Solving a rubik's via a method or not?

[Deleted member 51471]

My friend watched me solving it with LBL in my early cubing days, then he made up his own alg for the second layer, made up his own sune alg, and just did random sunes for LL

 

[brododragon]

My friend watched me solving it with LBL in my early cubing days, then he made up his own alg for the second layer, made up his own sune alg, and just did random sunes for LL

Did he solve it?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Did he solve it?

yes, he did.

 

[ZB2op]

You need to have algorithms to be able to solve a cube

I know this is old but technically the heise method uses no algorithms

 

[dudefaceguy]

I know this is old but technically the heise method uses no algorithms

Depends on what you mean by an algorithm. Heise doesn't use any written or memorized algorithms, but obviously you use sequences of moves that can be expressed in notation as an algorithm. Any sequence of moves can be expressed and described as an algorithm. Even with intuitive methods, you will use short, familiar sequences of moves. Even though I never "memorized" it as an alg, I obviously use R U R' when I am blockbuilding. And at this point, many commutators are so familiar to me that I am basically performing a memorized alg.

All of which is to say, don't get too hung up on the difference between intuitive and algorithmic solving, because there is no bright line between the two. I consider myself an intuitive solver, btw -- see the thread in my signature.

 

[kubesolver]

Depends on what you mean by an algorithm. (...)
sequences of moves that can be expressed in notation as an algorithm

My definition that I feel fits quite well what people consider as a difference between intuitive / algorithmic is the following:
- if you forgot a particular sequence then would you be able to easily come up with it via intuition / reasoning?
if you can then the step is intuitive. If you can't it's not.

E.g. if you're familiar with commutators to the point that they feel like algorithms you still can come up with them on the fly if needed hence I would consider that 3-style is mainly intuitive. It also applies to all but a few of my F2L inserts. However if I forgot an RUD G-perm somehow it would probably take me eternity to find it again so my PLL is algorithmic.

 

[brododragon]

I think that the closest you can get to alg-less would be a corners first method that transitions into LSE.

 

[kubesolver]

I think corners first into 3 style edges can be an easy alg less method
There was a post of a user who came up with such a method himself somewhere on the forum

 

[qwr]

sometime Soon™ I'll create my own method, probably using corners-first like the oldschool days. I need to post my horribly inefficient self-made skewb solution too.

 

[dudefaceguy]

I think corners first into 3 style edges can be an easy alg less method
There was a post of a user who came up with such a method himself somewhere on the forum

Heise is an easy alg-less method. Here is a beginner video I made: