# Difference between revisions of "User:Danegraphics"

Steven Mortensen, also known as Dane man on the forums. Known for the creation of BLL and collaborating the organization of a Finger trick notation.

When it comes to cubing, he isn't into speed as much as he is into the novelty of elegant and intuitive solutions.

Prefers to be happy.

Sometimes writes in the third person to sound more official.

## Methods Proposed

### BLL

BLL was developed over time as his standard method of solving the cube, which he uses to this day. It can be read about and understood on the BLL page or on the forums (Thread)

### Diaper Method/ZBLBL

The following is copied directly from his post here.

Diaper Method.

This method was meant to be more silly than serious.

1-Solve the cross, just as any other cross based method. 2-Solve the middle layer edges while simultaneously placing all of the first layer corners into the last layer. This makes the diaper shape on each side. (0-8 moves per edge HTM) 3-Place the first three corners in the first layer. (avg 7 moves HTM). 4-The last corner will be placed while simultaneously orienting the last layer edges. (24 algs, 14 excluding mirrors. Has an average of 9 moves HTM. The smallest of these algs are used in step 3.) 5-LL as desired starting with already oriented edges.

While it doubles the moves for the F2L to be completed, it also orients the LL edges, allowing for the interesting variations of the LL with edges oriented.

The benefits of this algorithm are that you get the same effect as ZB, but with much fewer algorithms. The cons are that it is complicated and tricky to learn. Not only that, but compared to ZZ, there are algorithms to learn to finish the F2L with the LL edges oriented. Really, not a speed method. Just a fun experimental one.

Algorithms for step 2 are intuitive. Like Fridrich F2L, except half the corners are acceptable and in any orientation.

Algorithms for steps 3 and 4 can be found as a subset of ZBLS (aka ZBF2L). They are only the first eight of each page: 1- First eight of these. 2- First eight of these. 3- First eight of these. Making 24 in total.

ZBLBL

This method is more efficient than the Diaper Method, modifying the LBL by inserting the last middle edge while simultaneously orienting the LL edges (only 21 algorithms, with avg of 8 moves HTM). It is also much easier to find and insert the first layer corners, than to insert middle edges while separating corners as in step 2 of the Diaper Method. The algorithms for ZBLBL are found here and here. I recommend you try this method as well.

OLL for these methods is reduced to 7 algorithms if you go that direction (OLL/PLL). Another variation of the LL that could be done (this I'm still developing the algorithms for as well) is where one permutes the edges while orienting the corners. This step has 42 algorithms, but the resulting PLL only needs 4 algs (H, Aa, Ab, E). Though recog for the first step is slightly tricky, it still works once learned.

### Skipper F2L (SF2L)

The following is copied directly from his thread post here

Skipper F2L (SF2L)

1-While performing F2L, one inserts the first two pairs normally. 2-Insert the corner of the third pair, not worrying about it's edge. 3-Insert the fourth pair using Winter Variation (27 algs). 4-Insert the edge of the third pair using ZBLBL algs (Modified to respect corner orientation, 21 algs. I'm still working on making these to see the avg moves.) 5-You are now left with a 1LLL, being just PLL (21 algs).

Comparing to the standard Fridrich(CFOP) OLL/PLL: avg moves: F2L(6.7*4)+OLL(9.7)+PLL(11.8) = 48.3 HTM avg moves: F2L(6.7*2)+C3P(~4)+WV(8.07)+ZBLBL(~8.5)+PLL(11.8) = 45.77 HTM

So the number of moves isn't reduced a great amount if at all (I need to make the ZBLBL algs to be sure), though, the algorithm count is reduced a little more. (OLL/PLL = 78 algs; WV/ZBLBL/PLL = 69)

The executional downsides to this method is the added recognition of inserting the corner of the third pair to prepare for WV (which should actually be very quick, and thus of little consequence), and the standard look-ahead of the last two F2L pairs becomes increasingly complex (not too much though, it just adds looking for 4 piece orientations per pair). The learning con is that it is quite unorthodox, and a good step out of the way of OLL because it replaces it entirely. Other than that, I see this method as being very effective, holding a lot of potential when it comes speed cubing even (perhaps especially) FMC.