• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Random Cubing Discussion

Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
59
Likes
0
Switching methods is so difficult I just switched to Roux and K4 from the crappy standard CFOP and Yaudux (which is ok), so what do you guys think is the standard time to get as fast/proficient with a new method as with your old?
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
880
Likes
1
Location
0, 0
I try to make a ruleset out of this (it seems to be more deterministic(easy) than I first believed):

1. identify the L/R case (white/yellow), there are 23 cases

2a. There are two corners with yellow stickers, these corners have 2 colors in common (one is yellow) -> ignore this
2b. The remainig two stickers on the yellow corners are always opposite colors. -> these are the first two stickers of the second pattern

3a+b. Just the same as step 2 to get the next two stickers for the second pattern.

4. the second patter is again one of the 23 cases and the combination tells me the alg.


my considerations (?):
a) the 23 cases are the same for both steps in theory, but in practise I memoryse pattern 1 as two set of stickers of the same color, while I have to identify pattern 2 as set of opposite colored stickers

b) there are only 42 pattern combos, but they can be combined in one of two orders.
I think I was reading this incorrectly. Originally, I thought you were suggesting a "find the opposite colors yourself" recognition. Now I see that you were describing how you were understanding it.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
59
Likes
0
I think you're switching for the wrong reasons.
That isn't why I'm switching, I'm fast with Yaudux and CFOP but I don't enjoy solving with them it's somewhat autonomous whereas I find my new 2 methods require some thought and I find them more fun to solve with, roux got me back into 3x3 as K4 got me back into 4x4
 
Joined
May 7, 2006
Messages
7,287
Likes
40
WCA
2003POCH01
YouTube
StefanPochmann
Had a weird solve, trying linear fewest moves. Double extended cross after 17 moves, and funnily the last two (adjacent) pairs were already solved, except in the wrong slots. Usually I'd swap them with [F U' L : U2], but I noticed the 6-moves OLL so did OLL before F2L. And then I ended up with an F perm "right on top" of the two wrong F2L pairs, so I set up the rest to be solved by a U2 turn:

f R U R' U' f'
[L D F' R2 F R' : U2]
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Had a weird solve, trying linear fewest moves. Double extended cross after 17 moves, and funnily the last two (adjacent) pairs were already solved, except in the wrong slots. Usually I'd swap them with [F U' L : U2], but I noticed the 6-moves OLL so did OLL before F2L. And then I ended up with an F perm "right on top" of the two wrong F2L pairs, so I set up the rest to be solved by a U2 turn:

f R U R' U' f'
[L D F' R2 F R' : U2]
Heh, that was cool.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
361
Likes
0
Bump?

This L2L4 stuff is getting to my head.
First layer average solve times

Average of 5: 8.98
How many "steps"/looks do you use for first layer, I need at least 3 looks wich is still to much as I believe.

I wonder how consistent your movecount is (~24), It's not so difficult to get sub 20 moves.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
361
Likes
0
I think I was reading this incorrectly. Originally, I thought you were suggesting a "find the opposite colors yourself" recognition. Now I see that you were describing how you were understanding it.
In fact I tried to understand how your "NMCMLL Version 3" could work (still no idea, but I'm very interessted)
But finally I now understand how you created Version 2
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,830
Likes
34
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
qqwref2
A bunch of random similarities I found between me and Chris Hardwick:
- we both used to be world-class in a few popular events, but have since stopped being competitive in them;
- we both moved on to less-popular events that we can still get impressive results in;
- we both won the 4x4x4 event at a US Nationals competition (once);
- we both haven't competed since US Nationals 2010;
- we're both very interested in math;
- we are both knowledgeable in cube theory;
- we both invented methods (that other people have learned since then);
- we're both active on this forum, and have a large number of posts.
 
Top