• 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 40,000+ 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

Ah, very nice. The previous video didn't even come remotely close to doing this justice; this video is a lot better. I'm quite impressed.

Could you do an average of 12, perhaps? Get 12 scrambles (25 moves is OK, cube explorer would be better though) and record the times, then take the average of the middle 10. I think since Feliks is a robot too he should have to compete against this, so it would be interesting to know how far he has to go :p
 
Ah, very nice. The previous video didn't even come remotely close to doing this justice; this video is a lot better. I'm quite impressed.

Could you do an average of 12, perhaps? Get 12 scrambles (25 moves is OK, cube explorer would be better though) and record the times, then take the average of the middle 10. I think since Feliks is a robot too he should have to compete against this, so it would be interesting to know how far he has to go :p

I'm glad you like this video better :-)

Thanks for the suggestion, yes, perhaps we should consider another video if there is enough interest...

If we did this then using Cube Explorer for the scramble would be the best idea wouldn't it!

It would be interesting to see Feliks compete against CubeStormer II... of course we would let him have the normal human inspection time just to make it close! :D
 
I think a lot of people would be interested in a robot average if it was posted in Video Gallery.
 
My attempt at a human computer-like method.

B D U' L2 F2 R2 F2 R2 D R D2 F' D' B' D2 F2 L2 F' U R' L' F B L R2

x LDF'LRB
L'U2L2U'L'R'
U R'ULU'RUL' U
F2B2R'U2RF2R'F2R2F2R2U2 LD2R'U2RD2R'U2L'U2M2

Way more moves than I hoped for and not suitable for speedsolving. Kind of fun though.
 
EO -> Something with edges -> Something with corners -> solve everything

I don't even think that's right. What are the steps?

1. EO + any two M edges at DF/DB
2. Two "oriented piece" 1x2x3 blocks on L and R
3. Orient remaining four corners and move remaining two M edges to M. (First step of NMLL)
4. Two real 1x2x3 blocks on L and R - while simultaneously trying to permute M.
5. Permute remaining four corners and position remaining four edges. (Second step of NMLL)
 
I do realize that it's not that similar to the usual computer methods. That's why I said computer-like. More human than computer with the 1x2x3s and the two four corner-four edge steps.
 
WJkU8.png
 
Just a thought about the beginner method, second layer edges after cross on bottom: Instead of teaching *two* cases/algorithms (one for each edge orientation), put it at UL (any orientation) and repeat R U R' U' F' U' F U' until it's solved (goes into FR). Also works for flipping an edge in place (doing the alg twice).
 
Last edited:
To me, the cube is a musical instrument. I try to play it better, more fluently, and more masterfully, but most of all more artfully. Love first, profit second.

Also:

If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone.
-- Jack Handy
 
Has anyone tried something like MGLS but permuting corners?
I've discovered a few algs when messing about with CMLL algs and accidentally twisting corners and I find it sometimes beneficial to leave a corner twisted on the second block.

Edit: I do mean for just I and Im cases. It'd be rather complicated for the rest of them.
 
Some more silly algs (with interesting effects):
R U R2 U2 R D' R' U2 R2 U' R' D
U M' S U F2 U' S' M U F2 U2
R u R' u' L S L' u R u' R' B2 L S' L' B2
R S E' R' E S'
(R2 U2 R2 S)2
R L D R' D L' U L D' R D' L' R' U'
U' M2 U R2 E' F2 D' S2 D F2 E R2
R U R2 U' R' S' U' R' U2 R U S
 
(R2 U2 R2 S)2
I realize the point of this was the fascinating nature of the algorithm, but in case someone likes this one, I wanted to point out that quicker is: F M2 S M2 f' (or any of the many similar alternatives). I use it often for big cubes BLD (5x5x5 or 7x7x7) to solve centers when I reorient.
 
Back
Top