Post ur New method ideas

[CubingBeLike]

So basically a couple weeks ago I thought of a new method idea.
1: Orient cross edge pieces (Don't Permute)
2: Finish the rest of F2L
3: Permute cross edges while doing eo (30 algs not including dot cases)
4: ZBLL
What do you think? I included an example solve here

 

[VortexCuber]

I also have a similar method idea:
1. Orient the cross while doing an xcross
2. F2L (2nd and 3rd pairs)
3. Permute cross while doing ZBLS
4. ZBLL

 

[Deleted member 36445]

What about this? MOOSPPSS method

1. Make a belt (MAB)
2. Orient bottom layer (OBL)
3. Orient top layer (OTL)
4. Separate both layers (SBL)
5. Permute bottom layer (PBL)
6. Permute top layer (PTL)
7. solve orientation parity (SOP)
8. solve permutation parity (SPP)

do you think it is a viable method that can achieve world class times?

 

[PapaSmurf]

Two things: https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/the-new-method-substep-concept-idea-thread.40975/ (and please read the first post).
Secondly, no, I don't think it's very good. Algs that mix U and D are generally not great. You also have exactly the same number of looks as CFOP, saving max 2 moves for 400 algs.

 

[CubingBeLike]

What about this? MOOSPPSS method

1. Make a belt (MAB)
2. Orient bottom layer (OBL)
3. Orient top layer (OTL)
4. Separate both layers (SBL)
5. Permute bottom layer (PBL)
6. Permute top layer (PTL)
7. solve orientation parity (SOP)
8. solve permutation parity (SPP)

do you think it is a viable method that can achieve world class times?

Isn't this just belt method?

 

[CubingBeLike]

Two things: https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/the-new-method-substep-concept-idea-thread.40975/ (and please read the first post).
Secondly, no, I don't think it's very good. Algs that mix U and D are generally not great. You also have exactly the same number of looks as CFOP, saving max 2 moves for 400 algs.

although, those 2 moves could mean the difference between success and failure

 

[CubingBeLike]

I also have a similar method idea:
1. Orient the cross while doing an xcross
2. F2L (2nd and 3rd pairs)
3. Permute cross while doing ZBLS
4. ZBLL

I don't think that an Xcross would be achievable in every solve while still being more efficent

 

[Deleted member 36445]

Isn't this just belt method?

Belt is slightly different, thus MOOSPPSS is a completely new method

 

[CubingBeLike]

Belt is slightly different, thus MOOSPPSS is a completely new method

1: Give it a shorter name
2: I think it is actually less efficient than CFOP because of parity, OLL and PLL x2 is only slightly better than CFOP, then you throw in making the belt, separating pieces, parity and all the rotations, it is just not worth it.

 

[Deleted member 36445]

1: Give it a shorter name
2: I think it is actually less efficient than CFOP because of parity, OLL and PLL x2 is only slightly better than CFOP, then you throw in making the belt, separating pieces, parity and all the rotations, it is just not worth it.

you may be right but it must stay that way if not it would be the same of other existent methods so I'll just stick to it.
and the name I choose is the original name so it must stay that way because if I changed it, it won't be the method I created

so yeah...

wanna learn it and practice it for some years?

 

[CubingBeLike]

y

you may be right but it must stay that way if not it would be the same of other existent methods so I'll just stick to it.
and the name I choose is the original name so it must stay that way because if I changed it, it won't be the method I created

so yeah...

wanna learn it and practice it for some years?

yeah... no

 

[CubingBeLike]

Belt is slightly different, thus MOOSPPSS is a completely new method

also, if it is only slightly different wouldn't that make it a belt variation, not a new method?

 

[PapaSmurf]

although, those 2 moves could mean the difference between success and failure

Not if the algs are bad. There's a reason why no one uses completly move optimal PLL for example.

 

[Deleted member 36445]

also, if it is only slightly different wouldn't that make it a belt variation, not a new method?

I think belt is a variation of my method.

 

[Fred]

How about this Ortega variant for 2x2:

1. Make a face as usual.

2. Instead of doing OLL, you learn all the algs to orient and permute the last layer edges all at once, while also fixing the permutation of the first face. I believe this would take over 100 algs, which is a lot more than Ortega ZB, so that's why I'm calling it "Ortega 1LLL."

 

[That_slow_guy]

I’m pretty sure there is already a thread for this

@abunickabhi

 

[Puzzle Maniac]

The C.H.E.A.T Method!
This new method will change this course of Rubixing history!

Step One:
RURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURURU
Step Two:
If step one didn't solve it, you're going to have to light it on fire and buy a new one.

 

[eeeeeeeee]

Eg for 3x3
Step 1: make a face
Step 2: solve using one alg
YIHENG WANG
USES THIS

 

[Kami]

So basically a couple weeks ago I thought of a new method idea.
1: Orient cross edge pieces (Don't Permute)
2: Finish the rest of F2L
3: Permute cross edges while doing eo (30 algs not including dot cases)
4: ZBLL
What do you think? I included an example solve here

I already do this minus the zbll. i just permute the cross whenever tho. whether it be during oll , pll, or sometime in f2l

 

[PapaSmurf]

@CubingBeLike this thread already exists, as I showed you earlier. https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/the-new-method-substep-concept-idea-thread.40975/
Mods, please do something with this thread to put it in its proper place like merging it with the linked thread.