Difference between revisions of "Skis method"

From Speedsolving.com Wiki
(Added explanation, steps, pros, cons and possible improvements)
m
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|name=Skis
 
|name=Skis
 
|image=Skis_method.png
 
|image=Skis_method.png
|proposers=[[WoowyBaby]]
+
|proposers=WoowyBaby
 
|year=2019
 
|year=2019
 
|anames
 
|anames

Latest revision as of 21:27, 9 February 2020

Skis method
Skis method.png
Information about the method
Proposer(s): WoowyBaby
Proposed: 2019
Alt Names: none
Variants: none
No. Steps: 4
No. Algs: 9-42
Avg Moves: <50
Purpose(s):

The Skis method was proposed by WoowyBaby in 2019 as a speedsolving method. It could be described as a mix of Corners First and Roux and was developed to allow for high TPS while maintaining a low movecount and keeping blockbuilding to a minimum. In spite of its potential, it currently doesn't have any active users.

Steps

Skis: Two 1x1x3 blocks ("skis") are built in DL and DR, respectively. Centers can be ignored here.

CLL: The remaining four corners on the top are oriented and permuted in one of 42 algorithms while preserving the DL and DR edges. Most CLL algorithms for 2x2 apply here, although one might also use CMLL (or any other CxLL subset that doesn't destroy DL and DR).

LR: The four edges in the E-slice are solved in pairs. (Similar to 4b of Roux.)

LSE: The last six edges on the M-slice and the U-layer are solved <MU>-gen, usually in multiple steps. Roux LSE is most common, although different approaches (listed in LSE) can be used here as well.

Pros

  • Inspection: Due to the Skis step, most of the solve can be planned in inspection. Therefore, it is sometimes possible to plan up to CLL. This prevents pauses mid-solve due to recognition (which is considered one of the biggest problems in Roux).
  • High TPS: Except for LR, every other step is either planned in inspection or algorithmic, which allows for very high TPS.
  • Less blockbuilding than Roux: Compared to Roux, the Skis method needs comparable or even less blockbuilding at the beginning and none in the middle of the solve. Therefore, less blockbuilding skills and intuitivity are required. This also gives beginners an easier learning curve than Roux does.
  • Algorithms: Only 42 algorithms need to be learned, which is the same as Roux and less than in other popular speedsolving methods like CFOP. Since only the DL and DR edges need to be preserved, most of the very well developed 2x2 CLL algorithms transfer here.
  • Very ergonomic: The Skis step and CLL are mostly <RUF>-gen and LSE is completely <MU>-gen, so turn speed can be very high and there are no rotations.

Cons

  • LR: LR can be harder to learn as it is very intuitive and edges can be almost everywhere. This causes worse lookahead and low TPS. It also doesn't have great ergonomics, so one needs to be able to switch between R, U, F, M and E moves.
  • Slice moves: Because of LR and LSE, this method heavily relies on slice moves, especially M, which can be hard for beginners to get used to and also aren't very easy to execute on big cubes. Since LSE is performed at the end of the solve, there is a higher chance to get a DNF instead of a +2.
  • Very new: As the Skis method is very recent, it hasn't been developed as much as other big speedsolving methods like CFOP, Roux and ZZ and thus has a lot less resources.

Possible improvements

  • E2L: To improve LR, LMCF's algorithmic E2L step can be used to allow for better ergonomics and higher tps because of the pre-made algorithms, although this will highly increase the amount of algorithms that need to be learned.

See also


External links