• 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!

BenChristman1

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
2,309
Location
The Land of 11,842 Lakes
WCA
2019CHRI11
YouTube
Visit Channel
Firstly, there’s so many times where you will be messing up stuff that you’ve already solved (steps 3-6). You’ll then just have to solve it again later, which essentially turns it into a Redux-like method. Secondly, do you know how long the center comms at the end take? Forever. Anytime you use comms, the method is going to be really slow.
 

LukasCubes

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
400
Location
West Virginia
Firstly, there’s so many times where you will be messing up stuff that you’ve already solved (steps 3-6). You’ll then just have to solve it again later, which essentially turns it into a Redux-like method. Secondly, do you know how long the center comms at the end take? Forever. Anytime you use comms, the method is going to be really slow.
well yeah thats how commutators and algorithms work, you mess up what you have for like 3 moves then you resolve them easily
 

BenChristman1

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
2,309
Location
The Land of 11,842 Lakes
WCA
2019CHRI11
YouTube
Visit Channel
I like any new idea the the creativity to create a whole new way of solving. It does not matter if the method is way worse than other methods, it is still interesting. You all are just shattering creativity.
Why does the Wiki say that it’s meant for speedsolving, then? You can’t speedsolve with this method.
 

LukasCubes

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
400
Location
West Virginia
I’m pretty sure any PLL isn’t 5 moves long, and you still didn’t address that comms take forever, especially big cube center comms.
yeah maybe but i can find better algs/commutators later

I like any new idea and the creativity to create a whole new way of solving. It does not matter if the method is way worse than other methods, it is still interesting. You all are just shattering creativity.
Yay thanks

Why does the Wiki say that it’s meant for speedsolving, then? You can’t speedsolve with this method.
If I can break 3 minutes twice per day with this method, I consider that speedsolving.
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
872
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Do you think it has potential because it genuinely could or because you made it? It's very similar to all the Roux big cube methods, and all of them aren't great for speedsolving (apart from Meyer) and none of them are good, not because the creators did a bad job, but because Redux/Yau are better. I do think direct solving has potential (see: K4, my direct solving method from late September), but even though one of those methods is mine, I'm pretty sure Yau is still better. The reason they're bad is because either cage is bad (which is what your method falls under) or M slice block building is bad, or there's no good way to do edge pairing for LSE. There might be, and that's where the search should be IMO, so I'd encourage you to search there, but with F2B->CMLL instead of corners->finish blocks.
 

LukasCubes

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
400
Location
West Virginia
Do you think it has potential because it genuinely could or because you made it? It's very similar to all the Roux big cube methods, and all of them aren't great for speedsolving (apart from Meyer) and none of them are good, not because the creators did a bad job, but because Redux/Yau are better. I do think direct solving has potential (see: K4, my direct solving method from late September), but even though one of those methods is mine, I'm pretty sure Yau is still better. The reason they're bad is because either cage is bad (which is what your method falls under) or M slice block building is bad, or there's no good way to do edge pairing for LSE. There might be, and that's where the search should be IMO, so I'd encourage you to search there, but with F2B->CMLL instead of corners->finish blocks.
I think it genuinely has potential. Yes this is similar to Roux big cube methods and has alot of slice moves. You can get the first step done in under 3 seconds consistently if high order cubers like Feliks and Max tries this (They wont try it lol). You can find efficient ways to solve it this method. My PB is 2:34.49 and I average sub-20 on 3x3.
 

Athefre

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,005
I found l2l4 algs in the waybackmachine if anyone is interested

cubertscubicle
These links are already on the wiki. It's good to see that there's still some interest in this series of methods. But this reminds me. I should update the L5EP wiki page to have Duncan Dicks as the proposer of the four on LL + one on middle layer L5EP and me as the four on LL + one on bottom layer L5EP.
 
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
1,100
YouTube
Visit Channel
These links are already on the wiki. It's good to see that there's still some interest in this series of methods. But this reminds me. I should update the L5EP wiki page to have Duncan Dicks as the proposer of the four on LL + one on middle layer L5EP and me as the four on LL + one on bottom layer L5EP.
if you'll update the wiki please update the links because the link to stachu site is broken, that's how I got the wayback machine link
 

Athefre

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,005
if you'll update the wiki please update the links because the link to stachu site is broken, that's how I got the wayback machine link
Oh yeah. I'll add the archive.org version. Thanks for pointing that out. There are so many broken links on the wiki because people left the community and their sites were deleted.
 

Athefre

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
1,005
L2L methods are so interesting, but there's no good way to do it easily or well from what I've looked at so far.
Very interesting for sure. I think it was the first method that contained the concept of finishing as much of the puzzle as possible using only algorithms. Duncan even talks a little about this on his site. This concept has gained some popularity recently, so it may be worth revisiting again. Years ago Stachu and Kirjava put a lot of effort into making it a competitive method. Their work didn't manage to catch on. However, with some modern techniques, maybe the perfect set of steps can be found.
 

Platform_

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
17
I don't use CFOP I use CFP cross+F2L+Platform(step one building a lateral face example blue with two angle and one edge oriented, step two oriented and permutation last 5 pieces)
my average 22.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
466
I don't use CFOP I use CFP cross+F2L+Platform(step one building a lateral face example blue with two angle and one edge oriented, step two oriented and permutation last 5 pieces)
my average 22.
I’m not sure what you mean but it sounds a lot like tripod
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
466
It's basically solve 1x3x3, then line subset of 1lll
Oh the P shape OLLs. Yeah that makes sense now. From my experience going through Tripod, it’s 100% not worth it for speed. The extra step of building something on the LL is so much slower. I think the alg sets have potential for CFOP though since recognition is easy.
 
Top