Status
Not open for further replies.
who is the person that sorted all the olls

and why did people think back then that that was good and made it standard

it really shouldnt be imo
full oll is pretty good wdym i mean it has alot of algs but if you learn all of them you become speed fast. Besides some of its algs are easy and recognizable.
 
full oll is pretty good wdym i mean it has alot of algs but if you learn all of them you become speed fast. Besides some of its algs are easy and recognizable.

Full OLL is good, but I think @f96 /eff meant is, why do people put the algs in groups that had weird names and why people back then accepted those groups and names. For example, there's a group that is called Akward Shape which sounds weird, when those cases obviously look like slingshots (well, i don't even know how to name them either.)
 
Full OLL is good, but I think @f96 /eff meant is, why do people put the algs in groups that had weird names and why people back then accepted those groups and names. For example, there's a group that is called Akward Shape which sounds weird, when those cases obviously look like slingshots (well, i don't even know how to name them either.)
yep thats why they call it akward shape
 
I'm seeking to improve my cfop and reduce my shockingly excessive cube rotations during f2l.
Question: Is it good practice after cross to have a certain colour face pointing towards you, so as you match f2l pairs you always know where each corner combination is located?
I know we solve with yellow up and white on the bottom, I just wonder I people then solve knowing red/green is back right, green/orange is back left, etc. Or whether you just have to be fluid and recognise and track which corner combo is where.

Thanks, and hope my ramble makes sense
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top