42

42 method
Information about the method
Proposer(s): Joseph Briggs
Proposed: 2017
Alt Names: Briggs3, B3, Briggs
Variants: TCMLL, TC
No. Steps: 4
No. Algs: 42 (basic)
Avg Moves: 42 STM (basic), 40- STM (advanced)
Purpose(s):

42, Briggs3 (B3 or Briggs for short) started off as an extension to Roux but eventually developed to such an extent it is considered a separate, though related, method.

Steps

  1. First Block (FB)
    1. Solve a 1x2x3 in DL (see Roux)
  2. Second Block Square and 1 oriented corner (SBsquare+c)
    1. Solve a 1x2x2 block in BDR
    2. Orient an LL corner and place in UBR
    3. Perform an R move
  3. Conjugated CMLL (also known as L5C reduction or Briggs Last Corners (BLC))
  4. Last 7 Edges (L7E)- usually solve in one of two ways:
    • FR first
      1. Orient remaining edges and solve the FR edge (EO+FR)
      2. Solve the UL and UR edges (4b in the Roux method)
      3. Solve the remaining edges (4c in the Roux method)
    • ULUR first
      1. Solve edges which go in ULUR or UFUB (including FR if it is in position) and orient edges
      2. Solve theremaining edge in the R layer
      3. Solve the remaining edges (conjugated 4c)

Pros

  • Low movecount compared to other methods
  • Relatively low number of algorithms
  • Less complex than many methods with a similar movecounts/algorithm counts
  • After the first block is built the rest of the cube can be solved mostly with R, r, M and U moves thus eliminating rotations.
  • The blockbuilding and intuitive nature of the method allows for rapid improvements in lookahead and inspection
  • Non-linear blocks are easier to implement as less is solved compared to Roux
  • CMLL is one of the best algorithm sets as there are only 42 cases and most algorithms are fast OLLCPs from CFOP
  • Relatively easy case recognition

Cons

  • Block building can be difficult for a beginner to get used to. The reliance on r and M moves may also be difficult for some people, so much so that cubers who have trouble with M turns should probably not use this as their main method (or better, practice practice practice the M moves). Slice turns can also be slower than using a quarter-turn metric.
  • Since the M-slice is used often, especially in the final stages, there is a larger chance of a DNF rather than a +2 if the solver misses the second flick in an M2, or if the solver misses the last M move. It is a DNF because M uses both the R and L face in one.
  • Multiple cases for each algorithm can be difficult to get use to.

Potential Improvements

  • It is possible that at least some of the CMLL algorithms could be less efficient than is possible as there is a slightly altered configuration of piece though so far this has not been pursued
  • TC (Tyrannical Caterpillar): similar to tyrannical caterpillar for Roux, it is possible that the FR edge could be inserted during the algorithm for solving the last 5 corners though this may provide a smaller benefit when compared to Roux and it is possible that it would not give any advantage at all
  • EG: similar to PEG, it is possible that the pairs in the blocks could be solved in different slots and these could be solved during L5C using EG algorithms with wide moves so that the pairs and blocks preserved and solved. This, like PEG itself, has also not been pursued.
  • F/B L5C: instead of performing an R/R'/L/L' move before L5C, a solver could do an F or B move to reduce the L5C cases though this would require an adapted form of L7E and the extra F or B move can interfere with the ergonomics of L7E.

Advanced Techniques

  • FR SBsquare: this is not necessarily an advanced technique and should be a logical step forward where the FR SBsquare is built and the oriented LL corner is placed in UFR before the solver performs an R' move before the conjugated CMLL algorithm is performed. Another extension in the same vein is to solve the right block completely and solve a square on the left of the cube rather than the right though as this may not provide much benefit as most algorithms and cubers are right handed so the lefty algorithms needed may be slower.
  • TCMLL: it is possible to use TCMLL algorithms so that the corner in BR slot after the R move does not have to be oriented though this requires more (128) algorithms.
  • Non-matching centres: The first two blocks can be built around incorrect centres. This allows for more efficiency and allows rouxers to take advantage of pre-built blocks. The centres are corrected directly before or after conjugated CMLL with either u M' u or u' M' u.
  • IDL (Influencing During L7E): a set of semi-intuitive algorithms similar to EOLR which are used to influence addition edges during the first or second step of L7E
  • NMLL: similar to the Roux technique, this allows the cuber to solve any of the 4 possible SBsquares. This can be seen as an extension of the FR SBsquare. While this could increase efficiency, it suffers from the same problem that Roux does: the L5C recognition can become more difficult (though this is not such a big problem when compared to Roux as all cases would be only the R2 separate block cases would be used and the recognition for L5C can be adapted much more easily compared to NMLL in other methods.).
  • Non-linear Blocks: an extension which may become more common as the method grows, this would involve combining the first and second steps so that both more of the cube is solved more easily in inspection as there is much less restriction and less solving when compared to Roux first step and second step where the technique is already quite well established.
  • F/F',B/B' L7E: this is where the solver performs an F or B move prior to or during L7E in order to give better cases. This would be most useful when used in conjunction with IDL. However, this means that there will be additional F/B moves in L7E which may interfere with the ergonomics of the step.
  • LPEC (L5C (with) Partial Edge Control): it is possible to learn multiple algorithms for each L5C case in order to force better L7E cases.

As a 2x2x2 method

The L5C/conjugated CMLL step can be applied to the 2x2x2 method and can be viewed as an extension to VOP essentially turning the method into a 2-step one. However, in this variation it is likely that CLL rather than CMLL algorithms would be used. By using additional algorithms, it is possible that the "V" does not need to "correctly" solved. In a similar way to how EG solves only a face, only the one colour of the "V" may need to be solved. It is possible to use other more advanced Briggs3 techniques such as NMLL. With the techniques listed previously it is possible that the first step may frequently become a "skipped" step or have only a 1 or 2 move solution when combined with colour neutrality thereby giving much easier 1-looking. However, it is possible that all the techniques may make the recognition much harder. Comparisons in the technique can also be drawn to TCLL or Varasano though alternatively it can also be viewed as an extension to them

A Note on Corners

Although 42 is frequently used with CMLL, this is merely because these algorithms are well know so only a new recognition would be needed. Some solvers have learned alternate algorithms which have been specifically generated for use in BTR. These algorithms are often much shorter and more ergonomic so it is advisable that any more advanced solver should learn these. See the algorithm sheet in External Links for a set generated by Shadowslice.

See Also

External Links