The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[dudefaceguy]

5. Solve the rest of the cube using U and the right inner slice (still working on this part)

By the way, I have tried to do this, and you CANNOT solve both centers and edges using only U and r (unless I have really missed something). EDIT: Actually you should be able to, since you can scramble the same pieces with U r. It just seems like the movecount would be very high.

It's either centers first and then edges using commutators (Lewis) or edges first and then centers using commutators (QTPI and Sandwich). You can do some center control while solving edges to get a few extra center pieces solved, but I'm not sure that this is worth it. There are 10 center pieces left if you solve edges first, or 8 if you also solve the two centers in the l slice while solving edges. 1/4 of these will usually be solved by accident, so there are usually 7 or 8 center pieces left, or 6 if you solve the extra 2 center pieces while solving edges. This is the difference between 2 and 3 commutators (or 1 4-move commutator cycling 6 pieces). Center commutators/algs can be really fast, but you have to look at the bottom and back faces to recognize the case.

Anyhow, I am obviously very excited to talk about this method but I will stop now and go to sleep.

 

[Alex Shih]

By the way, I have tried to do this, and you CANNOT solve both centers and edges using only U and r (unless I have really missed something). It's either centers first and then edges using commutators (Lewis) or edges first and then centers using commutators (QTPI and Sandwich). You can do some center control while solving edges to get a few extra center pieces solved, but I'm not sure that this is worth it. There are 10 center pieces left if you solve edges first, or 8 if you also solve the two centers in the l slice while solving edges. 1/4 of these will usually be solved by accident, so there are usually 7 or 8 center pieces left, or 6 if you solve the extra 2 center pieces while solving edges. This is the difference between 2 and 3 commutators (or 1 4-move commutator cycling 6 pieces). Center commutators/algs can be really fast, but you have to look at the bottom and back faces to recognize the case.

Anyhow, I am obviously very excited to talk about this method but I will stop now and go to sleep.

Do you know any specific cases where this isn't possible, or the specific reason this isn't possible? There might be a workaround (although I have a feeling that the workaround would probably be algorithmic). Also, if you want to continue this discussion, we should probably move to a different thread.

 

[Skewbed]

Here's an idea for finishing Hexagonal Francisco solves using pseudoslotting during the last edge.

Pseudoslotting ZBLL Finish:

1. Hexagon on D
2. Solve 3 E-slice edges like normal (RUru-gen)
3. Insert the last one with the corner by using pseudoslotting
4. Insert DF edge while doing EO (MU-gen)
5. ZBLL or such

Pseudoslotting OLL PLL Finish:

1. Same
2. Same
3. Same
4. Insert DF edge (MU-gen)
5. OLL
6. PLL

Example solve using OLL PLL Finish:

Scramble: U' L' D2 U2 B' D2 B2 L2 B R2 B L2 F2 U L' D R U' R2 B'

y2 // inspection
L D' L' // 3/4 cross, probably inefficient way to build hexagon
U' L' U' L // corner
R2 U' L U L' // corner
(D' U') L' U L // corner
u R U R' r U r' // edge
u r U r' F' U' F // pseudoslot
M' U' M // setup to LL
D' U R U R' U R d' R U' R' F' // OLL
U' L' U R' z R2 U R' U' R2 U D // PLL
R' // AUF (or ARF I guess)

 

[TheoryOfQuantum]

1.) What do you mean by X? an XCross?
2.) You forgot the rest of F2L
3.) There's a thread especially for proposing new methods, which can be found here.

I meant that you would make a literal X. Not practical, but somehow helps with F2L.
Btw for the other people talking about where's f2l, I kind of forgot to say that you did f2l with it, as I've used it so much that it's been pretty much forgotten as a step and more a part of the cross

 

[dudefaceguy]

Do you know any specific cases where this isn't possible, or the specific reason this isn't possible? There might be a workaround (although I have a feeling that the workaround would probably be algorithmic). Also, if you want to continue this discussion, we should probably move to a different thread.

Yes, let's move to the thread for this method: https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/intuitive-4x4-method-with-parity-avoidance.73049/

I will post a reply there.

 

[ProStar]

I meant that you would make a literal X. Not practical, but somehow helps with F2L.
Btw for the other people talking about where's f2l, I kind of forgot to say that you did f2l with it, as I've used it so much that it's been pretty much forgotten as a step and more a part of the cross

By X do you mean inserting all F2L pairs? If so then that's a really bad version of PCMS @CodingCuber

 

[Spacey10]

5 moves flipped pair alg.
If the flipped pair is in FR and the slot is BR, then do R U' R2 U R'. May already exist though.

 

[PetraPine]

HK method/variant
Do 2x2x2 block in back left or back right
ZZ EO
Turn 2x2 into 2x2x3 while also solving front pairs
COLL LSE

 

[PapaSmurf]

You, my friend, just invented the beginner version of WaterZZ or a version of Portico.

 

[CyoobietheCuber]

5 moves flipped pair alg.
If the flipped pair is in FR and the slot is BR, then do R U' R2 U R'. May already exist though.

Exists.

 

[Username: Username:]

Dunno if this exists but here it goes.
This is a wacky method that uses lots of algorithms so if you don't like learning algs then don't use this method.
I've posted this in a thread called "Pillman something something" and discussed this with other peoples, now I want to share it.

Step 1: it has two substeps to make inspection more feasible, step 1a is to make an FB + EO and plan it in inspection, I know that sounds crazy hard and it is, but with practice though, people can do it, I can guess some brave people can do it . Step 2b is to blockbuild an edge with 2 corners, Thus making one layer + EO.
tl;Dr: solve a layer + EO in two steps.

Step 2: solve the U layer edges into its place, and also, if all of your U layer edges are on the E slice, you can use one alg to solve them, kinda like L4EP but outside of last layer. tl;Dr: solve the U layer edges into its place. This step can obviously be improved to have more freedom, I'm open to all suggestions!

Step 3: Now, this alg set solves everything else, the LL corners and the oriented E slice edges in one algorithm while preserving the D layer and the U layer edges' orientation and permutation, this is similar to ZBLL, but, here's the catch, I think, this algorithm set has better recog and a bit lower algcount, now why better recognition? well ZBLL solves 8 pieces on the last layer, and the pieces are all combined together making it hard to recognize, but in this alg set, the 8 pieces, the corners and edges are separated, the E slice edges are not in the same layer as the LL corners, the part where it has a bit fewer algs? well, I just estimate that so take that with a grain of salt.
tl;Dr: solve the LL corners + the already oriented E slice edges.

I appreciate it if anyone calculates the average movecount for this method.

Step 4: Your cube is solved!

I'm open to any criticisms or corrections.

also, I'm trying this Chris Tran vibe kind thing, let me know haha

 

[PapaSmurf]

I don't understand that explanation at all.

 

[Spacey10]

I think @pillman made this already, look at member intro
Edit: here https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/i-made-bad-methods-and-practiced-them.77926/#post-1382046

 

[Sub1Hour]

I don't understand that explanation at all.

I'll simplify the steps

1. First layer + EO
2. ELL
3. E Slice + CLL

 

[PapaSmurf]

So the FB is actually on D, not on L. That makes a lot more sense, and is also bad.

 

[pillman]

I actually hav a method that is not effective at all but it is fun

 

[pillman]

its for 4X4 and up

 

[Username: Username:]

So the FB is actually on D, not on L. That makes a lot more sense, and is also bad.

If you don't like FB + EO on D, you could do this, EOCross, insert the D layer corners in a way that prevents the U layer edges from being on the E slice, now on the insertion of the last D layer corner, you permute all of the U layer edges, kinda like LPELL, but it's for one corner, not a pair.

also, just to clarify, the alg set which does CLL + E slice edges preserves the U layer edges, orientation and permutation but permutes the E slice edges.

 

[PapaSmurf]

Yeah, it's definitely worse than doing ZZ. You're doing layer+EO which is already kinda not good, then you're gonna do a step with not super recog then you're gonna do a step with not super recog or algs. As a general rule of thumb, any diag corner swap+edges that aren't in U are going to be majority awful algs.

 

[Username: Username:]

Yeah, it's definitely worse than doing ZZ. You're doing layer+EO which is already kinda not good, then you're gonna do a step with not super recog then you're gonna do a step with not super recog or algs. As a general rule of thumb, any diag corner swap+edges that aren't in U are going to be majority awful algs.

Oh ok then, and also, I'm not trying to compare to ZZ or anything, ye this might be a bad method anyway D=