# The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

#### CUBER1265

##### Member
That sorta sounded like pinkie pie but it's not.
OLLCP(331)->DB edge(intuitive)->L5EP(16)
Total=347(lol)
heh? as a cfop solver i at totally lost except for ollcp lmao

#### xsac

##### Member
heh? as a cfop solver i at totally lost except for ollcp lmao
The first two blocks are solved, so F2L minus M is completed
OLLCP orients the edges and solves all corners
DB solves the back cross edge
L5EP permutes the remaining 5 edges

#### CUBER1265

##### Member
The first two blocks are solved, so F2L minus M is completed
OLLCP orients the edges and solves all corners
DB solves the back cross edge
L5EP permutes the remaining 5 edges
Thanks

#### ObscureCuber

##### Member
4x4 roux method
1.Opposite centers
2.FB and SB
3.last 4 centers
4.Edge pairing(using commutators to pair edges or you can also just use algs)
5.3x3 stage

#### indev85

##### Member
Hello everyone!

This is quite out of topic, but recently, the first ever direct tutorial to solving the 4 Dimensional Rubik’s Cube has been posted!

Check it out:

Edit:
I forgot to mention this, but the person also has a whole playlist of these tutorials.

Last edited by a moderator:

#### Cubing Forever

##### Member
A new 2 look LSLL Method:

(Considering that the LS corner is solved)
step 1: CLL(42 algs, half of which can be transferred from/to 2x2)
step 2: L5E cycling FR(technically 162 but most of them can be solved by using 1 or 2 3 style comms or 1 5 style comm and the rest of them are either flips or 2e2e so it comes down to 40-50)
Total algcount: 82-92(if you use 2 3 style comms for the 5 cycles) to 208.

Pros:
Low algcount for 2 look LSLL
Easy recog

Cons:
Risky algs
Corner needs to be solved in LS for this to work.

Another variant:
L5C>L5E (basically M-CELL from the the side)

Is this already proposed? If so pls update.

#### RedstoneTim

##### Member
A new 2 look LSLL Method:

(Considering that the LS corner is solved)
step 1: CLL(42 algs, half of which can be transferred from/to 2x2)
step 2: L5E cycling FR(technically 162 but most of them can be solved by using 1 or 2 3 style comms or 1 5 style comm and the rest of them are either flips or 2e2e so it comes down to 40-50)
Total algcount: 82-92(if you use 2 3 style comms for the 5 cycles) to 208.

Pros:
Low algcount for 2 look LSLL
Easy recog

Cons:
Risky algs
Corner needs to be solved in LS for this to work.

Another variant:
L5C>L5E (basically M-CELL from the the side)

Is this already proposed? If so pls update.
As far as I know, this already exists. It's called Zipper-b and actually has a couple users.

#### xsac

##### Member
4x4 roux method
1.Opposite centers
2.FB and SB
3.last 4 centers
4.Edge pairing(using commutators to pair edges or you can also just use algs)
5.3x3 stage
won't it be better to pair edges using a free slot instead of commutators? you can use the fr slot to pair edges, and then simply put it back as paired edges aren't disturbed during edge pairing.

#### ObscureCuber

##### Member
won't it be better to pair edges using a free slot instead of commutators? you can use the fr slot to pair edges, and then simply put it back as paired edges aren't disturbed during edge pairing.
yah

#### carcass

##### Member
With all of you talking about a new 2 look LSLL method, I tried to make one myself. I apologize if this has already been done, but it is rather obscure so it should be original. I am also pretty confident about the algorithm count.
Orient All: 323 algorithms
Permute All: 453 algorithms
Total: 776 algorithms(less than ZB)
For OA, many of the algs have already been generated.173 of the OLLs + TOLS, 16 non OCLL 5CO cases, 54 OLS FE, and surely a few VLS algorithms may be of usage. This leaves a mere 80 OA algs to be generated.
For PA, there is TTLL and PLL. Unless there are some algorithms I am unaware of, this leaves a total of 360 algorithms.
In total, that is 440 algorithms to be generated.
The average CFOP user already know the 78 OLLs and PLLs, so that 698 algs to be learnt. Not a lot less, but a formidable head start.

#### PapaSmurf

##### Member
The main problem with that is that the permute all algs wiill be bad, especially the diag ones. For example, TTLL algs aren't really all that super good, same with edge+PLL (WLL). I thought of doinig a similar thing for ZZ, but decided to stop developing it pretty early for this exact reason.

#### Cuber Mao

##### Member
hey guys,I have known a method called EOM.It proposed by a chinese cuber in 2019.
this method mixed ROUX and ZZ.
1 EO,and put the UR UL(or UF UB)eages into DF DB.
2 zzf2l
3 coll
4 solve last 6 eages just like ROUX
in the first step you have 2 choices.or you can do eoline and use ZZ to solve .so you have 3 choices.
ps：
I am only an 8th grade student in China, so there may be grammar and spelling errors.

#### PapaSmurf

##### Member
This is already a thing called ZZ-4c and was proposed before 2019. Good to see Chinese cubers coming across to here though, more international links.

#### Petrus_EW

##### Member
Hola amigos de Speedolving !!!
He ido resolviendo el 3 × 3 × 3 con Petrus, y creo que encontré una variante de reducciones en este método (también se puede aplicar a ZZ o Heise).
Consiste en realizar los mismos pasos de Petrus a EO, a partir de aquí se debe insertar el par BR, antes de insertar el último par F2L, debemos colocar dos bordes opuestos en línea (por ejemplo verde / azul), realizando este movimiento, reduzco los algoritmos LPEPLL a 2 casos, uno de ellos con tres aristas bien permutadas y el otro con dos aristas bien permutadas, para estos casos existen dos algoritmos que sirven para insertar el F2L y permutar todas las aristas. Luego utilizo algoritmos OLC para mantener los bordes bien permutados y finalmente tengo PLL reducido a 4 casos (Aa / b, E, H).
Creo que es la variante 2LLL con menos algoritmos (2 casos LPEPLL, 7 algoritmos OLC y 4 algoritmos PLL = 13 algoritmos)
No sé si alguien ya ha pensado en esta variante, no la vi por ningún lado.
Si es así, me gustaría tener sugerencias para el nombre de esta variante, por ahora digo Petrus - EW.
Déjame saber en tus comentarios si esta variante ya existe, creo que no.
PD: Perdón por mi inglés

#### PetrusQuber

##### Member
Traducción: ‘Hello friends of Speedolving !!!
I have been solving the 3 × 3 × 3 with Petrus, and I think I found a variant of reductions in this method (it can also be applied to ZZ or Heise).
It consists of performing the same steps from Petrus to EO, from here the BR pair must be inserted, before inserting the last F2L pair, we must place two opposite edges in line (for example green / blue), making this movement, I reduce the LPEPLL algorithms to 2 cases, one of them with three well-permuted edges and the other with two well-permuted edges, for these cases there are two algorithms that serve to insert the F2L and permute all the edges. Then I use OLC algorithms to keep the edges well permuted and finally I have PLL reduced to 4 cases (Aa / b, E, H).
I think it is the 2LLL variant with less algorithms (2 LPEPLL cases, 7 OLC algorithms and 4 PLL algorithms = 13 algorithms)
I do not know if anyone has already thought about this variant, I did not see it anywhere.
If so, I would like to have suggestions for the name of this variant, for now I say Petrus - EW.
Let me know in your comments if this variant already exists, I think not.
PS: Sorry for my English’

Not quite sure what you mean, been a long time since I’ve been doing cubing lingo. Hopefully someone else can help out.
No estoy muy seguro de lo que quieres decir, ha pasado mucho tiempo desde la última vez que he estado usando jerga de cubos. Ojalá alguien más pueda ayudar.

#### Petrus_EW

##### Member
Traducción: ‘Hello friends of Speedolving !!!
I have been solving the 3 × 3 × 3 with Petrus, and I think I found a variant of reductions in this method (it can also be applied to ZZ or Heise).
It consists of performing the same steps from Petrus to EO, from here the BR pair must be inserted, before inserting the last F2L pair, we must place two opposite edges in line (for example green / blue), making this movement, I reduce the LPEPLL algorithms to 2 cases, one of them with three well-permuted edges and the other with two well-permuted edges, for these cases there are two algorithms that serve to insert the F2L and permute all the edges. Then I use OLC algorithms to keep the edges well permuted and finally I have PLL reduced to 4 cases (Aa / b, E, H).
I think it is the 2LLL variant with less algorithms (2 LPEPLL cases, 7 OLC algorithms and 4 PLL algorithms = 13 algorithms)
I do not know if anyone has already thought about this variant, I did not see it anywhere.
If so, I would like to have suggestions for the name of this variant, for now I say Petrus - EW.
Let me know in your comments if this variant already exists, I think not.
PS: Sorry for my English’

Not quite sure what you mean, been a long time since I’ve been doing cubing lingo. Hopefully someone else can help out.
No estoy muy seguro de lo que quieres decir, ha pasado mucho tiempo desde la última vez que he estado usando jerga de cubos. Ojalá alguien más pueda ayudar.
When using Petrus or ZZ you already have all the edges oriented (EO), in the case of Petrus you must finish the F2L using only 2 gen movements, you can start arming and inserting for example the BR pair, which leaves you in a situation of F2L -1, at this time before inserting the last pair, you must get two opposite edges to be in line and parallel to the last pair, this causes a reduction of cases of LPEPLL (it is a subset of LPELL), reducing the 6 cases of LPEPLL to only two. You only have to learn two algorithms, to insert the last pair and that all the edges are permuted.
What follows is to make an OLC algorithm that is a subset of OLL that maintains the permutation of the edges, there are 7 algorithms. Finally, it only remains to recognize the cases of PLL reduced to 4 (Aa, Ab, E, H).

#### PetrusQuber

##### Member
When using Petrus or ZZ you already have all the edges oriented (EO), in the case of Petrus you must finish the F2L using only 2 gen movements, you can start arming and inserting for example the BR pair, which leaves you in a situation of F2L -1, at this time before inserting the last pair, you must get two opposite edges to be in line and parallel to the last pair, this causes a reduction of cases of LPEPLL (it is a subset of LPELL), reducing the 6 cases of LPEPLL to only two. You only have to learn two algorithms, to insert the last pair and that all the edges are permuted.
What follows is to make an OLC algorithm that is a subset of OLL that maintains the permutation of the edges, there are 7 algorithms. Finally, it only remains to recognize the cases of PLL reduced to 4 (Aa, Ab, E, H).
Don’t think anyone else has done this before, but then again Petrus is a rare method. It’s basically for last slot.

#### Petrus_EW

##### Member
No creo que nadie más haya hecho esto antes, pero Petrus es un método poco común. Básicamente es para el último espacio.
Es cierto que Petrus es un método poco utilizado, pero esta variante de reducción no solo se limita al método Petrus, también se puede utilizar en ZZ. Al igual que Phasing, que es de ZZ, se puede usar en Petrus.
Es una variante de reducción, creo que es el método 2LLL con menos algoritmos. Alguna sugerencia para su nombre.
Lo descubrí usando Petrus.

#### AlgoCuber

##### Member
8355 Method for Speedsolving?

If you don't know what the 8355 method is, I recommend you watch this video:

My idea to make this suitable for speedsolving is this:
1. Do the cross as normal
2. Solve 3 F2L pairs, there are different ways to do this
• Using keyhole slotting/psuedoslotting, as shown in the video
• Using CFOP F2L, but since there is always one slot left open the move count is greatly reduced
3. Solve the remaining 5 edges, there are different ways to do this
• Using one algorithm
• On the first 3 yellow edges, make sure 2 are "correct" and 1 is not. Then, do the rest using 3 moves
4. Solve the remaining 5 corners, there are different ways to do this
• Using one algorithm
• 2-look it (My idea is to use commutators, may require some intuition)
This should be a great speedcubing method because
1. First 3 pairs do not use a lot of moves
2. The rest can be solved using algorithms
But a downside is that there will probably be a lot of algorithms to learn. The algorithms shouldn't be too different from CFOP, although they may require some changes. All points I listed above may not be optimized and the move count probably can be made smaller. I don't really know how to make algorithms though, so I guess you guys can help develop this method and make algorithms for it! Reply with any suggestions for the method you would like

Last edited:
Similar threads