#### guysensei1

##### Member
1,0/2,2/3,0/-2,-2/-3,0/2,2/

A Z perm inspired square-1 E perm, I can almost do this faster than the standard diagswap CP actually.

#### Rubiksdude4144

##### Member
so I avg around 35-40 seconds.
Here are the things I know and how fast I am on them

Basic cube shape - 4 - 7 s
Intuitive CO - 4 s
beginners EO - 3 s - 7 s
Know advanced CP (8 algs) - 3 s - 4 s
ik z and h perm but not u perm for EP - 5 s
parity - 6 s

if anyone can help me especially on cubeshape and eo that will be greatly appreciated

#### Y2k1

##### Member
Easies thing you can do is learn all the eo algs (there are only 5). Than next is to learn some more basic eps, like adjacent swap on top/bottom and opposite/o perm. For cubeshape and alg drilling, squanmate is a good tool https://github.com/sp3ctum/squanmate

#### cubeshepherd

##### Member
so I avg around 35-40 seconds.
Here are the things I know and how fast I am on them

Basic cube shape - 4 - 7 s
Intuitive CO - 4 s
beginners EO - 3 s - 7 s
Know advanced CP (8 algs) - 3 s - 4 s
ik z and h perm but not u perm for EP - 5 s
parity - 6 s

if anyone can help me especially on cubeshape and eo that will be greatly appreciated
I was averaging the same time that you are averaging 2 months ago and now I am sub 30/27 globally (I have also done 200-500 solves in the last few months which has helped). I say this because for me the biggest thing to get sub 30 was first memorize all the EO (step 3) and CP (4) algs from this website http://www.cubezone.be/square1step4.html
Those algorithms are very easy to memorize and once you have them down I would recommend to first learn the first 12 algs form step 5 and any additional ones after that if you wish. (I only know the first 12 algs on step 5 at the moment). I fix Parity during step 5 since some of the algorithms are meant to fix parity, and are only parity algs.
Cubeshape should and will get faster with the more solves that you do, especially since you will start to find more efficient ways of doing CS. This link helps if you are looking for all cubeshape cases:http://www.alchemistmatt.com/cube/square1list.html

Lastly, Make sure that you have a good Square 1. I was using the qiyi cubical square 1, until last month where I then purchased the SCS Volt M, which and been an amazing cube and well worth the price.

Keep practicing and soon you will be sub 25.

Last edited:

#### 1973486

##### Member
CO should not take 4 seconds, it's 3 slices. Are you sure those splits are true though, they add up to 33 seconds at worst and would make you avg about 30 assuming 50% parity.

Lastly, Make sure that you have a good Square 1. I was using the qiyi cubical square 1, until last month where I then purchased the SCS Volt M, which and been an amazing cube and well worth the price.
I'm sure the QiYi was holding you back from sub 30

#### cubeshepherd

##### Member
CO should not take 4 seconds, it's 3 slices. Are you sure those splits are true though, they add up to 33 seconds at worst and would make you avg about 30 assuming 50% parity.

I'm sure the QiYi was holding you back from sub 30
You are right for the most part about the Qiyi holding me back, because there were many times that I could have gotten sub 30/25 solves/averages, but I did not due to the cube locking up or popping on me, (Mostly due to my rough turning style).

With that being said, had I not purchased the SCS Volt M I most likely would be sub 30 by this point, just be practicing cube-shape and getting faster with the new algorithms that I memorized a few months back.

Thank you though for pointing that out, since you are right on that.

#### 1973486

##### Member
You are right for the most part about the Qiyi holding me back, because there were many times that I could have gotten sub 30/25 solves/averages, but I did not due to the cube locking up or popping on me, (Mostly due to my rough turning style).

With that being said, had I not purchased the SCS Volt M I most likely would be sub 30 by this point, just be practicing cube-shape and getting faster with the new algorithms that I memorized a few months back.

Thank you though for pointing that out, since you are right on that.
I think you missed the sarcasm, the fastest official avg with a QiYi is 8.24, it's not like it's a Calvin's or something. But if it's set up badly then it might slow you down a bit

#### cubeshepherd

##### Member
I think you missed the sarcasm, the fastest official avg with a QiYi is 8.24, it's not like it's a Calvin's or something. But if it's set up badly then it might slow you down a bit
Oops he-he! I apologize for the missed sarcasm.
I do know that the previous world record was with a Qiyi square 1, and every time I tried someone else's square 1 I really enjoyed it, but with mine I was having trouble being sub 30 consistently, which after I got the Volt M, I was able to start consistently getting 23-29 second averages and I broke my pb single and average by quite a bit then I had with the normal Qiyi square 1.
On a different note, do you have any tips to being sub 20/15. Any help is much appreciated.

#### Rubiksdude4144

##### Member
Oops he-he! I apologize for the missed sarcasm.
I do know that the previous world record was with a Qiyi square 1, and every time I tried someone else's square 1 I really enjoyed it, but with mine I was having trouble being sub 30 consistently, which after I got the Volt M, I was able to start consistently getting 23-29 second averages and I broke my pb single and average by quite a bit then I had with the normal Qiyi square 1.
On a different note, do you have any tips to being sub 20/15. Any help is much appreciated.
I use a Volt

#### Rubiksdude4144

##### Member
UPDATE: my volt broke. the edge snapped in 3
If you would like to donate to my association, the link is here

#### Space Cat

##### Member
Very surprised people are keeping this thread up.
wait it's for help on a wca puzzle, of course, it'd be updated a lot.

Anyway, is anyone willing to share an algorithm for the H-perm and Z-perm?

I mean willing as in please share it here.

#### JustAnotherGenericCuber

##### Member
H perm: same as on a 3x3, to do M2 is (1,0)/(-1,-1)/(0,1), to do U do (3,0)
Z perm: M2 U M2 U' M2

#### Space Cat

##### Member
H perm: same as on a 3x3, to do M2 is (1,0)/(-1,-1)/(0,1), to do U do (3,0)
Z perm: M2 U M2 U' M2
Thanks! I like how the Z perm looks like the 3x3 counterpart but with opposing centers when it's used on the 3x3.

#### Neil Johnson

##### Member
I have a question regarding CSP. So, in this (http://sqfunnub.wixsite.com/42pnpls/csp-guide) document Lakshay (i think it is) mentioned that he uses this rule for reference schemes: "The first edge position for a shape on top is the leftmost (CCW-est) edge in the biggest group of edges of that shape. The sequence goes clockwise from there, numbering each edge position as 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ...., n where n is the number of edges the shape has." If you have 6 edges on bottom, do you start on top with the 2 edges, or do you start with the largest group of edges (basically start on bottom)? Thanks to anybody who takes the time to answer my question!!

#### Y2k1

##### Member
I have a question regarding CSP. So, in this (http://sqfunnub.wixsite.com/42pnpls/csp-guide) document Lakshay (i think it is) mentioned that he uses this rule for reference schemes: "The first edge position for a shape on top is the leftmost (CCW-est) edge in the biggest group of edges of that shape. The sequence goes clockwise from there, numbering each edge position as 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ...., n where n is the number of edges the shape has." If you have 6 edges on bottom, do you start on top with the 2 edges, or do you start with the largest group of edges (basically start on bottom)? Thanks to anybody who takes the time to answer my question!!
This is the older method of csp tracing, which is similar to bld tracing. The newer method is by Cale Schoon and I find it easier to follow.

(all the cubeshape algs are in the description (not mine)).

#### 1973486

##### Member
This is the older method of csp tracing, which is similar to bld tracing. The newer method is by Cale Schoon and I find it easier to follow.
This implies Cale's method obsoletes BLD tracing when it doesn't

#### Duncan Bannon

##### Member
I really don't know anything about Sqaure 1 but, I saw they added some EP algs to Alg.db

#### Y2k1

##### Member
This implies Cale's method obsoletes BLD tracing when it doesn't
Sorry if it sounds like that, it definitely doesn't, it's that a lot of people may find it easier than bld tracing (like me)

#### Thom S.

##### Member
I really don't know anything about Sqaure 1 but, I saw they added some EP algs to Alg.db
I'm totally gonna flood them with PBLs once they have them

#### Neil Johnson

##### Member
This is the older method of csp tracing, which is similar to bld tracing. The newer method is by Cale Schoon and I find it easier to follow.

(all the cubeshape algs are in the description (not mine)).
Thanks but I have seen this method, and I like bld tracing much better