supercavitation
Veteran
Isn't that just Stadler? I know the second one is KBCM.
The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread
- Thread starter elrog
- Start date
Isn't that just Stadler? I know the second one is KBCM.
Ross The Boss
Veteran
well i have never heard of 'roux by four,' but i use a system similar to your second proposition, though i do f2b, corners, centers +drdf at the same time, then ell. and i do not think that pairing the edges after f2b and centers is very good at all, but im open to being proven wrong with some example solves...
2180161
Veteran
I would do an example solve, but seeing as my 4x4 solves are about 125+ moves, I dont feel like doing that.
Berd
Legend
I'll do an example solve soon!
obelisk477
Veteran
GuRoux
Veteran
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 1,713
- Location
- San Diego, California
- WCA ID
- 2014TANG03
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
actually this video is not that. it's solve DR and DL edge and two non-f2b edges in the remaining cross slots. then solve like f2l. cmll, lse.
obelisk477
Veteran
Ah. Nevermind then
Randomno
Banned
4 and 5 can be combined into ELL.
Oh awesome. It's kind of cool that it preserves corners.
EDIT: Even though it's not exactly the same, it's still interesting.
Last edited:
Ross The Boss
Veteran
oh my, golden oak, oh my indeed... im sorry to say but this is probably one of the most common method proposals we get around here (or at least the one that i hear the most often). i would generally say that it does not have much potential so to problems with efficiency. im feeling like the average number of moves needed to "complete the cross" is about 6, and then it would take another 9 moves on average to solve the U layer edges. so in total that is more moves than the average LSE, and the algorithms are less fingertrick friendly; there is less ability to do M2s and consecutive M' moves than during LSE.
Last edited:
Pranav Sindura
Member
Yeah me too, I also Thought about it about but Left it and thought it was of no use......
But it can be of use if the MOVE COUNT IS LOW like 4-5 Moves only because there are no EDGES ON A 2X2.......
Randomno
Banned
Seems like everything has been created as a method.
That's why the last big 4 method is from 2006.
Berd
Legend
Which one was it?
Randomno
Banned
ZZ.
Berd
Legend
What was the order that they were devolved?
Randomno
Banned
TomasCZ
Member
New CFOP substep ? cross EP+CO
I know, that this is not the first method, which skips cross edge permutation.
Hi guys !
Sorry for my english.
I have created a method, which allows me to have a shorter cross (in some cases)
I would like to explain briefly what this method basically does: It orients LL corners ans simultaneously permutes cross edges.
All substeps I had known only solved LL edges or corners, but I thought, that there should be a method, which does something with cross.
So basically it allows me to have 2 edges on cross swapped, and still solve the cube normally. Sometimes cross is VERY easy when I dont care about edge permutation.
So the solve would look like this:
cross (2 edges swapped)
F2L + edge orientation
OLL + cross edge permutation
PLL
Pros:
-only 16 algorithms (basic method)
-good lookahead for F2L
-better cross-F2L transition
-shorter cross
Cons:
-edge control is needed
-algorithms average cca 11 moves
Algs: View attachment KralVariation(KV).pdf
I was also considering permuting the edges, when doing PLL or full OLL, but that would need a large alg set.
Also, all 6 edges could be solved with corners orientation (large alg set again)
What do you guys think of this ? What are your opinions ?
I know, that this is not the first method, which skips cross edge permutation.
Hi guys !
Sorry for my english.
I have created a method, which allows me to have a shorter cross (in some cases)
I would like to explain briefly what this method basically does: It orients LL corners ans simultaneously permutes cross edges.
All substeps I had known only solved LL edges or corners, but I thought, that there should be a method, which does something with cross.
So basically it allows me to have 2 edges on cross swapped, and still solve the cube normally. Sometimes cross is VERY easy when I dont care about edge permutation.
So the solve would look like this:
cross (2 edges swapped)
F2L + edge orientation
OLL + cross edge permutation
PLL
Pros:
-only 16 algorithms (basic method)
-good lookahead for F2L
-better cross-F2L transition
-shorter cross
Cons:
-edge control is needed
-algorithms average cca 11 moves
Algs: View attachment KralVariation(KV).pdf
I was also considering permuting the edges, when doing PLL or full OLL, but that would need a large alg set.
Also, all 6 edges could be solved with corners orientation (large alg set again)
What do you guys think of this ? What are your opinions ?
Last edited:
Randomno
Banned
Unpermuted cross > F2L + EO > COLL > last edges.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Deleted member 27249
- Puzzle Theory
- Deleted member 27249
- Puzzle Video Gallery
