The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[brododragon]

I'll be a little less cruel: try developing a square-1 full blind method. Honestly, I'm not sure if its possible but I'd love to see it if it is.

I second that.

 

[WoowyBaby]

It is in fact possible.

How to Solve Square-1 Blindfolded

(Mike Hughey)

You could your own great awesome one if you'd like to.

 

[fuzzballcat]

It is in fact possible.

How to Solve Square-1 Blindfolded

You could your own great awesome one if you'd like to.

Whoa, never knew that! So cool (given I'm a square-1 enthusiast)!
Image square-1 OH...

 

[Etotheipi]

I'll be a little less cruel: try developing a square-1 full blind method. Honestly, I'm not sure if its possible but I'd love to see it if it is.

@Mike Hughey did it I think, though it might have been someone else and im confusing names.

 

[ProStar]

Whoa, never knew that! So cool (given I'm a square-1 enthusiast)!
Image square-1 OH...

Z3Cubing did that

 

[Sion]

Darn guys, you kinda just shot down his idea.
Try to be nice and give more explanation why other options are better, but good job ImmolatedMarmoset for telling why it’s bad, thank you.

So, the first two blocks of Roux and your method are the same.

Then, you decide to solve the UL UR edges?
This actually takes about 7 moves on its own, this is from some personal testing, which is pretty inefficient for just placing two pieces, which isn’t great, but if it leads to better steps it could be worth it.

Then you get to CLL, which, is not simply doing COLL but less restrictive, but in fact, more restrictive, so the algorithms would be much longer and worse. I have personally tested this with CE, and CMLL’s that can be solved in 9 moves require 13-14 moves now, because of those edges that you have to preserve.

Finally, we have L4E, which at first, I thought they would be oriented, so then you could solve it with just a simple cycle that would take 4-5 moves and is very quick, but if they actually not oriented which is what I understood, then it would take many more moves, but also, the algorithms would be non-MU. I have personally tested this with CE and verified that the shortest solutions are MFE or MBE moves and such, and about 10 moves of those weird moves, and if you search for only MU algorithms, they are much longer, in fact, as long as the entire LSE on its own.

So, since we know this is bad, let’s tell you an alternative to your method, and hopefully it’ll teach you of what’s bad and good.

After first two blocks, if you want to solve UL UR, you should stock them in D layer, because 1) this always takes less time then solving them directly, it in fact is close to cutting it in half, and 2) the CLL algorithms will be much nicer, because they will not be restricted by the UL UR edges on top.

But, even though this little slight variant is much better than what you proposed, it still leaves you with the same gross L4E as mentioned earlier. So, if we can manage to orient these edges in an earlier step, then the L4E will be super duper nice, infinitely better than it is now. We could do so whilst solving the UL UR edges to D layer, because this would require extra algorithms to be memorized as if we were to orient while doing CLL, and, orienting these four edges while stocking UL UR actually only takes a few extra moves, so it’s a good trade off. Perhaps just three very quick and easy MU moves added here to get rid of eight or so bad and slow moves in the end.

So, this new and improved method I have goes like this:
- First Block
- Second Block
- EO + Stock ULUR (or UFUB)
- CLL (similar to COLL)
- Good L4E (easy M-slice)

Here’s an example solve to prove its good:

Scramble: U B2 R' F2 R2 U2 L2 F2 D L2 F2 D L2 U2 B' F L B2 F' R' U'
(y2)
D R f R D' f // First Block (6/6)
r' y R U R' U S' R' F2 R y' // Second Block (9/15)
U' M U M' U2 M U' M' // EO + ULUR (8/23)
U' R U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 U2 R // CLL (10/33)
U2 M2 U' M2 // Permute Final Edges (4/37)

What do you guys think of this variant method?

I like the idea, but here are a few little things I’m a curious about.

1: what makes this any better than EOLR?
2: how do you assure the CLL step doesn’t mess up orientation or orients itself incorrectly?

 

[Etotheipi]

1: what makes this any better than EOLR?

The only advantage I can see is better look ahead from blocks, since you do the eo edges step before doing an alg, so you have a lower TPS before this step and you can track the edges better, but other than that I don't know.

 

[ProStar]

CFEC?

Cross
F2L
Edges - Doesn't need to keep CO/CP, just needs to orient and permute edges. I'm assuming you could do modified ELL
Corners - Modified version of COLL, it needs to keep edge permutation as well as orientation. Still would only be 42 cases

Depending on how many algs a simple method for corners would take, it might be a viable beginners method, as edges only takes 1 alg(Sune)

 

[Pyjam]

Corners - Modified version of COLL, it needs to keep edge permutation as well as orientation. Still would only be 42 cases

L4C has 84 cases.

Because edges are solved at this point you cannot AUF as in CxLL so the number of cases is quadrupled, but because you cannot have parity that is reduced again by factor 2.

 

[WoowyBaby]

Edges would be very easy and short, good.

Corners would be long and slow, and it would actually be double 42, so 84 algs.
Why? Do M2 U M2 U2 M2 U M2 U2.

Although, I do have to say, recognition is actually pretty good, so maybe this can be good.

 

[ProStar]

Ok, idea for a different way of teaching beginners method:

Cross - Normal
Corners - Solve corners on bottom, use sexy move to insert
Middle edges - Line the edge up so it makes a bar with the center, then move it away from where it needs to go. Then do the alg(sexy move), then you can just do these three moves(do F' U' F) to insert it. You can make that part use only sexy and a little intuitive part. Use lefty sexy(L' U' L U) for the left side.
Orient Yellow Edges - Use F (sexy) F' and you're able to cycle through the 3 cases.
Permute Yellow Edges - take the pair out (R U R'), then the alg (sexy), then put the pair back in(R U' R'). You can repeat this until edges are permuted.
Orient Yellow Corners - Flip yellow on bottom, then use the alg(sexy) to orient the corners(normal beginners)
Permute Yellow Corners - With yellow on bottom, take a corner out (R U R'), do D moves so that the correct corner is above the two correct edges, then put the edge back in(R U' R'). Then repeat for all the corners. Then the cube is solved

So with this, you only need sexy move(R U R' U') and lefty sexy(L' U' L U) to solve the cube(with maybe a couple moves added/subtracted, like for yellow cross/corners or something).

(I learned from the Rubik's tutorial and basically did brute force 4lll for LL, so maybe this is the normal method lol)

Here's an example solve that gives comments on how you'd explain it. Be warned, it's over 180 HTM, has more lines then the reconstruction of Feliks' entire Ao5 WR, and has a stupid amount of U U' lol

L4C has 84 cases.

Oh ok, thanks. Would the cases for edges be the same as ELL, or less because corners are ignored?

Edges would be very easy and short, good.

Corners would be long and slow, and it would actually be double 42, so 84 algs.
Why? Do M2 U M2 U2 M2 U M2 U2.

Although, I do have to say, recognition is actually pretty good, so maybe this can be good.

Yeah, that makes since why it would double.

 

[brododragon]

Ok, idea for a different way of teaching beginners method:

Cross - Normal
Corners - Solve corners on bottom, use sexy move to insert
Middle edges - Line the edge up so it makes a bar with the center, then move it away from where it needs to go. Then do the alg(sexy move), then you can just do these three moves(do F' U' F) to insert it. You can make that part use only sexy and a little intuitive part. Use lefty sexy(L' U' L U) for the left side.
Orient Yellow Edges - Use F (sexy) F' and you're able to cycle through the 3 cases.
Permute Yellow Edges - take the pair out (R U R'), then the alg (sexy), then put the pair back in(R U' R'). You can repeat this until edges are permuted.
Orient Yellow Corners - Flip yellow on bottom, then use the alg(sexy) to orient the corners(normal beginners)
Permute Yellow Corners - With yellow on bottom, take a corner out (R U R'), do D moves so that the correct corner is above the two correct edges, then put the edge back in(R U' R'). Then repeat for all the corners. Then the cube is solved

So with this, you only need sexy move(R U R' U') and lefty sexy(L' U' L U) to solve the cube(with maybe a couple moves added/subtracted, like for yellow cross/corners or something).

(I learned from the Rubik's tutorial and basically did brute force 4lll for LL, so maybe this is the normal method lol)

Here's an example solve that gives comments on how you'd explain it. Be warned, it's over 180 HTM, has more lines then the reconstruction of Feliks' entire Ao5 WR, and has a stupid amount of U U' lol




Oh ok, thanks. Would the cases for edges be the same as ELL, or less because corners are ignored?



Yeah, that makes since why it would double.

It's a bit like this: https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/8355_Method

It uses only the sexy move and is similar to CFOP, But this method is more move-effecient.

I would still this has some viability, as it's more similar to CFOP, meaning it gives the beginner a better understanding of CFOP.

 

[ProStar]

It's a bit like this: https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/8355_Method

It uses only the sexy move and is similar to CFOP, But this method is more move-effecient.

I would still this has some viability, as it's more similar to CFOP, meaning it gives the beginner a better understanding of CFOP.

"Move-Efficient" lol

Yeah, that one is weird. I'd say normal LBL is better than that. I've been working on developing an easier beginners, because the one I learned had a bunch of algs. (1 for cross, one for corners(although those were mostly intuitive), 2 for middle edges, 3 for yellow cross, 1 for yellow corners, 1 for permute corners, 2 for permute edges). The only reason I thought of this is because I'd been playing around with only solving the edges of the cube, and that got me the idea of an edges first LL(CFEC, I posted about it last post), and then turned that into a beginners.

(If you're wondering, I learned from the Rubik's tutorial)

 

[Etotheipi]

I learned the beginners method from rubiksplace.com, which, looking back, used some really weird algs.

 

[brododragon]

(1 for cross, one for corners(although those were mostly intuitive), 2 for middle edges, 3 for yellow cross, 1 for yellow corners, 1 for permute corners, 2 for permute edges).

You can do that method in less algs
Cross: can be done in 0, just takes a couple days to figure out.
Corners:
E-Slice edges: U R U’ R’ U’ F’ U F (and mirror of it)
Yellow Cross: Can be done with a 3-step cycle: F R U R’ U’ F
Permute two adjacent edges: R U R' U R U2 R' U
Permute 3 Corners Counterclockwise: U R U’ L’ U R’ U' L
Orient Corners: 1 trigger R' D' R D
4 algs and a trigger

 

[brododragon]

I have already posted this but put it in a spoiler do no one read it :confused: :?. Anyway, this is directed towards @WoowyBaby but anyone is welcome to comment.

Let me just start off by saying what you created is almost definitely way better then what I was visualising. I want to see if what I had in mind had any viability anyway, though. The UL and UR edge aspect has viability, but I'm wondering if there's more.

What I had in mind was solving UR, UL, UFL, UFR, UBL, and UBR. The weird L4E, though, kinda ruins it.

Idea 1
The best thing I can think of that follows my vision is this:
1. Solve either the UL or UR edge + EO
2. insert the other edge whilst simultaneously doing COLL.
3. L4E

Idea 2
Note: this is nothing like what I had in mind, just a random idea.

I don't really know why I'm doing these any more; you already had a great idea I can probably not top, but here it goes.

1. F2B
2. Solve the DB and UB edges, along with the UBR and UBL corners. For this, you will probably need to do an x' rotation, but that shouldn't be too slow.
3. Solve the UF and DF edges, along with the UFR and UFL corners.
4. Solve the UL and UR edges

For step 2, before the x' rotation, you should probably take note of what the F face looks like (and the bottom of the DF edge.

 

[ProStar]

You can do that method in less algs
Cross: can be done in 0, just takes a couple days to figure out.
Corners:
E-Slice edges: U R U’ R’ U’ F’ U F (and mirror of it)
Yellow Cross: Can be done with a 3-step cycle: F R U R’ U’ F
Permute two adjacent edges: R U R' U R U2 R' U
Permute 3 Corners Counterclockwise: U R U’ L’ U R’ U' L
Orient Corners: 1 trigger R' D' R D
4 algs and a trigger

I know, but Rubik's couldn't possibly have made their method decent lol

 

[ProStar]

Ok another idea:

F2L-1
Orient corners while doing LS(so like ZBLS for corners). Some of the algs could be WV/SV, but the rest would have to be generated
Last layer - Permute the corners while oriented and permuting edges. This would have less algs then ZBLL.

CFEC?

Cross
F2L
Edges - Doesn't need to keep CO/CP, just needs to orient and permute edges. I'm assuming you could do modified ELL
Corners - Modified version of COLL, it needs to keep edge permutation as well as orientation. Still would only be 42 cases

Depending on how many algs a simple method for corners would take, it might be a viable beginners method, as edges only takes 1 alg(Sune)

Wait... Is this BLL?

 

[Skewbed]

Ok another idea:

F2L-1
Orient corners while doing LS(so like ZBLS for corners). Some of the algs could be WV/SV, but the rest would have to be generated
Last layer - Permute the corners while oriented and permuting edges. This would have less algs then ZBLL.

That LL subset is called COALL, and definitely could be improved with LS as described.
It doesn't have too many algs, but I don't think that they have been genned that well.

 

[ProStar]

That LL subset is called COALL, and definitely could be improved with LS as described.
It doesn't have too many algs, but I don't think that they have been genned that well.

Doesn't COALL only work if the pair is already paired(like VHLS instead of ZBLS)?