• 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!
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
34
Likes
12
Location
Utah
WCA
2015LYON01
I saw a video with a comparison between ZZ and Roux that I thought could be applied to other methods.

Basically, although the methods may seem very different, ZZ could be thought of as a worse version of Roux.

Roux

ZZ

First Block

Left Block

Second Block

Right Block

CMLL + L6E

EOline + ZBLL



If you compare how they solve certain groups of pieces, F2B seems a little harder than ZZF2L, but CMLL and L6E is way better than EOline and ZBLL.

I was wondering if there are any other good 3x3 methods that this could be applied to like this?
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
10
Likes
0
WHICH IS EASY?

I am studying about a new aproach to solve the cube. Maybe somebody has used and named it before me, I don't know and I don't care.

1. EOLine
2. F2L - 1 Slot (LB is my choice)
3. LS + CP without O at the same time
4. CO + EP at the same time (Finishing the Cube)

For the 4th stage, there are two recognition alternatives.

1. Look the colors for URF corner and find the edges in the same colors.
2. Look the UF and UR edges, and determine the right position of them using the URF corner colors.

Both have pros and cons. You can try and notice them yourself. I want to ask you which was easier. Not logicaly but in practice.
The images have the same algorithm but different recognition techniques.

R' U2 R2 U R2 U R U' R U' R'

Thanx for your interest...
 

Attachments

Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
1,478
Likes
937
I am studying about a new aproach to solve the cube. Maybe somebody has used and named it before me, I don't know and I don't care.
You might not care, but for reference, this is basically full CPLS + 2GLL.

For the 4th stage, there are two recognition alternatives.

1. Look the colors for URF corner and find the edges in the same colors.
2. Look the UF and UR edges, and determine the right position of them using the URF corner colors.

Both have pros and cons. You can try and notice them yourself. I want to ask you which was easier. Not logicaly but in practice.
The images have the same algorithm but different recognition techniques.

R' U2 R2 U R2 U R U' R U' R'
#2 is absolutely, 100% the faster option if you can put time into practising it. It's essentially two-sided recognition, whereas the other one (finding two edges) is three-sided/four-sided.

However, if you're asking for "easier", looking for bars and other obvious patterns is the easiest, imo. The case you have in your pictures is easily identified by the lack of bars, as well as the H-perm-like pattern around the oriented corner.
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
10
Likes
0
You might not care, but for reference, this is basically full CPLS + 2GLL.
CPLS+2GLL The aim is same, but all actions are different. I don't use RF slot as LS. I use LB. And "CPLS setup" is also different. I stack them in a different way an location. And my starting position needs 15 algs, not 26 ;) (CORRECTION: NOT 15! NEAR 90! GO BACK AGAIN TO THE CLASSICAL POSITION. OR SOLVE THE FL SLOT, GET THE LBD CORNER TO UFL AND MAKE AN L MOVE TO HIDE IT. THIS IS THE CPLS SETUP. AGAIN 26 ALGS. EXCUSE ME.) 2GLL is same but maybe some algorithms are different.

ZZ-Orbit solves the pair but does a kind of EPLL without inserting it. And hide them to the back before recognition. Not a benefit. Insert it and use COLL. Much easier.

The case you have in your pictures is easily identified by the lack of bars, as well as the H-perm-like pattern around the oriented corner.
Can you expand the explanation?

Edit 1: (WRONG! NO NEED TO READ IT.) Inspect my CPLS recognition position. R U' L U R' U L2 U2 L U' L2 U L U' L U' L U L. That needs 15 algs, because the corner is always at the ULB corner in 3 different positions and the edge can be only in 5 different positions. One of the algorithms is only L'. The solving alg of this scramble is R' U2 R U' L' U R' U2 R. Too easy. And the recognition code is LD. Because 1st sticker of the URF piece is Orange, and the other corner includes Orange is on the L side. Other Blue corner "is not" at B, So it must be Down. We look for only two corners. One is Front Left, second is Back Right, always. No need to look to Down...

Edit 2: And you can prepare a Special Case Algorithms Set. (SCAS, good name:) If these 3 corners (all U except BL) oriented correctly, we can use one of these algs to Skip the CO stage. That needs again only 15 algs, 30 in total. There is only easy EP. I can do all EP cases with AUF before, not after.

Edit 3: There is a different Special Case in which all the corners are at the right positions. In such a case, again a skip of CO is possible. But this requires 135 different algs.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
10
Likes
0
However, if you're asking for "easier", looking for bars and other obvious patterns is the easiest, imo. The case you have in your pictures is easily identified by the lack of bars, as well as the H-perm-like pattern around the oriented corner.
Oh, yes. I understood. Weakness of my English... First I'd tried this but thought this one was more difficult. Because you must look for 3 edges again. It is the result of my second technique. So then I found these two. And yes, I've chosen #2 already. I'm memorizing the Sune cases now. First 6 is OK...
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
1,478
Likes
937
Can you expand the explanation?
If you look at the case solved by R' U' R U R U R' U' R' U R U R U' R', it has two bars: one on the front face and one on the back face. The case solved by R U R' U R U2 R' has three bars. This case has no bars, but the edges around the oriented corner are adjacent colours rather than opposite colours.

You can make a flowchart to determine which case you have, based on matching/adjacent/opposite colour patterns and the number of bars you can see. It's not the fastest method of recognising 2GLL cases (or ZBLL in general), however.
 
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
373
Likes
139
YouTube
filipemtx
Maybe this is dumb and not new but what about:

First layer, CLL, L8E (3style last 8 edges or: 2e, 2e, ELL)

can be fun, maybe a viable alternative to L2L4 and mostly intuitive method
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
274
Likes
157
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
PapaSmurf Cubes
As we’re talking about LBL methods, here’s one which genuinely could be good:
1) layer (10)
2) edge (6)
3) 2 edges (10)
4) CFRLL - CLL but ignoring FR (not my original idea) (10.75)
5) L5E (12.5)

In total 49.25 moves. An improvement would be solve layer- corner then do L5C L5E.

That would make it more like this:
layer-corner (9)
Edge (6)
2 edges (8)
L5C (12)
L5E (12.5)
Which is 47.5. it saves 2 moves, and could make the third step less algorithmic.

Advantages: it's mostly algorithmic, as the first 2 steps are intuitive, then alg spam, so high tps. More efficient than cfop by a large amount.

Disadvantages: lots of algs (approx 370), and if you switch to the (probably) better L5C variant, it's around 951 algs. Which is a lot, although some of them are short (eg R U' R').
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
10
Likes
0
If you look at the case solved by R' U' R U R U R' U' R' U R U R U' R', it has two bars: one on the front face and one on the back face. The case solved by R U R' U R U2 R' has three bars. This case has no bars, but the edges around the oriented corner are adjacent colours rather than opposite colours.

You can make a flowchart to determine which case you have, based on matching/adjacent/opposite colour patterns and the number of bars you can see. It's not the fastest method of recognising 2GLL cases (or ZBLL in general), however.
I did understand wrong. I understood as PLL positions in OLL, like Sune+Z or BowTie+E, etc. I'd used your explanation for PLL only. Yes, it is easier than others. But it requires a "head/cube circle" all the times, like my first recognition technique. In fact, my #1 rec. tec. need only -at most- 3 edges to look, not all four. Because if it is not in the first 3, then it must be at 4th. But you must count 2 or 3 bars. Maybe the 3rd is on the forth. So, you must look to all 4.

Despite everything, I'll try it before being too late...

Edit: Your long example algorithm is my Sune-LB alg for 2 techs both. Or Sune+Z for my wrong understanding ;) Is it 2-Bar-Sune for your tech?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
10
Likes
0
It is 2-opposite-bar-sune.

R' U2 R . U R U' R' . U R U . R U R' U' . R U R is 2-neighbor-bar-sune. For me only Sune-FR for both techs. Naming your technique is difficult. But I think, it is easier for eyes without words...

Edit: And not only the number of bars, but the position of them is important for your rec. tec. I've found more than one 1-bar-sune.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,039
Likes
321
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Aerma
As we’re talking about LBL methods, here’s one which genuinely could be good:
1) layer (10)
2) edge (6)
3) 2 edges (10)
4) CFRLL - CLL but ignoring FR (not my original idea) (10.75)
5) L5E (12.5)

In total 49.25 moves. An improvement would be solve layer- corner then do L5C L5E.

That would make it more like this:
layer-corner (9)
Edge (6)
2 edges (8)
L5C (12)
L5E (12.5)
Which is 47.5. it saves 2 moves, and could make the third step less algorithmic.

Advantages: it's mostly algorithmic, as the first 2 steps are intuitive, then alg spam, so high tps. More efficient than cfop by a large amount.

Disadvantages: lots of algs (approx 370), and if you switch to the (probably) better L5C variant, it's around 951 algs. Which is a lot, although some of them are short (eg R U' R').
Isn't this 'improved' version just Keyhole followed by L5C/L5E? Solving the last F2L pair normally and following it with last layer is probably better, or maybe MGLS.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
2,861
Likes
783
Location
Hampshire, England
YouTube
Shadowslice
Another silly idea: using EOLS during f2l to orient other f2l edges so you can do rotationless f2l.
Maybe not using EOLS properly, but influencing F2L pairs is already a very common trick. Using full Eols wouldn't be very useful most of the time as inserting the pair and dealing with the next one would be better than rotationless
 
Top