Recognition between COLL and OLL

[Neutrals01]

Hmm...if OLL and PLL, which is easier to master?

rephrase?
msg too short

hmm...means that OLL (57 cases <short algorithm>) , PLL (21 cases <long algorithm>). Is it easier to master OLL or is it easier to master PLL?

[Pochmann mode]Define master[/Pochmann mode]

hmm...as in which is easier to reach an almost 0 sec recognition?

 

[AvGalen]

I think that the best of the best can get a negative time on recognising OLL. That means that before they finish the F2L they already know which OLL they will get.

That is also possible for PLL, but much harder.

 

[MHordecki]

Based on my experience I think that COLL/EPLL is a bit faster IMHO. While racing with fellow Fridrich (OLL/PLL) user of an equal skill, my LL times were usually better.

 

[not_kevin]

Based on my experience I think that COLL/EPLL is a bit faster IMHO. While racing with fellow Fridrich (OLL/PLL) user of an equal skill, my LL times were usually better.

The issue is, 'tho, you have to (typically) spend extra time orienting the cross during your final pair. You should start with cross+3F2L, if you want to be fair.

 

[Kenneth]

Based on my experience I think that COLL/EPLL is a bit faster IMHO. While racing with fellow Fridrich (OLL/PLL) user of an equal skill, my LL times were usually better.

The issue is, 'tho, you have to (typically) spend extra time orienting the cross during your final pair. You should start with cross+3F2L, if you want to be fair.

With the pair done and ready in LL, else you need to know all ZB's and I don't think anybody does.

 

[yurivish]

Several people know all of ZBF2L, which is what you're talking about (orienting the last layer edges as you put in the last pair. The rest of ZB is ZBLL, which solves the rest of the cube with one algorithm.

 

[brunson]

I'm learning ZBF2L right now. I know about six algorithms, only 152 to go. ;-)

Seriously, I don't think I'll ever bother learning all cases, I'm more interested in getting an intuitive feel for edge control and alternate strategies for pair and insert.

 

[AvGalen]

If you want to get an intuitive feel for edge control you shouldn't learn ZBF2L algs. ZBF2L algs are optimal algs which contradicts the "intuitive feel" you want. VH might be more suited for that "intuitive feel".

 

[yurivish]

I'm learning ZBF2L right now. I know about six algorithms, only 152 to go. ;-)

Seriously, I don't think I'll ever bother learning all cases, I'm more interested in getting an intuitive feel for edge control and alternate strategies for pair and insert.

That's a good idea. There is such a thing as intuitive ZBF2L, which you seem to be on the right track towards. It seems pretty damn difficult to be able to determine what moves to do to orient all the edges on-the-fly, but it probably takes less time to master than it does to be comfortable with all the ZBF2L algs.

 

[AvGalen]

Edge control is actually pretty easy and straight forward when the edge from the F2L is involved. Just try this scramble: R' F R F' U2 F U2 F' U' F U' F'. Orient 1 edge while seperating (R U2 R'), Match (F' U2 F), Insert while keeping edges oriented (U F' U2 F or U2 F' U F but not U' F R' F' R)

But when the edge from the F2L is already solved I have more problems with edge control. Just try this scramble: R' F R F' U2 F U2 F' U' F U' F2 U F. Match (U R U' R'), orient 1 edge (U' R U' R'), insert while orienting 2 more edges (U' R' F R F'). Which isn't really shorter then match (U R U' R'), insert (U2 R U' R') Edge Orient (R' U' F' U F R)