Actually, you should definitely not assume that the people who originally divided 1LLL into subsets always knew what they were doing. They developed many of their theories at a time when not many people had the practical experience of learning large algsets, and definitely had some wrong ideas about things like recognition.I've been looking at your progress all this time and I have only 1 thing to tell you. It is not worth to learn 1LLL in 1 go. They have been divided into subsets(like Tripod, ZBLL, etc.) and then into further subsets(like Pi,H,etc.) for a reason. The people who divided them into subsets were/are not mad they did it for a reason.
@Zubin Park 's guide to become sub-x till then
I know you have said this
times but still this was my advice. Your wish to listen or not. So many people are telling you this but you aren't listening.
Learning by subsets is a very good approach, but is definitely not the only option. Learning in a random order is actually quite reasonable. Simon Kalhofer, a full ZBLL user endorses this method of learning ZBLL, which uses a random order (using Anki).
I would also add that the standard subsets that you mentioned such as Tripod, Pi and H aren't necessarily the only reasonable subsets to consider. I think you could be creative here and define many reasonable subsets for yourself. For example, algs which are a combination of sune+another alg, cases which have checkerboard patterns on top, algs which have 1x1x2 blocks, algs with 1x1x3 blocks etc.
I find that those who haven't actually had the experience of learning a lot of algs seem to have a idea that there are certain rules you have to follow to learn algs effectively. The fact of the matter is that there are many decent approaches to learning large algsets, and it's not so easy to say that one is better than all the rest. This does not mean that there are no bad approaches - there are many - however, if your method of learning is well thought out, and you can prove to yourself that it's more effective for you than other approaches (and not just because you're bad at the other approaches), you should be prepared to go against the common wisdom and stick to your guns.
(disclaimer: I have not looked at what LukasCubes' learning method is and can't comment on whether it's good or bad. The main point of this post is to argue that sometimes you need to be willing to go against the grain and think for yourself.)