#### Sajwo

##### Member
does someone use this already?

#### PhillipEspinoza

##### Member
1) Chris! Thanks for doing that seminar and thanks to the person who posted it, I unfortunately had to leave the venue early that day so I missed this seminar. I'll have to watch it later.

2) I've developed a beginners method for people who aren't beast alg learners like you. It involves just splitting the TTLL algs into COLL equivalents. So since this method is like a ZB substitute (like Splenda or, let's say Stevia), it makes sense for me to learn to recognize the COLL case first to train my eyes to TTLL more efficiently. That's how I recog a lot of ZBLL cases, in fortunately learned COLL first and it made a great stepping stone to learn some ZB algs. So there can be an intermediate step to TTLL where you just do an easy TTLL case to force an edge PLL. This can be referred to as COTTL (Corners Orient Tran Thomas Last Layer) and can be reduced to the 6 cases that you have to learn to recognize anyway. This will only add 1 to 2 seconds to your time and allow you to get a gauge on what to expect as you start learning to recog and execute the specific TTLL cases. To someone liker Mr. Tran who can learn this method in a day with a gun to his head, this may seem ridiculous or unnecessary. But to the masses that want to make this more doable, this could be a great stepping stone. I'll post my favorite TTLL algs for each case as a suggestion for COTTL algs (again, I'm learning for OH so these will have an OH bias in terms of executablity, except both opp).

Front Bar: y' *G PERM* (R U' R y R2 u R' U R U' R u' R2 F2)
Right Bar: U F2 *G PERM* (R2 u R' U R U' R u' R2 y L' U L')
All Bars: R *J2 PERM* U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U' R2
Both Opposite: U2 x (R' U R U')X4 x'
Front Opposite (2-gen): R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2
Right Opposite (2-gen): y' R2 U2 R2 U R2 U R2

This makes it REALLY REALLY beginners friendly in terms of algs as it relies on PLL's most cubers already know.

Again, this is not meant to be a suggestion for a better method, in fact you will be slower with this obviously, but with every new method or technique learned (like F2L) you should expect to be slower before becoming faster.

Now that I'm done with the embarrassment that was US Nats 2016, I think I'm going to dedicate time to learning this method in full, because why the heck not?

#### Teoidus

##### Member
Question from the seminar: could you explain why there's a 33% chance of TTLL being 2-gen?

#### JTWong71

##### Member
Question from the seminar: could you explain why there's a 33% chance of TTLL being 2-gen?
It is because you can rotate the cube with a y', allowing there to be another chance of having to only use <R, U> Gen to solve the rest of the cube with TTLL.

#### PhillipEspinoza

##### Member
Look at my COTTL cases in previous post. There are 6 types of TTLL cases to recognize. 2 of those types are labeled 2-gen. 2/6 is 1/3, which is 33%.

#### Rnewms

##### Member
--- Both Opp #8 ---- Both Opp #1 ---- All Bars #6 ---

BO #8: [U'] R2 U' F2 U' F2 R2 U2 R2 D R2 D' [U']

BO #1: R' F' R2 F R U2 R' F' R2 F R [U2]
Which I execute as: x' R' D' (l' R') F R U2 R' F' (l R) D l [D2]

AB #6: R' U R' F' U' F R U R' F R' F' R2 U2 R

Last edited:

#### JanW

##### Member
That's nice Phillip! I was about to ask about a 2-look version for TTLL yesterday, but as I was formulating the question, I came up with that solution you suggested and didn't bother... I haven't figured out yet how you would best split TSLE into smaller subsets for 2-look TSLE, in case you want to learn TTLL first.

Both Opposite: U2 x (R' U R U')X4 x'
I think you mean U2 x (R' U R U')X3 x'

#### AlphaSheep

##### Member
I haven't figured out yet how you would best split TSLE into smaller subsets for 2-look TSLE
There are quite a few options for 2-look TSLE.

The easy way is to pick the easiest F2L case that combines the edge with any corner. This inserts the edge and an oriented corner on D in at most 2 triggers. Then you do OCLL. This is a really easy 2-look system that gets TSLE solved in at most 5 triggers.

The case where all corners are oriented and just the edge needs to be inserted is a good one to learn next: R U' R' U2 R U R'. If the bottom corner is oriented already, do OCLL followed by this.

Once you've got the hang of that, learn the 5 cases with one misoriented corner on top and the corner on D facing forward. You can solve the simple base case with R U R' U R U' R' (Do the inverse to see which case it solves). Three of the remaining cases can be reduced to this base case by putting the misoriented corner in UFR and performing either R U R', R U2 R', or R U' R' to move the F2L edge to UF. The one case that can't be reduced easily is where the corner and edge form a "false pair", in which case just use the WV alg: L' U2 R U R' U2 L.

After learning that, any case with DFR facing forward can be reduced to one twisted corner on top with just a sune or anti-sune.

#### JanW

##### Member
The easy way is to pick the easiest F2L case that combines the edge with any corner. This inserts the edge and an oriented corner on D in at most 2 triggers. Then you do OCLL. This is a really easy 2-look system that gets TSLE solved in at most 5 triggers.
That's certainly an easy way to do it. I was thinking about inserting edge first, didn't see the obvious solution to pair it with any oriented corner. Thanks!

Last edited:

#### GenTheThief

##### Member
zz f2l-1 seems overlooked in everything I've seen. Could you explain the D move thing further? Does it just limit the 8 zz block options to 6? Cool method btw. I've been following it since colorful pocket's vlog and want to switch to it from cfop.
So, the idea behind adjusting the D layer.
After TSLE, you solve an edge into the FR position and your E-slice is solved, your U layer is unsolved and you D layer is unsolved by one corner piece.
In TTLL, you solve the missing corner into the DFR position and force an LL skip.

However, if you wanted to be slot neutral, you would mirror TSLE into the three other slots, and then Adjust D Face into the front right position. Then you wouldn't have to mirror your TTLL algs also.
But chris did say that in practice, it's easier to not be slot neutral and always leave the front right open.

#### sub20oneday

##### Member
i want to learn zz ct what order should i learn the algs

#### AlphaSheep

##### Member
i want to learn zz ct what order should i learn the algs
If you read a few posts up, @PhillipEspinoza posted an easy to learn 2-look TTLL and a couple posts later, I posted a 2-look TSLE. That's the best starting point. After that, it's best to figure out your own system. Go through the cases on http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html and try grouping them by distinctive features. I find it easier to learn the ones that have short algs and/or distinctive blocks first.

Also, I found this TTLL alg today. I think it flows really nicely after a couple minutes of practice.

R F' r U R2 U' r' F R

and it's inverse is also decent (just switch the direction of the first and last R)

R' F' r U R2 U' r' F R'

#### sub20oneday

##### Member
If you read a few posts up, @PhillipEspinoza posted an easy to learn 2-look TTLL and a couple posts later, I posted a 2-look TSLE. That's the best starting point. After that, it's best to figure out your own system. Go through the cases on http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html and try grouping them by distinctive features. I find it easier to learn the ones that have short algs and/or distinctive blocks first.

Also, I found this TTLL alg today. I think it flows really nicely after a couple minutes of practice.

R F' r U R2 U' r' F R

and it's inverse is also decent (just switch the direction of the first and last R)

R' F' r U R2 U' r' F R'
thanks now i can burn through these algs in under a week

#### PhillipEspinoza

##### Member
@AlphaSheep That's a great TTLL or even COTTLL alg. I'll have to work that one into my base.

Average move count for:

TSLE: 10.37
12 + 3 + 8 + 7 + 11 + 11 + 7 + 8 + 8 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 8 + 8 + 12 + 11 + 4 + 8 + 8 + 11 + 11 + 9 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 8 + 8 + 7 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 7 + 11 + 12 + 11 + 15 + 12 + 11 + 9 + 4 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 7 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 8 + 11 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 12 + 8 + 10 + 8 + 12 + 11 + 7 + 9 + 11 + 12 + 8 + 7 + 10 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 11 + 11 + 11 + 8 + 12 + 11 + 16 + 8 + 11 + 8 + 11 + 8 + 12 + 16 + 15 + 12

TTLL: 15.21
FRONT BAR:
8 + 20 + 16 + 19 + 18 + 15 + 17 + 19 + 13 + 15 + 17 + 13 = 190 / 12 = 15.83
RIGHT OPP:
16 + 16 + 12 + 20 + 18 + 11 + 12 + 14 + 10 + 16 + 13 + 12 = 170 / 12 = 14.16
BOTH OPP:
15 + 13 + 15 + 18 + 12 + 20 + 12 + 18 + 19 + 20 + 13 + 13 = 188 / 12 = 15.66
ALL BARS:
16 + 16 + 15 + 20 + 16 + 18 + 16 + 13 + 16 + 17 + 15 + 16 = 194 / 12 = 16.16
RIGHT BAR:
10 + 15 + 17 + 16 + 18 + 15 + 13 + 15 + 16 + 15 + 14 + 19 = 183 / 12 = 15.25
NO BARS:
14 + 20 + 12 + 15 + 14 + 12 + 8 + 19 + 7 + 16 + 15 + 19 = 171 / 12 = 14.25

25.5 average move count for ZZ-CT LL.

This is using the bolded algs provided on gyroninja.

So given the average move counts for ZZ as provided on the main ZZ website, here is the calculation for average move count one could expect for ZZ-CT in total:

6.127 (EO Line) + 11.44 (first 2x3x1 block any corner) + 6.61 (2nd 2x2x1 block fixed corner) = 24.177 average for everything up to last slot + last layer.

24.177 + 25.58 = 49.75 average move count.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, for those who are curious as to the move count comparison to MGLS:

ZZ + MGLS:
2 (ELS with cancelation estimate) + 9.5 (CLS) + 12 (PLL) = 23.5 average move count for LS+LL.

ZZ + WV:
6.34 (last pair, BS'd this average someone fact check please) + 8.02 (WV) + 12 = 26.36 average move count for LS+LL.

In order to make this method as strong as we want it to be, we shouldn't shy away from comparing it to other methods. I think the obvious strength in ZZ-CT comes from 1) 1 less look for LS+LL, 2 as opposed to 3 (I describe it this way as opposed to saying a 1 Look Last Layer because one could argue that MGLS could be seen as a 1LLL as well) and 2) the increased chance for an LL skip (though if you look at PLL as the LL step in MGLS, I imagine an LL skip for MGLS would happen as often as a PLL skip).

ELS for ZZ could almost be considered as trivial as phasing and the look could almost be considered negligible. Not all looks are created equal, therefore they shouldn't be seen as the same. When you get into it, what qualifies as a look anyhow? Would the positioning of the bad corner in TTLL count as a look? Convention says no, but you are taking a second to process that information however brief it is, and are oftentimes doing a move like U, U', U2, or U3 to allow you to move on to the next look. But it's so insignificant that we count is as part of the one look of TTLL. I say the ELS could be seen in the same way in ZZ and maybe all it takes is a shift in perspective to realize that maybe MGLS combined with ZZ was the original 1LLL method? (well, besides ZB of course).

Feel free to disregard this entire last ramble of a paragraph.

Last edited:

#### 4Chan

I think that the alignment of the edgr/corner is the same as when people align PLL up to their preferred angle.

So that look is equal to other methods in my opinion.

For example, after identifying the T perm, you still have to AUF to put it in place.

Alignment is only necessary for execution, not recognition.