• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

What Orientation do you use for Blindsolving?

I solve cfop with white on bottom so i am naturally more comfortable with the color scheme with yellow on top. I'm just now learning and have been going with yellow on top, blue facing me :)
 
Green front, white up, because when I'm practicing I scramble all my puzzles in WCA orientation, and it's therefore more familiar. But for some reason I started learning ZZ with red front yellow up. I am intending to switch that, because I have an alternate color scheme with pink for red and black for orange, and if I go to green-white for ZZ then my non-standard colors are bad edges.
 
I do white top green front just since that's the orientation I always scramble with so I am used to it
 
I think white top green front has a few advantages - when looking at someones reconstruction you don't know whether they scrambled in their orientation or in wca orientation - white top green front solves that ;). Also it means scrambling is still the same for other events too.
 
Going orientation neutral will be good.
We can treat the 6 center pieces as 6 movable pieces, and maybe cancel one of the last edge comm with the center piece solving.
Maybe influence parity too.

But it is way too advanced just like pre-moves in 3bld memoing.

PS: My orientation is YO (Yellow top , orange front)
 
Initially learned from Zane and thought that blue on top and red on front was the best, but then I switched to white top, green front.
I don't know why but I think its because there is greenery all around in my area and the sky also remains blue and white all the time.
 
In my software, I wanted to support _any_ chosen orientation. The challenge comes to clearly specifying this. The notation I came up with specifies the UF edge cube for the scrambling orientation, and the Singmaster form destination of the UF edge cube as the whole puzzle is rotated to the solving orientation. The reason for choosing the UF edge is because the WCA competition rules for scrambling specifies the colors for the U face and the F face. For western colored cubes, WCA scrambles them with White on U and Green on F. Orange on U and green on F, for western colored cubes, would read "@UF=RF". Yellow on U and Blue on F on the same coloring system would read "@UF=DB". An internal table then translates "@UF=RF" to "z" and @UF=DB to "x2", and so forth.
 
In my software, I wanted to support _any_ chosen orientation. The challenge comes to clearly specifying this.

Haven't seen how your software works but
You probably get the preferred orientation through User input. Use two characters to specify(RB = Red top, Blue front, WG = White top, Green front) use that in a switch with all the possibilities and return the corresponding code in your notation.

Isn't that what you want?
 
Haven't seen how your software works but
You probably get the preferred orientation through User input. Use two characters to specify(RB = Red top, Blue front, WG = White top, Green front) use that in a switch with all the possibilities and return the corresponding code in your notation.

Isn't that what you want?
Actually not, in order to support alternative cube coloring systems. Thus the Singmaster relative _positions_ are instead employed. Similar for the move notation to specify U L F R B D instead of W O G R B Y or the resister color codes 9 4 5 2 6 4 or some other color-system dependent notation.
 
Actually not, in order to support alternative cube coloring systems. Thus the Singmaster relative _positions_ are instead employed.
Fair enough, but when the rest of the world likes to describe their orientation in terms of which faces (colours) move to U and to F, why do you think it's "clearer" for your notation to instead require them to specify where the UF edge moves to? And with a cryptic format too? It looks more like an attempt to make things less clear.
 
Back
Top