is it might be a little lookahead-unfriendly, though the majority of the times I find myself using it it's on the last pair.
Avoids B face turns and rotations only downside is it might be a little lookahead-unfriendly, though the majority of the times I find myself using it it's on the last pair.
Logiqx
Member
I really should use your approach when I want to flip edges. I currently use my RU alg but adapt the ending to use a sledgehammer for insertion.
Don't forget R U R U R U' R' U' R' which also preserves OLL. Once in a while, I'll think that BR is pre-solved when in reality the edge is from the LL, looking good when viewed from the right. The resultant OLL case can also look genuine from certain angles but after solving OLL, it's a surprise to see an F2L piece in the LL. The quick fix is to use the RU alg to insert the F2L edge, followed by PLL.
Logiqx
Member
Here's a summary of my experiences at the Peterborough Open 2018. Apologies for it being so long...
I was sorry to miss the two Mark's - @mark49152 and @newtonbase but it was good to see @Shaky Hands. You can always rely on Andy to be in attendance! I only attended on Sunday so I was signed up for 3x3x3, OH, 2x2x2 and Megaminx. After somewhat on-off practice in the run up to the weekend, I was still feeling like any of my PBs were up for grabs. My priorities were OH average, 3x3x3 average (despite not practicing the event properly), 2x2x2 single/average followed by making the cut for a Megaminx average (untouched for a fortnight).
The first round of 3x3x3 was better than I did last month but a counting sup-20 let the average down. The 3rd solve was 21s due to a mis-planned cross and the last solve was 20s due to lack of focus and being complacent about a sub-16 average being on the cards... 16.61, 15.14, 21.76, 14.00, 20.12 = 17.27 average
Next up was my main event (OH) although I'd mis-remembered the schedule and was warming up for 2x2x2 until maybe 10 minutes before it started! My first solve was being judged by @Shaky Hands and was going nicely, reaching an R-Perm at dead on 20 seconds which would usually mean a high-22 or low-23 second solve. I managed to lockup half way through the R-Perm and that threw my muscle memory, butchering the F2L so I opted to DNF the solve. Slightly on edge after that mistake I played it safe for the next two solves to maintain the chance of an average, both were 27 seconds. I was relaxed by the fourth solve but for some inexplicable reason, I did a random turn as I put down the cube and had to correct it before stopping the timer which turned a 25 into another 27. The last solve was really nice (reaching LL at 16s) but it ended with an unfavourable OLL, followed by an F-Perm which usually takes me about 5 seconds. It was my fastest solve at 26s but it could very easily have been low 20 with more typical LL cases. So the average was 27.22 (finally, sub-30) but could very easily have been sub-25 without the stuff I mentioned. DNF, 27.45, 27.09, 27.13, 26.11 = 27.22 average (PB)
Luck plays a significant role in 2x2x2 and TBH my scrambles weren't too bad. There was one scramble where I couldn't plan a face so that was always going to be the discard. Unfortunately, I'd messed up the previous solve (sup-6) so I failed to get a sub-5 average which represents my global times. The last solve was a PB single (drawing with @mark49152 as it happens) but I should really have been able to one-look the solve and solve it in well under 3 seconds - (R U R') F (R U R' U') (R U R' U') F' + AUF. 4.53, 6.83, 8.37, 5.33, 4.02 = 5.56 average (ok for comp but I'd be pissed if I churned out a similar Ao100 at home).
Second round of 3x3x3 started with a +2 because I mis-recognised the colours, I think due to the light (16.68 + 2 = 18.68). Second solve was just bad (19.21) but solve 3 was ok at 15.96. Solve 4 was also decent (mid-high 15 perhaps) but my fingertips failed to stop the timer and after realising it was still running, I actually stopped it at 16.92. The last solve was just bad at 18s. Without the counting +2 and timer incident, it'd have been a sub-17 average despite the counting 18. I can take heart at 6/10 decent 3x3x3 solves (between 14.00 and 16.61) but I need to a avoid silly mistake like plus 2's and failure to stop the timer. Two bad solves per average just needs to be reduced to one bad solve in future!
I hadn't practiced Megaminx in the leadup to Peterborough but I knew there was a chance of making the 2:30 cut for an average. My first solve was slow and steady but it produced a 2:16.13 which I was happy with as my debut solve. I blew the second solve hunting for pieces (2:49.09) and after that it all got a bit unusual. My judge started solving during the third solve which I found increasingly annoying and I eventually called the delegate to ask for an extra which I did get given. The extra was a 2:37.19 because TBH I still wasn't entirely recomposed and the solve was pretty stop-start. The third attempt (fourth solve) was going swimmingly until I got to the last layer and the judge said he didn't think the timer was switched on (screen blank). After another discussion with the delegate, I was given another extra! That solve didn't feel nearly as good and was 2:40.76. Come the final attempt (solve 7) there was still more fun in store. Whilst removing the cube cover the judge knocked my GoPro from it's pearch. I glanced at it for a moment and said that I'm not allowed to touch it then I looked back at my mega and started my solve. The judge called 8 seconds by which time, I'd solved a couple of edges for my white star and I then realised that I hadn't started the timer. lol... DNF.
I was fully expecting to do 2 megaminx solves so having done 7 solve in what was effectively the slowest possible time... 2:42.35 average, I felt pretty guilty and judged every group of 7x7x7 to re-balance the cubing karma.
Summary... I had some cool conversations with parents and competitors and I enjoyed my solves a lot more than I did a month ago. I'm starting to get used to competition again but it's looking like it will be late October when I'll next compete. I've finally registered a one-handed average which sub-30 average (27.22) rather than screwing up monumentally, leaving me with the confidence that I can do a lot better in future. Six decent 3x3 solves (ignoring the +2 and failure to stop the timer) is a good platform to build on for a sub-16 or sub-15 average. For 2x2, I just need a few more attempts with regular scrambles to get close to my sub-5 global average. A modest improvement in my 2x2x2 single (4.02) leaves plenty of room for a future PB single.
Hope to see more of you at the next event - @40yearstosolve, @bubbagrub, @mark49152, @newtonbase and @Selkie.
I was sorry to miss the two Mark's - @mark49152 and @newtonbase but it was good to see @Shaky Hands. You can always rely on Andy to be in attendance! I only attended on Sunday so I was signed up for 3x3x3, OH, 2x2x2 and Megaminx. After somewhat on-off practice in the run up to the weekend, I was still feeling like any of my PBs were up for grabs. My priorities were OH average, 3x3x3 average (despite not practicing the event properly), 2x2x2 single/average followed by making the cut for a Megaminx average (untouched for a fortnight).
The first round of 3x3x3 was better than I did last month but a counting sup-20 let the average down. The 3rd solve was 21s due to a mis-planned cross and the last solve was 20s due to lack of focus and being complacent about a sub-16 average being on the cards... 16.61, 15.14, 21.76, 14.00, 20.12 = 17.27 average
Next up was my main event (OH) although I'd mis-remembered the schedule and was warming up for 2x2x2 until maybe 10 minutes before it started! My first solve was being judged by @Shaky Hands and was going nicely, reaching an R-Perm at dead on 20 seconds which would usually mean a high-22 or low-23 second solve. I managed to lockup half way through the R-Perm and that threw my muscle memory, butchering the F2L so I opted to DNF the solve. Slightly on edge after that mistake I played it safe for the next two solves to maintain the chance of an average, both were 27 seconds. I was relaxed by the fourth solve but for some inexplicable reason, I did a random turn as I put down the cube and had to correct it before stopping the timer which turned a 25 into another 27. The last solve was really nice (reaching LL at 16s) but it ended with an unfavourable OLL, followed by an F-Perm which usually takes me about 5 seconds. It was my fastest solve at 26s but it could very easily have been low 20 with more typical LL cases. So the average was 27.22 (finally, sub-30) but could very easily have been sub-25 without the stuff I mentioned. DNF, 27.45, 27.09, 27.13, 26.11 = 27.22 average (PB)
Luck plays a significant role in 2x2x2 and TBH my scrambles weren't too bad. There was one scramble where I couldn't plan a face so that was always going to be the discard. Unfortunately, I'd messed up the previous solve (sup-6) so I failed to get a sub-5 average which represents my global times. The last solve was a PB single (drawing with @mark49152 as it happens) but I should really have been able to one-look the solve and solve it in well under 3 seconds - (R U R') F (R U R' U') (R U R' U') F' + AUF. 4.53, 6.83, 8.37, 5.33, 4.02 = 5.56 average (ok for comp but I'd be pissed if I churned out a similar Ao100 at home).
Second round of 3x3x3 started with a +2 because I mis-recognised the colours, I think due to the light (16.68 + 2 = 18.68). Second solve was just bad (19.21) but solve 3 was ok at 15.96. Solve 4 was also decent (mid-high 15 perhaps) but my fingertips failed to stop the timer and after realising it was still running, I actually stopped it at 16.92. The last solve was just bad at 18s. Without the counting +2 and timer incident, it'd have been a sub-17 average despite the counting 18. I can take heart at 6/10 decent 3x3x3 solves (between 14.00 and 16.61) but I need to a avoid silly mistake like plus 2's and failure to stop the timer. Two bad solves per average just needs to be reduced to one bad solve in future!
I hadn't practiced Megaminx in the leadup to Peterborough but I knew there was a chance of making the 2:30 cut for an average. My first solve was slow and steady but it produced a 2:16.13 which I was happy with as my debut solve. I blew the second solve hunting for pieces (2:49.09) and after that it all got a bit unusual. My judge started solving during the third solve which I found increasingly annoying and I eventually called the delegate to ask for an extra which I did get given. The extra was a 2:37.19 because TBH I still wasn't entirely recomposed and the solve was pretty stop-start. The third attempt (fourth solve) was going swimmingly until I got to the last layer and the judge said he didn't think the timer was switched on (screen blank). After another discussion with the delegate, I was given another extra! That solve didn't feel nearly as good and was 2:40.76. Come the final attempt (solve 7) there was still more fun in store. Whilst removing the cube cover the judge knocked my GoPro from it's pearch. I glanced at it for a moment and said that I'm not allowed to touch it then I looked back at my mega and started my solve. The judge called 8 seconds by which time, I'd solved a couple of edges for my white star and I then realised that I hadn't started the timer. lol... DNF.
I was fully expecting to do 2 megaminx solves so having done 7 solve in what was effectively the slowest possible time... 2:42.35 average, I felt pretty guilty and judged every group of 7x7x7 to re-balance the cubing karma.
Summary... I had some cool conversations with parents and competitors and I enjoyed my solves a lot more than I did a month ago. I'm starting to get used to competition again but it's looking like it will be late October when I'll next compete. I've finally registered a one-handed average which sub-30 average (27.22) rather than screwing up monumentally, leaving me with the confidence that I can do a lot better in future. Six decent 3x3 solves (ignoring the +2 and failure to stop the timer) is a good platform to build on for a sub-16 or sub-15 average. For 2x2, I just need a few more attempts with regular scrambles to get close to my sub-5 global average. A modest improvement in my 2x2x2 single (4.02) leaves plenty of room for a future PB single.
Hope to see more of you at the next event - @40yearstosolve, @bubbagrub, @mark49152, @newtonbase and @Selkie.
Last edited:
pglewis
Member
Thank you for this! I hadn't settled on an alg that preserves EO from the back slot and just used the wide turn one since it's practiced, dot OLLs be damned.
Not friendly for the back slots but great for preserving EO from the front, picked up from @JanW a while back and I still love it (bonus points that the edge setup is the same as the sledge-based solution): F' - sexy - R' F R.
JanW
Member
Or if edge is on the left, you can do the inverse to save a U2 setup. Inverse is exactly the same, except the middle R becomes R'.
Logiqx
Member
FYI. I've refreshed the static over-40's rankings page on GitHub - https://github.com/Logiqx/wca-ipy
Some of you may not know of the dynamic page as well (please remind me, who set this up originally?) - https://goo.gl/nL6ma2
The downside of the dynamic view is that it also includes solves from when people were under 40.
Some of you may not know of the dynamic page as well (please remind me, who set this up originally?) - https://goo.gl/nL6ma2
The downside of the dynamic view is that it also includes solves from when people were under 40.
Old Tom
Member
Great! You can update that in three weeks, when a plus-80 fellow (me, as of last week) posts possibly the slowest 3x3x3 time on the list. Will be at the Fredericksburg Open.
newtonbase
Premium Member
Well done @Logiqx Glad you finally got a decent round of OH.
I have just found out that that a 3 generation family break has been proposed for the last weekend of October It's not definite yet but I think it's probably going to happen so my next comp is likely to be WSM.
SpartanSailor
Member
I didn’t get to compete in MBLD over the weekend after all. BUT this morning I gave 4 cubes a shot on the forum weekly comp. “submitted” four cubes and tried to keep myself limited to 40 minutes. I took 21:23 but got 2/4. I really only focused on the two cubes that gave me good memos. My review really only focused on those two—then I executed them as the first 2. I left all the “risk” for memo to the final two cubes... and those were a mess. But! I did get an “official” result of 0 points.
Using the advice here for an official comp to submit 4 and effectively choose the best two was my real method. I have to say, I’m a little shocked I got the two... or rather, I surprised myself.
Using the advice here for an official comp to submit 4 and effectively choose the best two was my real method. I have to say, I’m a little shocked I got the two... or rather, I surprised myself.
newtonbase
Premium Member
Well done.
SpartanSailor
Member
I’m hooked now. This only confirms it. Lol. I will be doing MBLD at the next official opportunity.
newtonbase
Premium Member
Excellent idea. Are you using rooms yet?
SpartanSailor
Member
No. Today I just did two phrases (each cube—actually 4 phrases with corner/edge for each cube).
I’ll have to eventually, but for 2-3 cubes, I was able to keep my normal straight letters or phrases straight.
I’ll have to eventually, but for 2-3 cubes, I was able to keep my normal straight letters or phrases straight.
pglewis
Member
@SpartanSailor: I'm guessing you could probably just go straight for 2/2 at this point. 6 mins per cube should be enough for a fairly strong memo at your pace and that leaves 2 mins per cube for review and 2 mins per cube for execution.
SpartanSailor
Member
I was thinking that too. I may submit 3 and go for 2/3 and get at least 1 pt. I certainly wasn’t in a hurry and did memo all four sets of corners to get a sense of which ones were “easier”. That was a few minutes effectively down the drain.
Whenever the next comp is that has MBLD, I’ll compete.
AbsoRuud
Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,047
- Location
- Lelystad, Flevoland, The Netherlands
- WCA
- 2019POLL04
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Hi all. Spent some time on the 2x2x2 today. Halved my PB single. I popped it though. I need a Moyu Weipo or something instead of my 2$ 2x2x2. But progress is progress!
Do you need to be an official WCA competitor to show up on the abovementioned lists?
Do you need to be an official WCA competitor to show up on the abovementioned lists?
openseas
Member
Great progress! Going for 2/3 or 3/3 will be a good idea.
Do you know what will come next? 2.5 MBLD is almost equivalent to 4BLD.... so.....
Logiqx
Member
Some of you may remember that quite some time back I said I wanted to try to solve the Square-1 without watching a tutorial or reading a guide.
Reason: I don't want to learn a speed solving method until I've figured out a basic method by myself. I've previously figured out Clock, Pyra, Skewb and Mega but I always felt that Square-1 would be a lot harder. Well, I attempted it today and it's been driving me insane!
My approach is as follows - 1) cube shape (combination of intuition / trial and error). 2) corners into respective layers (easy). 3) edges into respective layers (creating an alg drove me absolutely potty whilst I was watching The Hateful Eight this evening). 4) corner permutation (creating algs was relatively easy). 5) edge permutation (yet to tackle), 6) E-layer (trivial). Parity is the last thing that I'll tackle so until then, I'll just be re-scrambling!
The photos show my final attempt tonight in which edge permutation just happened to be solved after corner permutation. I'll keep beating my head against the wall tomorrow and hopeful discover something that behaves like a U-Perm. I'm feeling like I made decent progress today and now I know what parity means on Square-1!
Has anyone else attempted this infuriating puzzle without a tutorial?
Reason: I don't want to learn a speed solving method until I've figured out a basic method by myself. I've previously figured out Clock, Pyra, Skewb and Mega but I always felt that Square-1 would be a lot harder. Well, I attempted it today and it's been driving me insane!
My approach is as follows - 1) cube shape (combination of intuition / trial and error). 2) corners into respective layers (easy). 3) edges into respective layers (creating an alg drove me absolutely potty whilst I was watching The Hateful Eight this evening). 4) corner permutation (creating algs was relatively easy). 5) edge permutation (yet to tackle), 6) E-layer (trivial). Parity is the last thing that I'll tackle so until then, I'll just be re-scrambling!
The photos show my final attempt tonight in which edge permutation just happened to be solved after corner permutation. I'll keep beating my head against the wall tomorrow and hopeful discover something that behaves like a U-Perm. I'm feeling like I made decent progress today and now I know what parity means on Square-1!
Has anyone else attempted this infuriating puzzle without a tutorial?
openseas
Member
Haha, I did it, solved once but that was it. Still wondering how I did it, though. Never attempted again....
