The Method With No Name [Using OLLCP in "CFOP"]

[kcl]

It is CFCE though.

For the last layer you solve a CLL then an ELL.

Think about it..

If you did CLL and ell you would really be preserving EO every time? Didn't think so.

 

[tseitsei]

Ok, first of all this thread is stupid.

Secondly we don't need a name for every method with ONE substep different from the main method.
Here CFOP is obviously the main method and you only do 1 single substep differently (OLLCP vs OLL) so your method is merely CFOP with OLLCP if you REALLY want to specify that...

(+ I'm quite drunk right now but I still realize that naming every single method with different substep(s) is really really stupid and unneccesary(spelling. ****** english is not my native language).

 

[qqwref]

I don't think we really need to come up with names for each LL variant of CFOP

This. It's exactly the reason we name substeps (like OLLCP) - there are probably hundreds of combinations of substeps you can do to slightly modify standard Fridrich. If you want to explain your method you can just say "I use CFOP with OLLCP" and anyone who knows what OLLCP will understand perfectly.

 

[GG]

If you did CLL and ell you would really be preserving EO every time? Didn't think so.

I didn't mean what I said, I said that to prove that it is as close to cll/ell as it is to oll/pll,
Sameer said "it's just cfop"
So i said "it's just cfce"

I'm not like that, don't worry! xD

 

[Hypocrism]

Let's go back to "Fridrich" and you can have "CFOP". Just for you...

 

[scottishcuber]

There is EO, EP, CO, and CP. OLLCP does EO, CO, and CP. Two of those (EO/CO) affect OLL. And two of those (CO and CP) affect CLL. That's why he says it's equally close to both, and I agree with that. What makes you see it differently?

Good point. I agree.

Well... OLL and CLL are subsets of OLLCP. Similarly EPLL is a subset of PLL and also ELL.
OLL is 1/6th of OLLCP, and PLL is 6 times bigger than EPLL.
However, CLL is 1/8th of OLLCP and ELL is 8 times bigger than EPLL.

So if you look at it this way, OLL/PLL is "closer" to OLLCP/EPLL than CLL/ELL.

Ah that's interesting. I like this reasoning the most.

I didn't mean what I said, I said that to prove that it is as close to cll/ell as it is to oll/pll,
Sameer said "it's just cfop"
So i said "it's just cfce"

See Rob's post.

Also we are both right in that technically CFCE and CFOP can both be used. In which case, it doesn't matter and this thread is stupid

Ok, first of all this thread is stupid..

Indeed.

 

[Kirjava]

This. It's exactly the reason we name substeps (like OLLCP) - there are probably hundreds of combinations of substeps you can do to slightly modify standard Fridrich. If you want to explain your method you can just say "I use CFOP with OLLCP" and anyone who knows what OLLCP will understand perfectly.

It's so nice to be reading a thread and getting agitated wanting to say something then seeing someone else post it.

 

[PhillipEspinoza]

Well, if we come up with a name for this, we have to come up with a name COLL + EPLL. Don't want COLL users to feel left out.

I think OLLCP is like COLL, is like WV, is like CPLS, is like, EOCPLL, is like TMWNN. They're all extra techniques you could use to do the LL more efficiently. We can't have a different name for a version of something where 2/3 of it is the same as the existing current dominant version. We're not Apple.

I think the moment you start working on F2L differently (being at the very miminmum 1 F2L slot) then you can consider a name. This is why we have names for ZB and MGLS and why people can refer to someone who uses this method as using MGLS or ZB (if they do ZBF2L).

 

[goodatthis]

^^ exactly

Sort of like how if you make an Xcross, you dont call it XCFOP. CFOP is an abbreviation for a method which involves sock job the cross, f2l pairs, and last layer. If you use OLLCP, you're still using the CFOP method. It's just a variation. The only reason why CLL/ELL has it's own name is because it is reasonably different from doing an OLL/PLL last layer. OLLCP bridges the ago between CLL and OLL because it's doing both.