The wiki has the answers to COLL and ELL, although you're probably actually looking for CLL, not COLL. "Better" is a matter of personal preference, but the fact that OLL and PLL are far more commonly used, even by the most experienced cubers, says a lot.what are coll and ell algorithms? are they better than normal oll and pll?
Although many experienced cubers will know COLL for cases where their top cross is solved, whereby increasing the chances of a PLL skip.
Sorry, let me clarify.Eh? That makes no sense. What I pointed out is that if your edges aren't pre-oriented you wouldn't use COLL. If they are pre-oriented, you wouldn't use ELL.
You still don't get the point. Sensible combinations are COLL/EPLL or CLL/ELL (or better still, OLL/PLL). Not COLL/ELL as you advised above. Learning both COLL and CLL seems overkill.Sorry, let me clarify.
You are right. It is more advantageous to learn COLL and CLL; however, I assumed that hkpnkp only intended to learn COLL for some reason.
Dude, read the thread. Nobody uses COLL and ELL together. Look at reconstructions of Mats' and Feliks' solves and you will see that they use OLL/PLL, mostly.does mats valk and feliks zemdegs use coll and ell?
Care to explain how? I assume you mean either EPLL is a subset of ELL, or you can use COLL algs as a sub-optimal CLL when you don't care about EO. Both of which are technically true, but pedantry doesn't make it any clearer an answer to the OP's question, in which it was unclear whether s/he was referring to COLL/EPLL or CLL/ELL.They do.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|W||Q&A #0 (WhoCube) - (SEND ME YOUR QUESTIONS)||Puzzle Video Gallery||2|
|Gan 356i questions||Hardware Area||2|
|S||Notation questions for megaminx solvers||Software Area||9|
|N||some Questions for a new fella||Cubing Help & Questions||14|
|P||Miscellaneous questions||Hardware Area||1|