[Help Thread] ZZ and ZB Discussion

[brian724080]

WV would really help if the pair is in place, but it's no good if you try to force those cases. Plus, you shouldn't look into WV too early, because your opinion may change about ZZF2L. For your second question, I do two 2x2x1 blocks, and two 2x1x1 pairs. There should not be any 2x2x2 block unless you're looking into XEOCross, which probably isn't worth it considering that there are only 15 seconds of inspection. Your perspective on WV and SV is correct, they're not supposed to come up every case.

 

[uvafan]

WV would really help if the pair is in place, but it's no good if you try to force those cases. Plus, you shouldn't look into WV too early, because your opinion may change about ZZF2L. For your second question, I do two 2x2x1 blocks, and two 2x1x1 pairs. There should not be any 2x2x2 block unless you're looking into XEOCross, which probably isn't worth it considering that there are only 15 seconds of inspection. Your perspective on WV and SV is correct, they're not supposed to come up every case.

Wait what...
I disagree with this whole post - some of the facts are just wrong actually.
- I don't get at all why he shouldn't look in WV - what do you mean change his opinion about ZZF2L? wtf
- Why would you make an xEOCross when you can make an x-EOLine(which is worth considering) - also, you misread his post. To answer his question (he meant 2x2x1, not 2x2x2) I personally do one block then the other ~80% of the time and the other way ~20%, because it is more ergonomic.
- Finally, what do you mean WV and SV don't come up every case? The point is you get an OLL Skip no matter what. Cases can be mirrored easily - just like instead of doing R U R' for a front right insert you would do R' U' R for a back right insert.

 

[MM99]

thanks for the replies guys and but I feel as if my question hasn't been fully answered... would my idea for wv and sv be good or would it just wreck the flow that zzf2l has going for it?

 

[TDM]

thanks for the replies guys and but I feel as if my question hasn't been fully answered... would my idea for wv and sv be good or would it just wreck the flow that zzf2l has going for it?

Learn to mirror or rotate the cases for the FR pair so you can do them from any angle without rotating. I've only learned the 0-1 corner misoriented cases, and they're easy to mirror. I'm sure it's the same for the others too. True, some of them may not be fast (e.g. the R' F R U R U' R' F' case at the back), but I still find it faster than insert+OCLL. Learning to mirror and rotate cases is very useful in ZZF2L, as it significantly reduces the number of algs you have to learn as well as still using the same number of rotations (none). As you're using ZZ, I presume your left hand isn't incredibly slow, so you should be fine just doing this. Don't rotate, as one of the advantages of using ZZ is that you don't have to rotate at all during F2L.

 

[MM99]

Learn to mirror or rotate the cases for the FR pair so you can do them from any angle without rotating. I've only learned the 0-1 corner misoriented cases, and they're easy to mirror. I'm sure it's the same for the others too. True, some of them may not be fast (e.g. the R' F R U R U' R' F' case at the back), but I still find it faster than insert+OCLL. Learning to mirror and rotate cases is very useful in ZZF2L, as it significantly reduces the number of algs you have to learn as well as still using the same number of rotations (none). As you're using ZZ, I presume your left hand isn't incredibly slow, so you should be fine just doing this. Don't rotate, as one of the advantages of using ZZ is that you don't have to rotate at all during F2L.

Thanks... And I'm actually left handed so I can do alot of things with my left better like double flicks for example my left hand is really fast at them and my right is pretty much useless when it comes to double flicks anyway would learning to mirror algs be like relearning them so instead of 27 wv there would be 108? or are they already in your head and you just have to tweak them abit if that makes sense. And I know you guys are probably getting sick of my questions but could you list some zz cubers that would be good to look at on youtube? cause the only ones I really know about are asmallkitten and uvafan

 

[uvafan]

Thanks... And I'm actually left handed so I can do alot of things with my left better like double flicks for example my left hand is really fast at them and my right is pretty much useless when it comes to double flicks anyway would learning to mirror algs be like relearning them so instead of 27 wv there would be 108? or are they already in your head and you just have to tweak them abit if that makes sense. And I know you guys are probably getting sick of my questions but could you list some zz cubers that would be good to look at on youtube? cause the only ones I really know about are asmallkitten and uvafan

Practice double flicks with your right again - it will be a very useful skill, and the later you learn it, the harder it will be to learn. The algs are really easy to mirror, as I said, just like F2L pairs - you're still just learning 27 cases. Just think of it in terms of what you are doing to the pair/ the rest of the cube.

 

[TDM]

Thanks... And I'm actually left handed so I can do alot of things with my left better like double flicks for example my left hand is really fast at them and my right is pretty much useless when it comes to double flicks anyway would learning to mirror algs be like relearning them so instead of 27 wv there would be 108? or are they already in your head and you just have to tweak them abit if that makes sense. And I know you guys are probably getting sick of my questions but could you list some zz cubers that would be good to look at on youtube? cause the only ones I really know about are asmallkitten and uvafan

Oh, then practise more with your right hand. As uva said, practising with your weaker hand is important with ZZ, and double flicks are really useful, and like with colour neutrality (being y-axis neutral is very helpful), it's easier if you learn earlier on. If you look at what happens with the pieces as you do WV, that may help in mirroring them. For example, the case when all corners are oriented. You break the pair with an L', you insert it with U2 R U R', and then insert the other pair with U2 L. Using things like these, you can mirror some cases easily. Another case I find easy to mirror is R U' R' U2 R U' R' U2 R U R'. It's doing an insert, U2, repeat that again, then insert the pair normally. That can be done from any angle if you think about it like that.
I don't get sick of questions - I like helping people (I hope what I'm saying is actually helpful and makes sense...). mDiPalma also has a YT channel. Those are the only three I know of, although there may be more.

 

[161803398874989]

I think I may have a solid variation on ZZ-porky/profane koala. Rather than pushing DR corners to DR in an arbitrary position, push them to their correct position. This takes 1 move extra most of the time. It's not too bad and easy to do. Then you can recognize the swap you need to do by positioning the UFL correctly and looking at UFR and UBL. If UFR <-> UBL (ie. they have to swap), you just do that. If UFR -> UBL (ie. UFR goes to UBL but not the other way around), you have to swap UFR and UFL. If UFR <- UBL, you have to swap UFR and UBR.
This narrows it down to 3 cases (or 12 if you account for orientation) and is a tad easier because you don't need to worry about the DR corners and whether or not you need to swap them.

 

[mDiPalma]

I think I may have a solid variation on ZZ-porky/profane koala. Rather than pushing DR corners to DR in an arbitrary position, push them to their correct position. This takes 1 move extra most of the time. It's not too bad and easy to do. Then you can recognize the swap you need to do by positioning the UFL correctly and looking at UFR and UBL. If UFR <-> UBL (ie. they have to swap), you just do that. If UFR -> UBL (ie. UFR goes to UBL but not the other way around), you have to swap UFR and UFL. If UFR <- UBL, you have to swap UFR and UBR.
This narrows it down to 3 cases (or 12 if you account for orientation) and is a tad easier because you don't need to worry about the DR corners and whether or not you need to swap them.

There are the same amount of "cases" for both swapped and unswapped DR corners. The only difference is the expected solved permutation of the top layer. When the DR corners are place, like you propose, the top layer corners can require either an adjacent/diagonal/or no swap to be in their solved permutation. But when the DR corners are swapped, the solved state of the top layer corners IS the diagonal permutation. So you might require an adjacent/diagonal/no swap of the top corners to attain this state. In the end, there are still only 3 cases, only 2 of which require an algorithm.

It is true that recognition may be slightly easier, if the user always places the DR corners correctly. However, I have some experience with ZZ-Porky v1, and I can assure you that the amount of thinking associated with dealing with a swapped set of DR corners is next to none.

You have a neat recognition method, though, which can easily be expanded to the swapped DR corners cases.

 

[cubeninjaIV]

Does anyone know a good alg for this case?
(Setup) L U2 L' B' R B2 L2 B R' B2 L2 F U2 F'

 

[mDiPalma]

Does anyone know a good alg for this case?
(Setup) L U2 L' B' R B2 L2 B R' B2 L2 F U2 F'

http://boca.bee.pl/case.php?l=en&cat=th&sid=186

 

[cubeninjaIV]

http://boca.bee.pl/case.php?l=en&cat=th&sid=186

Many thanks. I checked every ZB resource i could think of but forgot that one. I've been generating algs for about 12 hours

 

[Jokern]

I would recommend using Y-axis neutrality and switching to it now - the longer you wait, the harder it will be to switch - as for planning the EOLine, do some EOLine BLD averages.

I'm about 30avg and do not have any axis neutrality, but maybe I should start, but I feel like y-axis neutrality is hard, wouldn't z-axis neutrality be easier? Especially z2.

If I understand this correctly;
Y-axis neutrality is when you have the same UD colors, but can switch the faces you orient with respect to. It is this I find hard, changing the edgeorientation colors.
Z-axis neutraliy is when you orient the edges with respect to the same face (have same FB colors) but choose a different face for the eoLINE.

 

[TDM]

I'm about 30avg and do not have any axis neutrality, but maybe I should start, but I feel like y-axis neutrality is hard, wouldn't z-axis neutrality be easier? Especially z2.

If I understand this correctly;
Y-axis neutrality is when you have the same UD colors, but can switch the faces you orient with respect to. It is this I find hard, changing the edgeorientation colors.
Z-axis neutraliy is when you orient the edges with respect to the same face (have same FB colors) but choose a different face for the eoLINE.

z-axis neutrality doesn't affect the orientation of any of the edges, and is therefore near-useless. It saves you a couple of moves maximum when placing EOLine edges. y-axis neutrality allows you to change the orientation of up to 8 edges, which can be very helpful. It's not as easy... but z-neutrality is harder than no neutrality and has barely any effect on anything, just like y2 neutrality. Learn y-axis neutrality, or learn nothing. And y-neutrality is better than nothing. Don't be lazy.
I made a post on how I use inspection here. I know I'm not good at explaining, so please ask questions if there's anything you don't understand. It's relatively easy to understand/learn compared to learning ZZ at first, so I'd definitely look at it if I were you.

 

[Jokern]

z-axis neutrality doesn't affect the orientation of any of the edges, and is therefore near-useless. It saves you a couple of moves maximum when placing EOLine edges. y-axis neutrality allows you to change the orientation of up to 8 edges, which can be very helpful. It's not as easy... but z-neutrality is harder than no neutrality and has barely any effect on anything, just like y2 neutrality. Learn y-axis neutrality, or learn nothing. And y-neutrality is better than nothing. Don't be lazy.
I made a post on how I use inspection here. I know I'm not good at explaining, so please ask questions if there's anything you don't understand. It's relatively easy to understand/learn compared to learning ZZ at first, so I'd definitely look at it if I were you.

Yes this makes sense, I read your post last week and have been practising y-axis neutrality since, your post on inspection was very helpful.

Before last week i was confident in planning EO during inspection, and were beginning to trace the line pieaces, but now i find it very hard to have time/brainpower for tracing line pieaces during inspection.
Did I start this too early or should i just power through, sooner or later I should be able to plan entire EOline CN?

 

[Millet]

z-axis neutrality doesn't affect the orientation of any of the edges, and is therefore near-useless. It saves you a couple of moves maximum when placing EOLine edges. y-axis neutrality allows you to change the orientation of up to 8 edges, which can be very helpful. It's not as easy... but z-neutrality is harder than no neutrality and has barely any effect on anything, just like y2 neutrality. Learn y-axis neutrality, or learn nothing. And y-neutrality is better than nothing. Don't be lazy.
I made a post on how I use inspection here. I know I'm not good at explaining, so please ask questions if there's anything you don't understand. It's relatively easy to understand/learn compared to learning ZZ at first, so I'd definitely look at it if I were you.

I've just started with y-axis CN and your post (though complicated) really helped a lot. Thanks!

 

[MM99]

Alright so I've only been using zz for just under 2 months so there is still a lot I don't understand... One main question I have is how much more effective is the block building f2l over the classic pair by pair, And is forcing a block to be made really helpful or will all the setup you used in the block just be time and moves wasted. And another thing I'm wondering is do the good ZZers solve one side at a time (ex. if they made their block on the left they would put in the remaining left pair before they looked at the right) or will the just solve what ever looks to be the most efficient. The reason why I'm asking is because even though my times are already fairly low with zz compared to cfop (cfop 19 zz 25) it feels like I'm just doing a modified version of cfop instead of zz... anyway hopefully you guys can get me some answers because I really do want to continue with this method and try to do my part in getting it recognized as more than just a "lesser" method because it really can be just as fast as cfop we just haven't put enough time into it yet.

 

[mDiPalma]

Alright so I've only been using zz for just under 2 months so there is still a lot I don't understand... One main question I have is how much more effective is the block building f2l over the classic pair by pair, And is forcing a block to be made really helpful or will all the setup you used in the block just be time and moves wasted. And another thing I'm wondering is do the good ZZers solve one side at a time (ex. if they made their block on the left they would put in the remaining left pair before they looked at the right) or will the just solve what ever looks to be the most efficient. The reason why I'm asking is because even though my times are already fairly low with zz compared to cfop (cfop 19 zz 25) it feels like I'm just doing a modified version of cfop instead of zz... anyway hopefully you guys can get me some answers because I really do want to continue with this method and try to do my part in getting it recognized as more than just a "lesser" method because it really can be just as fast as cfop we just haven't put enough time into it yet.

Not sure what you're asking, but generally speaking, xeoline is better than eoline. Also, the fact that you are thinking that far ahead during inspection will aid the fluidity of the solve, even if your xeoline movecount is not great.

Most proficient ZZers will do one block at a time, unless we notice an absurdly simple insertion on the opposite side. Completing one F2L side at a time is great in that it guides your mind to search for a certain group of pieces during the solve. For example, if you start with the front left 2x2 block, your brain will automatically begin scanning for the rear left F2L pair pieces while you solve the 2x2. Your lookahead is therefore more "intelligent".

When solving one side at a time, I also find it easier to cancel moves associated with leaving the slot "open".

It is also often more ergonomic to solve one side at a time.

For onehanded, doing both blocks at the same time can require >5 unnecessary z rotations, whereas forcing yourself to solve one block at a time and intelligently isolating required pieces to certain faces during eoline, can effectively only require a maximum of 2 z rotations.

 

[TDM]

I haven't checked this thread in a while; sorry for the late responses.

Before last week i was confident in planning EO during inspection, and were beginning to trace the line pieaces, but now i find it very hard to have time/brainpower for tracing line pieaces during inspection.
Did I start this too early or should i just power through, sooner or later I should be able to plan entire EOline CN?

This will always happen if you switch from not being CN to being CN in any method. You can never start being CN too early; with practise you should be able to plan EOLine in inspection. You have to either make deciding which F colour to use faster, or improve your planning of EOLines faster. If you could already plan EOLines with blue front, you may want to practise a bit with red front (although not too much; you don't want to suddenly find blue front impossible ) to improve your EOLine planning and F2L in that orientation. Deciding which orientation to use can be done by practising more and more. I was slow at it at first, but I did get quicker.

your post (though complicated) really helped a lot.

Yeah, sorry. I really suck at explaining things. At least you understood it.

 

[MM99]

Not sure what you're asking, but generally speaking, xeoline is better than eoline. Also, the fact that you are thinking that far ahead during inspection will aid the fluidity of the solve, even if your xeoline movecount is not great.

Most proficient ZZers will do one block at a time, unless we notice an absurdly simple insertion on the opposite side. Completing one F2L side at a time is great in that it guides your mind to search for a certain group of pieces during the solve. For example, if you start with the front left 2x2 block, your brain will automatically begin scanning for the rear left F2L pair pieces while you solve the 2x2. Your lookahead is therefore more "intelligent".

When solving one side at a time, I also find it easier to cancel moves associated with leaving the slot "open".

It is also often more ergonomic to solve one side at a time.

For onehanded, doing both blocks at the same time can require >5 unnecessary z rotations, whereas forcing yourself to solve one block at a time and intelligently isolating required pieces to certain faces during eoline, can effectively only require a maximum of 2 z rotations.

Thanks man and that's basically what I was asking so I guess I should start looking for blocks all the time because in the end it will improve my efficiency