• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

[Help Thread] The "Square-1 Help / Alg Sharing" thread

CraZZ CFOP

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Messages
94
WCA
2018HUGE02
I’m not saying you know PBL and I’m also not saying that you have to know PBL to be good. All I’m saying is that Lin needs very few algs to get good at. And while CO and EO recog take less than 1 second, Lin algs can be nearly instantaneous because you don’t have to look at the bottom. And of course EPLL is also quite easy.
Remember that CSP makes the alg count go up to about 200 to about 400 no matter what you use. Not that this changes this argument, but if you don't want parity, you would have to learn a lot of algs anyway.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
619
Location
The FitnessGram Pacer Test is a multi stage...
I'm not comparing CO+EO to CP+DF and EPLL. I'm trying to compare CO+EO to FB which imo are about the same speed depending on the scramble (and you do have to look at the bottom for both.) From there I don't think SB and PLL+1 can be faster than doing PBL or CP+EP (you pretty much have to use PLL+1 for Lin to have a chance at competing with vandenbergh).
I guess it certainly could be. But I prefer the more intuitive type of solving. For some, Vandenbergh is going to be better. For some, Lin is going to be better. Just remember that Helmer Ewert uses Lin and has the former WR.

Also, Lin is better for lucky singles. I have a friend that averages 24-25 with Lin and has an 11 second PB single, just for a personal example.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
8
Location
California
YouTube
Visit Channel
You really can't, as they are fundamentally different puzzles with different ways of turning. Find a YouTube tutorial for scrambling Square-1 and I'm sure it'll be very helpful!
I know it is possible because if you watch a ssc tutorial, it will tell you to use a square 1 algorithm. This must mean that there is a way to convert them. Yes, they are different, but they still have their similarities.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
987
Location
Over there by the thing in the corner.
YouTube
Visit Channel
I know it is possible because if you watch a ssc tutorial, it will tell you to use a square 1 algorithm. This must mean that there is a way to convert them. Yes, they are different, but they still have their similarities.
It may work for a couple algs, but not for the vast majority of them. The puzzles are just too different to convert all of the algs.
 

GenTheThief

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
1,655
Location
Illinois, U.S.A.
WCA
2016GEEN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Umm, I don't know what EZD algs are, and assuming that this thread was originally asking about SQ-1 to 3x3 algs, I might be able to help.

Sq-1 algs follow the form:

1, 6 / 2, -3 /

Turn the top layer, turn the bottom layer /turn the side/ turn the top layer, turn the bottom layer /turn the side/

In Sq-1, you can turn the top layer less than 90 degrees and still turn the slice. In 3x3, you can't. However, any Sq-1 algs that exclusively have 90 degree turns should be able to be converted into 3x3 algs.

So, double L-perm is the basic CP on Sq-1. You can also do it on 3x3: R2 U' R2 U D R2 D' R2
In Sq-1 notation, it would look something like this: / -3, 0 / 3, 3 / 0, -3 /

I think, anyway. If someone is good at Sq-1 sees something wrong, feel free to provide the correct explanation.

@American-Cuber I hope this answers your question, as I don't know what is actually was in the first place.
 

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
1,896
I know it is possible because if you watch a ssc tutorial, it will tell you to use a square 1 algorithm. This must mean that there is a way to convert them. Yes, they are different, but they still have their similarities.
People used to call ⟨R2, U, D⟩ algs for 3×3×3 "square-1" algs, not because they're relevant to square-1, but because the turns involved are similar to what you'd do a square-1 (180° rotation of the right side of the puzzle, turning the top or bottom layers by any amount). You can't just blindly translate an ⟨R2, U, D⟩ PLL alg like a U perm ( (R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 U2)2 ) to square-1 moves ( / 6,0 / −3,0 / −3,0 / 6,0 / 6,0 / −3,0 / −3,0 / 6,0 ) and expect it to have the same effect.

It's bad terminology, and thank goodness people no longer use it.

Square-1 algs (as in, algs for a literal square-1, not as in ⟨R2, U, D⟩) that use only 90° turns of the top and bottom layers, when converted to an RUD alg on 3×3×3, will permute the corners in the same way, but there's no guarantee (and in fact, it's generally untrue) that they'll permute the edges in the same way. Square-1 algs that break cubeshape can do weird stuff that RUD algs on 3×3×3 can't, the most obvious example being parity, and a less obvious example is that the adj-adj CPP case has a 2-gen alg, while adj-adj corner permutation is straight up impossible to do in 2-gen on a 3×3×3.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 13, 2019
Messages
81
Location
Earth
Hi all,
I have been learning how to solve a square-1, but when I get to Corner Orientation, I get stuck. I've been watching many tutorials and according to them, you should use the adjacent and diagonal swap. But when I use adjacent/ diagonal swap, it only solves 2 or 3 sides. Please help if you can :)
Thanks!

IMG_20190714_131303.jpgIMG_20190714_131307.jpgIMG_20190714_131310.jpgIMG_20190714_131313.jpg

Pic/Side 1 Pic/Side 2 Pic/Side 3 Pic/Side 4
Note: White is on the top, yellow on bottom.
 
C

Cubinwitdapizza

Guest
So I globally average about sub 1:30 on square-1. I just want some tips on how I can maybe get sub 1. I kinda know scallop kite, and I need to memorize 6 more ep algs and I’ve memorized everything (except for horizontal parity.) So if anyone has any helpful links or tips, please give them to this page. Also moderators please don’t move this page to any other square-1 forums because they all haven’t been responded to in a while. Also, i have a Yuxin little magic m square 1 and if I upgrade, should I get a cubicle labs Yuxin or a volt m. Thank you!
 

PokeCubes

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Messages
16
WCA
2017SWOR01
the YLM squan is fine, best on the market. Make sure you learn all of the EO and CP algs (there are only a few and they're pretty easy). From there learn some easy EPs, then focus on getting cubeshape down. Make sure to learn all the 3 slice cubeshape cases, then learn how each 4 slice case goes into 3 slices, 5 slice cases into 4 slice cases and so on. This should help https://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/square1d.htm
 
C

Cubinwitdapizza

Guest
Can you send your splits for each step of the solve? Also i assume you don't mean you need to learn 6 more ep algs and you mean 6 more eo algs.
Sorry to confuse that a bit I don’t use full Vandenbergh so I use the square 1 pdf on kungfumanchoo.com so 6 more ep algs for that.
These are AO5
Cube shape- 20.5
Co- 4.6
Eo-8.92
Cp- 6.66
Ep- 22.83
Auf/special moves- 1.16.
Add about 22 seconds of pausing lol.
 
Top