• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

TerryD's quest for sub 10 ZZ-CT

TerryD

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
47
If ZZ-C++ becomes more optimized, I might learn it instead of ZBLL as recognition seems quite a bit easier. I'm curious: how does the movecount of ZZ-C++ compare to ZZ-a ?
 

zzcuberman

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
84
its probably about the same because combing the two methods turns alot of 11 move tlse into 8 move cases and alot of 8 moves into the 3 move ct cases and vise versa with the C cases. basically it just takes advantage of ergonomics and fewermoves with an alg count similar to zbll
 

zzcuberman

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
84
i think its wayyyy more interesting! im also genning the other two corner flips for TTLL so that could create alot more 3 movers and lower it even more. alot of these are short. For instance R'D'RU2R'DR or (U')R'D'RU'R'DR
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
692
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
The main problem wit C++ compared to A is slot neutrality, which matters a lot more the faster you get. Ignoring better solutions for FR generally isn't a great idea and in most methods, not having a degree of freedom in the intuitive steps isn't great. For example, Roux SB has 4 possible corner edge pairs whereas if you did the back square first, you'd only ever have 2 pairs to choose from, even if the front square had a better solution.
 

zzcuberman

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
84
The main problem wit C++ compared to A is slot neutrality, which matters a lot more the faster you get. Ignoring better solutions for FR generally isn't a great idea and in most methods, not having a degree of freedom in the intuitive steps isn't great. For example, Roux SB has 4 possible corner edge pairs whereas if you did the back square first, you'd only ever have 2 pairs to choose from, even if the front square had a better solution.
Sadly theres always downsides... Its not to hard to leave on fr. But colorful pockets showed the intuitiveness of tsle can be done from all slots and then just align d for the ttls. For the step further into a hybrid adding in an alg or 2 of C shouldnt be much harder so really it can be as free as you want it to be
 
Top