Kirjava
Colourful
I read your post and understood it the first time, I'd prefer not to be told to read it again when my reply was perfectly valid.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not a good speedcubing method on its own but it's a nice way to focus your practice if you want to learn COLL or full ZBLL.
Agreed.I think using COLL when you get an EO skip is completely different than forcing EO because you rely on COLL for LL.
It's not a good speedcubing method on its own but it's a nice way to focus your practice if you want to learn COLL or full ZBLL.
[rant]Sorry? VHF2L and COLL are the parts of the solve slower than Fridrich, and that only slightly if you know what you're doing. VHF2L is clearly slower, but I think of it as ZZ with the EO near the end. No one gets on EOLine for being a slower start than the cross, so why get on VHF2L for that, especially when it's more fingertricky. Recognition for COLL is often faster than OCLL recognition (and always faster than OLL recognition) and the algs are very similar in speed (except a few odd cases and the Sunes). But then EPLL (or a skip) makes up for all of that. Recognition is instantaneous (most of the time I know that case before I'm done with COLL), execution almost as fast, and AUF is nothing to worry about.
My times with Fridrich are in the 21-22 range while my VH times are 19-21 (large range because of those few bad cases). I've probably put more work into VH, yes, because my goal is ZBLL, but I have spent a lot of time of Fridrich and I haven't been all that impressed. [/rant]
COLL takes more time to learn (mostly recognition for me- the algs are easy) and VHF2L is hard to practice. I would also note that you should learn OLL if you're going to learn the VH system because there are many cases that, erm, suck and that you're going to want to avoid. You should also know full PLL for that 1/27 OLL skip chance.
how many VH algs did you learn? i was only planning on starting with pre-built pair algs, then maybe adding more.
It's not a good speedcubing method on its own but it's a nice way to focus your practice if you want to learn COLL or full ZBLL.
[rant]Sorry? VHF2L and COLL are the parts of the solve slower than Fridrich, and that only slightly if you know what you're doing. VHF2L is clearly slower, but I think of it as ZZ with the EO near the end. No one gets on EOLine for being a slower start than the cross, so why get on VHF2L for that, especially when it's more fingertricky. Recognition for COLL is often faster than OCLL recognition (and always faster than OLL recognition) and the algs are very similar in speed (except a few odd cases and the Sunes). But then EPLL (or a skip) makes up for all of that. Recognition is instantaneous (most of the time I know that case before I'm done with COLL), execution almost as fast, and AUF is nothing to worry about.
My times with Fridrich are in the 21-22 range while my VH times are 19-21 (large range because of those few bad cases). I've probably put more work into VH, yes, because my goal is ZBLL, but I have spent a lot of time of Fridrich and I haven't been all that impressed. [/rant]
COLL takes more time to learn (mostly recognition for me- the algs are easy) and VHF2L is hard to practice. I would also note that you should learn OLL if you're going to learn the VH system because there are many cases that, erm, suck and that you're going to want to avoid. You should also know full PLL for that 1/27 OLL skip chance.
This doesnt really answer your question, but sometimes i recognize the OCLL case using COLL recognition. like if i see a checkerboard pattern on the top of the corners, i know that its pi.How is COLL recognition faster than OCLL recognition?
This doesnt really answer your question, but sometimes i recognize the OCLL case using COLL recognition. like if i see a checkerboard pattern on the top of the corners, i know that its pi.How is COLL recognition faster than OCLL recognition?
This doesnt really answer your question, but sometimes i recognize the OCLL case using COLL recognition. like if i see a checkerboard pattern on the top of the corners, i know that its pi.How is COLL recognition faster than OCLL recognition?
This, definitely.
When I see double bars of colour, I know it's an H set.
What about for those who are still 2LOLL? I realize that there are only 57 OLLs and most of them have triggers that make them easy, but there are still those (like me) who worked too much to have time to do everything in their day, improve F2L, and learn a new OLL every day (I tried to learn the 6 dot cases before Indiana Winter 2010 but that didn't work out so well). Now I just do partial edge control whether it's a built pair or the RUR' case (I just RU'R2FRF'U2R'FR'F'). My point though is since I'm already going to orient edges, then corners, why not make the most of it and learn COLL and then I only have to remember H, Z, Ua, Ub? Yes sometimes I'll get an OLL skip but I already know all 21 PLLs.
Fair enough. Somebody mentioned COLL can help learning 2x2 CLL easier, couldn't I just use all COLL algs on a 2x2 anyway? Solve a layer then coll? I think if that was the case at least I could argue it's "more worth it."
How is COLL recognition faster than OCLL recognition?