Random Blindfold Cubing Discussion

[Keroma12]

Is there a spreadsheet or guide anyone has that has an example for all the combos?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fi4xgUz5b23UXMlHq7Tt5C8Ak8-U3XdbeQ9Anw68BQc/edit#gid=0

 

[TheGrayCuber]

Hey guys, I have a question about the way you chose your comms : what do you think is better between those algs and why?
[UR'UD:[D2, RU'R']] (setup into 9-moves comm)
[UR'U':[R'U'R, D2]] (setup into 8-moves comm)
Thanks for the answers

I personally would pick the second one. It seems to flow better and I can execute it faster.

 

[CarterK]

Hey guys, I have a question about the way you chose your comms : what do you think is better between those algs and why?
[UR'UD:[D2, RU'R']] (setup into 9-moves comm)
[UR'U':[R'U'R, D2]] (setup into 8-moves comm)
Thanks for the answers

How about [UD R' U: R U' R', D]?

 

[Martial]

I personally would pick the second one. It seems to flow better and I can execute it faster.

I saw the second one in several alg lists of the top 3blders :/
I think both are good algs, but is there a personnal choice from cubers depending on their cubing style ? The first one seems more complicated to do intuitively, but maybe it's just my point of view, I think I'm not able to see difference between those algs in term of fingertricks at my current blind level, that's why I require some help here

 

[pinser]

I saw the second one in several alg lists of the top 3blders :/
I think both are good algs, but is there a personnal choice from cubers depending on their cubing style ? The first one seems more complicated to do intuitively, but maybe it's just my point of view, I think I'm not able to see difference between those algs in term of fingertricks at my current blind level, that's why I require some help here

The first one is objectively optimal because it is fewer qtm. If we count UD as one qtm (which we should), then [UR'UD:[D2, RU'R']] is 14 qtm while [UR'U':[R'U'R, D2]] is 15 qtm

 

[Martial]

Ok I see what you mean, I was not thinking like that, thanks

 

[mark49152]

I usually favour algs where any R move in the setup is in the opposite direction to the first R move of the insert. That makes the alg more likely to be regripless although that's no guarantee that it flows better.

[UR'U':[R'U'R, D2]] - the two consecutive R' moves means it feels awkward for me to do without a regrip first.

[UR'UD:[D2, RU'R']] - I can do this regripless from home grip.

Having said that, I don't really like either of them. I find the left handed UD' awkward in the second one.

I don't really have a better suggestion for this case though. I use a D2 R setup, regripping right hand during the left handed D2.

 

[lucarubik]

i use a D2 R setup aswell, but i kinda hate that set, i use the same idea for the three of them

I've been considering making some toogling on my letter scheme, so all the letters have the same color of sticker, both if they are corners or edges, i ended up with a pretty speffz looking scheme, with my own letters, and disrespecting the direction, sort of speak, this is what it looks like:



i see two main differences between this and the speffz scheme
- I get to group letters in the same piece better, so the corner next to the edge that has the letters L and Z has the letters L and Z aswell, i would imagine this is good, no downside to this.
- in the edges of a 4x4 the letter of the edge doesn't always match the letter of the closest corner, but sometimes it will match the letter of the second closest one. hope this is clear.

So the question is wich of the differences weights more, does the second one weight enough to make it worth it to rearange even more letters, so it becomes completely speff looking?
thanks in advance.

PS also have i missed any other important difference?

 

[abunickabhi]

i use a D2 R setup aswell, but i kinda hate that set, i use the same idea for the three of them

I've been considering making some toogling on my letter scheme, so all the letters have the same color of sticker, both if they are corners or edges, i ended up with a pretty speffz looking scheme, with my own letters, and disrespecting the direction, sort of speak, this is what it looks like:

View attachment 9311

i see two main differences between this and the speffz scheme
- I get to group letters in the same piece better, so the corner next to the edge that has the letters L and Z has the letters L and Z aswell, i would imagine this is good, no downside to this.
- in the edges of a 4x4 the letter of the edge doesn't always match the letter of the closest corner, but sometimes it will match the letter of the second closest one. hope this is clear.

So the question is wich of the differences weights more, does the second one weight enough to make it worth it to rearange even more letters, so it becomes completely speff looking?
thanks in advance.

PS also have i missed any other important difference?

AFAIK , this is the system used by many Spanish cubers , especially Berta, as I have seen her alg sheets.

Actually many top solvers do modifications on the speffz scheme , but it is too minor to call it a different system.
I really didnt understand your second point completely (I think speffz is also good for 4x4 sticker identification with a little bit of practise) , but I with my little spanish knowledge , clearly see that this system is better , "to group letters in the same piece better".
I use a language called Marathi to encode pieces , which is very different from any lettering scheme. And the fun part is I do not have to romanize the language into English letters in order to make a comprehensive system.
I too believe it is an easier system to use than Speffz for me.

(Side note: Please letter your buffer stickers too ,coz in floating buffers , that target will be unnamed , so you can make a mistake in shooting to a target , Use Y or C consonant sound for it)

 

[lucarubik]

AFAIK , this is the system used by many Spanish cubers , especially Berta, as I have seen her alg sheets.

Actually many top solvers do modifications on the speffz scheme , but it is too minor to call it a different system.
I really didnt understand your second point completely (I think speffz is also good for 4x4 sticker identification with a little bit of practise) , but I with my little spanish knowledge , clearly see that this system is better , "to group letters in the same piece better".
I use a language called Marathi to encode pieces , which is very different from any lettering scheme. And the fun part is I do not have to romanize the language into English letters in order to make a comprehensive system.
I too believe it is an easier system to use than Speffz for me.

(Side note: Please letter your buffer stickers too ,coz in floating buffers , that target will be unnamed , so you can make a mistake in shooting to a target , Use Y or C consonant sound for it)

in speffz the corner with a letter is the one next to the edge with that letter clockwise, in my set up thats true for all faces but U and D, so if i wanted a speffz looking one i would have to rotate either the corners or the edges of that faces clockwise or counterclockwise respectively. so its fundamentally different, not just a substitution of the letters

why would i ever want to put letters to the buffer? if im using a different buffer its cause my main buffer piece is already solved, or cause i've already memorised its solution in another cycle right? a cycle where i used it as buffer.
thanks for the replay

 

[lucarubik]

I've made another division in the cicles, this time not just grouping simetrical across the x y and z axis cases, but simetrical across any axis, 14 groups that technicly share alg, i've also done some more or less automatic tweeking (wont go into details) so the solving algs of consecutive cases are alike, although this is buffer or technique or even letter dependand, im not sure, im sure that it kinda worked though
table in the signature with updated algs although not definitive yet feel free to copy the calsification into your own sheet if you like it, aswell as the algs
*oh also filled a UFR sheet aswell as a UF although the UF one is pure transposition, was considering changing buffers but considering parity i think i like mine more.

 

[Arc]

Hi is there an optimal order for searching for cycle breaks for UFR/UF buffers?

 

[TheGrayCuber]

Hi is there an optimal order for searching for cycle breaks for UFR/UF buffers?

It depends on the speed that you do each target. To find out which ones are optimal, I timed all of my algs and figured out which letters are the fastest for me.
For corners my fastest are: LFD, RFD, RBD.
For edges they are: BU, LB, FD.

 

[Arc]

It depends on the speed that you do each target. To find out which ones are optimal, I timed all of my algs and figured out which letters are the fastest for me.
For corners my fastest are: LFD, RFD, RBD.
For edges they are: BU, LB, FD.

Shouldn't you average the entire piece, not just the sticker? Since you're not guaranteed to end the cycle on the same sticker you start it on?

 

[lucarubik]

Shouldn't you average the entire piece, not just the sticker? Since you're not guaranteed to end the cycle on the same sticker you start it on?

yes. the one you are on by 0,66 and the other by 0.33, and you add them. but honestly just dont, let your instint drive you, if your eyes are close to one unsolved go for that one, if the last one was UF go for DF, if your letter is O go for the G and memorize O.G. and al paccino's face since you are already halfway trough. why would you force your brain to adopt a rule when you can adopt the rule your brain chooses, no matter how complicated it is.
wait its not .3/.6 but .25/.75 i think

 

[TheGrayCuber]

yes. the one you are on by 0,66 and the other by 0.33, and you add them. but honestly just dont, let your instint drive you, if your eyes are close to one unsolved go for that one, if the last one was UF go for DF, if your letter is O go for the G and memorize O.G. and al paccino's face since you are already halfway trough. why would you force your brain to adopt a rule when you can adopt the rule your brain chooses, no matter how complicated it is.
wait its not .3/.6 but .25/.75 i think

It is probably not exactly .25/.75 but that is what I did. It can be good to pick a random piece in the short term, but with practice it becomes easy and quick to pick an optimal piece.

 

[lucarubik]

i want to share an idea for parity, works best with UFL and UF as buffers aswell as with UBR and UR, although im not sure how i like UR, but im pretty sure i like ULcorners more than URones, might be jsut bias, ill use UFL UF for the example

if the first (or last) edge is UL you do U and old pochmann with the last (or first) corner
if the first (or last) edge is DL you do S U and then old pochmann with the last (or first) corner
if the first (or last) edge is UR, DF or DB you do U and then M' M2 or M and then old pochmann with the last (or first) corner

Im pretty sure it's a well known techinque i just wanted to write down how i'd do it *exactly*

 

[lucarubik]

went a bit further organizing the cycles, the corner cycles, its arbitrary but usefull for my style wich is pretty standard i think. the algs with a letter A have two pieces in the L layer (except for those cases where there is no such thing) so B and C cases of the same case (number) share alg, with some exceptions

 

[joshsailscga]

Chris Hardwick will drop off the top-100 for 5BLD soon, currently ranked exactly 100th :O

 

[T1_M0]

Had a lot of things going on at a competition this weekend
https://m.cubecomps.com/competitions/3724/events

- 4bld was okay, not so good memo and took it pretty safe during the execution. 4:01 and 2nd place. PR is 3:56 but I've clearly made progress. I should expect mid-3 minute solves soon.

- MBLD: Got a 25/25 in 55:22, my former NR was 20/21 and my PB at home is 21/21. I'm extremely happy about this, puts me 19th in the world.

- 3BLD: I got NR single 31.83 (not awesome, sub-30 coming next time). I'm pretty disappointed since I missed a great mean on both rounds (finals were DNF (33.xy, apparently I messed it during the very last alg), 31.83, 33.04 so it would've been a sub-33 mean (my NR mean is 40.95 but it's not good by any means)

- 5BLD: Okay, so Ville's former WR has stood since 2011, the video says it all.

Not too bad though, I got a success I needed to put me number 1 in Finnish overall kinchranks and bld event kinchranks.

It was definitely my favourite comp so far, I set a lot of records in many events. It's just the beginning.