The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[2180161]

I have a new method/ idea. It is mainly an adaption of Waterman to Roux, seeing as it is a Corners-First Method
First solve your a line, as in ZZ, however, EO doesn't matter. Then solve your corners, using whatever method you like, whether it be Ortega, Guimond, Or CxLL. Just make sure that your line isnt destroyed.
Then cycle three edges, to solve your F2B. (you will have to cycle multiple times)
Now, your CMLL is already done.
Now the last step is LSE.
What do you think? I realize move count is high, but it could be used for speedsolving, and seeing as I average about 23 seconds, and I got a 19 second time, so I think it could be good.

 

[mDiPalma]

good idea! maybe you can solve the corners first, then the line.

it would allow more efficiency for the corners, and would allow you to pick whichever line was easiest, once the corners are done.


try it out and let me know!

 

[2180161]

The corners and line took much less time that way, about 6 seconds. My problem with this method though, is the edge cycling. But hey I'll work on that.

 

[2180161]

What I had originally thought, was solve a layer, solve your LL corners then solve F2L using edge cycles, then ELL, but thought it was the same as Waterman

 

[2180161]

Ok here is another method!
Learn all possible permutations!
No, This is the real one!
Solve a 1x2x3 block like in Roux. Using R,r, U, and M, solve F2l.
OLL
PLL
Let me know what you guys think!

 

[2180161]

Using the above method, I got a 44 second time, but that is because my first block takes about 15-20 seconds
`

 

[mark49152]

Isn't that just like an EO cross adopted from ZZ?

No, because I meant only orienting the F2L edges. So you'd get rotationless F2L but full OLL rather than COLL/OCLL.

just because an edge is oriented doesn't always mean it'll make a nice case.

True but it's whether the whole F2L is nicer on balance that matters.

Similar question: has anyone tried a ZZ variant where only the F2L edges are oriented when making the line (including the D edges)? So you'd get an easier EOline and better lookahead into first block, but finish with full OLL/PLL.

 

[GuRoux]

Similar question: has anyone tried a ZZ variant where only the F2L edges are oriented when making the line (including the D edges)? So you'd get an easier EOline and better lookahead into first block, but finish with full OLL/PLL.

i know i've thought of it, but i don't use zz. i would assume using this when it is hard to get all eo would be a good idea. how much faster is OLL with edge oreinted already compared to all OLL.

 

[mDiPalma]

has anyone tried a ZZ variant where only the F2L edges are oriented when making the line (including the D edges)? So you'd get an easier EOline and better lookahead into first block, but finish with full OLL/PLL.

yes and i throw up every time

 

[Smiles]

Similar question: has anyone tried a ZZ variant where only the F2L edges are oriented when making the line (including the D edges)? So you'd get an easier EOline and better lookahead into first block, but finish with full OLL/PLL.

It doesn't take that much to orient the LL edges, and you benefit so much from it actually.
It's not a comparison of OCLL to OLL.
It's a comparison of Winter + Summer variation / MGLS / COLL / OCLL / a bunch of other techniques to just OLL.

Not to mention look ahead is easier when your UB edge is oriented and you know it's a LL edge.

 

[obelisk477]

Not really a 'new method', just a thought I had. If you know full COLL, couldn't you identify (in each of those COLL cases that you know) what EP is necessary for it to be a skip (for it to be a ZBLL), and then just learn one extra ZBLL (a shorter one) for that COLL case and apply it instead if you don't get that EP? It would increase the probability of PLL skips to 1/6 (for ZZ users), which means for any given average of 5 you would get one skip in that average about 60% of the time.

Pros: Can be a helpful way to learn some more ZBLLs and make them useful instead of hoping they come up. Increases PLL skip chances to 1/6 (for ZZ users).
Cons: Using the extra ZBLL will still leave you with EPLL every 5/6 solves (but if you're using COLL anyway, this shouldn't be much of an issue). The common COLLs are usually the fastest, so the extra ZBLL may take a little longer than the regular COLL case.

 

[TheOneOnTheLeft]

I think this is very similar to COLL+1. Learn two ZBLL algs for each COLL case and you can always solve at least one edge, so you either get U-perm or EPLL skip.

 

[mDiPalma]

or you can apply LPELL to solve EP during the insertion of the last pair. Then knowing 2x42 "COLL" algs would be enough to solve the cube.

these are "L4C" algs and suck.

perhaps you can force a predictable unsolved EP during the insertion of the last pair. maybe those algs wont suck

 

[2180161]

Hi I was wondering if this would work.
It is an adaption of the Heise method to one I made.
Solve F2L-1 using the Heise method, and while doing so, fix bad edges
COLL +1 or Solve first layer, then COLL
Place two adjacent edges with their corresponding corners.
Solve L3E with commutator.

 

[2180161]

Here is an example solve. Note: my Heise Blocks are extremely ineffecient.
Scramble:F' R' U' R2 U' L B2 L2 U R' B2 U' B F D' U2 B2 F2 D2 F' L2 R2 B2 L R'
First block- U2
Second block- x' y D2 R2 U M U' R U2 M' F L2 F' U
Third Block-R' E(towards L) F R D' x y' R U R U RU R' U' R' U' R L
Final block-R UR' L' U2 R' U2 R r' U2 R U' M' U R' U' R U R2 D' R' D U'
Fix Bad edges-x' y U2 R U' R U R' U' M' U R U' r'
COLL +1- U R U D R' U R U2 B2 U B2 U' D' R2
Now, I got lucky, and got a skip, so here is the other way starting from the end of Fix bad edges
Solve First Layer - U' R' U' R U R'
COLL- r U R' U' L' U l F' U2 T-perm.
Solve adjacent edges- R U' R U R U R U' R2
L3E- U2 R2 U R U RU' R' U' R' U' R' U'

 

[mDiPalma]

nice idea! is this what you mean (using your scramble)?

D2 F2 D B2 U2 // 2x2x2 (5)
x2 F U' L' F U' // 3x2x2 (5)
x z R' U2 F R' F' U R // eof2l-1 (7)
U2 R' U2 B' R' B U2 R2 U R' U2 // leave 3 edges (11)
R' F R S R' F' R S' // ell (8)
=36

 

[TorbinRoux]

I have an idea to improve the Roux method a tad. So here are the steps:
1. 1st block like normal
2. Solve UL and UR pieces in the DF and DB spots
3. 2nd block
4. CMLL
5. Edge Orientation
6. Align top layer and do M2.
7. Then do the middle layer edge case.

Basically, you sort out the UL and UR pieces before so you don't have to do it later.

 

[mDiPalma]

i have bad news for you

Spoiler

dont u need M for the second block?

what if ur E-slice edges are misoriented? wouldn't that make ur second block really hard?

unless u use a petrus-esque method to orient the second block edges. in which case, u should just use pure petrus.

 

[kcl]

I can generally tell if there's a super easy way to EO during cross but I won't go out of my way for it.

 

[TorbinRoux]

Good point. But technically you don't need M for second block, you could do a more cfop style block
Also, as an example, if I were solving my blocks with white on bottom, the UL and UR pieces would be connected to their respective center, which would be yellow. Then the second block would basically be 2 F2L cases and 1 "cross" piece. It's truly not much harder than a typical second block, just a little less efficient.