Why Not Teach CLL/ELL?

[peterbone]

Sorry for bumping this old thread. I'm currently learning full CLL/ELL. I think it can be as fast as OLL/PLL. It is more efficient on average (less turns) and there are also slightly less algs to memorize. Some people have said that recognition is harder but if you learn CLL based just on looking at colours then you're only looking for one thing - similar to recognising patterns in OLL.
Has anyone else on here learnt full CLL/ELL? What times are you getting? I just have the L cases left to learn. If you have algs that aren't on the Wiki pages, can you add them (seems like I'm the only one who ever updates those pages). I've spent some time looking for better algs with cube explorer but there are still some cases I'd like to find alternatives for.

 

[Kirjava]

Has anyone else on here learnt full CLL/ELL? What times are you getting?

My OLL/PLL and CLL/ELL times are about equal.

There's a bunch of algs you might not know about in this thread.

 

[shiqi peng]

i guess that the first world champion used fredrich? i don't know!but when i started my speeding solving career,i just was taught CFOP

 

[irontwig]

The first world champion (Mihn Thai) used Corners First.

 

[Stefan]

Fridrich and Minh.

 

[Buddybenj]

What are the disadvantages of CFCE compared to CFOP? I have been earring different stories. Does CFCE take more recognition? How many stickers do you need to recognise an algorithm? Why are the advantages to CFOP?

 

[Poke2000]

Yes, CFCE does take more recognition. I think that's the main reason why people prefer CFOP.

 

[kcl]

Basically CLL recognition is trickier than PLL recognition. And then ELL can't be predicted easily.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

How are CLL/ELL algs in terms of finger friendliness versus OLL/PLL?

 

[kunparekh18]

How are CLL/ELL algs in terms of finger friendliness versus OLL/PLL?

I dunno about CLL, but ELL is mostly <M,U>.

 

[ottozing]

I would think that ELL prediction would be really easy during CLL compared to PLL prediction during OLL. Also, all the ELLs that are just pure 3 cycles are much easier to sub 1 than some of the best PLLs. However, the cases with a 3 cycle and a 2 flip with one of the edges not being within the 3 cycle are absolutely awful (Worse than my "worst" PLL cases imo, although I am far more experience with PLL and it is a way more developed substep than ELL, so this could change). As for CLL recognition being worse than OLL recognition, I'm not really sure. I think both are really easy to do mindlessly

 

[kcl]

I would think that ELL prediction would be really easy during CLL compared to PLL prediction during OLL. Also, all the ELLs that are just pure 3 cycles are much easier to sub 1 than some of the best PLLs. However, the cases with a 3 cycle and a 2 flip with one of the edges not being within the 3 cycle are absolutely awful (Worse than my "worst" PLL cases imo, although I am far more experience with PLL and it is a way more developed substep than ELL, so this could change). As for CLL recognition being worse than OLL recognition, I'm not really sure. I think both are really easy to do mindlessly

I suppose CLL recognition becomes just as good as PLL, I mean it's just recognizing color patterns in a different way. I'm curious to see what would happen if we were to make more headway with CFCE. I feel like for all the people that want a "Rouxish" version of CFOP, that's pretty much it.
I've thought about learning it just for fun. It seems like it could be pretty fast, and there aren't that many algs. Isn't it like 30 for ELL and 42 for CLL?

This has me thinking about this again..

 

[ChickenWrap]

I think one reason is that the massive amount of M turns in ELL is not practical for fast solving on big cubes...but I don't think ELL/CLL is popular enough to have optimized algs quite yet...maybe in the future

 

[mark49152]

a "Rouxish" version of CFOP

What do you mean by this?

 

[notfeliks]

What do you mean by this?

I think he means that you would would do an alg for corners and then (usually) finish off the cube using <M,U>. Sort of like a Rouxish way of finishing the cube off if you don't like F2B, OLL and PLL.

 

[peterbone]

CLL takes a while to learn but I don't think it's slower to recognise than OLL. The best way to learn it is just based on colours. The recog is the same as CMLL in Roux (most of the algs are the same), which we know is fast. ELL is mostly MU algs like LSE in Roux, which we also know can be done quickly. It's slightly more efficient than OLL-PLL, although with CFOP you can sometimes skip OLL with edge control and there's currently no equivalent to that for CFCE. As others have said, CFCE is not as well suited to big cubes or one-handed.

 

[uberCuber]

As others have said, CFCE is not as well suited to big cubes or blind.

Wait what, I don't think CFOP is any better suited for blind than CFCE.

 

[kcl]

I've had a bit of time to think this over in class today. I feel like CFOP is more popular because it can be expanded on much more. We can use OLLCP, OLS, even basic edge control. I feel that a CLL/ELL approach is more restricted, especially since EO and EP is affected (effected?) by CLL unless you use COLL.

 

[bobthegiraffemonkey]

I've had a bit of time to think this over in class today. I feel like CFOP is more popular because it can be expanded on much more. We can use OLLCP, OLS, even basic edge control. I feel that a CLL/ELL approach is more restricted, especially since EO and EP is affected (effected?) by CLL unless you use COLL.

There are ways to add on to CLL/ELL, such as by influencing the ELL case. You even mentioned the obvious one: OLLCP. And COLL can affect (not effect) EP.

 

[ChickenWrap]

Wait what, I don't think CFOP is any better suited for blind than CFCE.

Some Pll algorithms are very useful for blind solving, especially for beginners.