PapaSmurf
Veteran
Potential New 3x3 Technique: Free Slotting ( CFOP extension/cousin to psuedoslotting)
- Thread starter OreKehStrah
- Start date
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Full TTLL - January 2018.pdf
drive.google.com
RubiksLVR525
Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2019
- Messages
- 2
PLZ That will make it much more undertsandable.
ALso plz share a link
OreKehStrah
Veteran
I had forgotten to make a video lol. Hopefully seeing it will help make more sense. If you have any more questions just let me know! j
PS: Ignore my voice lol, I had just woken up and recorded it.
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Just a couple updates:
1. I'm working on generating better quality algs for TTLL
2. I gave some thought as to when it is best to use free slotting during a solve and I currently think that it is best done at the beginning and should be planned in inspection. There are many reasons for this. The first is that inspection and look-ahead are the two biggest separators of skill, and being able to inspect more in makes the solve drastically easier.
I realized another nice side benefit of doing the free slot pair first, or at least planning it in inspection, is that it makes pseudoslotting a lot easier since you will know where on slot with a correct edge is and you would only need another slot with a corner, which thus eliminates the need for TTLL at all in solves performed like this.
However, I still think TTLL will be worth using in some cases instead of doing pseudoslotting. The first is that if you opt to do psuedoslotting, you won't be completely done with that F2L slot; you would have to use mental resources again on that slot. The second reason is that there will be times using TTLL instead will give better LL cases over pseudoslotting. Finally, there will be times where it is just easier to plan multiple normal F2L pairs, and will be better off doing the free slotting, if need be in the solve, later in the solve.
Let me know what you guys think!
1. I'm working on generating better quality algs for TTLL
2. I gave some thought as to when it is best to use free slotting during a solve and I currently think that it is best done at the beginning and should be planned in inspection. There are many reasons for this. The first is that inspection and look-ahead are the two biggest separators of skill, and being able to inspect more in makes the solve drastically easier.
I realized another nice side benefit of doing the free slot pair first, or at least planning it in inspection, is that it makes pseudoslotting a lot easier since you will know where on slot with a correct edge is and you would only need another slot with a corner, which thus eliminates the need for TTLL at all in solves performed like this.
However, I still think TTLL will be worth using in some cases instead of doing pseudoslotting. The first is that if you opt to do psuedoslotting, you won't be completely done with that F2L slot; you would have to use mental resources again on that slot. The second reason is that there will be times using TTLL instead will give better LL cases over pseudoslotting. Finally, there will be times where it is just easier to plan multiple normal F2L pairs, and will be better off doing the free slotting, if need be in the solve, later in the solve.
Let me know what you guys think!
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Hey everyone!
Just wanted to share some more thoughts about this technique about a year after first proposing it that gives it a bit more merrit/utility even without TTLL:
I think that this technique actually has the most merrit in the inspection stage.
Cross+2 is definitely something doable, but is quite difficult to consistently.
When you consider Cross+1+FreeSlotted Pair, inspecting is way easier than cross+2 and offers a lot of interesting benefits that you can choose from
I think the end goal for this technique is for TTLL algs to be optimized and useable, but even then I suspect it will be like ZBLL where some cases
are better done as the "conversion alg" + PLL, since it basically is a 1 look either way.
The "Conversion alg" is: U2 x R' U R U' R' U R U' R' U R U' from the standard TTLL recognition angle. You probably already recognize this as a simple, fast F2L alg. After the U2, the alg swaps the UFR and DFR stickers/Corners, and the UFL and UBR stickers/Corners.
Because you know you have an F2L edge, plus a properly oriented corner of the LL in one of the slots, you know you will end up with an ordinary case for the last layer. This gives you the option to do the conversion alg, and change what OLL case you have, or if it's a good OLL case, either do TTLL if you happen to know it, or recognize the TTLL case, and then do the conversion alg + the PLL you already know to do from recognizing what PLL you get from any given TTLL. In a sense, this lets you recognize what PLL case you have when you finish F2L by simply rearranging the order of CFOP steps a bit.
Some may argue this might not be as fast since you have to do the conversion alg and a PLL, and maybe it is, but you still have to consider that you are doing this to a slot you planned in the inspection step and presumably executed quickly as a result, which helps mitigate this. As a result, the benefit of knowing/controlling your LL and having the ability to plan more in inspection might give this idea more merrit even without TTLL being optimized yet.
Let me know what you think. It's definitely interesting if nothing else, and can help people plant cross+1 as an inbetween from just cross and cross+1
Just wanted to share some more thoughts about this technique about a year after first proposing it that gives it a bit more merrit/utility even without TTLL:
I think that this technique actually has the most merrit in the inspection stage.
Cross+2 is definitely something doable, but is quite difficult to consistently.
When you consider Cross+1+FreeSlotted Pair, inspecting is way easier than cross+2 and offers a lot of interesting benefits that you can choose from
I think the end goal for this technique is for TTLL algs to be optimized and useable, but even then I suspect it will be like ZBLL where some cases
are better done as the "conversion alg" + PLL, since it basically is a 1 look either way.
The "Conversion alg" is: U2 x R' U R U' R' U R U' R' U R U' from the standard TTLL recognition angle. You probably already recognize this as a simple, fast F2L alg. After the U2, the alg swaps the UFR and DFR stickers/Corners, and the UFL and UBR stickers/Corners.
Because you know you have an F2L edge, plus a properly oriented corner of the LL in one of the slots, you know you will end up with an ordinary case for the last layer. This gives you the option to do the conversion alg, and change what OLL case you have, or if it's a good OLL case, either do TTLL if you happen to know it, or recognize the TTLL case, and then do the conversion alg + the PLL you already know to do from recognizing what PLL you get from any given TTLL. In a sense, this lets you recognize what PLL case you have when you finish F2L by simply rearranging the order of CFOP steps a bit.
Some may argue this might not be as fast since you have to do the conversion alg and a PLL, and maybe it is, but you still have to consider that you are doing this to a slot you planned in the inspection step and presumably executed quickly as a result, which helps mitigate this. As a result, the benefit of knowing/controlling your LL and having the ability to plan more in inspection might give this idea more merrit even without TTLL being optimized yet.
Let me know what you think. It's definitely interesting if nothing else, and can help people plant cross+1 as an inbetween from just cross and cross+1
PapaSmurf
Veteran
Cool idea, but why don't you use something like either triple sexy or R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2?
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Either should work! I just copied the alg from Justin Taylor’s TTLL document to save myself some time!
Graaaby
Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2020
- Messages
- 16
It sounds pretty good but i am still struggling with normal oll so ill hold off for a bit
otherwise i would look into it more
otherwise i would look into it more
Brayden_Speedcuber
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2020
- Messages
- 22
This is super interesting! I agree that this method is very good as in the way that you only need to solve 3/4 pairs sometimes, but if you don't get a free FSP pair, wouldn't TTLL basically be useless. If people start to use TTLL is the future (which there is good chance they might) I think they would do the first three pairs normally, and if the fourth pair is a free FSP pair, they would use TTLL. Otherwise it seems like just adding more recognition and learning more algs for nothing. I also really like the idea of TT-ZBLL and I think people will be using that too.
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Thanks! The thing is, you can pretty much always plan a free pair in inspection if you choose, which gives you more control over your solve later.
Similar threads
