TerryD's quest for sub 10 ZZ-CT

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 ?
 
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
 
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
 
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.
 
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
 
Back
Top