[Help Thread] Square-1 Discussion

[Iwannaganx]

Is it worth buying a square one? I solve 3x3 in 40sec, 4x4 in 4mins ish, 2x2 in like 12sec, and skewb in 40sec (but I never do skewb) I'm trying to learn full pll, is it worth getting a new puzzle and letting it sit for ages because I have no time to learn the algs?

 

[PokeCubes]

3x3 skill barely transfers to square-1. When you first start you don't need many algs (or even if you want to be fast you don't need many algs), I believe beginner's is roughly 7 algs. Also I'm sure you have time to learn the algs, as they're pretty easy and you just have to be smart with drilling. If you decide to get a square-1, get the Little magic M.

 

[kadabrium]

after cubeshape, one layer of the square-1 can be solved with max three niklas just like a big cube center, leaving pll.

The wiki page makes mention of a "LBL" method but gives no description of it at all. has anyone explored this method in depth?

Even if it turns out less efficient than Vand for speed i figured it could be a good beginners method due to the low alg count. Granted the steps before ep in Vand can also be solved with the commutator but if you are using just that and nothing else it would require more iterations over there.

Edit: the 1st layer case that requires 3 comms to solve is insertion of a single edge piece. Is there an optimal alg for that? Right now i solve it by setting up to a U perm with the other layer.

 

[kadabrium]

I managed to derive the niklas variant 1,0 / -3,6 / 3,0 / -3,0 which inserts DLF corner into ULB while flipping U/D so that you can build the first layer on U.

Then if necessary a last edge can be inserted from UR to BD with 1,0 / 3,0 / 3,0 / -1,-1 / -2,1 / -3,0

 

[ImmolatedMarmoset]

I managed to derive the niklas variant 1,0 / -3,6 / 3,0 / -3,0 which inserts DLF corner into ULB while flipping U/D so that you can build the first layer on U.

Then if necessary a last edge can be inserted from UR to BD with 1,0 / 3,0 / 3,0 / -1,-1 / -2,1 / -3,0

Hey,
Just wanted to let you know that there is an LBL of sorts. I used to use it. It basically involves building a layer, then permute corners then permute edges. However, a much better method is Lin. This is basically build a layer minus an edge, then insert the edge while permuting corners with an alg, and then EPLL. Helmer Ewert uses an advanced version of this method (CSP and solving the whole last layer while inserting the edge) and is currently tied for 6th in the world in average with a 7.56 average at Jonkoping side events 2019.

Hope this helped.

 

[kadabrium]

Hey,
Just wanted to let you know that there is an LBL of sorts. I used to use it. It basically involves building a layer, then permute corners then permute edges. However, a much better method is Lin. This is basically build a layer minus an edge, then insert the edge while permuting corners with an alg, and then EPLL. Helmer Ewert uses an advanced version of this method (CSP and solving the whole last layer while inserting the edge) and is currently tied for 6th in the world in average with a 7.56 average at Jonkoping side events 2019.

Hope this helped.

Thanks for the reply

Lin does look like better way to build one layer. However is OLECP+EPLL better than simple OLE+PLL? I would think recognition for the latter is easier but not sure about execution.

compared to Vand, do lbl methods have a greater movecount? Vand CO only takes 2 moves, EO and CP around 4-5 each. building a layer takes at least one move per piece before the last edge or at least 6 in total, and then some another 6 moves for the edge itself.

 

[ImmolatedMarmoset]

Thanks for the reply

Lin does look like better way to build one layer. However is OLECP+EPLL better than simple OLE+PLL? I would think recognition for the latter is easier but not sure about execution.

compared to Vand, do lbl methods have a greater movecount? Vand CO only takes 2 moves, EO and CP around 4-5 each. building a layer takes at least one move per piece before the last edge or at least 6 in total, and then some another 6 moves for the edge itself.

the answer to your first question is, yes, it is. Particularly if you don’t use CSP, because parity PLL isn’t fun, while parity EPLL isn’t all that bad. Plus, as I said, there is PLL+1 where you solve OLE and LL at the same time with only like 72 algs w/o parity (at that point most would know CSP). You still should know full PLL as a world class solver in case you can insert both edge with an m2.

I can tell you that maximum for 1st layer minus 1 edge is 8 slices, and then PLL+ 1 looks to be around 10-12 slices on average with the algs I have (I have a doc)

 

[kadabrium]

the answer to your first question is, yes, it is. Particularly if you don’t use CSP, because parity PLL isn’t fun, while parity EPLL isn’t all that bad. Plus, as I said, there is PLL+1 where you solve OLE and LL at the same time with only like 72 algs w/o parity (at that point most would know CSP). You still should know full PLL as a world class solver in case you can insert both edge with an m2.

I can tell you that maximum for 1st layer minus 1 edge is 8 slices, and then PLL+ 1 looks to be around 10-12 slices on average with the algs I have (I have a doc)

do you have all the lsll algs?

 

[kadabrium]

Is 1-look l10p possible? there are 5 ol2e cases (1-1, 3-cycle, adj-opp, opp-opp, D-opp) each of them containing no more than 76 algs

 

[Sue Doenim]

Is 1-look l10p possible? there are 5 ol2e cases (1-1, 3-cycle, adj-opp, opp-opp, D-opp) each of them containing no more than 76 algs

Assuming parity is correct, you'd have PLL (21), swapped PLL (22), PLL+1 (76), swapped PLL+1 (76), opp (76), and adj (76), so 271 algs if I did it right. I say that's pretty feasible, if someone is dedicated enough to square one, especially since with M2 you can easily change the case if you get a case you haven't learned yet.

 

[kadabrium]

Assuming parity is correct, you'd have PLL (21), swapped PLL (22), PLL+1 (76), swapped PLL+1 (76), opp (76), and adj (76), so 271 algs if I did it right. I say that's pretty feasible, if someone is dedicated enough to square one, especially since with M2 you can easily change the case if you get a case you haven't learned yet.

how does one go about generating sq1 algs? subsets of particular interest to me are ol2e-cp (for a 2look method that can somewhat handle parity) and l6e (full roux stylistics)

 

[Sue Doenim]

how does one go about generating sq1 algs? subsets of particular interest to me are ol2e-cp (for a 2look method that can somewhat handle parity) and l6e (full roux stylistics)

Jaap Scherphuis made an optimal solver you can find out about here, but it's not very user-friendly. I think maybe you could also use kSolve, but I don't know anything about it.

 

[Cubingcubecuber]

Does anyone have a good W perm alg with W perm on top and a solved bottom?

 

[kadabrium]

Jaap Scherphuis made an optimal solver you can find out about here, but it's not very user-friendly. I think maybe you could also use kSolve, but I don't know anything about it.

generated OL2E-CP of the 3-cycle and Adj sets:

Spoiler: ol2ecp

3-cycle(UF-DB-DF)
Front swap D3B2C1A54G8H7E6F-
4,0/2,11/0,3/3,0/3,0/9,0/0,3/1,10/8,0 [8|19]

Back swap A3C2B1D54G8H7E6F-
0,11/0,3/4,1/0,9/2,8/1,10/8,5/3,0/0,4 [8|21]

Left swap D3C2A1B54G8H7E6F-
1,0/5,2/3,0/9,0/1,10/5,5/0,3/0,9/0,4 [8|20]

Right swap C3D2B1A54G8H7E6F-
0,11/4,7/9,0/0,3/11,2/7,1/3,0/9,0/2,0 [8|20]

Diag swap D2C3B1A54G8H7E6F-
4,0/2,0/9,0/0,3/0,3/9,0/8,0/7,1/8,0 [8|18]

Adj(LB)
Front swap A5C7D4B31G8H2E6F-
1,0/3,11/3,0/3,3/3,0/2,0/9,0/0,9/0,7 [8|19]

Back swap B5D7C4A31G8H2E6F-
0,5/9,0/1,0/0,3/8,0/4,0/0,9/3,1/11,0 [8|18]

Left swap B5A7C3D41G8H2E6F-
0,8/1,4/5,2/1,4/2,8/3,0/0,7 [6|17]

Right swap A5B7D3C41G8H2E6F-
1,9/9,0/3,0/2,8/4,1/2,5/0,9/7,7/2,0 [8|22]

Diag swap B5A7D4C31G8H2E6F-
9,0/0,9/4,0/8,0/0,3/9,11/3,0/3,0/0,7 [8|18]

D-opp swap
Adj A1B4D2C37E6F5G8H-
0,8/3,0/0,9/3,0/4,7/2,8/3,10 [6|16]
Diag A4D2C1B37E6F5G8H-
1,9/3,0/9,0/0,9/5,11/10,1/9,0/0,3/8,3 [8|21]

Idk what kind of coincidence it is that all except one are 8 slices long. I just set up the cases minimalistically so it is almost certain there will be shorter algs that do different EPs elsewhere on the cube.

Edit: added the bottom swap set although the diag one may not be more efficient than simple insert + nperm. The opp-opp insert set looks to me as almost certainly not worth it.

we need a better name for this subset too. cdmll?

 

[ASlicedSquare1]

So about two months ago, a started to actually practice sq1, and Ivs dropped my time to about 27 second, but now my times are plateauing. I'm not sure which algs I should start learning. Any help would be appreciated.

Algs I know:
Cubeshape: just started using scallop-kite and scallop-scallop
CO-all [if you can call them algs}
EO- Just 3: single-single , opposite-opposite , adj-adj [not sure of their proper names]
CP- all
EP- Just 4: adj-adj , opposite-opposite , single - single , adj parity

My time split is roughly 434311
Cubeshape: 5-6 sec
CO: 3 sec
EO: 4 sec
CP: 3-4 sec
EP: 10-12 sec

 

[Cubingcubecuber]

Learn all the eo, and learn more ep
I average 25 with full eo, and bottom Uperms, Zperm, Hperm, Operms, Wperm, and both parities, as well as everything on top too. My approach is to solve the bottom efficiently(like using adj adj instead of parity)even if it changes the top. Then I do one alg to fix the top and it’s solved. My biggest problem is my 12 second cube shape lol.

 

[PugCuber]

Yeah. I agree. Learn all of EO, and learn some more EP.

 

[ASlicedSquare1]

Thanks a ton!

 

[Cubinwitdapizza]

Should I learn CSP first or full EP?

 

[brandbest1]

Should I learn CSP first or full EPLL?

CSP first; learn a few EP's that will help you do most cases but CSP eliminates all the parity cases, so it's definitely more useful to learn first.