The New Method / Substep / Concept Idea Thread

[Deleted member 51471]

i proposed petrus francisco here first before i made my own thread about it. It deserves its own thread

When everyone ignores a method, it generally means it doesn't deserve it's own thread.

 

[PetraPine]

i proposed petrus francisco here first before i made my own thread about it. It deserves its own thread

thats not how it works lol

 

[Gnome]

So you're proposing 1 days worth of "waiting" is equal to months of hard work, algorithm generation, tutorials and example solves?

 

[Deleted member 51471]

https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/the-new-method-substep-concept-idea-thread.40975/page-334 yesterday at 2:40PM EST and I made the thread about it TODAY. There is proof.

Ok. But that's not the point. I've posted plenty of ignored methods here, but I didn't make a new thread for every single one of them.

 

[Spacey10]

https://www.speedsolving.com/threads/the-new-method-substep-concept-idea-thread.40975/page-334 yesterday at 2:40PM EST and I made the thread about it TODAY. There is proof.

Cool, but you don't need a new thread for every method on here. Super cool methods were developed ONLY on this thread, and example would be Yau.

 

[PetraPine]

You can also use specific threads for vairiants of methods,
like this is a petrus vairiant so use a petrus thread

 

[Nir1213]

While this method may be unique in its own way, unique doesn't necessarily mean good. In Petrus, you would do EO -> 2-gen-F2L -> ZBLL. This method splits that into four smaller steps. In general, and definitely here, few big steps is faster than many small steps (due to look-ahead, transition time, etc). Not saying you shouldn't try to make methods—because you absolutely should—but this one probably isn't one worth exploring further.

As for it having its own thread, you are supposed to use the megathread, regardless of whether you want your method to have its own thread or not. If you propose a method in the megathread and the general consensus among others is that it's a good method worthy of exploration, only then should it get its own thread.

EDIT: yep, it was moved to the megathread

i guess you got a point.

 

[Nir1213]

i understand my method is not that good but is should be deserving of its own thread

for a method to have its own thread, its gotta be worthy of it. But the method you made isnt really the best.
Im sorry, lukas.

ok whatever, any ideas to improve petrus francisco?

nvm it isnt worth making improvements anymore
you could do it for fun

 

[PetraPine]

of course its not. Well have fun.

Just allow it to be Do anything to create f2l-1 that is soo much better

 

[Nir1213]

of course its not. Well have fun.

im not doing it lol

 

[PetraPine]

that doesnt make it developed,
you dont have an algset generated for ll even a bad simple one.

 

[PetraPine]

does winter variation count as an algset? Its in the method, its an entire step.

what about that corner orientation step
thats a major step that is uncounted for

 

[PetraPine]

yes i have my own algset generated for that but i am not ready to post it yet

ya right lol

 

[Nir1213]

ya right lol

*scoffs*

 

[PetraPine]

yes i have my own algset generated for that but i am not ready to post it yet

why would you be not ready to post an algset???
its an algset...
that is the reason i think this is a lie and i think
he hasnt generated one

 

[PetraPine]

thats not an algset and M U doesnt orient corners

 

[PetraPine]

no im talking about EO+DF edge for step 5. Just use the entire Winter Variation for step 4 after intuitively pairing up the last slot.

entire wv is awful and long there is no reason to use it,
its pretty bad
you should just orient corners after,
and you can do coll after edge orientation

 

[PetraPine]

i get your point but to have more hexagonal francisco in the method, ima keep my way. I dont disrespect your opinion, im just saying i like my version better. I will keep you idea in mind tho incase i do change it.

alright,
atleast for people getting into the method they should be allowed to also do EO COLL as many already now the algset.

 

[PetraPine]

Dont know if this is original or not but created this method along time ago to learn basic edge comms,
Solve 2x2x3(like petrus) into back.
solve front two corners.
Coll
L7E
(you could solve L7E with COMMS or a specific L7E alg set)
this method can be like fairly efficient if you know comms well,
plus the blockbuilding aspects.
you could also solve the last cross piece with corners and than do comms it might be better for fingertricks while bieng less efficient.

 

[whaffle]

I was trying to create a speedsolving method based on DR/Belt, and here are some of my ideas:

DR:
I think the fastest(not necessarily most efficient) way to achieve DR is EOBelt -> CO. Belt edges don't have to be solved, they just have to be in the E slice and oriented. After EOBelt, you can use TSLE Edge in slot algorithms to solve CO of one side, and then solve CO of the other side with OCLL. Alternatively, to avoid a z2 rotation, you can orient 3 corners on the bottom during EOBelt then orient the remaining corners. You could also blockbuild DR F2L and do OLL, but I haven't tested this too much and I don't think it would be too efficient.

Solve after DR:
I have thought of 3 ways to solve after DR that could be fast:

• Reduce to <R2, L2, U2, D2, F2, B2> then solve F2B, which leaves you with 4c
• Blockbuild F2L then PLL/ Blockbuild to F2L-1 Corner then TTLL
• Blockbuild 223 and finish with Mehta

I think if you do

EOBelt -1 edge + 3CO
TSLE
Reduction to <R2, L2, U2, D2, F2, B2>
Roux finish

it might me a decent method.