Ortega first step algs

[Zarxrax]

I've been generating algs for the first step of ortega 2x2 method.

Why algs?
- Minimize your move count
- Most of the algs are very fingertricky
- Quite easy to sub-1 just about every case
- many 2-gen algs
- It's easy to trace through and see the OLL during inspection time
- You can better evaluate your alternatives for which side to start with


I've got 50 cases, and I think it's mostly complete. You can view them here:
http://amvhell.com/stuff/cubes/ortega.html

If anyone notices any cases that I forgot, please let me know.

 

[Escher]

You dont need algs "_"

 

[Zarxrax]

You dont need algs "_"

Your opinion. I think they are very useful. I've found tons of really nice solutions where I would have done a 6-10 move solution previously.

 

[JeffDelucia]

I think what you need is a 3d cube thing.

 

[JustinJ]

It's useful to learn a solution for a difficult case, but in general after solving 2x2 a lot the line is kind of blurred between intuition and algs for face/layer making.

KAWAII~~ \(^o^)/

It's kind of pointless to consider them algs, as you'd really just be seeing a more efficient way of doing the layer.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

You dont need algs "_"

Your opinion. I think they are very useful. I've found tons of really nice solutions where I would have done a 6-10 move solution previously.

The worst case for Ortega step 1 is 5 moves, not 4. However, over 99.95% of cases do not require more than 4 moves.

Goal: one face of a single color

distance positions
0 22654
1 132828
2 626354
3 2057908
4 832588
5 1828

Average distance = 2.966

Maybe you're just bad at making faces.

 

[Zarxrax]

Maybe you're just bad at making faces.

Yes I am. I'm very bad at it. But can you do it in 4 moves 99% of the time? If so, that's impressive.

 

[onionhoney]

But actually making a layer is more efficient IMO.

 

[hawkmp4]

Maybe you're just bad at making faces.

Yes I am. I'm very bad at it. But can you do it in 4 moves 99% of the time? If so, that's impressive.

Yeah. It takes some practice. Don't hold yourself to 15 seconds of inspection time, take as much time as you need to. You'll start to see it quicker and quicker.

It shouldn't need to be said, but I'll say it just in case- learn to be CN on 2x2.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

Maybe you're just bad at making faces.

Yes I am. I'm very bad at it. But can you do it in 4 moves 99% of the time? If so, that's impressive.

Well, I only tried 25 times...

Spoiler

Session average: 2.87
1. 3.00 U' F' U F' U R U R2
2. (1.00) R U' R F U' R2 U2 R' F U'
3. 3.00 F2 R' U R2 U' F' R2 F' U
4. 3.00 F2 U' F2 R' U2 R U R2 U2
5. (4.00) U' F2 R2 F' R F R2 U' R'
6. 3.00 U' F' R F2 R U R2 F' U'
7. 3.00 U R F2 U2 R' F U' F2 R'
8. 3.00 U2 R F U R2 U2 R' U
9. 3.00 U2 F' R2 F R2 F U' R2 F2
10. 4.00 R' U2 R' U F' R' F U' F2 U2
11. 4.00 F' U2 R U' F2 R U' R
12. 3.00 U' R' U' F' R' U F' U2
13. 4.00 F U2 F' U F2 U F' R F2
14. 2.00 R' F2 U R' U' R2 U' R U2
15. 3.00 R' U R' U' F' U' F R' U'
16. 3.00 R' U R2 F U' R' U'
17. 2.00 F' U2 F' R' U2 R U' F U'
18. 1.00 F R U' F U R2 U2
19. 3.00 R F' U' F2 R U R2 F2 R'
20. 3.00 F' U2 R U2 R' U R2 F2 U
21. 3.00 F2 U2 F R2 U F' R2 F2 U'
22. 2.00 U2 F' R U2 F' R F R2 U'
23. 3.00 F' U' F' U R2 F' R' F R'
24. 2.00 F' R F2 R F2 U' R F R' U
25. 3.00 R' U2 F R2 U' R F' U2 R'

 

[JeffDelucia]

My mean of 25 was 3.96. I could definitely get something from these algorithms as I had 3 6's.

 

[Daniel Wu]

This is comparable to using algs for cross on 3x3 imo.

 

[hawkmp4]

This is comparable to using algs for cross on 3x3 imo.

This.

If you're having trouble doing this efficiently, just play around with your 2x2 a bit. You'll be much better off- developing your intuition for such things will put you in a better place, you can't generate algs for all the possible cases. But if you learn how to think through any position, you won't have an issue.

 

[Inf3rn0]

lol I suck 3.88 avg of 25.
Im happy enough with that not to need algs though.

 

[hawkmp4]

Well, you're less than a move over optimal. That's not horrible by any means.

 

[Zarxrax]

I updated the first post with a link to the algs.

 

[Ashmnafa]

Are you color neutral? If not, that will be oodles of help on your first side. It shouldn't take algs to make a side.

 

[Zarxrax]

I'm not really sure why everyone seems to have trouble understanding how this could be useful. I don't see anyone complaining that F2L algs are posted everywhere, and those are easy to solve intuitively.

 

[Ashmnafa]

Because you can solve a first side much easier than F2L pairs. It's just putting corners in, not even permuted.

 

[Gavin]

Making a side is way to easy to need algs. 90% of the time there are already two pieces in place.