• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

Random Cubing Discussion

Let's say we denote R2 as Rh. Now we can denote the slices in this way: R2, R3, R4 and so on. Then, we can have one-way expressions like these: Rw4h (4Rw2), Lw3h' (3Lw2'), Rw2-4h (2-4Rw2).
What do you think?
 
Let's say we denote R2 as Rh. Now we can denote the slices in this way: R2, R3, R4 and so on. Then, we can have one-way expressions like these: Rw4h (4Rw2), Lw3h' (3Lw2'), Rw2-4h (2-4Rw2).
What do you think?
Nice idea, and something that could be used for 6x6 and up, but I think we already have a too established notation system to make any major changes. Good idea tho.
 
What's the average optimal movecount for solving 1) a face 2) a layer, on skewb?
 
Back
Top