[Help Thread] ZBLL Discussion and Help

Let's necro this thread as per this suggestion in this post.

It's 2015 and it seems like there's a lot more interest in this. (I think I timed my return poorly:( )
Let's put our minds together and do something cool.

My question is: Why do so many of us start at T set?

I started with T set because my ZB guru/sensei Jason Baum started with T and posted his algs on his website.
It was a matter of convenience because his website had pretty nice algs and a full ZBF2L list.

What's everyone else's rationale?
I'm guessing because T has easy recognition and nice cases?
Who else started with a different subset and why did you choose to do so?
 
I started with U because it's the worst OCLL case for me. I plan to work my way down to the easiest OCLL cases (AS and S). i.e. I plan to learn the cases which are most useful first.
 
Ahhh, I see! I feel like when you learn it, you're going to be absurdly fast. :eek:

What're your expectations/predictions for it, sir?
 
I think it's worth it for bigcubes and OH but I'm not competely sure about 3x3x3. Maybe it's all worth it apart from the AS and S cases, given that your recognition and algorithm recall is good enough :p
 
4Chan said:
Let's necro this thread as per this suggestion in this post.

It's 2015 and it seems like there's a lot more interest in this. (I think I timed my return poorly:( )
Let's put our minds together and do something cool.

My question is: Why do so many of us start at T set?

I started with T set because my ZB guru/sensei Jason Baum started with T and posted his algs on his website.
It was a matter of convenience because his website had pretty nice algs and a full ZBF2L list.

What's everyone else's rationale?
I'm guessing because T has easy recognition and nice cases?
Who else started with a different subset and why did you choose to do so?
Click to expand...

I actually did it differently than most. I learned sets from both T and U at the same time since I found many were just inverses. They both had excellent recognition and fairly decent algs, hence my choice.
 
I started with the T set simply because it was the first in line on almost all resources, and if I'm going to learn them all, I might as well do it systematically. If it is true that the T cases are easier to learn than most of the others, it was just luck on my part.
 
4Chan said:
Let's necro this thread as per this suggestion in this post.

It's 2015 and it seems like there's a lot more interest in this. (I think I timed my return poorly:( )
Let's put our minds together and do something cool.

My question is: Why do so many of us start at T set?

I started with T set because my ZB guru/sensei Jason Baum started with T and posted his algs on his website.
It was a matter of convenience because his website had pretty nice algs and a full ZBF2L list.

What's everyone else's rationale?
I'm guessing because T has easy recognition and nice cases?
Who else started with a different subset and why did you choose to do so?
Click to expand...

Probably because easy recognition and inverses in other subsets that are easy to recognize.

I started with H. I choose H because I thought H and Pi would be the most difficult to recognize.
It seemed like a good idea to do the most difficult OLL subsets first because by the time you finish ZBLL you would have the most practice and experience with them. I also noticed that my H algs created H and Pi algs.

I plan on learning in this order: H, Pi, L, T, U, AS, S (Sunes last because the sune algs are too fast, even the COLLs are so fast so I am ok with OCLL/PLL and COLL/EPLL till I master every other OLL subset.)

I am curious about the people that know full ZBLL now.
Did you just take algorithms you found online and just learn them to learn ZBLL as fast as possible? or did you try generating for as many cases as possible?

@4chan - I am curious about the above because you said you learned in a month. That is fast but I feel it could be bad for you because of changing algs in the future and using bad algs just because it solves that case seems like a hindrance.

I personally plan on generate algorithms for every single case. I want God tier algs for every ZBLL case.
I ended up learning over 60 algs for the H subset just because I kept being given, generating, or finding better algorithms online.

I want to learn ZBLL but I want to develop it fully first with amazing algs.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tl;dr - I like turtles.

** I want to thank Robert Yau, Rob Stuart, Jabari Nuruddin, Antoine Cantin. Most of my best ZBLL algorithms came from you guys. And Jayden McNeill, Feliks Zemdegs keep posting those tasty ZBLLs for me to NIIIIIIIIIIIIINJA!
 
Lazy Einstein said:
I am curious about the people that know full ZBLL now.
Did you just take algorithms you found online and just learn them to learn ZBLL as fast as possible? or did you try generating for as many cases as possible?
Click to expand...
Online almost entirely other than a few I found by hand, but since than i've genned a quite few as you know.

Lazy Einstein said:
@4chan - I am curious about the above because you said you learned in a month. That is fast but I feel it could be bad for you because of changing algs in the future and using bad algs just because it solves that case seems like a hindrance.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I did. I figured switching algs is easy and takes little time, but learning to recognize the entire set quickly takes forever. I also chose algs that I found easier to memo over faster algs. Since then I'd guess I've changed 75-150 cases.
 
Lazy Einstein said:
I started with H. I choose H because I thought H and Pi would be the most difficult to recognize.
It seemed like a good idea to do the most difficult OLL subsets first because by the time you finish ZBLL you would have the most practice and experience with them. I also noticed that my H algs created H and Pi algs.

I plan on learning in this order: H, Pi, L, T, U, AS, S (Sunes last because the sune algs are too fast, even the COLLs are so fast so I am ok with OCLL/PLL and COLL/EPLL till I master every other OLL subset.)
Click to expand...

I was going to start with 2GLL, but I really like this order (it seems to go in order, at least for me, of fastest COLL recog to slowest, which should help). I still haven't figured out if I'm going to learn the Sune/Antisune cases, but I've got quite a while.

Also, I've been going through the algs on Algdb, I just wanted to thank you, there's no way I'd even have a shot at this if you hadn't generated so many ZBLLs.
 
supercavitation said:
I was going to start with 2GLL, but I really like this order (it seems to go in order, at least for me, of fastest COLL recog to slowest, which should help). I still haven't figured out if I'm going to learn the Sune/Antisune cases, but I've got quite a while.

Also, I've been going through the algs on Algdb, I just wanted to thank you, there's no way I'd even have a shot at this if you hadn't generated so many ZBLLs.
Click to expand...

No problem. Note that even though I am generating tons of algs, a lot come from these guys --> Robert Yau, Rob Stuart, Jabari Nuruddin. I have made about 20-30% on my own.

Hopefully this increased interest in ZBLL will cause tons of algs to be created.

Enjoy learning and remember, if you generate or find any good algs, you can add them to algdb.net.
It goes to a pending file so that I can hand check every alg to make sure that it wasn't accidentally submitted incorrectly, to the wrong case, with redundant AUFs; also to ensure that a rotation is added to the start of an alg, so that lazy people like myself, do not have to figure out what angle to execute that alg from.

EDIT: The organization for ZBLL came from BOCA. RIP
 
Lazy Einstein said:
No problem. Note that even though I am generating tons of algs, a lot come from these guys --> Robert Yau, Rob Stuart, Jabari Nuruddin. I have made about 20-30% on my own.

Enjoy learning and remember, if you generate or find any good algs, you can add them to algdb.net.
It goes to a pending file so that I can hand check every alg to make sure that it wasn't accidentally submitted incorrectly, to the wrong case, with redundant AUFs; also to ensure that a rotation is added to the start of an alg, so that lazy people like myself, do not have to figure out what angle to execute that alg from.
Click to expand...

Thanks to you guys as well, then!

I feel like learning this subset (feels weird to call nearly 500 algs a subset) when I'm slower (I'm barely sub-20) will actually help in the long run, because as I get faster, I'll be more used to using these, and more used trying to recognize ZBLL quickly. Thoughts?
 
supercavitation said:
Thanks to you guys as well, then!

I feel like learning this subset (feels weird to call nearly 500 algs a subset) when I'm slower (I'm barely sub-20) will actually help in the long run, because as I get faster, I'll be more used to using these, and more used trying to recognize ZBLL quickly. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Meh. Times mean nothing. I was sub-18 CFOP when I switched to ZZ and started learning COLL. I am now sitting at 20 seconds with ZZ using COLL/EPLL and ZBLL with a wild deviation in my solves from 13sec-25secs for my normal Ao12.

If you enjoy learning algs and like the idea of ZBLL, don't let your times discourage you. You will be fast eventually. I think you should learn it right away. I pretty much guarantee even the slowest person would be sub-4 with recognition and execute on full ZBLL once truly learned.
 
4Chan said:
Let's necro this thread as per this suggestion in this post.

My question is: Why do so many of us start at T set?

I started with T set because my ZB guru/sensei Jason Baum started with T and posted his algs on his website.
It was a matter of convenience because his website had pretty nice algs and a full ZBF2L list.

What's everyone else's rationale?
I'm guessing because T has easy recognition and nice cases?
Who else started with a different subset and why did you choose to do so?
Click to expand...

l started with the T set because it was the most documented (Jason Baum's website) but then halfway through l switched to the H set because it had fewer algorithms.
 
supercavitation said:
Would you say that was a good decision in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Yes, l definetly think it was a good decision because it boosted my confidence seeing as whenever l got a H set l always knew the alg. That's what made me focus on memorizing all the algorithms rather than relying on COLL until l knew them all, l was just tired of the long pauses and then realizing that l didn't know the algorithm.
 
I intend on learning ZBLL one day, but all this is making me want to get started now. I started by organising all the cases here (warning, hundreds of pics). Seeing the shear number of cases laid out like that makes it look very intimidating.

The strategy I used while learning COLL was to pick the easiest cases to recognise first, rather than focus on one specific set at a time. Is it a good idea to do this for ZBLL? Or should I rather focus on learning all of the cases for a specific COLL case before moving on to others?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ottozing
[Help Thread] Megaminx Discussion
48 49 50
Replies
982
Views
167,682
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
Kevencito
I vibecoded a cubing app so you don't have to:)
Replies
0
Views
50
Kevencito
Kevencito
pomily22
how to learn ZB well?
Replies
2
Views
359
pomily22
pomily22
D
The Hybrid Method CFBL/ZBLL
Replies
0
Views
373
Deleted member 27249
D
I
Zbll
Replies
2
Views
519
I like gear cube
I
Back
Top