Speedsolving wiki: PLL Page

[JustinJ]

I was looking at the PLL page today, and I'm wondering, what's the wiki stance on mirrors and inverses? For example, Ra has, among others, the following algs:

y2 z U R2 U' R2 U F' U' R' U R U F U2 R
y2 L U2 L' U2 L F' L' U' L U L F L2 U
R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U R B R2' U
R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U l U R2 F

Which is a little ridiculous. I'd like to delete all but the second one, which is the best in my opinion, but that seems too subjective of a decision for a wiki page, so what's the best solution?

 

[kpcube]

I use Y' R U' R' U' R U R D R' U' R D' R' U2 R' U'

Which is quite wonderful if you ask me

 

[Zarxrax]

If people could potentially want to use them, I don't see any reason to delete them. Most people probably just go down the list performing each alg listed to see how they like it. I honestly don't think everyone feels like taking the time to work out mirrors for every single alg on their own.

However, I think it would be nice to group similar algs like that together, so its clear that they are all based off the same alg.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

I was under the impression the whole point for putting multiple algorithms for all the cases was so that people could pick which one(s) they like.

 

[cmhardw]

I agree that the function of the Wiki is to provide a vast resource of all possible options, and people can pick the ones they like. I don't think any algs should be deleted from that list, only new algs added. Having said that, I also think it's a bit strange how sometimes people who like a particular alg very much right handed will not use the reflection of that alg to left handed for the reflected case. The opposite situation could be true for left handed cubers not reflecting to right handed for the reflected case.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

I used to reflect my algorithms, specifically the G PLL's. I actually cheated a good bit with PLL when learning it a year ago by learning one alg but getting two cases from it. This made learning PLL quite a bit easier. At the time, I believed my left hand was good enough to preform up to par with my right hand. I realized this was a big mistake, as my LH G perms took 4 seconds to execute! I changed this past August to RH algs only and I can consistently sub2 all PLLs, so I'm definitely going to stick with RH algs. I realize practice could fix this, but it takes me less practice with RH algs than it does LH algs to get them sub2

 

[Sa967St]

I was under the impression the whole point for putting multiple algorithms for all the cases was so that people could pick which one(s) they like.

The thing about those R perm algs is that they are all the exact same alg just performed a bit differently. They aren't mirrored, they're the same alg with different rotations.

I think it would be nice to group similar algs like that together, so its clear that they are all based off the same alg.

Agreed.

 

[JustinJ]

I was under the impression the whole point for putting multiple algorithms for all the cases was so that people could pick which one(s) they like.

They're all the same alg, just with rotations.

If people could potentially want to use them, I don't see any reason to delete them. Most people probably just go down the list performing each alg listed to see how they like it. I honestly don't think everyone feels like taking the time to work out mirrors for every single alg on their own.

However, I think it would be nice to group similar algs like that together, so its clear that they are all based off the same alg.

For one thing, the last two are almost identical, there's no difference in execution, so there's absolutely no reason to keep both. Having repeats of the same alg makes it more time consuming to go through the list to look for nice ones. I might agree if the transformations were significant, but in this case the first one is just z, and the last two are only a y2 away.

I wouldn't have as much of a problem if when people added mirrors, they added them directly below the original algs. Part of my problem is that a lot of these algs are added to the top of the list. I think the more common algs should be placed at the top, rather than obscure ones like y2 z U R2 U' R2 U F' U' R' U R U F U2 R.

I agree that the function of the Wiki is to provide a vast resource of all possible options, and people can pick the ones they like. I don't think any algs should be deleted from that list, only new algs added.

I have to disagree that algs shouldn't be deleted, there are some that there's absolutely no purpose for, like "R' D' R D' B D B' D R' D' R U R' D R D' B D' B' D R' D R U" that's listed under H perms. I agree that there should be a variety of algs, but there needs to be some discretion involved in what's just clutter and what's actually useful.

 

[cmhardw]

I have to disagree that algs shouldn't be deleted, there are some that there's absolutely no purpose for, like "R' D' R D' B D B' D R' D' R U R' D R D' B D' B' D R' D R U" that's listed under H perms. I agree that there should be a variety of algs, but there needs to be some discretion involved in what's just clutter and what's actually useful.

Seeing as the front page of the PLL Wiki says this:

The following page gives a list of all of the PLLs, along with a picture and a list of common algorithms for each one.

Then yes, I suppose algs like that particularly long H perm should be deleted. Some algs may be interesting from a fewest moves standpoint, or a general theory standpoint, but this PLL list is defined as a list of "common" algs. Based on that, yes I can see the reason in deleting that longer H perm alg.

 

[Sa967St]

Surely some of the algs here should be deleted:

Spoiler

The first nine or so are just two(?) different algorithms.

 

[Mike Hughey]

Having said that, I also think it's a bit strange how sometimes people who like a particular alg very much right handed will not use the reflection of that alg to left handed for the reflected case. The opposite situation could be true for left handed cubers not reflecting to right handed for the reflected case.

Chris, do you always use reflections of algorithms you like? I've asked this question generically before, and never gotten a response from anyone. It seems logical that a reflection should always work if you're truly ambidextrous, but I definitely don't use reflections of many of my algorithms (except BLD). A good example is that I recently switched to the conjugated T perm for the one J perm, but I couldn't possibly do a reflected T perm (I admittedly haven't ever really tried it), so I definitely don't use the corresponding reflection for the other J perm. I know other people who use a different, much longer conjugated alg for the other J perm using the right-handed T perm, rather than reflect.

I think I need to go learn the left-handed T perm now.

 

[JustinJ]

Seeing as the front page of the PLL Wiki says this:


Then yes, I suppose algs like that particularly long H perm should be deleted. Some algs may be interesting from a fewest moves standpoint, or a general theory standpoint, but this PLL list is defined as a list of "common" algs. Based on that, yes I can see the reason in deleting that longer H perm alg.

Perhaps there should be a separate page to put algs like this, in the interest of keeping all the algs on the PLL page practical for speedsolving (or the other way around)? There are plenty of others that I don't think should be on there as well.

 

[cmhardw]

Chris, do you always use reflections of algorithms you like? I've asked this question generically before, and never gotten a response from anyone. It seems logical that a reflection should always work if you're truly ambidextrous, but I definitely don't use reflections of many of my algorithms (except BLD). A good example is that I recently switched to the conjugated T perm for the one J perm, but I couldn't possibly do a reflected T perm (I admittedly haven't ever really tried it), so I definitely don't use the corresponding reflection for the other J perm. I know other people who use a different, much longer conjugated alg for the other J perm using the right-handed T perm, rather than reflect.

I think I need to go learn the left-handed T perm now.

Hey Mike,

To be honest, yes for the most part I always use the reflections of algs I like. I will even do algs like the F, V, Z perm left handed if it presents itself that way to me. There are some OLL's that I haven't yet learned to do both handed, but I know that I could if I chose to. I also haven't learned to do the H perm competently fast left handed, although I can do it left handed if I try.

I am a right handed person, but back in 2002 I decided that as far as I was concerned it was completely unacceptable to use a different right handed alg rather than the left handed reflection of a right handed alg that I liked very much. I will admit that it took a long time to adjust to this. The first algs that I really worked on getting "up to speed" left handed were all the Sune/Anti-Sune variations. It was actually quite difficult for me to adapt to getting fast at all these algs left handed at first. Previous to working on them I only did them from 1 fixed angle if it was a left handed Sune. Over time, and with tons of "lefty drills" I eventually got comfortable with the Sunes left handed from all angles and moved onto other algs.

I have found that I am not ambidextrous, I always default to right handed for things. However, I force myself to also be competent with most everything I do left handed as well. I can write, somewhat legibly, left-handed. I can cup stack both right and left handed (there is a dominant hand in cup stacking). I'm admittedly not the fastest speedsolver around, so I suspect that most of the top cubers would completely disagree with me on this point. I suspect even that most of the really fast speedsolvers have not read even this far into my post. I personally find it empowering to know that although I am genetically a right handed person, that I can overcome that limitation if I choose to. I choose to be ambidextrous in cubing, and therefore with practice I became ambidextrous in my cubing.

Chris

P.S. My left handed T perm, and my left handed J perm are both faster than the right handed versions now. They have been that way for a few years now, I've even done averages of 50 for each alg both hands. It goes to show that sometimes you're better at something (left handed algs) than you think you might be.

 

[TiLiMayor]

I don't get what yuu JustinJ are pretending, what I thought when I first came across the PLL wiki page is that there are so many algs (technically the same) to let people choose between them for the one who suits them better. yes, I believe this look so much messy just to show people different fingertricks on how to perform the same alg too, so for yuu saying there should be some sort of grouping for the algs in each case, but to reach a point in which we delete the vast log of reflections just to make it look nicer doesn't seem thet logical to me, a begginer cuber making its way learning his first PLL algs can take some time to mirror correctly or to find more suitable fingertricks for a single alg.

 

[Sa967St]

I don't get what yuu JustinJ are pretending, what I thought when I first came across the PLL wiki page is that there are so many algs (technically the same) to let people choose between them for the one who suits them better. yes, I believe this look so much messy just to show people different fingertricks on how to perform the same alg too, so for yuu saying there should be some sort of grouping for the algs in each case, but to reach a point in which we delete the vast log of reflections just to make it look nicer doesn't seem thet logical to me, a begginer cuber making its way learning his first PLL algs can take some time to mirror correctly or to find more suitable fingertricks for a single alg.

JJ mostly means deleting duplicate algs that come up more than once with slight modifications, like this:

R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U R B R2' U
R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U l U R2 F

Only the last few moves are different and the fingertricks for both are pretty much the same.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

Ah, I didn't see they were the same (my fault, since I didn't even read the algorithms, just took note that he listed a few of them). I would agree that makes sense

 

[TiLiMayor]

JJ mostly means deleting duplicate algs that come up more than once with slight modifications, like this:

R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U R B R2' U
R U2 R' U2 R B' R' U' R U l U R2 F

Only the last few moves are different and the fingertricks for both are pretty much the same.

So some sort of grouping as Zarxrax said? scroll down spoilers?

 

[JustinJ]

Perhaps deleting them isn't the best option, but having blatantly slower reflections/rotations, like y2 z U R2 U' R2 U F' U' R' U R U F U2 R, or just useless (from a speedsolving perspective) algs, like (R' S R u) * 6 displayed alongside commonly used algs is a bit silly.

A beginning cuber doesn't know what algs are good since they're no good at turning yet. Having so many algs will just turn off beginners who don't know how to tell which are good. When I was a beginner, I gravitated to the sites with only one alg per case, since I didn't want to accidentally pick a bad alg. At the very least, I'm going to move all the decent algs to the top.

 

[qqwref]

I think:
- we should aim for only ONE listing for each sequence of turns (hopefully using the fastest style); it is well-known that any algorithm can be performed in multiple ways, and that's part of learning it. Listing every possible way it could be performed is a waste of space.
- we should keep as many separate algorithms as we can, but move the best ones to the top (and possibly bold them or something).

 

[FatBoyXPC]

it is well-known that any algorithm can be performed in multiple ways, and that's part of learning it.

I think if we were to think about beginners here, I would be inclined to disagree with this in their favor. I have seen a lot of posts (and I'm guilty of doing the same thing) of telling people to choose an alg from the list that they can feel flows well for their style. I think that seeing the alternate notation to show execution differences is beneficial in this aspect.

I would agree though that it does clutter the list, take up space, and we could probably benefit by finding a way to display alternate notations with the same algorithm (maybe a lightbox or other type of pop up window).