On you go, solve the 2x2x2 corners of a 5x5 and tell us how you get on.An idea for a new 5x5x5 method--I think it's unique. It goes like this: Solve 2x2x2 cubes on all the corners, then solve the edge "inner squares" as Heise would call them, then solve as a 3x3x3. Any more ideas or algorithm suggestions?
This made me lol. It is an absurd thought to change to the most impractical reduction method just so that the 3x3 stage uses a different number of layers. And aren't you "Mr. Movecount" or something? What happened to your argument that what turns you make don't matter as long as it's fewer moves?I don't think solving as a 3x3 with double moves is such a bad idea. I think it would be easier to turn quickly. It is kind of hard to start out with corners though.
Much as I enjoy reading about theory and ideas, I'm still confused about what you're trying to achieve. Speed, or fewest moves? A number of times you've expressed a preference for saving moves over using faster algs/techniques, but you're not doing full-on FMC either. So yes I can imagine that kind of competition event would suit you! Perhaps there should be a forum called "elegantsolving.com"I think it would be cool if they had competitions where you won if you had the best average of moves and speed.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Machine learning method generation plausibility.||General Speedcubing Discussion||8|
|Does method neutral on 3x3 worth it?||General Speedcubing Discussion||26|
|Brainstorming for methods/substeps (for speedsolving)||General Speedcubing Discussion||10|
|Calculating Method/Substep Efficiency||Puzzle Theory||26|
|Method Substeps and Subgroups||Puzzle Theory||4|