• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

ZZ-CT Thread

lillod

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Messages
16
Hello. I am a cfop user and I would like to learn this method by nationals. I know full oll and pll along with being able to recognize the cube being one trigger from an oll skip and the 72 2-sided pll recognitions.

I was wondering about y axis neutrality. It seems like it would be harder to ignore the FR slot if it isn't the same color each time. I would greatly appreciate advice directed to someone just learning zz and am interested in what orientation neutrality that other people use.

btw PTSD seems like an interesting concept. Good luck with it;)
 

gateway cuber

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
468
Location
in your car driving away...
YouTube
Visit Channel
Hello. I am a cfop user and I would like to learn this method by nationals. I know full oll and pll along with being able to recognize the cube being one trigger from an oll skip and the 72 2-sided pll recognitions.

I was wondering about y axis neutrality. It seems like it would be harder to ignore the FR slot if it isn't the same color each time. I would greatly appreciate advice directed to someone just learning zz and am interested in what orientation neutrality that other people use.

btw PTSD seems like an interesting concept. Good luck with it;)
My main method is also cfop, but I also know ZZ, and as far as y axis neutrality goes, when I was learning ZZ I decided I wanted to be y axis neutral on white and yellow, so what I did was I solved in different orientations every solve and now it doesn't really seem to bother me when my block colors are always different. As for how this would affect TTLL recognition, I wouldn't know cause I only know like 7 of them...
 

Cale S

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
2,410
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2014SCHO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Actually, it wouldn't. See, in ZZ-CT we just solve the egde. The attached corner might be white, or it might be yellow. Either way TSLE is solved.
but if you wanted an advanced version of TSLE that made it so you got a PLL case for TTLL, you would use this set of algs (although it's separated by F2L case). F2L + OLL is the same as TSLE + corner, because they both solve corner + edge + OLL
 

IQubic

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2012
Messages
188
Location
Seattle, WA
WCA
2014CASP01
but if you wanted an advanced version of TSLE that made it so you got a PLL case for TTLL, you would use this set of algs (although it's separated by F2L case). F2L + OLL is the same as TSLE + corner, because they both solve corner + edge + OLL
TSLE + Corner is different from ZZ OLS. ZZ OLS assumes that the pair is already made, which is fine, but requires an extra step + look. TSLE + Corner requires you to learn 5 variations for each TSLE (one for each possible position of the White corner). However, at this point, we're just reinventing ZZ-C. ZZ-C is Corner + Edge + OCLL.
 

CubingGenius

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2016
Messages
238
TSLE + Corner is different from ZZ OLS. ZZ OLS assumes that the pair is already made, which is fine, but requires an extra step + look. TSLE + Corner requires you to learn 5 variations for each TSLE (one for each possible position of the White corner). However, at this point, we're just reinventing ZZ-C. ZZ-C is Corner + Edge + OCLL.
ZZ OLS is the first step of ZZ-c. You insert the last F2L edge and corner (they don't have to be a pair as you said) and orient the LL, leaving PLL.
 

ExultantCarn

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Messages
94
WCA
2017CHAN07
If you're using ZZ, why don't you just learn winter variation and summer variation instead of ZZ-CT? You would have to use on algorithm for last slot + OLL, and then one more for PLL, which most of us already know. Beyond that, you would have a 1/72 chance for an last layer skip (I'm assuming there statistic since the chance for a PLL skip is that). It also requires 54 algorithms if you do the WV/SV on your front right slot
 
Last edited:

Rcuber123

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Messages
873
Location
At your house stealing your cubes
WCA
2014TAMI01
If you're using ZZ, why don't you just learn winter variation and summer variation instead of ZZ-CT? You would have to use on algorithm for last slot + OLL, and then one more for PLL, most of us already know. Beyond that, you would have a 1/72 chance for an last layer skip (I'm assuming there statistic since the chance for a PLL skip is that). It also requires 54 algorithms if you do the WV/SV on your front right slot
In ZZ-CT you don't need to pair the last F2l pair
 

ExultantCarn

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Messages
94
WCA
2017CHAN07
In ZZ-CT you don't need to pair the last F2l pair
Even with SV you don't need to completely pair the last F2L pair up. And if the stats are what I think they are, then you can get some extremely fast singles. On another note, goes do you calculate the chance of an ll skip
 

mDiPalma

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
1,536
The move expense for WV and SV (including making the pair) over ZZ-CT is only 2 moves, which can almost be recouped from the less restricted F2L configuration. The algorithm count, case recognition, and skip chances are also much better in WV/SV.

Speed-Heise also gives you a 1/27 chance of a LL skip at a lower alg and move expense than ZZ-CT. Or you could just solve the last 5 edges with simplified LPELL and insert the last corner with a commutator (completely intuitive) for the same effect. CT's approach is simply not an efficient means of reducing cubestates to generate a skip.
 
Last edited:

Cale S

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
2,410
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2014SCHO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
TSLE + Corner is different from ZZ OLS. ZZ OLS assumes that the pair is already made, which is fine, but requires an extra step + look. TSLE + Corner requires you to learn 5 variations for each TSLE (one for each possible position of the White corner). However, at this point, we're just reinventing ZZ-C. ZZ-C is Corner + Edge + OCLL.
OLS (like the document) covers all possible pair cases (and has the same algs as 5 per TSLE)
 

lillod

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Messages
16
  • Chance of EO (1/2)^4
  • Chance of edge being in slot 1/5
  • Chance of coriented corners (1/3)^4
  • Chance that a last layer corner is in the slot 4/5
  • Multiply them to get .0123% or 1/8100
Interesting thing about the decimal is that it is (123456790) repeating. It skips the 8 for some reason.
EDIT the chance of skipping tsle or vls in zz is 1/405
 

gateway cuber

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2016
Messages
468
Location
in your car driving away...
YouTube
Visit Channel
  • Chance of EO (1/2)^4
  • Chance of edge being in slot 1/5
  • Chance of coriented corners (1/3)^4
  • Chance that a last layer corner is in the slot 4/5
  • Multiply them to get .0123% or 1/8100
Interesting thing about the decimal is that it is (123456790) repeating. It skips the 8 for some reason.
EDIT the chance of skipping tsle or vls in zz is 1/405
wow and it was a good TTLL too not even a yucky one...
 
Top