I'm not asking how to solve this parity
With that said, read on
~~
So i just finished doing a solve which i thought was going amazingly great and i thought i might finally break the coveted 210seconds mark, however there was this parity which forced me to dnf (it was taking too long and i rushed through it)
in macky's notation, the parity was a (1 6)corner, (4 12) edge.
I know how to solve this parity (in my haste during the solve i messed up it but that's not the point). However, when playing around with this combination after, i found a much much easier solution than i had previously attempted. my new solution for this is L' B2 z' T-perm, z B2 L
Now, I orient edges with respect to the UDFB faces and corners with respect to the UD faces (as standard as it gets), and so it's pretty obvious that doing L' screws up my corner orientation, as well as doing a PLL on an L/R face. However, it's pretty obvious that they screw the orientation up in a pre-determined manner, which is why I want to take advantage of this in future solves. For me it's clear how the edges stayed oriented. The corners is what I'm looking for.
the L' B2 screwed up corner 1 such that it needs to be rotated CW. The T-perm swap screwed up corner 6 such that it needs to be rotated CW and corner 1 was fixed. and undoing the setup moves obviously forced corner 6 to be rotated correctly in the end so all is well.
So, do you think it's practical learning which setup moves screw up orientation in which way and which PLLs screw it up in which way to cancel each other out? could be helpful i think, and there's barely anything to learn at all
worth it?
edit: also a random question while I remember -- does this forum have an archive view like the last one had? Call me a minimalist, but I much preferred that
With that said, read on
~~
So i just finished doing a solve which i thought was going amazingly great and i thought i might finally break the coveted 210seconds mark, however there was this parity which forced me to dnf (it was taking too long and i rushed through it)
in macky's notation, the parity was a (1 6)corner, (4 12) edge.
I know how to solve this parity (in my haste during the solve i messed up it but that's not the point). However, when playing around with this combination after, i found a much much easier solution than i had previously attempted. my new solution for this is L' B2 z' T-perm, z B2 L
Now, I orient edges with respect to the UDFB faces and corners with respect to the UD faces (as standard as it gets), and so it's pretty obvious that doing L' screws up my corner orientation, as well as doing a PLL on an L/R face. However, it's pretty obvious that they screw the orientation up in a pre-determined manner, which is why I want to take advantage of this in future solves. For me it's clear how the edges stayed oriented. The corners is what I'm looking for.
the L' B2 screwed up corner 1 such that it needs to be rotated CW. The T-perm swap screwed up corner 6 such that it needs to be rotated CW and corner 1 was fixed. and undoing the setup moves obviously forced corner 6 to be rotated correctly in the end so all is well.
So, do you think it's practical learning which setup moves screw up orientation in which way and which PLLs screw it up in which way to cancel each other out? could be helpful i think, and there's barely anything to learn at all
worth it?
edit: also a random question while I remember -- does this forum have an archive view like the last one had? Call me a minimalist, but I much preferred that
Last edited:
