The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[pizo45]

i'm glad someone thinks the pizo hybrid is a good method! I think it really has the potential to set some wrs especially since OLL and PLL are so fast

now i just have to get people to learn it...

 

[pizo45]

Hi guys i am calling this the pizo hybrid method because it has the insane tps of CFOP and low movecount like Roux!

pizo hybrid method:
step 1: solve the 1x2x3 on the left and the right
step 2: use really fast M and U moves to finish the cross and orient all the edges on the last layer
step 3: use OLL and PLL to finish the last layer

so what do you guys think? i put this in the new method substep thread and people told me that it is extremely efficient and that people have already gotten sub-10 averages with it !!! so it definitely has potential

i hope you give it a try, maybe soon we will see the pizo method setting a new world record

 

[Thermex]

i'm glad someone thinks the pizo hybrid is a good method! I think it really has the potential to set some wrs especially since OLL and PLL are so fast

now i just have to get people to learn it...

Okay but the method has already been proposed. It's called "LLOB". I believe CriticalCubing has a video on it (you couldn't claim this as "your" method since it's already been created).

 

[pizo45]

I just watched the video, pizo hybrid is completely different.
instead of solving the cross and orienting the top edges criticalcubing does something called "EO+DFDB"
pluscriticalcubing used ZBLL which has 493 algorithms to memorize... that is WAY too many.

 

[Hazel]

I just watched the video, pizo hybrid is completely different.
instead of solving the cross and orienting the top edges criticalcubing does something called "EO+DFDB"
pluscriticalcubing used ZBLL which has 493 algorithms to memorize... that is WAY too many.

EO+DFDB is just a fancy way of saying solving the cross while orienting the top edges, and ZBLL has proven to be quite good if you take the time to learn and get fast at the algorithms. Even if you just do OLL/PLL or even COLL/EPLL for the last layer, it's still LLOB (I call it ZBRoux but they're the same thing).

 

[Hazel]

The thing is, this is exactly ZBRoux (or LLOB). The step 2 you described is exactly what EO+DFDB is, and no matter how you solve the last layer for step 3 it's still ZBRoux/LLOB. It's a potentially very good method, but it's just been thought of many times before.

 

[efattah]

The thing is, this is exactly ZBRoux (or LLOB). The step 2 you described is exactly what EO+DFDB is, and no matter how you solve the last layer for step 3 it's still ZBRoux/LLOB. It's a potentially very good method, but it's just been thought of many times before.

ZBRoux/LLOB is really only viable if you use ZBLL. As the pizo45 suggested it, using regular OLL/PLL, I can't think of almost any situation that it could be faster than ordinary CFOP. If you don't know ZBLL then you might as well finish the cross after F2L (without orienting LL edges) then just do OLL/PLL, otherwise you are essentially orienting the edges then orienting the corners right after... Having said that an interesting variant would be partial cross, F2L, then solve DF+DB while simultaneously orienting the entire last layer, then doing PLL. This would probably have around 1,000 algorithms with no benefit over classic ZBRoux though.

 

[Thom S.]

You really were on the right way but you can't try to take a method as your idea when it isn't.
Also, it is recommended that you take a look at the different steps at the Speedsolving Wiki to know things like EO+DFDB
in reallity ZBLL isn't too many anymore, it's slowly becoming a thing now
Saying that it's different pecause you use OLL/PLL(practically worst thing you can do) is like saying you use a different method because you use 4LLL instead of OLL/PLL

 

[Thom S.]

Ok, so I made a kind of Advanced Beginner Method for NxNxNBLD Corners as there isn't really much between OP and 3Style(I'm quite dubious that it doesn't exist but I haven't seen it)
It works by using a different Algorithm gor every Targen instead of Setup + Y Perm + Undo which saves about 5 Moves per Target
I have put this on it's own Thread so people can Suggest Algorithms.
If you don't do 3BLD seriously and you don't want to learn all of 3Style this is just for you.
At my first solve I had 41 Moves less with this than with regular OP for Corners which can make a big difference.(my estimate is about 32 moves less than OP on average)

https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/threads/advanced-op-for-corners-method.67070/

 

[Abram Lookadoo]

new method (my previous method with a refined step) (bbbl)

1) cp block
solve a 1x2x3 block on left while solving corner permutation
2) 2x2x2 block
solve a 2x2x2 block in DRB (or DRF)
3) 1x2x2 block
solve a 1x2x2 block in DRF (or DRB)
4) ollep
(nicknamed azll by myself)
solve the last layer (1/675 algs)

 

[Teoidus]

new method (my previous method with a refined step) (bbbl)

1) cp block
solve a 1x2x3 block on left while solving corner permutation
2) 2x2x2 block
solve a 2x2x2 block in DRB (or DRF)
3) 1x2x2 block
solve a 1x2x2 block in DRF (or DRB)
4) ollep
(nicknamed azll by myself)
solve the last layer (1/675 algs)

Great, now can you capitalize things properly?

On the method itself: it doesn't seem worth the 675 algs. I would much rather achieve similar ergonomics/movecounts with vanilla roux.

I just watched the video, pizo hybrid is completely different.
instead of solving the cross and orienting the top edges criticalcubing does something called "EO+DFDB"
pluscriticalcubing used ZBLL which has 493 algorithms to memorize... that is WAY too many.

They're the same thing...
Unfortunately a lot of methods (some would say all) have already been thought of before, and your idea to hybridize Roux and CFOP is actually a really common proposal.
Also unfortunately, this forum's search is useless, so the only reasonably efficient way to find out if something's been done before is either to read a lot of posts or to propose ideas over and over and get @shadowslice e to yell at you.

 

[Abram Lookadoo]

Great, now can you capitalize things properly?

On the method itself: it doesn't seem worth the 675 algs. I would much rather achieve similar ergonomics/movecounts with vanilla roux.

i created this method for the purpose of maximizing the use of the gen i feel most comfortable with (R,r,M,U), so i think it's worth it.

i will not fix the capitalisation. this is because i feel not capitalising fits my personality, less formal and calm.

 

[Thom S.]

i will not fix the capitalisation. this is because i feel not capitalising fits my personality, less formal and calm.

Please, keep your "individual" side away from this Forum

 

[Abram Lookadoo]

Please, keep your "individual" side away from this Forum

as long as i get what I'm saying across, without talking unrelivently about myself, does it matter?

 

[Thom S.]

i created this method for the purpose of maximizing the use of the gen i feel most comfortable with (R,r,M,U), so i think it's worth it.

It can be done so much easier:
After FB, SB and LSE are already in the good gen area, so the only thing left is CMLL. If you do your CP Block you will only get (R, U) CMLLs so maximized 2-Gen with minimal effort.

Now that I come to think of it, for ZBroux, what if we make a CP Block as our FB and after EO+DFDB we only get 2GLL cases?

as long as i get what I'm saying across, without talking unrelivently about myself, does it matter?

It does. Norms were invented for a good reason and correct Text-formatting makes your Messages seem more
Organized
Good to read
and as the strongest Point, it shows thst you care for what you wrote and you gave it time. Ehy should you take something seriously if the writer doesn't care to give it a second read and format it to be more appealing

 

[Teoidus]

iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg

I don't believe making yourself more difficult to understand is a valid personality trait.

Though it certainly makes him unique; I can recognize Lookadoo's posts on sight now... I just can't understand them and don't think to put in any more effort into reading than he does into writing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Hazel]

Please, keep your "individual" side away from this Forum

Personally I have no issue with his style of writing, but I suppose it's subjective.

 

[Spencer131]

It does. Norms were invented for a good reason and correct Text-formatting makes your Messages seem more
Organized
Good to read
and as the strongest Point, it shows thst you care for what you wrote and you gave it time. Ehy should you take something seriously if the writer doesn't care to give it a second read and format it to be more appealing

I believe that if someone doesn't completely follow the norms, it's fine as long as it's understandable. You also used 'unconventional' formatting and incorrect spelling, but that didn't make it hard to read.

 

[Teoidus]

The formatting was intentional (the previous half of his message actually critiquing the method is written just fine).

 

[Thom S.]

Good, I see that there are different opinions on this Topic.
anyway, does anyone have Algorithms for Orientation and Permutation of all 8 wings on the top Layer?