Winter Prelude

[cubacca1972]

Just some additional stuff on the Winter Variation for the few of you out there that use Fridrich instead of Petrus.

This may be worth consideration instead of learning the WV mirrors.

Step 1. Solve the first 3 corner edge pairs

Leave the last slot at the front right position.

Step 2. Orient the last 5 edges

The last 5 edges (all 4 U edges plus the FR edge) are oriented when their facelet (the U facelet for the U edges, or the F facelet for the FR edge) is on the U face, or the F face if it is in the FR position:

RF RU Flipped

F'UF (3,3)

RF UF UR UB Flipped

F'L'U2LF (5,6)

UR UF flipped

FR'F'R (4,4)

UR UL Flipped

RBUB'R' (5,5)

UR UL UF UB Flipped

F2LFL2U2LF (7,10)

Step 3. Assemble the last corner edge pair using only R and U moves

This will eliminate the possibility of WV mirror cases.

Step 4. Do WV

That's all that's required to have a one look LL.

I don't know if this has been explored yet. If it has, move along. Nothing to see here.

 

[Ranzha]

It's basically putting together edge control with WV, which isn't uncommon. Good idea though! It ultimately won't give a cuber the speed advantage you were probably hoping for.

 

[mariano.aquino]

Not fast but funny. You can check ELS step from mgls for nice algs. I think I'd rather do EO and then EJF2L. It's fewer cases, ru gen and has easier mirrors =)

 

[Godmil]

That's all that's required to have a one look LL.

So when you get to the last slot, instead of doing 1xF2L + OLL + PLL, you're doing EO + 1/2 F2l + WV + PLL. OK technically you've only got one staqe left when the F2L gets completely finished, but that's adding 1 look and most of an F2L alg. I can't see this being useful as a general system.

 

[kinch2002]

Can you clarify what's actually new here? I thought WV was already only used when edges were oriented. Orienting after 3 F2Ls is just the nub alternative to forcing EO during previous pairs, which is what most people do.

On second glance, I see that you're avoiding mirrors. I shall think about it further, but can't see it as being fast at all.

 

[Escher]

So when you get to the last slot, instead of doing 1xF2L + OLL + PLL, you're doing EO + 1/2 F2l + WV + PLL. OK technically you've only got one staqe left when the F2L gets completely finished, but that's adding 1 look and most of an F2L alg. I can't see this being useful as a general system.

I concur, probably better (but still not that great) would be to use some EO algs to reduce an RV case to a WV case - I think a few RV algs are just that, with some cancellations.

 

[Godmil]

There have been so many new LS/LL variations lately I think I can cut down on a lot of my posts with a little signature adjustment. VVV

 

[cubacca1972]

So when you get to the last slot, instead of doing 1xF2L + OLL + PLL, you're doing EO + 1/2 F2l + WV + PLL. OK technically you've only got one staqe left when the F2L gets completely finished, but that's adding 1 look and most of an F2L alg. I can't see this being useful as a general system.

Yes.

Edges (1/5 algorithms 4.8 moves), WV (1/27 algorithms 8.07 moves), then PLL (1/21 algorithms 12.3 moves) 25.17 moves total.

Instead of

Insert last Corner/Edge pair (3 moves), OLL (1/57 algorithms 9.7 moves), then PLL (1/21 algorithms 12.3 moves) 25 moves total.

The above totals disregard AUF moves.

By the numbers, standard OLL then PLL is 0.17 moves faster. There are probably other total move savings in assembling the last Corner/Edge pair, as you are not restricted to U and R moves.

On the other hand, some might find appeal in learning 53 algorithms in total for the Last Slot and Last Layer, instead of 78 algorithms for OLL and PLL (if you want to compare apples to apples, the last CE pair would be 2 more algorithms for a total of 80).

 

[Rpotts]

Your movecount estimate doesnt seem to include setting up to wv, should be something like 6 moves higher

 

[cubacca1972]

Your movecount estimate doesnt seem to include setting up to wv, should be something like 6 moves higher

Do you mean building the Corner/Edge pair?

I don't know the move counts for this, but I do know that there would only be half the cases, since the edge orientation step eliminates half the possibilities. I might look them up for fun.

 

[cubacca1972]

You will need about 6.6 moves to set up the WV C/E pair in the ready position.

So for full WV

Edges 4.8 + Setup 6.6 + WV 8.07 + PLL 12.3 = 31.77

Versus

Standard/Orthodox Fridrich

Last Slot 7.8 + OLL 9.7 + PLL 12.3 = 29.8

For a differnce of 1.97 moves. This does not take into account case frequencies for corner edge pairs.

 

[Rpotts]

So it's higher movecount and more looks, what exactly is the advantage then?

 

[cubernya]

So it's higher movecount and more looks, what exactly is the advantage then?

That's assuming that you're also orientating edges before you make the pair, which IMO isn't necessary.

 

[Godmil]

That's assuming that you're also orientating edges before you make the pair, which IMO isn't necessary.

Well that's the method being proposed. What do you think is the better solution?

 

[cubacca1972]

So it's higher movecount and more looks, what exactly is the advantage then?

53 required algorithms vs 78. Those WP algorithms eliminate the WV mirrors.