The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[Matt—]

The problem with solving the two D-layer edges while solving OLL is 1) too many algorithms and 2) most of those algorithms are going to be bad. I stand by my earlier point.

Well, I tried. Oh well

 

[Hazel]

Well, I tried. Oh well

The algorithm you showed wasn't too bad, but that was quite a lucky case :3

 

[Matt—]

The algorithm you showed wasn't too bad, but that was quite a lucky case :3

Yep

 

[TanakaKImito]

I thought about a new beginner method
OLL 's memorization and memorization of PLL It is all together with only two
It is unlikely to finish with eyes, not memorization, so I will forget it.

I would like you to teach if there is already this alignment method.
If not, I would like to name it
CEO1P1 (Yukata Method) Yukata is the clothes I wear in the summer of Japan.
Or
OP2 Method


C cross
E Second stage
OLL (same procedure as the second row)
D bottom four
PLL (corner only)


The characteristic of this alignment is that you do not remember the edge of OLL.
Do not use

The color to be used F on the place to use
The color on UF is for F

Use R U 'R'
Use y L 'U L
The orientation of the OLL edge is aligned with these two

In the idea of parity, there is no case that only one edge direction is aligned, that is, the last direction of the second row is aligned when crossing is possible.

ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー ー

I will put the cloth on the U side after lifting it up, I think that it will be easy to start the D plane crossing by doing so

-----
Align E and align D
Procedure for aligning E columns
I will put it in
The place where I am now is UF
The color of F is in U.

R U 'R'

When the color of F is in F
y U' L 'U L


-----
I will make an OLL cross when arranging the fourth one
The color to be used F on the place to use
The color on UF is for F

Use R U 'R'
Use y L 'U L
The orientation of the OLL edge is aligned with these two
-----

Next, align the D side, if it rotates U R L it will not crumble, it's okay.
Use U 'R U' R 'U 2 R U' R '

Use y U L 'U L U 2 L' U L


Not used R U R 'U' R U R 'U' R U R 'U'

Because U' R U' R' U2 R U 'R' changes the direction of UFL UBL, so do not learn it if you use this, it's okay.

-----
OLL memorization R U R 'U R U 2 R'
Mirror L 'U' L U 'L' U 2 L
The other five patterns will be either of these two if you insert the procedure on the right once
Please think. If you make an OLL cross, you can reduce it from 52 to 7, I reduced it to 2 by doing it again

-----
Edge of PLL reuses OLL
R U R 'U R U2 R' to turn y L' U' L U' L' U2 L y '

Aa-permishes memorize, if directly taught
After aligning the edges of OLL. I think that 'x' R U R 'D R U' R 'D' is good
It does not collapse when you align OLL, because it only affects edges.

Aa-perm
x R 'U R' D 2 R U 'R' D 2 R 2

-----
It is the end
Thank you for reading.
I am using the application of keyhole, I can not say it is a complete original but I would like to name it
Please let me know if there is a better way.

I made a commentary movie but it is not in English, it is in Japanese.
First of all I think that it is important to be aligned, because I do not settle down, I made memorization as much as possible in order to remember when arranging only once a year.

If you think this method is good please tell someone, I will be delighted without seeing it. I will be more pleased if I call your name


Please enjoy teaching.


Because it is a new alignment way, even a frustrated person can complete it! Please do not rate it if you can not do it!
High Rating 3 Low Rating 0 Views 103 Viewer Retention 27% Video Length 24 Minutes

There are also ways to align on my site.
http://dogcube.html.xdomain.jp/




Finally I am interested in Rubik's Cube so far because of this video, I want to write it though it is Japanese.

And when I started Rubik 's Cube I was laughed around, I could not arrange to have it,
Even so, when I talked to me from that time and when I got to be able to arrange a new twisted puzzle, I am thankful to my friends for saying that I'm going to arrange them by myself. Without it I will not be present, this method is also my memory. That's why I turned on Yukata.

 

[dbeyer]

I took some time to break down the steps and tricks. Here is a quick visual breakdown of the solve progression for my proposed 4x4 method.

First 1x3x4 block.


Next, 2nd 1x3x4 block.



Then solve 2 Adjacent Centers, leaving the other two (F and U, relatively speaking) scrambled (fix quickly later).


Above shows the state post "+2 Centers"

Added the Permuted Corners just as an orientation reference.

Then pair a wing pair at DB with a D2 setup.


Then start pairing the wings at the DF with their matches using rU2r' or l'U2l.



Line the two wings up either on the r slice or the l slice, teal and purple respectively.

These finger tricks preserve the UL and UR pair. It flips the UF pair in place.

And even if your last 2 centers are completely swapped post reduction, you have a fast algorithm to fix it like rU2r'l'U2l. Mind you this also goes to show that you can influence but not focus on the last 2 centers during the Last Six Edge Wings pairing step.

You can also simultaneously solve the last 3 wing pairs under certain cases (and I am looking for more solutions to the cases I haven't found yet.

Here is a nice one.
You have Permuted 3 of the Last Six Edge Wing Pairs. So you have 3 left.

Essentially there are Sune and T-OLL shapes that can happen in these "D" cases.

Two of the cases are solveable by (Rw)UR'URU2(Rw)' or (Lw)'U2LUL'UL.

Once you pair all the edge pairs. Do CmLL and Last 2 Centers, then Last 6 edge and fix parities as needed.

 

[SM cubing]

I just thought of a pretty cool redux Submethod for 4x4, and I hope you like it

Step one: solve all of the centers

Step two: pair the cross edges and two edges for f2l (place them as you make them) also, try to make the solved f2l pairs next to each other

Step 3: use the last two f2l slots to pair the rest of the edges

Solve as a 3x3 after that

 

[Thom S.]

I just thought of a pretty cool redux Submethod for 4x4, and I hope you like it

Step one: solve all of the centers

Step two: pair the cross edges and two edges for f2l (place them as you make them) also, try to make the solved f2l pairs next to each other

Step 3: use the last two f2l slots to pair the rest of the edges

Solve as a 3x3 after that

If you don't pair up one edge at a time it's gonna be really hard and time consuming to control exactly which edges need to be paired in which step. Also, L6E will need at least 6 slices(4 if you are lucky) and that is inefficient compared to Redux for example

 

[SM cubing]

If you don't pair up one edge at a time it's gonna be really hard and time consuming to control exactly which edges need to be paired in which step. Also, L6E will need at least 6 slices(4 if you are lucky) and that is inefficient compared to Redux for example

I suppose it needs.some work, maybe pair it with yau method

 

[xyzzy]

I just thought of a pretty cool redux Submethod for 4x4, and I hope you like it

Step one: solve all of the centers

Step two: pair the cross edges and two edges for f2l (place them as you make them) also, try to make the solved f2l pairs next to each other

Step 3: use the last two f2l slots to pair the rest of the edges

Solve as a 3x3 after that

Like what Thom S. said, you can't control the edges you pair if you want to pair them efficiently. Variations of this idea have been proposed before, e.g. pair white edges first, solve cross, then do the rest of edge pairing like in Yau; and they're all bad because they're wasting moves for no good reason. (Slightly different story on bigger cubes if you use freeslice edge pairing, but that's off-topic.)

You might want to look into the OBLBL method, which does 3/4 cross like in Yau, and solves two F2L pairs together with the centres. Using only two free slots for pairing the last six dedges is indeed slightly less move-efficient than using all four slots, but emphasis goes on slightly. It's not a big difference—probably less than 2 moves on average.

 

[SM cubing]

Like what Thom S. said, you can't control the edges you pair if you want to pair them efficiently. Variations of this idea have been proposed before, e.g. pair white edges first, solve cross, then do the rest of edge pairing like in Yau; and they're all bad because they're wasting moves for no good reason. (Slightly different story on bigger cubes if you use freeslice edge pairing, but that's off-topic.)

You might want to look into the OBLBL method, which does 3/4 cross like in Yau, and solves two F2L pairs together with the centres. Using only two free slots for pairing the last six dedges is indeed slightly less move-efficient than using all four slots, but emphasis goes on slightly. It's not a big difference—probably less than 2 moves on average.

Ok. Looks like I'll scratch it

 

[JohnSkyz]

Here is a concept and idea that makes CFOP easier. I called it CEFOP(Cross - Edge Control-F2L-OLL and PLL). Basically it is to introduce edge control after cross. The idea is as follows.

Basically a cube has 12 edges and a scrambled cube has an even number of good and bad edges. If you use ZZ, you need to be proficient to inspect 12 edges and turn them good using F,F' for 4 bad edges in F face and using B or B' move for 4 bad edges in B face.
If 2 bad edges, you can use FUF', FU'F', F'UF,F'U'F' , FU2'F' to turn bad edges in equator from bad to good and similar for back face by replace the F turns with B turns.

But once you done that the whole solve is 2 gen with just R,L, U and D moves. But the EO line is the quite difficult for people who are used to making cross optimally by using all moves including F and B without restriction. What if a CFOP user wants to make a solve 2 gen? It is harder to be color neutral on ZZ and sometimes it feels restrictive

My suggestion for CFOP cubers who are optimal with cross solving, color neutral and extended cross solvers is to do edge control after cross.
This can turn your whole F2L into rotation less solving and get only OLL cross cases. The reason it is easier to focus on finding and fixing bad edges if the cross which is already solved are all good edges. You end up just focussing on 8 edges. You can have zero or even number of bad edges such as 2,4,6 or 8 bad edges.

You can do edge control for just the 4 middles layer edges or all 8 edges to make a F2L solve more seamless. The result is all the difficult F2L case with flipped edges are avoided and dot OLL can be avoided.

Basically after doing the cross, if you have bad edges in UF and FR position, a sledgehammer will change them to good. A reverse sledge hammer will turn UF and UR edges to good.

Changing bad edges to good
1) Use R'FRF' to change UF and RF bad edges to good edges and
LF' L'F for bad edges in UF and LF position
2) Use rUR' URU2r' to change UF and UR bad edges to good edges
or R' (R'FRF') R to change UF and UR bad edges to good
or F (U'RUR')F'
3) Use rU2R'U'RU'r' to change UF and UL bad edges to good edges
or L (LF'L'F)L' to change UF and UL bad edges to good
4) Use F( RUR'U')F' to change UF and UB bad edges to good edge
5) Use RU2R' (Sleghammer) U2(slegehammer) to change UF, UR, UL and UB to good edge
6) Use FBUF'B' for bad edges in UF and UL and FL and BR postions etc.

I like to focus on 1-5 above on fixing bad edges and how to be fast in fixing bad edges with quick look ahead and inspection.

After solving cross, you should focus on the 3 edge pieces (FU,FR and FL) facing you. You should also track any good edge with the top color on the U face(eg. Yellow) , If they are good edges of the top color in the equator make a quick decision to do a Y or Y' turn so you have most Yellow edges that are good in equator. Track the good Yellow edges on top as well. If both edges in equator is good, do a quick d2 turn.

The aim is to quickly have 2 edges in the back of equator to be good. You can quickly use 3 move insert(such R'UR') to put a yellow edge into equator if possible. Use 1-4 method to correct remaining bad edges. Once there are no more edges to fix, the rest of the solve is simply rotationless F2L and OLL. You can either focus on just fixing middle layer edges or both.

If we are fixing only middle layer bad edges, it is important to look at just the middle layer edges on the top layer. Imagine if all the top middle layer edges is on the U layer. Assuming yellow is the top color, you will usually have blue ,green red and orange. If blue and green is dominant color, either blue or green should be the front face to have less rotation. If orange and red is the dominant color, that should be the front face. You need at most one rotation and one sledge hammer to have a rotation less F2l subsequently.

In fact all F2L can be solved with at most one rotation and no F moves to fix bad edges. if we solved by those pairs having F and B colors first and bring bad edges to the U face and rotate 90 degrees about Y axis and solve all remaining pairs. All difficult F2L cases can be avoided. The trade off is solving selected pair rather than solving any pairs you see in usual F2L which may slow you down initially.

Some explaination of the step is in the video below

Middle layer edge control

I have tried this method and tried to understand it, to be honest it is a good and unique method, it can save alot of time and it can be helpful to maybe intermediate solvers, maybe if you try it, you could like the method, i tried the method and got my first sub 30 seconds.

 

[AtlasTheGarbage]

I posted a thread on Reddit a while back about a method variation I developed based on ZB Roux where EODFDB is solved using an algorithm from any move set instead of just limited to MU, and is allowed to destroy CxLL.

I called this derivative of EODFDB "ZBLSE" (deriving from "ZBLS" of ZB method).

I was quick to coin the term "MV" for the method variation as a whole (short for "McWilliams Variation") even though I'm still not sure if anyone ended up learning it.

The steps go as follows:
1.) F2B of Roux
2.) ZBLSE
3.) ZBLL

 

[Hazel]

I posted a thread on Reddit a while back about a method variation I developed based on ZB Roux where EODFDB is solved using an algorithm from any move set instead of just limited to MU, and is allowed to destroy CxLL.

I called this derivative of EODFDB "ZBLSE" (deriving from "ZBLS" of ZB method).

I was quick to coin the term "MV" for the method variation as a whole (short for "McWilliams Variation") even though I'm still not sure if anyone ended up learning it.

The steps go as follows:
1.) F2B of Roux
2.) ZBLSE
3.) ZBLL

How are the algorithms for ZBLSE? The M/U ones are already very good.

 

[PapaSmurf]

The main problem I have with zblse is that it ruins recog. If you got insane with zbll and could recog zbll by tracking 2 edges, and you already knew the coll case, you have 0 pause into zbll recog. With zblse, this is ruined as the coll case isn't preserved.

 

[AtlasTheGarbage]

How are the algorithms for ZBLSE? The M/U ones are already very good.

There are a few that are actually surprisingly not that bad. I've seen a few that got genned which resemble fat sunes or fat antisunes with setup moves (namely M/M'/M2 as setups) and I've also seen a few that got genned which resemble ELL algs with setup moves. There are a few that are best done MU though, but my idea was that ZBLSE is to EODFDB as CMLL is to 3x3 CLL; a good few choice cases would definitely benefit from messing up those extra pieces, but a lot of them are best done with the standard solution.

I have the entire set genned here. There are a few cases which genuinely suck (namely the RUMD algs because I tried to gen RUDr but then HARCS tried to cheat with R r' etc.) but there a few tabs on the bottom which show earlier revisions of the sheet with some possibly better solutions for those cases which accidentally got filtered out when I fed it all back into HARCS to get it to "curate" its own solutions (namely RUMr which is usually good)

 

[CubingDoggo]

I have thought of a kinda new method with my friend, also we don’t have a name yet. You would start by straight up solving the four F2L pairs normally. Then, use COLL to solve the top, or use some alg set( like maybe a 2 look version). Finally, you would use M moves and S moves, or turn and just do a M to solve all the other edges. I don’t have the algs since I don’t have computer(sorry). Do you think this method is good? And also, try to think of a name.

 

[WombatWarrior17]

This already exists, it's called columns first.
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Columns_First_Methods

 

[CubingDoggo]

Ah, okay. Thanks.

What about we solve all edges( top cross and bottom cross, or maybe alg subset of M, E, and S moves) Then, we could solve with some a perms or something . Also, if you have some, post your own methods.

 

[Hazel]

Ah, okay. Thanks.

What about we solve all edges( top cross and bottom cross, or maybe alg subset of M, E, and S moves) Then, we could solve with some a perms or something . Also, if you have some, post your own methods.

This is just called Edges First, and is generally considered to be really bad because solving the corners when all the edges are solves is very inefficient...

 

[Skewbed]

Ah, okay. Thanks.

What about we solve all edges( top cross and bottom cross, or maybe alg subset of M, E, and S moves) Then, we could solve with some a perms or something . Also, if you have some, post your own methods.

You cannot solve edges with just <M, E, S>, beause the four edges in the M slice will stay in the M slice. The same is true for the E and S slices.

Edges first is considered worse than corners first, because in corners first, solving just edges is easier since slice moves don't mess up the corners.