# Pyraminx method names

#### Carrot

##### Member
Hello Speedsolving

I have heard people say something like "I use Oka-LBL-superIMBAstar-WO-with-wintervariation" yeah right, no one knows the names of the pyraminx methods. I know quite a lot of methods and I will list them here and give them a short description, I will post the most common names and possible variations of this method.

Any comments about my naming choice would be very appreciated, as it is all based on my opinion unless something else is mentioned.

Here is a renewed list of method names, please tell me if I missed anything or if I wrote anything wrong

**=I am not sure, so I am just guessing a bit.

Bob Burton's method

steps:
• Solve the centers of a layer
• Solve 3 edges so they finish the layer
• Hope for a skip, if not, repeat step 1 and 2 just with a another colour layer

Type: LBL method
Number of algs required: 0-1
Used by: Bob Burton

LBL (Layer by Layer) method
- Also known as: Beginner's Method

steps:
• Solve the centers of a layer
• Solve 3 edges so they finish the layer
• Solve the rest in one alg (3 edges surrounding a top)

Type: LBL method
Number of algs required: 5-6
Used by: Piotr Kozka, Simon Westlund, Erik Akkersdijk, Yuxuan Wang

Beginner's Polish V**

steps:
• Solve 3 centers and 2 edges so that they form a V shape on the bottom-back
• Solve the back edge of the top
• Solve the last 3 edges that appears on your front in one alg

Type: LBL method
Number of algs required: ~30

Polish V
- Also known as: L4E

steps:
• Solve 3 centers and 2 edges so that they form a V shape on the bottom-back
• Solve the last 4 edges in one alg

Type: LBL method
Number of algs required: ~30
Used by: Tomasz Kiedrowicz

FP method**

steps:
• Solve a face (permutation of the face is not taken into account)
• Solve the last 6 edges in one alg

Type: FP method
Number of algs required: ~25

MP method**

steps:
• Solve a V (permutation of the V is not taken into account). Please take a look at the 'Polish V' if you don't know what a 'V' is
• Solve the last 6 edges in one alg

Type: FP method
Number of algs required: Major amount (around 1337 algs according to Chip Munkjor, but I think ~100 is more realistic)

Petrus

steps:
• Solve 2 centers and an edge so the form a 1x1x3-like block
• Flip the edges so they are all oriented correct
• Solve the rest 2-gen intuitively

Type: Blockbuilding method
Number of algs required: 0-3

Backbone

steps:
• This is step 1 and 2 from "Petrus" merged together
• Solve the rest 2-gen intuitively

Type: Blockbuilding method
Number of algs required: 0
Used by: Stefan Pochmann**

HB (Half-Backbone)

• Solve two centers next to an edge, while also orienting the other two edges which will be next to one of those corners (so those edges can be solved 2-gen) - there are two possibilities for any given initial edge
• Solve those two edges while also orienting the two centers they are connected to
• Solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Blockbuilding method
Number of algs required: ~3

Keyhole Method

steps:
• Solve 2 of the top edges
• Solve the centers with help of 'missing edge'-spot (also known as keyhole)
• solve the last edge of the top
• solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 5-10
Used by: Bruno Bereczki

Oka method
- Also known as: Oka (expert) ... People saying they are using Oka method and in fact are using Keyhole, GTFO xD

steps:
• "solve" two edges surrounding the top center (1 should be in it right spot, the other should be in a top spot where it can be fixed with 3 moves, R U R' for example)
• Solve the centers using keyhole
• Solve the last 2 top edges (3 moves)
• solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 5
Used by: Yohei Oka, Bruno Bereczki

WO method(beginner version)

steps:
• Solve 3 edges surround a center so they form solved top
• Solve the centers one by one
• solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 5
Used by: Danish newbies

steps:
• Solve 3 edges surround a center so they form solved top
• Solve the centers in one alg
• solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 10-13
Used by: Oscar Roth Andersen

Matthew Flay method

steps:
• Solve 3 edges surround a center so they form solved top
• Solve the rest in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: ~100

Nutella method

steps:
• Just search for it on youtube please... (it's hard to describe on text)

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 10-13
Used by: Oscar Roth Andersen, Jonathan Midjord Shapira

OFF method (Owidiusz Freaking Flip)

steps:
• Solve 3 centes of a face whilst permuting the 3 edges for that layer (Don't care about orientation of the edges)
• Solve the rest in one alg

Type: LBL
Number of algs required: a lot I guess
Used by: Owidiusz Pryk

IWO method (Improved Wedel-Odder)

steps:
• Solve 3 edges surrounding a center so that they form solved top, and make sure you also solve at minimum 2 of the bottom centers
• Solve the last 3 edges + 1 center in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: I never really counted, but I have some alg sheets xD

1-flip method

steps:
• Solve 3 edges of an top surrounding a top so you have 2 solved edges and 1 flipped edge
• Solve the flipped edge and the centers in one alg
• Solve the last 3 edges in one alg

Type: Top first method
Number of algs required: 10-13
Used by: Oscar Roth Andersen

If you see any mistakes... please point them out =)

/Odder

Last edited:

#### Carrot

##### Member

Sorry, but I have never heard of it, can you tell me/us about it or do you have a link with further information?

#### Stefan

##### Member
Richard was the first (I know of) who published it, back when he was the first to unofficially average sub-10 or sub-9, and it's what you call "Oka (youtube style)". Used to be here: http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/

Last edited:

#### Stefan

##### Member
And interesting... does nobody use what I call backbone (what you call Petrus, but the first two steps combined)? Is it too bad or too hard?

#### Carrot

##### Member
Luck should be called Bob Burton's method lol

Good idea, I had no idea what this should be called, that's why I added the question mark.

Richard was the first (I know of) who published it, back when he was the first to unofficially average sub-10 or sub-9, and it's what you call "Oka (youtube style)". Used to be here: http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/

I added it as "other names" under "Oka (youtube style)" as Oka is the most widely known name for this method...

#### Carrot

##### Member
And interesting... does nobody use what I call backbone (what you call Petrus, but the first two steps combined)? Is it too bad or too hard?

It is definitely a hard method, but fast pyraminxers say petrus style methods for pyraminx is impossible to lookahead in.. I will add your method to the list and another one I forgot

Note: Stefan double posted, I double post

Last edited:

#### Stefan

##### Member
I agree with Bob Burton method, that's the name I know for it

And interesting... does nobody use what I call backbone (what you call Petrus, but the first two steps combined)? Is it too bad or too hard?

It is definitely a hard method, but fast pyraminxers say petrus style methods for pyraminx is impossible to lookahead in.

I never studied it much, but I think EOLine for 3x3x3 should be harder and people are doing that, no?

#### Carrot

##### Member
I agree with Bob Burton method, that's the name I know for it

And interesting... does nobody use what I call backbone (what you call Petrus, but the first two steps combined)? Is it too bad or too hard?

It is definitely a hard method, but fast pyraminxers say petrus style methods for pyraminx is impossible to lookahead in.

I never studied it much, but I think EOLine for 3x3x3 should be harder and people are doing that, no?

I think we are misunderstanding eachother, I think I should have said reckognition instead, but my theory about this statement is that EOLine for 3x3x3 is easier to plan because tracking the orientation on a 3x3x3 doesn't take that much effort and only about a third of the puzzles functional pieces is affected, on the pyraminx I haven't found any way to easily track the orientation, plus 50% of the edges is affected on a single turn, which might make it harder to imagine in the head.

but then again, who cares so much about pyraminx that they would begin learning a method as backbone, and really stretch it to the limit, (which I would guess is about 1-2 second for EO+block and 1-2 for the rest plus tips which is 2-4 average if you don't have to reckognize.. ;-) ) and then back to where I think we misunderstood eachother, I was thinking about reckognition of the last 5 edges, I find it hard to look at them and within a second perform an alg-like solution.

#### qqwref

##### Member
Thanks a lot for this, it's very useful.

Is there anywhere where all of the algs for IWO? (And what does it stand for? :confused

#### Carrot

##### Member
Thanks a lot for this, it's very useful.

Is there anywhere where all of the algs for IWO? (And what does it stand for? :confused

No algs online =) but it stands for Improved WO (yeah, I'm not that creative xD)

EDIT: it's really not a hard work to write down the cases as they all are very intuitive and straight away, the first group of 12 cases is already known if you know how the solve the 3 bottom edges... so only 24 new cases... and I don't think there are any cases that are more than 9 moves incl. AUF that's why I would prefer this over Polish V, even though first step is a bit harder...

EDIT2: If someone draw the images I will find the algs

Last edited:

#### Tim Major

##### Platinum Member
IWO (Improved Wedel Odder)
other names: ...
steps:
• solve top edges and 2 centers bottom centers meanwhile (it doesn't matter how the last one is oriented)
• solve the rest in one alg (3 edges and 1 center)
variations: WO, Polish V
A few of these seem identical. But isn't this just Polish V? Like, purely Polish V?

Edit: Great list btw. I want to point out more things, but this list looks so good. I would have called Bob Burton's method, LBL luck.

Last edited:

#### Carrot

##### Member
IWO (Improved Wedel Odder)
other names: ...
steps:
• solve top edges and 2 centers bottom centers meanwhile (it doesn't matter how the last one is oriented)
• solve the rest in one alg (3 edges and 1 center)
variations: WO, Polish V
A few of these seem identical. But isn't this just Polish V? Like, purely Polish V?

Edit: Great list btw. I want to point out more things, but this list looks so good. I would have called Bob Burton's method, LBL luck.

no, as I wrote to you on MSN:
Tim Major say:
this is identical to polish V
Odder says:
that's like saying petrus and backbone is the same because they both start with a block...
the only difference in petrus and backbone is that in petrus you do EO after block, and backbone you it meanwhile...
but they are not the same...

(thanks Stefan for applying backbone to the list )

I agree with you that you can use the Polish V algs on it. But that's just like saying, Oka methods, WO, Johan Holmedahl's method are all identical because the last step is the same.

sorry, but I disagree with you in this.

ohh, if you have something to point out please do it ;-) and thanks for liking the list.

ehhm.. Bob Burton's Method sounds definitely better than LBL luck but I'll add that as a "other names"

#### Tim Major

##### Platinum Member
no, as I wrote to you on MSN:
Tim Major say:
this is identical to polish V
Odder says:
that's like saying petrus and backbone is the same because they both start with a block...
the only difference in petrus and backbone is that in petrus you do EO after block, and backbone you it meanwhile...
but they are not the same...

(thanks Stefan for applying backbone to the list )

I agree with you that you can use the Polish V algs on it. But that's just like saying, Oka methods, WO, Johan Holmedahl's method are all identical because the last step is the same.

sorry, but I disagree with you in this.
Then I must have used IWO ever since I started using "Polish V", so you can't really call it your new method, when it isn't new. Sorry, In my eyes this is like, making a cross differently on 3x3, making it on top rather than on bottom. No, that's a too big difference. I really don't see the difference from this to Polish V.

#### Carrot

##### Member
no, as I wrote to you on MSN:
Tim Major say:
this is identical to polish V
Odder says:
that's like saying petrus and backbone is the same because they both start with a block...
the only difference in petrus and backbone is that in petrus you do EO after block, and backbone you it meanwhile...
but they are not the same...

(thanks Stefan for applying backbone to the list )

I agree with you that you can use the Polish V algs on it. But that's just like saying, Oka methods, WO, Johan Holmedahl's method are all identical because the last step is the same.

sorry, but I disagree with you in this.
Then I must have used IWO ever since I started using "Polish V", so you can't really call it your new method, when it isn't new. Sorry, In my eyes this is like, making a cross differently on 3x3, making it on top rather than on bottom. No, that's a too big difference. I really don't see the difference from this to Polish V.

The idea behind Polish V: solve the last step as L4E
The idea behind IWO: solve the last as last 3 edges and one center...

some theory:
Polish V got 57 4edge cycle cases
IWO with the center adjusted got 20 4 edge cycle cases

Polish V's worst case is a 10 move case... 4flip for example
IWO's worst case is a 9 move case..

Polish V got in total 96 cases
IWO got in total 36 cases

Polish V can have a maximum of all four edges misoriented
IWO has a maximum of 2

Polish V L4E has an average move count of: 6.71
IWO has an average move cont of: 6.72 (I haven't searched for optimal solutions, only what pops into my head when I saw the cases... but it's close to optimal xD)

still same method? xD

no, as I wrote to you on MSN:
Tim Major say:
this is identical to polish V
Odder says:
that's like saying petrus and backbone is the same because they both start with a block...
the only difference in petrus and backbone is that in petrus you do EO after block, and backbone you it meanwhile...
but they are not the same...

(thanks Stefan for applying backbone to the list )

I agree with you that you can use the Polish V algs on it. But that's just like saying, Oka methods, WO, Johan Holmedahl's method are all identical because the last step is the same.

sorry, but I disagree with you in this.
you can't really call it your new method, when it isn't new.
well I came up with this method about exactly 1 year ago... and I didn't claim to call it new?

Last edited:

#### Daniel Wu

Bump.
I was looking at this list by Otter and noticed that I used youtube style OKA. So I looked into Oka style where you use R U R' to solve the top edges and keep the bottom centers oriented. I just want to say that it's very easy to learn and implement into solves. I learned it just today and I'm already using it with a degree of fluency in my regular solves. So, if you know OKA youtube style, learn the other style. It's worth it. Solves become more consistent and lower. It allows you to take advantage of starting positions better because you have more flexibility while solving.

#### Carrot

##### Member
Bump.
I was looking at this list by Odder and noticed that I used youtube style OKA. So I looked into Oka style where you use R U R' to solve the top edges and keep the bottom centers oriented. I just want to say that it's very easy to learn and implement into solves. I learned it just today and I'm already using it with a degree of fluency in my regular solves. So, if you know OKA youtube style, learn the other style. It's worth it. Solves become more consistent and lower. It allows you to take advantage of starting positions better because you have more flexibility while solving.

fixed, and true! =D

#### hic0057

##### Member
Which method do you reccomend to use and do you know of any video tutorials.