OLL simplified

To find out how much time you will loose this way, just compare the best cases (equal) and the worst cases (worst regular OLL, worst "3rd gen OLL") and measure the time it takes you. The real difference will be about halfway.

So let's say that the worst regular OLL takes 3 seconds and the worst "3rd gen" OLL takes 5 seconds. Than you will loose about 1 second on average.
 
AvGalen said:
To find out how much time you will loose this way, just compare the best cases (equal) and the worst cases (worst regular OLL, worst "3rd gen OLL") and measure the time it takes you. The real difference will be about halfway.

So let's say that the worst regular OLL takes 3 seconds and the worst "3rd gen" OLL takes 5 seconds. Than you will loose about 1 second on average.
Click to expand...

that won't necessarily give anything away though. the worst oll case could be much worse than the rest, or conversely, the worst 3rd-gen oll case could be about the same as others. testing just the endpoints won't give any information about the other 55 cases aside from the min/max cases

but yes i'm pretty interested in this. i've already done some simple stuff for the cases when all edges are oriented just by experience (so i'd know for example that if i have a "car" then face it towards me, and do sune+antisune)

also, i have a question regarding 2look OLL. i've been told for a true 2look, you'd need to know the 2 edge algs and the 7 corner algs, right? but what if you get a case where the edges cannot be solved in one alg. doesn't that make it a 3look? or do the 7 corner algs include these 2 cases, in which case it's really a 1-2look?

sorry if that sounded confusing ;P
 
hait2 said:
that won't necessarily give anything away though. the worst oll case could be much worse than the rest, or conversely, the worst 3rd-gen oll case could be about the same as others. testing just the endpoints won't give any information about the other 55 cases aside from the min/max cases

but yes i'm pretty interested in this. i've already done some simple stuff for the cases when all edges are oriented just by experience (so i'd know for example that if i have a "car" then face it towards me, and do sune+antisune)

also, i have a question regarding 2look OLL. i've been told for a true 2look, you'd need to know the 2 edge algs and the 7 corner algs, right? but what if you get a case where the edges cannot be solved in one alg. doesn't that make it a 3look? or do the 7 corner algs include these 2 cases, in which case it's really a 1-2look?

sorry if that sounded confusing ;P
Click to expand...

It would be a 2-3 look, but generally would count as a 2 look since there is basically only 2 steps to it.
 
I am facinated how much you guys concentrate on the speed of things and new algs.

my intension of this was simply to expand on my cubeknowledge! nothing else

its discusable if this is "easier" for a newb to learn..
 
I'm sure most people would agree that it is *easier* to learn different combinations of the same algorithms, rather than a new one for each case. However, I think this topic has shifted towards the potential speed of this new OLL method.

Clearly it will not be faster, but I agree with Arnaud, that it is probably possible to get this OLL method down to about 1-1.5 seconds slower than regular OLL. Depending on someone's current speed, 1-1.5 seconds might not change the overall solve time at all, or it might have a large impact...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jskyler91
How to Solve a Rubik's Cube Simplified
Replies
0
Views
1,964
jskyler91
jskyler91
Jteddy
Which Is Less Common?
Replies
6
Views
360
Wagnit
W
S
7x7 OLL Parity
Replies
8
Views
796
Skywalker2026
S
iguana
2-sided OLL recognition help (delete)
Replies
0
Views
292
iguana
iguana
EveryDayGamer2763
How to find 2x2 OLL skip?
Replies
3
Views
444
Daichi Halphen
D
Back
Top