https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=4chan&feedformat=atomSpeedsolving.com Wiki - User contributions [en]2019-08-19T05:23:05ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.31.0https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=31303Chris Tran2017-06-09T22:38:39Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|-Chris Tran at Virginia Open 2016]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth IV<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Delegate, Head of [[Cubicle Labs]]<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Cubicle Labs, Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT, ZZ-HW<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Christopher V. Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He heads Cubicle Labs in Westchester, New York, where he pioneered many innovations such as commercial puzzle dyeing, flexible centers with magnetic tensions, as well as accelerating the field of puzzle magnetics. His efforts in puzzle magnetics led to the first commercially available magnetic 3x3 puzzle, which was superior to previous puzzles in stability, tactility, and lockup reduction.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]], which solves an F2L piece and the LL simultaneously.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29536Chris Tran2016-11-07T14:40:39Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|-Chris Tran at Virginia Open 2016]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He heads Cubicle Labs in Westchester, New York, where he pioneered many innovations such as commercial puzzle dyeing, flexible centers with magnetic tensions, as well as accelerating the field of puzzle magnetics. His efforts in puzzle magnetics led to the first commercially available magnetic 3x3 puzzle, which was superior to previous puzzles in stability, tactility, and lockup reduction.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]], which solves an F2L piece and the LL simultaneously.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29522Chris Tran2016-10-26T22:11:40Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|-Chris Tran at Virginia Open 2016]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
After working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry, he headed Cubicle Labs in Westchester, New York, where he pioneered many innovations such as commercial puzzle dyeing, flexible centers with magnetic tensions, as well as accelerating the field of puzzle magnetics. His efforts in puzzle magnetics led to the first commercially available magnetic 3x3 puzzle, which was superior to previous puzzles in stability, tactility, and lockup reduction.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]], which solves an F2L piece and the LL simultaneously.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29521Chris Tran2016-10-26T22:10:23Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|-Chris Tran at Virginia Open 2016]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
After working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry, he headed Cubicle Labs in Westchester, New York, where he pioneered many innovations such as commercial puzzle dyeing, flexible centers with magnetic tensions, as well as accelerating the field of puzzle magnetics. His efforts in puzzle magnetics led to the first commercially available magnetic 3x3 puzzle, which was superior to previous puzzles in stability, tactility, and lockup reduction.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29443Chris Tran2016-10-07T06:15:08Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|-Chris Tran at Virginia Open 2016]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29442Chris Tran2016-10-07T06:14:28Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=[[File:Christran.jpg|200px|thumb|left|alt text]] <br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=File:Christran.jpg&diff=29441File:Christran.jpg2016-10-07T06:13:43Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29440Chris Tran2016-10-07T06:12:32Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
* http://smarteggtoy.eu/index.php/1st-smart-egg-competition/at-rubiks-u-s-nationals-2015/<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29439Chris Tran2016-10-07T06:11:22Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Disciplinary Committee, WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for the Northeastern United States. Also during 2016, he joined the WCA Disciplinary Committee, which investigates and handles misconduct at WCA competitions.<br />
<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=29428Chris Tran2016-10-04T17:01:53Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB, ZZ-CT<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
He was also 2015 national champion of 2-Layer Blue Smart Egg, and currently holds the world record at 8.07 seconds.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28962ZZ-CT2016-06-21T17:17:08Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. The D corner is completely ignored, and is recognized purely from corner orientation and shape, just like an OLL.(108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
<br />
Another useful advantage in ZZ-CT is that it theoretically requires no rotations.<br />
By adjusting the D layer after TSLE, it is possible to ADF for TTLL to avoid all rotations during the solve.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US National Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
TSLE Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-tsle.html<br />
<br />
TTLL Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28961ZZ-CT2016-06-21T17:14:03Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
<br />
Another useful advantage in ZZ-CT is that it theoretically requires no rotations.<br />
By adjusting the D layer after TSLE, it is possible to ADF for TTLL to avoid all rotations during the solve.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US National Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
TSLE Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-tsle.html<br />
<br />
TTLL Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28958ZZ-CT2016-06-21T17:12:10Z<p>4chan: /* Algorithms: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US National Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
TSLE Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-tsle.html<br />
<br />
TTLL Algorithms:<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28957ZZ-CT2016-06-21T17:11:38Z<p>4chan: /* Algorithms: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US National Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-tsle.html<br />
http://gyroninja.net/zzct/zzct-ttll.html<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28657Chris Tran2016-05-16T08:04:28Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28656Chris Tran2016-05-16T08:04:07Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. <br />
<br />
He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry.<br />
<br />
He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28655ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:07:47Z<p>4chan: /* Disadvantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US National Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28654ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:06:25Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing when there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28653ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:05:59Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
The concept intuitive edge control in CFOP, can also be tweaked to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28652ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:05:17Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is easily recognised, only involving the orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28651ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:04:36Z<p>4chan: /* History: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case RUD subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28650ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:03:55Z<p>4chan: /* History: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as x' (R' U R U')*3 and R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28649ZZ-CT2016-05-16T06:03:23Z<p>4chan: /* History: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry probabilities of oriented pieces, it was observed that LL Skip algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting ''an edge instead of a corner''. This ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but completely annihilated in comparison. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically enhanced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28648ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:55:18Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance), and sixteen times greater than CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28647ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:52:50Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (fully solved cube after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance) with CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28646ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:52:20Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip (solved state after TSLE) occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance) with CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28645ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:50:39Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by multiple orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance) with CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28644ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:49:59Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15% chance) with CFOP (1.8% chance).<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28643ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:49:27Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28642ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:49:13Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms are simply cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the first move in the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28641ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:48:35Z<p>4chan: /* History: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. <br />
<br />
This property serendipitously yielded very surprisingly short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms were observed to simply be cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28640ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:47:58Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. This property serendipitously yielded very surprising short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
Additionally, several algorithms were observed to simply be cancelled or conjugated PLL algorithms. <br />
<br />
For example, executing the G-Perm (R U R' y' R2 u' R U' R' U R' u R2) with an R' instead of an R, (which also cancels the last R2) or replacing the first move in the J-Perm (R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 L R U') with an R instead of an R'. This means that most people who know PLL will already know several cases. Recognition of these cases is also obvious, since very case which has a 1x1x3 block is a cancelled or conjugated PLL.<br />
<br />
Every case which has a 1x1x2 block is a conjugated ZBLL, which permits advanced ZBLL users to quickly use provisional algorithms as they transition to full ZZ-CT.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28639ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:47:28Z<p>4chan: /* History: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT, as reported herein:<br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
By maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but instead inserting an edge instead of a corner, this ergonomic barrier was not only overcome, but significantly improved. The overall quality and movecount was dramatically reduced due to the properties of corner permutation. This property serendipitously yielded very surprising short, ergonomic algorithms such as (R' U R U')*3 , R2 U2 R2 U' R2 U' R2 , and R2 U R2 U R2 U2 R2. Additionally, an entire 12 case subset was observed to be completely regripless.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28638ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:32:50Z<p>4chan: /* Disadvantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28637ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:32:35Z<p>4chan: /* Disadvantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
''"(ZZ-CT) sounds like a good method-- the only disadvantage is that you have to use ZZ."''<br />
-Andrew Ricci (2012 US Nationals Champion)<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28636ZZ-CT2016-05-16T05:30:35Z<p>4chan: /* Advantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time, which is twice as much as ZBLL (15%) and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28635ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:16:20Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28634ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:16:05Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28633ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:15:28Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28632ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:15:14Z<p>4chan: /* Disadvantages: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
==Algorithms:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28631ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:14:55Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
'''COMING IN JUNE 2016'''<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28630ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:13:45Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). It is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson ( who generated a significant fraction of the algorithms)<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28629ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:12:46Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is 100% 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' is named after Chris Tran (creator) and Blake Thompson (generated a significant fraction of the algorithms). It forces an LL Skip with only 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial). Due to <br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ-CT&diff=28628ZZ-CT2016-05-16T03:01:00Z<p>4chan: /* Example Solves: */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ-CT<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Chris Tran]]<br />
|year=2015<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=<br />
|steps=4 (EOLine, F2L-1, TSLE, TTLL)<br />
|algs=200<br />
|moves= 40-50<br />
|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''ZZ-CT''' is a [[3x3]] method proposed by [[Chris Tran]]. It is a variant of the [[ZZ Method]] with a unique 2 look LSLL, divided into TSLE and TTLL.<br />
<br />
'''TSLE''' inserts the last edge whilst orienting all corners. (108 cases, all trivial) This step is completely 2-gen and all states can be solved by a linear combination of '''at most three''' R U R', R U' R', or R U2 R' triggers, which permits simple memorization and executions. Many of the TSLE insertions are the same as the traditional F2L algorithm, and has a much lower move count than other last slot methods since it ignores permutation of the corners and edges except UF. Using RUD, LUR, and non-2gen algorithms improves upon ergonomics and move count and allows for even shorter inserts. <br />
<br />
'''TTLL''' is named after Chris Tran (who created the method) and Blake Thompson (who generated a significant portion of the algorithms). It forces an LL Skip with 72 cases (42 w/mirrors, 30 non-trivial).<br />
<br />
==Steps==<br />
# [[EOLine]]<br />
# F2L-1<br />
# TSLE: Insert last edge and orient corners. ''(Tran Style Last Edge - 108 cases)'' 100% 2-gen<br />
# TTLL: Force an LL skip. ''(Tran-Thompson Last Layer - 72 cases)'' 33% 2-gen<br />
<br />
==History:==<br />
<br />
ZZ-CT was created with the intention of fixing everything wrong with ZBLL, and to create the first feasible LL-Skip method under 200 algorithms. Several months of brainstorming and evolution led to ZZ-CT. <br />
<br />
The core fundamental concept is the orientation of corners before reaching last layer.<br />
<br />
By abusing rotational symmetry statistics of oriented pieces, it was observed that algorithm count could be reduced by at least an order of magnitude or more. This pre-orientation also allowed for simple and obvious recognition of permutation.<br />
<br />
The first incarnation of this method was one which oriented all corners during the completion of the third slot, and then forced LL skip (~800-1000 algorithms). <br />
<br />
ZZ-HW was the next big improvement, which oriented all corners and inserted the corner in the fourth slot, followed by forced LL skip(~200 algorithms). However, this method was limited by algorithm ergonomics, since diagonal corner swap and edge insertion algorithms are too long and are not sufficiently ergonomic for competitive speedsolving purposes. <br />
<br />
However, by maintaining the same concept and algorithms, but inserting an edge instead of a corner, this hindrance could be ignored, and novel beneficial attributes were serendipitously discovered, as reported herein.<br />
<br />
==Advantages:==<br />
<br />
When compared with ZBLL, ZZ-CT solves the issues of large algorithm count, recognition, statistical hindrances, practise requirement, and steep learning curve by having a significantly '''lower algorithm count''', obvious colour blocks '''(PLL-style recognition)''', and '''better statistics''' for the same amount of looks.<br />
<br />
TSLE is also easily recognised, and only involves looking at orientation of corners and finding the last edge.<br />
This requires a similar mental load as OLL, and does not require knowing where the last LS corner is.<br />
<br />
Similar to intuitive edge control in CFOP, the same concept can be used to simplify TSLE. <br />
<br />
For example, in CFOP, intuitive edge control is seeing that there are no oriented edges and doing R F R F'(sledgehammer) instead of U R U' R'. This ensures no dot cases, reducing OLL by 7 cases.<br />
<br />
In ZZ-CT, intuitive corner control is as simple as observing there are no oriented corners, and doing R' U2 R instead of U R' U R during third slot to avoid all misoriented corners, which reduces TSLE by 16 cases. Intuitive corner control can even force superior TSLE cases with better execution, recognition, and move count, in the same way that intuitive edge control forces a better OLL.<br />
<br />
Lookahead into TTLL is also similar to lookahead into PLL during OLL.<br />
Since ''oriented colour blocks'' are being put together, it is easier to predict the last algorithm. This is opposed to ZBLL, in which formation of LS brings together ''misoriented colour blocks'', which are harder to discern for lookahead purposes.<br />
<br />
Statistically, ZZ-CT leads to good single times due to the following attributes:<br />
# PLL occurs 20% of the time (1 out of 5 solves). Leading to a well known algorithm that most cubers already know.<br />
# True LL skip occurs 1 out of 360 solves (0.27%), as compared with 0.0064% in CFOP(1 out of 15552 solves), and 0.051% in ZZ(1 out of 1944 solves). Which means that the probability is increased by orders of magnitude.<br />
# 2-Gen EVERYTHING occurs 29% of the time (approx. 1 out of 3 solves), as compared to 15% chance with ZBLL and 1.8% chance with CFOP.<br />
# Individual TTLL probabilities are similar to OLL. In comparison, the statistics for ZBLL cases are profoundly lower. This means that some cases will only pop up every few days during solves, meaning that it requires much less practice to execute TTLL than ZBLL.<br />
# TSLE is skipped approximately one out of every 405 solves (0.24%), which adds another level of reduced single times.<br />
<br />
==Disadvantages:==<br />
<br />
You have to use ZZ.<br />
<br />
==Example Solves:==<br />
<br />
Scramble: R2 F2 R' U2 R2 B2 U2 R' B2 D2 U' L2 F L' R2 F' U2 R2 U F' <br />
<br />
EOLine: X' D' L' F L U R2 D' (7/46)<br />
<br />
F2L-1: R U' R' U R' U2 L U2 L U L R' U R D R U' R' D' U (20/46)<br />
<br />
TSLE: R U2 R' U' R U2 R' (7/46)<br />
<br />
TTLL: y' U R' U R U' R' U2 R U R' U' R (12/46)<br />
<br />
<br />
'''MORE ON THE WAY'''<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28627Chris Tran2016-05-16T02:50:41Z<p>4chan: /* See Also */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry. He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
* [[ZZ-CT]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28626Chris Tran2016-05-16T02:50:21Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. He is currently enrolled in graduate school, working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry. He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28625Chris Tran2016-05-16T02:49:53Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. He is currently working on a PhD in Synthetic Organic Chemistry. He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became the WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region. In 2016, he transitioned into becoming the WCA Candidate Delegate for New Hampshire and nearby New England region.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28624Chris Tran2016-05-16T02:48:03Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-2010; 2015-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became a WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region, which in 2016 has changed to New Hampshire.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chris_Tran&diff=28623Chris Tran2016-05-16T02:47:30Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Infobox<br />
|NAME=Chris Tran<br />
|IMAGE=<br />
|IMAGEYEAR=<br />
|ALIASES= 4Chan, Humphrey Wittingtonsworth<br />
|COUNTRY=USA<br />
|BIRTHDATE= 2-25-1992<br />
|AGE= 24<br />
|JOBS= WCA Candidate Delegate<br />
|YEARSACTIVE=2008-present<br />
|ID=2008TRAN02<br />
|FAMOUSFOR=Learning full ZB<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Chris Tran''' is an [[USA|American]] speedcuber. He is most notable for being the first person to learn full [[ZB_method|ZB]] in 2009. After a hiatus from cubing between 2011-2015, he relearned full ZBLL in one month from new algorithms, effectively learning ZBLL twice.<br />
<br />
In 2015, he became a WCA Candidate Delegate for Georgia and nearby Southeastern USA region, which in 2016 has changed to New Hampshire.<br />
<br />
He has also created multiple methods based on ZBLL such as [[ZBLD|ZBLD]] (Solving edges and corner simultaneously with ZBLL), CTLS (Using ZBLL to force LL skips and FMC insertion), and LL Skip methods such as ZZ-HW and [[ZZ-CT|ZZ-CT]].<br />
<br />
== See Also ==<br />
* [[ZB method]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Speedcubers|Tran, Chris]]<br />
[[Category:Cubers|Tran, Chris]]</div>4chanhttps://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=ZZ_method&diff=28622ZZ method2016-05-16T02:42:34Z<p>4chan: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Method Infobox<br />
|name=ZZ<br />
|image=Eoline.gif<br />
|proposers=[[Zbigniew Zborowski]]<br />
|year=2006<br />
|anames=<br />
|variants=ZZ-[[VH]], ZZ-a, ZZ-b, ZZ-c, ZZ-d, ZZ-Orbit, ZZ-[[WV]], [[MGLS-Z]], [[EJLS]]<br />
|steps=3 or 4 (depending on LL)<br />
|moves=44 with [[ZBLL]], 55 with [[OCLL]]/[[PLL]]<br />
|algs=20 to 537<br/>F2L: 0 to 40 <br/>LL: 20 to 497<br />
|purpose=|purpose=<sup></sup><br />
* [[Speedsolving]]<br />
* [[Fewest Moves]]<br />
* [[One-Handed Solving]]<br />
}}<br />
<br />
The '''ZZ method''' is a 3x3 speedsolving method created by [[Zbigniew Zborowski]] in 2006. The method is focused both on low move count and high turning speed; during the majority of [[F2L]], the solver only needs to make L, U, and R moves, which means that the solver's hands never leave the left and right sides of the cube, resulting in faster solving. In addition, edges are already oriented when the solver reaches the last layer, meaning the solver has fewer cases to deal with.<br />
<br />
==The Steps==<br />
* '''[[EOLine]]:''' This is the most distinctive part of the ZZ method. In this step, the solver orients all the edges while placing the DF and DB edges. The two edges and the bottom centre are the "line" in [[EOLine]]. This step puts the cube into an <L, U, R> group, meaning F, B, or D moves are not required for the remainder of the solve. Although this step may seem like a hinderance, it speeds up the F2L and LL.<br />
* '''[[ZZ F2L]]:''' The solver creates a 2x3x1 block on each side of the line via blockbuilding. Because one only needs to do L, U, and R moves, solving is very quick.<br />
* '''LL:''' The solver uses algorithms to solve the remaining pieces. Since the edges in the LL were oriented during EOLine, it can be completed in fewer moves and/or with fewer algorithms to learn.<br />
<br />
==Variants==<br />
There are several variations of the ZZ method, each of which treats the [[F2L]] and [[LL]] differently:<br />
<br />
====Solving F2L and LL separately====<br />
* '''[[OCLL]]/[[PLL]]''' The LL is completed by first orienting the corners (OCLL), and then permuting corners and edges (PLL). This is the second least algorithm intensive 2-look method for solving the last layer, following ZZ-reduction.<br />
* '''[[OCELL]]/[[CPLL]]''' This is similar to using [[COLL/EPLL]], but more of the algorithms can be [[2-gen]]. First the LL corners are oriented and LL edges are permuted in one step, then the cube is completed with CPLL in the final step.<br />
* '''ZZ-a:''' [[ZBLL]] is used to complete the last layer in a single step, also known as [[1LLL]] (one-look last layer). There are 494 cases, solvable by 177 algorithms, in an average of ~12.08 moves.<br />
* '''[[COLL]]/[[EPLL]]'''<br />
* '''[[NMLL]]''' completes the last layer when matching or non-matching blocks are used. The first step separates the colors belonging to the left and right layer. The second finishes permutation.<br />
<br />
====Influencing LL during F2L====<br />
* '''ZZ-b:''' During F2L, the solver employs a technique called [[Phasing]] to correctly permute two opposite LL edges. Before the last corner-edge pair is placed, the solver uses one of several algorithms depending on how the edges are positioned. The last layer is then completed with one look using [[ZZLL]].<br />
* '''ZZ-[[WV]]:''' Before the last corner-edge pair is placed, the solver correctly orients all the corners by using 1 of 27 algorithms. After the first two layers, the solver is left with a PLL case, since both edges and corners are oriented.<br />
* '''ZZ-c:''' The last layer corners are oriented during insertion of the last F2L block. This system is similar to using [[Winter Variation]], but can be applied to ''any'' last block situation and uses many more algorithms. Conceptually, the comparison of ZZ-c with ZZ-WV is similar to the comparison of [[ZBLS]] with [[VH]].<br />
* '''[[ZZ-blah]]''' The last layer corners are ''disoriented'' during insertion of the last slot allowing the last layer to be solved using the Pi and H subsets of [[ZBLL]].<br />
* '''[[MGLS-Z]]''' During the F2L last slot, only the edge is placed. LL corner orientation and the final F2L corner are then solved in one step using [[CLS]]. Finally the solve is completed with [[PLL]].<br />
* '''[[EJLS]]''' Similar to MGLS-Z, but using less algorithms. During the F2L last slot the edge and corner are connected and placed, but the corner is not necessarily oriented. A subset of CLS is then used to orient the last slot corner along with the LL corners. [[PLL]] to finish.<br />
* '''ZZ-d:''' Just before the completion of the left-hand F2L block, the solver permutes the remaining corners to put the cube into an <R, U> group. This makes the rest of the solve [[2-gen]], which is even faster than 3-gen. Only a maximum of 2 additional moves are required to correctly permute the corners. The process is called, [[CPLS]]. However, the solver must determine the permutation of all the unsolved corners to execute this step; this is a slow process, which makes ZZ-d inappropriate for speed solving. [[2GLL]] to finish.<br />
* '''ZZ-Orbit:''' A variation of ZZ-d, the solver will permute all the corners during insertion of last F2L's pair. Recognition is not so straight forward, but much faster than that of ZZ-d. Once performed, a [[2-gen]] subset of [[ZZLL]], consisting of 71 algs, can be used for 1-look last layer. This has many similarities to [[CPLS]]/[[2GLL]], but was developed independently. Thread:[http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?34994-At-last-ZZ-method-has-been-COMPLETED!!!!!!!!&p=705181#post705181] Guide:[http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?43208-ZZ-Orbit-Guide]<br />
* '''ZZ-e:''' Similar to ZZ-d and ZZ-Orbit. After solving left block, the solver swaps remaining corners to put the cube into an <R, U> group. The process is called, 'Semi-Permunitation'. This makes the rest of the solve [[2-gen]], which is even faster than 3-gen. However, the solver must determine the permutation of all the unsolved corners to execute this step; this is a slow process, which makes ZZ-e inappropriate for speed solving, even more than ZZ-d. [[2GLL]] to finish. Post:[http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?20834-ZZ-ZB-Home-Thread&p=768029#post768029]<br />
* '''[[ZZ-reduction]]''' During F2L, the solver employs a technique called [[Phasing]] to correctly permute two opposite LL edges. Then a 2-look orientation/permutation approach is used, with the phased edges preserved in the orientation step, resulting in a reduction of PLL cases down to 9 compared to 21 in full PLL. This is the least algorithm intensive 2-look method for solving the last layer of any [[2LLL]] method, needing 7 + 9 = 16 total algorithms.<br />
* '''ZZ-z: ''' Similar to ZZ-d, ZZ-e, and ZZ-orbit, this variant relies on permuting the corners so that the solve can be done 2-gen after the 3rd step. This variant also has fewer algorithms than any other variant. First, the solver creates an EOLine, left block, CP, 1x2x2 block on BDR, LPELL, 2GLL.<br />
*'''[[ZZ-CT]]:''' This variant solves EO and all but one F2L slot, then inserts the last edge and orients corners in one algorithm, then solves the rest (PLL and one corner), again in one algorithm.<br />
<br />
== Pros ==<br />
* '''Reduced Move Set''': F2L is completed using only R, U and L turns and no cube rotations are required.<br />
* '''Lookahead''': Pre-orientation of edges halves the F2L cases and makes edges easier to find and connect to blocks/corners. During a ZZ solve, the cube is typically held in the same orientation through out the solve which allows a memory map of pieces' correct locations to develop allowing fast/intuitive ability to place pieces without thinking/looking.<br />
* '''Efficiency''': With a blockbuilding-based F2L and pre-orientation of LL edges around 55 moves can be achieved without difficulty. Optimising F2L blokbuilding and adoption of more advanced LL systems such as [[ZBLL]] will reduce this move count significantly.<br />
* '''Ease of Learning''': Most of the difficulty in ZZ is confined to the EOLine stage. Intuitive blockbuilding during F2L is fairly easy to pick up and only 20 algorithms (assuming use of mirrors) are required to achieve a 2-look last layer with [[OCLL]]/[[PLL]].<br />
* '''Flexibility''': With edges pre-oriented many systems exist for completing the last layer in a ZZ solve, ranging from [[OCLL]]/[[PLL]] to [[ZBLL]]. A blockbuilding F2L also allows for the development of many short cuts and tricks as skill improves.<br />
<br />
== Cons ==<br />
* '''Reliance on Inspection''' - ZZ makes heavy use of inspection time, which is fine when 15 seconds is given, but in situations where no inspection is used it can be a drawback. For example, when using reduction on big cubes or within multi-solve scenarios starting a ZZ solve can be difficult. This isn't much more than other methods though.<br />
* '''Difficulty of EOLine''' - EOLine is weird to get used to at first. In order to plan and execute in one step and takes a ''long time'' to master. New users should expect it to take in the order of months to achieve full EOLine inspection in 15 seconds. In the interim, breaking it down into two steps (EO + Line) can be used as a fall-back.<br />
* '''2 Extra F2L Cubies to Solve''' - The first step of Fridrich (Cross) and ZZ (EOLine) are roughly comparable in terms of move-count. The remainder of F2L in ZZ requires solving of two more cubies (10 in total) than Fridrich slots (8 in total). However, freedom to fully rotate the L and R faces and the use of more efficient block building compensates for this apparent disadvantage.<br />
* '''Switching between L and R moves''' - On the other hand, this can feel weird. It takes some time getting used to and mastering. After one does master this though, f2l is really smooth.<br />
<br />
== Notable users ==<br />
* [[Conrad Rider]]<br />
* [[Phil Yu]]<br />
* [[Andrew Nathenson]]<br />
* [[Zbigniew Zborowski]]<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
* [[EOLine]]<br />
* [[Edge Orientation]]<br />
* [[ZZ-blah]]<br />
* [[ZBLL]]<br />
* [[ZBLS]]<br />
* [[VH]]<br />
* [[Winter Variation]]<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
* [http://cube.crider.co.uk ZZ Method Tutorial]<br />
* [http://rubiks-cube.c0.pl/inne/eoline.htm EOLine Solver (Java)]<br />
* YouTube: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6tkUlkjnOE EOLine tutorial]<br />
* YouTube: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHJBsGwnvuQ ZZ Method Variations]<br />
* Speedsolving.com: [http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5180 ZZ Speedcubing Method]<br />
* Speedsolving.com: [http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8235 ZZ Cubers]<br />
* Speedsolving.com: [http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20834 ZZ/ZB Home Thread]<br />
* Speedsolving.com: [http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16020 ZZF2L Move Count]<br />
* Speedsolving.com: [http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8871 Noob's Approach to Missing Link for ZZ-d]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 methods]]<br />
[[Category:3x3x3 speedsolving methods]]</div>4chan