Why Not Teach CLL/ELL?

[TDM]

affected (effected?)

Affect is verb, effect is noun. Think of the effect.

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

We're talking about the methods CFOP and CFCE, not the alg sets used in those methods. Plus ELL is also useful for BLD (TuRBo).

 

[kcl]

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.

I was realizing that the same way WV is applied, you could probably use an alternate CLL alg or use a COLL alg for the same thing.. But overall it just seems like CFOP has been expanded on more thoroughly. It's been what, 30 years of work on CFOP? Few people work with CFCE, so it's not nearly as expanded, much like roux.

 

[ChickenWrap]

Affect is verb, effect is noun. Think of the effect.

We're talking about the methods CFOP and CFCE, not the alg sets used in those methods. Plus ELL is also useful for BLD (TuRBo).

I get that, but honestly, TuRBo isn't as popular or well known as OP. anyway, for beginners, the whole BLD solve can be done with just the Y and T perm, with added speed if you use the J perms (and R for parity).

Its not that the same can't be accomplished with CLL/ELL, but has anyone even proposed that as a BLD method? Nope.

 

[Stefan]

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.

What if you do ELL first and CLL last? Also has the lowest move count (compared to CFOP, CFCE and CFPO):
http://www.ai.univ-paris8.fr/~bh/cube/

 

[kcl]

What if you do ELL first and CLL last? Also has the lowest move count (compared to CFOP, CFCE and CFPO):
http://www.ai.univ-paris8.fr/~bh/cube/

I thought about this. That would literally allow you to onelook your last layer. The issue is that unless I'm mistaken, there would be four times as many CLL algs. Because after edges are solved, each CLL can have 4 different auf's.

 

[Stefan]

The issue is that unless I'm mistaken, there would be four times as many CLL algs. Because after edges are solved, each CLL can have 4 different auf's.

I haven't thought it through, but I don't think so. If you're right, then it has to do with orientation. Ignore orientations, let's look only at permutation. Permuting corners first, you have two cases (three including solved). Permuting corners last, you have four cases (five including solved). That's not four times as many.

 

[TheOneOnTheLeft]

The wiki says there are twice as many cases: http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Last_Four_Corners

 

[peterbone]

Sorry, I meant one-handed but wrote blind. I have no idea why.

 

[CoasterKingII]

How well does the CLL/ELL method work?

I have been thinking about switching from Fridrich last layer to CLL/ELL last layer. I want to know how well it works and if anyone on this forum uses it.

 

[TDM]

I don't think many people use it; most people think CFOP is faster than CFCE. If you're using it because you like MU ELL, and don't really like CFOP, you might want to try Roux instead.

 

[pdilla]

I use CLL/ELL sometimes (I forgot alot of my ELLs though...) It's the recog times that keep me from sticking to it in my speedsolves, ultimately.

 

[lerenard]

Kinda off-topic but I'm learning COLL now and I've found that there were only 16 unique algorithms that weren't OCLL algs I already knew, and I've found that the hardest thing has been remembering which case goes with which alg, but after about 5 days I'm at the point where I can recognize and execute every case without my cheat sheet (although sometimes I do the wrong alg and so then I undo it and usually I get it right the second time)

I think it's useful because it can be used for Petrus, Roux, even 2x2 (although I realize it's not optimized for 2x2 and probably will learn new algs for some of those cases if I ever get into that seriously.) I actually learned it so that I could try out Roux because 2-look CMLL annoyed me (far too repetitive) and I didn't want 42 useless algs in my memory if I didn't like it. Also the same 7 OCLL algs over and over got boring and I refuse (for the time being) to learn full OLL.

 

[Ranzha]

I remember about 2/3 of ELL, and it's really useful, but only every once in a while. As I don't know 3x3 CLL or most of COLL, it usually goes unused.

I entertained the idea of learning 3x3 CLL and finishing ELL as an alternative to doing really bad OLLs, but never saw it through. CLL/ELL is supposed to have a lower movecount than OLL/PLL, but so many people are used to recognition for OLL/PLL and really aren't used to ELL recognition that OLL/PLL takes precedence. Not to mention CFOP is most always considered and CFCE is something people find out about later.

 

[King Mike]

OLL/PLL vs CLL/ELL

Hey guys!
So recently I've fallen in love with M slices....yes, lol
I saw multiple videos of solves with a CLL/ELL last layer and I think they just look sooooo cool.

I already learned PLL and do 2 Look OLL.
I kinda wanna spice it up and learn ELL and CLL.

Is it worth to learn it? Which one is faster and which one do you prefer?

Peace!

 

[cashis]

I think OLL & PLL is faster because its easier to recognize, at least for most people. If you like M slices, do Roux more

 

[chaos]

Should I switch to CFCE?

Many people dont use CFCE that much, and they says that ELL M-slices are hard to execute, and they are hard to recognize than CFOP. But I practiced Columns first and Roux pretty much and I don't have any difficulties to execute ELLs, and my recognition in ELL is better than PLL.

The only thing that makes me hesitate is CLL recognition. My recognition in CLL is really bad.


Should I switch to CFCE?

 

[JustinTimeCuber]

Many people dont use CFCE that much, and they says that ELL M-slices are hard to execute, and they are hard to recognize than CFOP. But I practiced Columns first and Roux pretty much and I don't have any difficulties to execute ELLs, and my recognition in ELL is better than PLL.

The only thing that makes me hesitate is CLL recognition. My recognition in CLL is really bad.


Should I switch to CFCE?

Do it if you think it will make you faster. I can't say exactly. Don't do it if you don't want to though, because it is hard to be good with a method that you don't like.

 

[TDM]

I think you should switch if you wan to. Your CLL recognition will improve, so it can be a very good method.

 

[shadowslice e]

Many people dont use CFCE that much, and they says that ELL M-slices are hard to execute, and they are hard to recognize than CFOP. But I practiced Columns first and Roux pretty much and I don't have any difficulties to execute ELLs, and my recognition in ELL is better than PLL.

The only thing that makes me hesitate is CLL recognition. My recognition in CLL is really bad.


Should I switch to CFCE?

you can do it if you want: the only other problem is that the ELL algs aren't great compared to OLL/PLL but you could try my M-CELL with CMLL as this will have better algs IMO and be more intuitive

 

[Hazel]

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I feel like OLL/PLL is holding me back from improving, I average mid-13 and my LL is really bad and I can't seem to raise its TPS. I'm pretty good with M slices so I was interested in ELL, what are the pros and cons of CLL/ELL? I already know and use COLL (minus sune/antisune) and I really like it.
EDIT: My cross+F2L time is about 9 seconds