• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

ABM( A Bad Method):
1. Make an x-cross but with only a corner piece, not a pair.
2.Solve the other three pairs
3.Orient and permute the remaining corners
4.L5E
 
2180161 said:
3^7 for orientation. sooo way too many.
also, 8! for the final step. It could be reduced by using Guimond algs (orient faces, and then PBL)
Click to expand...

Divided by 4 for each alg because AUF.
EDIT how much can we reduce orientation alg count if we allowed for rotations to minimise case count? Seems like a scramble could be many cases at once.
 
Last edited:
A mix of Roux and ECE/SSC:

1. Solve 2 adjacent E-slice edges and orient two corners and one yellow/white edge (in between the corners) and place these oriented pieces under the E-slice edges
Moves: ~5
Exec. time: 1 second
2. Place an oriented white/yellow edge in DL
Moves: ~2
Exec. time: 0.5 seconds
3. Solve the remaining E-slice edges by pairing them up with oriented corners and inserting them
Moves: ~10
Exec. time: 2 seconds
4. Recognize OCLL, then solve EO and OCLL in one look
Moves: ~15
Exec. time: 3 seconds
5. Solve the F2B along with CMLL (during the last corner insertion you permute all corners)
Moves: ~18
Exec. time: 4 seconds
6. Permute the last six edges
Moves: ~7
Exec. time: 2 seconds

Total moves: ~57 (not that great lol)
Exec. time: 12.5 seconds

Wow this is actually really bad XD
 
turtwig said:
Would it actually be that huge? There are 6 cases for solving corners into the right layer and 9 PBL cases, so there wouldn't be too many cases if you "combined" them.
Click to expand...

I think you would have something like 8!/4/4/2/2/2=315 though I'm sure you can find more ways to reduce alg count than the ones I thought of (mirrors/aufs/inverses).
 
Lately I've been looking at a sort of Roux-CFOP hybrid. I've been trying to learn Roux lately, and realized that, though there is a lot of freedom in blockbuilding, you almost always end SB by inserting an F2L style pair; this method tries to make use of that. Here are the substeps in outline:

1) FB
2) SB (up to last pair)
3) Place last slot while permuting corners
4a) Use <M,U> to orient D edges
4b) Use a modified OLL alg set (doesn't affect corner permutation) to orient LL
5) LSE, with edges oriented from step 4

The idea here is that, since making the last pair involves mostly M slice moves, which doesn't disturb corner permutation, I could potentially identify the CP case ahead of time while placing the last slot, and then the OLL would allow me to skip the EO recognition/halfstep. Further, OLL has easier recognition than CMLL imo, so the transition into step 4 would be smoother (though the CP recognition for step 3 could be a bit of a pain, so it's hard to say how this would pan out in practice).
Step 4a (orienting D edges) on average takes only 2-3 moves, and can be affected during the placement of the last pair, so I don't think it'd take much time, and about half of the standard OLL algs don't affect corner permutation anyway (i.e. variants on sune/asune & doublesexy), so step 4b should not be too bad.

I also learned yesterday that CP isn't affected by <R,U>, so I'm wondering if it'd be possible to identify the corner case while building the SB, eliminating some of the delay in recognizing the proper CP case when placing last slot.

I've made a webpage that explains the method in detail with algs that I've generated and diagrams explaining them.
What do you guys think?
 
Teoidus said:
Lately I've been looking at a sort of Roux-CFOP hybrid. I've been trying to learn Roux lately, and realized that, though there is a lot of freedom in blockbuilding, you almost always end SB by inserting an F2L style pair; this method tries to make use of that. Here are the substeps in outline:

1) FB
2) SB (up to last pair)
3) Place last slot while permuting corners
4a) Use <M,U> to orient D edges
4b) Use a modified OLL alg set (doesn't affect corner permutation) to orient LL
5) LSE, with edges oriented from step 4

The idea here is that, since making the last pair involves mostly M slice moves, which doesn't disturb corner permutation, I could potentially identify the CP case ahead of time while placing the last slot, and then the OLL would allow me to skip the EO recognition/halfstep. Further, OLL has easier recognition than CMLL imo, so the transition into step 4 would be smoother (though the CP recognition for step 3 could be a bit of a pain, so it's hard to say how this would pan out in practice).
Step 4a (orienting D edges) on average takes only 2-3 moves, and can be affected during the placement of the last pair, so I don't think it'd take much time, and about half of the standard OLL algs don't affect corner permutation anyway (i.e. variants on sune/asune & doublesexy), so step 4b should not be too bad.

I also learned yesterday that CP isn't affected by <R,U>, so I'm wondering if it'd be possible to identify the corner case while building the SB, eliminating some of the delay in recognizing the proper CP case when placing last slot.

I've made a webpage that explains the method in detail with algs that I've generated and diagrams explaining them.
What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

This is like Briggs and B2 but the CP step is in a different place so makes the recognition slower and much more difficult. I think it's also better to do the EO with LSE because you can cancel moves and combine certian steps so is better for that.

TL;DR, have a look at my sig and don't split up EO.
 
What makes the recognition more difficult than the CP in Briggs/B2? I was thinking that you could recognize it while forming SB.
 
Teoidus said:
What makes the recognition more difficult than the CP in Briggs/B2? I was thinking that you could recognize it while forming SB.
Click to expand...

The recognition itself is not more difficult though in Briggs/B2, you can do it in inspection so removing the recognition time as the recognition for CP can be difficult. Especially while doing SB. You could try doing it like NCPB 2.0 though that method does have the same weakness. In other words, the recognition is not necessarily harder or more difficult, but you can do it in inspection for Briggs/B2 so eliminating the downsides
 
Hey guys, would this work?

So I don't know much about magnets and how they work, but I know magnets with opposite polarities attract, and magnets with the same polarity push each other away. So what if someone made a cube with pieces coated with a metal that had some polarity? This would mean the pieces wouldn't touch, so turning would be effortless, would make no sound and corner cutting would be very easy. Also, if the magnets were strong enough, lockups would be impossible since the pieces couldn't catch on each other.

Sorry if this is stupid and wouldn't work, I don't know the first thing about magnet physics or whatever. Just an idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
The physics of Rubik's Cube to Substep Method Platform
2
Replies
33
Views
1,777
Christopher Mowla
Christopher Mowla
D
Incomplete Substep Method LL Megaminx
Replies
2
Views
298
Deleted member 27249
D
Dane man
Calculating Method/Substep Efficiency
2
Replies
27
Views
8,600
brododragon
brododragon
M
What method is this?
2
Replies
24
Views
6,120
~Adam~
~Adam~
AK51
2.51 world record used 33 moves, it shall be 28 moves using AK-cubie method
Replies
0
Views
202
AK51
AK51
Back
Top