The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[brododragon]

What if one of the F2L edges is where the cross edge normally goes? How do I take that out without disturbing EO/The pair already there? Doing M' U2 M ruins EO

@Etothepi is correct, but at least how I do Petrus F2L, you shouldn’t get into that situation.

What I do is place the cross piece before placing the first pair (you can still make the first pair, just not place it). Because of this, it doesn't matter where you put the cross piece in. If one of the F2L edges is where you would put the cross, just do an F move (or R or L, depending on your orientation), and you've got a place to put the cross. Once you've placed the cross piece, you can take the F2L edge out and continue like normal.

 

[Deleted member 51471]

I'm naming my method Petrus-W

 

[brododragon]

I'm naming my method Petrus-W

Just curious, why?

 

[ProStar]

Just curious, why?

Probably WarriorCatCuber

 

[PetrusQuber]

This is actually very interesting, @WarriorCatCuber came across it while critiquing my example solve, and I was like - what? I don’t think the 2x2x2 and expansion would be more ergonomic, since that’s how Petrus is done, but then the rest of the solve changes completely. This is basically shooting into a ZZ solve halfway through, and switching to RUL gen. I’ve never been good at critiquing methods, so I’ll just say this is definitely a viable method, and could be explored further to become world class.

 

[Deleted member 51471]

ZZ Method - External Resources

There are many great resources to help with gaining knowledge and becoming better at the cube. Here are some of them:

sites.google.com

L5EP algs can be found here.

 

[Deleted member 51471]

A huge thanks to the person who did the Wiki page ! However, there is a slight mistake. since EO is said to be done petrus style and then FU for two pairs. EO is meant to be done ZZ-style (Key sticker being the FUD centers) and Both pairs with RUL. Check out woowybaby's example solve. Thanks anyway!

 

[PetrusQuber]

A huge thanks to the person who did the Wiki page ! However, there is a slight mistake. since EO is said to be done petrus style and then FU for two pairs. EO is meant to be done ZZ-style (Key sticker being the FUD centers) and Both pairs with RUL. Check out woowybaby's example solve. Thanks anyway!

I edited the creator’s post.

 

[Deleted member 51471]

I edited the creator’s post.

Thanks ! Just wondering, how do you edit on the wiki ?

 

[PetrusQuber]

Thanks ! Just wondering, how do you edit on the wiki ?

You can create an account using the button in the top right corner of the homepage, then you have freedom to edit and post.

 

[Hazel]

@WarriorCatCuber there's one main issue I have with Petrus-W:
<F, U> isn't fast—it would be much better to rotate and use <R, U> and then rotate back. But at that point, you're just doing Petrus with two mandatory rotations and (no offense intended), a worse LL. CLL -> L5E is simply slower than ZBLL as it's two steps rather than one, and the 2-3 moves saved by not bothering with that last cross edge during the F2L step doesn't make up for that.
I don't mean to say that you should just drop the idea or anything, but rather you should get past these limitations. How can you spin this in a direction that would be an actual improvement upon Petrus, or at least an as-fast variation?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

@WarriorCatCuber there's one main issue I have with Petrus-W:
<F, U> isn't fast—it would be much better to rotate and use <R, U> and then rotate back. But at that point, you're just doing Petrus with two mandatory rotations and (no offense intended), a worse LL. CLL -> L5E is simply slower than ZBLL as it's two steps rather than one, and the 2-3 moves saved by not bothering with that last cross edge during the F2L step doesn't make up for that.
I don't mean to say that you should just drop the idea or anything, but rather you should get past these limitations. How can you spin this in a direction that would be an actual improvement upon Petrus, or at least an as-fast variation?

What ? I know FU isn't fast, see the edited wiki page. If you didn't misunderstand that, petrus EO also has FU during EO.

 

[PetrusQuber]

@WarriorCatCuber there's one main issue I have with Petrus-W:
<F, U> isn't fast—it would be much better to rotate and use <R, U> and then rotate back. But at that point, you're just doing Petrus with two mandatory rotations and (no offense intended), a worse LL. CLL -> L5E is simply slower than ZBLL as it's two steps rather than one, and the 2-3 moves saved by not bothering with that last cross edge during the F2L step doesn't make up for that.
I don't mean to say that you should just drop the idea or anything, but rather you should get past these limitations. How can you spin this in a direction that would be an actual improvement upon Petrus, or at least an as-fast variation?

If you got this from the wiki page, somebody accidentally misunderstood the method, it does ZZ style EO with block in back, then use RUL gen to solve two pairs, followed by COLL and L5EP.

Also I made some other minor changes, like correcting permuting four edges to permuting five edges, etc.

 

[Hazel]

What ? I know FU isn't fast, see the edited wiki page. If you didn't misunderstand that, petrus EO also has FU during EO.

If you got this from the wiki page, somebody accidentally misunderstood the method, it does ZZ style EO with block in back, then use RUL gen to solve two pairs, followed by COLL and L5EP.

Also I made some other minor changes, like correcting permuting four edges to permuting five edges, etc.

Ah, I looked at the page again and it looks better
Still, though, after EO, I feel that 2-gen F2L -> ZBLL is just better than 3-gen F2L minus the edge -> CLL -> L5EP.
That said, I'd love to be proven wrong, and if you still believe in the method then I hope you will

 

[PetrusQuber]

Unless an edge or corner is stuck in slot on the other layer, most of the pairing still remains 2 gen - you may do a couple L moves to put an edge in position, then do RU pairing, then swap round to LU pairing. And also, ZBLL is not for everyone . (Though recognition for L5EP is still worse than EPLL)


Quick question for the person who edited in the Pros and Cons - didn’t it have 12 more algorithms than EPLL, according to previous posts?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Unless an edge or corner is stuck in slot on the other layer, most of the pairing still remains 2 gen - you may do a couple L moves to put an edge in position, then do RU pairing, then swap round to LU pairing. And also, ZBLL is not for everyone . (Though recognition for L5EP is still worse than EPLL)


Quick question for the person who edited in the Pros and Cons - didn’t it have 12 more algorithms than EPLL, according to previous posts?

I made a mistake in the previous post. Also, L5EP is barely worse than EPLL, you still only have to look at the top layer.

 

[PetrusQuber]

Also, how exactly did you come up with the method? I might put a history section in.

 

[ProStar]

(Though recognition for L5EP is still worse than EPLL)

Just watch the piece during L2P(Last 2 Pairs), then you'll only need to see the LL edges

 

[Deleted member 51471]

Also, how exactly did you come up with the method? I might put a history section in.

When PapaSmurf told you in your quest for sub-8 petrus that you should do your 223 in the back, I thought he meant to do something like this, by putting in the cross edge with F2. But when I critiqued you, you were a little confused, so I realised it wasn't the case. So, I decided to propose this here, without putting in the cross edge with F2.

 

[ProStar]

I propose calling the "F2L" step for Petrus-W "L2P", for Last 2 Pairs. The reason is that the first 2 layers are never actually completed, since the DF edge remains mispermuted until the final step. Also, how many algs to do COLL+L5EP in one step? If it were similar to ZBLL, it'd remove the downside of having to always 2-look, even at advanced levels.