I do CFOP sometimes during petrus sessions, but only if its a really lucky scramble.View attachment 13987
I'm Justin is bad.
He also only really solves with ZB.
Anyway, method neutrality is possible but not worth it, just like most methods which go for good singles.
View attachment 13987
I'm Justin is bad.
He also only really solves with ZB.
Anyway, method neutrality is possible but not worth it, just like most methods which go for good singles.
you are right but it could be pretty fun to use method neutrality.I do CFOP sometimes during petrus sessions, but only if its a really lucky scramble.
trying to inspect for two methods and use both at the same consistency doesn't seem worth.
Solving cross first is better also this method has been come up with alot before I'm pretty sure(including I thought of this before) also you still have to do full cross just seperately solve the last cross edge less efficiencythinking of a new belt method. Not sure if this has been proposed before, but here it is.
1: permute 3 cross edges and make a belt around the cube.
2: insert the last cross edge quickly with M moves.
3: insert the f2l corners. You could do a last slot method on one of the last corners but it depends since some cases might not have algs that make the pair, then insert it. For example when you have a case where you have a corner which white is on top, and the f2l edge is solved (this is a white cross solve), you can do it by RURURURUR insert. But to do a last slot method to orient EO, URURURUR would be much more optimal.
4: solve last layer by any method you want.
Pros: you dont have to make a full cross, only 3 cross edges, which means that the first step will be more easy, and more cross tricks might open up, as well as your cross time decreasing.
For belt, there is alot of freedom, which means while inserting edge pieces, it could open up to more belt tricks to make the belt step more efficient and faster.
the corner permutation is pretty simple and fast.
Edit: Another pro is that you can use CLS everytime.
Cons: doing Belt and Corner permutation is slower than doing F2L.
Look-ahead is very hard.
Pieces can be hidden almost anywhere during belt, making it very hard to find pieces without multiple rotations.
This method just isnt as fast as other methods, like ZZ, Petrus, Roux, or CFOP. But it could still be used as a speedsolving method. It is also pretty simple, meaning that it could be used as a method for beginners.
idk what to call this method.
doing the full cross while making belt is really hard, as one cross edge might pop up. It also restricts more tricks.Solving cross first is better also this method has been come up with alot before I'm pretty sure(including I thought of this before) also you still have to do full cross just seperately solve the last cross edge less efficiency
kinda but it’s differentIsn't that just the keyhole f2l into oll and pll?
Not really on my perspectiveThis is just CFOP but using keyhole for F2L...
There is nothing different. it's literally just CFOP with keyhole.kinda but it’s different
An alg? What for? Or do you mean method?Just as to make everyone understand what I’m doing I am trying to create a better alg for the belt method.
Finally someone get’s itIt's not really a "belt method" at all. You are solving 7 pieces before the belt is done
I meant the a better alg to solve the whole belt with A solve cornerAn alg? What for? Or do you mean method?
ok thenOk guys I am keep my opinion to my self now since everyone keeps on saying this is a CFOP method
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
[Unofficial] 5x5 Cage Method UWR 1:28.18 by Hill Pong | Puzzle Video Gallery | 2 | ||
The best 4x4 method??? | General Speedcubing Discussion | 8 | ||
Creators Competition: Method-Making Competition No. 1 | Forum Competitions | 10 | ||
Calculating Method/Substep Efficiency | Puzzle Theory | 27 | ||
M | What method is this? | Cubing Help & Questions | 24 |