Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum
 It is currently Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:28 am

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

 Page 1 of 2 [ 62 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:39 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
This question is cropping up a lot, so I thought I would post the major methods, and then maybe a mod could sticky this thread so we don't have a load of people asking the same question.

It is recommended that you don't just jump to one method. Read through the list and find a few that interest you, then look into each, keep your options open.

Fridrich Method:
A very fast First 2 Layers method, start by solving a cross on one face, then proceeding to solve the First 2 Layers, followed by a 2 Look Last Layer solve, basic method has 77 algorithms (without the inverse of them), recognised as one of the fastest methods out there:
http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/cube.html
Other Fridrich algorithms can be found in many other sites, here are just a few.
Bob Burton: http://www.cubewhiz.com/
Shotaro 'Macky' Makisumi: http://cubefreak.hp.infoseek.co.jp/
Speedcubing.com Collection: http://speedcubing.com/

ZB:
ZB includes ZBF2L and ZBLL. First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved with any method, cross and 3 c/e-pairs for example. Then, using ZBF2L, the last pair is solved and LL edges oriented. Then the rest is solved with ZBLL, in other words, corners are oriented and LL is permuted in one alg. There's no advanced or beginner version about ZBF2L, always only edges are oriented, not corners.
http://zborowski.republika.pl/expert3x3x3method.html

Petrus Method:
As with many methods, this starts with an F2L step proceeded by completing the last layer. Unlike Fridrich, Petrus is not algorithm heavy and is based around intuitive block building. Basically, the method follows this structure; solve a 2x2x2 block, expand that to a 2x2x3, orient bad edges, complete F2L, solve corners with COLL and then finally permute any remaining edges if needed.
Some people, instead of learning COLL and edge permutation, prefer to learn the 7 corner only OLL algorithms and then finish the LL with PLL.
Petrus Method: http://lar5.com/cube/

Gilles Roux Method:
Another unique method. It works with block building, similarly to Petrus, but in a different fashion. You start by solving a 1x2x3 block on the left hand side, followed by an identical block on the right side. Thereafter you permute and orient all remaining Last Layer corners using CMLL. From here, only M and U turns are made. The next step consists of orienting all remaining "bad edges". After orienting the "bad edges" you solve the two edges simultaneously which belong above the 1x2x3 blocks. The last, and shortest, step is permuting the final 4 edges.
Roux Method: http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Intro.html

Waterman Method:
Advanced corners first method. about 90 algorithms to learn. Solve a face on L, do the corners on R and then solve the edges. An extremely fast method.
http://www.rubikscube.info
(Thanks to Kirjava for that information)

Heise method:

This method doesn't require any algorithms. First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved intuitively. Then remaining edges are oriented. After that you create 2 c/e-pairs, and solve the remaining edges. The last 3 corners are solved using a commutator.
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/method.html

VH method:
First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved with Fridrich or some other method. Then the last pair is paired up, but not inserted. Then it's inserted to F2L and LL edges are oriented in one go. Then, using COLL, corners of LL are solved while preserving edge orientation. Then edges are permuted.
http://www.cubestation.co.uk/cs2/

ZZ method:
This is Zbigniew Zborowski's method. First, DF and DB edges are solved and all 12 edges are oriented. Then F2L without one c/e-pair is solved using RUL. Then the last pair and LL edges are solved in one go. After that LL corners are solved with ZZLL.
http://www.speedcubing.com.pl/nooks_zz.htm
(Thanks for Johannes91 for this information)

David J. Salvia Method:

I built my method around freedom of movement. This means that most solves take between 33 and 54 moves (I count any movement of a side or slice as one move.)
In the F2L many cubists do "the cross" first, I do it last. Where many people use OLL PLL, I use CLL ELL.
http://www.speedcubing.com/DavidJSalvia.html
(Thanks to David Salvia himself for this information)

MGLS:
Macky originally came up with this idea from Heise's old method. It's not a full cube solution, but rather an alternative system that solves from last slot up to PLL. First, the last slot edge is placed and the LL edges oriented (ELS) and then the last slot corner is placed and the LL corners are oriented in one algorithm (CLS). There are 125 distinct cases, which can be solved with 69 algorithms and their mirrors.
This method, incidentally, can be used with any F2L method, Petrus, Heise, ZZ...
http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/
(Information from Lucas Garron)

Human Thistlethwaite:
Ryan Heise came up with a human-executable version of Thistlethwaite's solution. Using short algorithms and intuitive steps, the cube is put into successively stricter groups until it is solved.
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/human_thistlethwaite_algorithm.html
(Information from Lucas Garron)

Please feel free to post anymore methods you feel should be mentioned and I will update it as I go along.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Last edited by Pembo on Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:28 pm, edited 12 times in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:46 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Pembo wrote:
ZBF2L:
This is an interesting F2L method, the basic method leaves the last layer with a cross already solved, which leaves only 7 algorithms to learn for Permuting Last Layer

Er.. what?

Waterman Method:
Advanced corners first method. about 90 algorithms to learn. Solve a face on L, do the corners on R and then solve the edges. An extremely fast method.
http://www.rubikscube.info

~Thom

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:48 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Yer I always do that, I realised just before you posted that and corrected the PLLs to OLLs

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Wed Jul 26, 2006 1:11 pm

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Pembo, nice list! I think this is a good idea, because beginners often ask this. But I have a couple things about ZB.

Pembo wrote:
ZBF2L:
This is an interesting F2L method, the basic method leaves the last layer with a cross already solved, which leaves only 7 algorithms to learn for Orienting Last Layer, the advanced method solves F2L and then completely Orient Last Layer in one go. This method has a LOT of algorithms to learn. Lars Vandenbergh's site has the basic method, which is 306 algorithms, the advanced method has over 800!

ZB includes ZBF2L and ZBLL. First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved with any method, cross and 3 c/e-pairs for example. Then, using ZBF2L, the last pair is solved and LL edges oriented. Then the rest is solved with ZBLL, in other words, corners are oriented and LL is permuted in one alg. There's no advanced or beginner version about ZBF2L, always only edges are oriented, not corners.

Heise method:
This method doesn't require any algorithms. First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved intuitively. Then remaining edges are oriented. After that you create 2 c/e-pairs, and solve the remaining edges. The last 3 corners are solved using a commutator.
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/method.html

VH method:
First, F2L without one c/e-pair is solved with Fridrich or some other method. Then the last pair is paired up, but not inserted. Then it's inserted to F2L and LL edges are oriented in one go. Then, using COLL, corners of LL are solved while preserving edge orientation. Then edges are permuted.
http://www.cubestation.co.uk/cs2/

ZZ method:
This is Zbigniew Zborowski's method. First, DF and DB edges are solved and all 12 edges are oriented. Then F2L without one c/e-pair is solved using RUL. Then the last pair and LL edges are solved in one go. After that LL corners are solved with ZZLL.

Top

 Post subject: speedcubing methodsPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:47 am

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:17 am
You might try the Salvia method...

http://www.speedcubing.com/DavidJSalvia.html

DJ

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:54 am

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Can I have some information on it please David? just so people reading it will have an overview before looking at it.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 3:24 pm

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Eastern Michigan University (Minnesota at heart)
What about the basic LBL method? It's basically an even easier Fridrich method. Don't count it out. I still average 40 seconds with it.

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

20, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Top

 Post subject: My methodPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:39 pm

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:17 am
Pembo wrote:
Can I have some information on it please David? just so people reading it will have an overview before looking at it.

I built my method around freedom of movement. This means that most solves take between 33 and 54 moves (I count any movement of a side or slice as one move.)

In the F2L many cubists do "the cross" first, I do it last. Where many people use OLL PLL, I use CLL ELL.

Cheers

David J

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:25 pm

Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:50 pm
Location: New York
thats what I used to do for the LL. but a lot of the algs for the coners were slow to perform and recognize. they may use less moves but they take longer than OLL to do. They are more handy on a 2x2x2 because then you can do the LL in one step and half the move of OLL and PLL.

_________________
Average: 14.38 seconds

Individual Times: 14.17, 12.93, (12.89), 13.12, 14.00, 15.59, 16.23, 14.11, 14.03, (17.61), 14.75, 14.89

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:55 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
is there any video footage of the waterman method? i've never seen/heard of this method, and it sounds interesting to look at.

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 7:42 am

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
is there any video footage of the waterman method? i've never seen/heard of this method, and it sounds interesting to look at.

Video evidence exists of a sub-18 solve with it by Waterman himself.

==

I'm bumping this old thread because it should be sticky'd.

Sausage, you know what to do.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 7:54 am

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
Thom wrote:
Video evidence exists of a sub-18 solve with it by Waterman himself.

Is that on the net?

EDIT:

Waterman on google didn't find it, but Mark Waterman did. Oops!

http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/med ... terman.wmv

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:35 am

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
BUMP!

Can we have this stickied Sandy?

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 11:31 am

Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:30 pm
Location: bay area, california
How about more generalized corners first methods (ala Ortega? Verasano?)
Maybe not the fastest out there, but easy to learn.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:53 pm

Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:40 pm
Location: California

MGLS:
Macky originally came up with this idea from Heise's old method. It's not a full cube solution, but rather an alternative system that solves from last slot up to PLL. First, the last slot edge is placed and the LL edges oriented (ELS) and then the last slot corner is placed and the LL corners are oriented in one algorithm (CLS). There are 125 distinct cases, which can be solved with 69 algorithms and their mirrors.
This method, incidentally, can be used with any F2L method, Petrus, Heise, ZZ...
http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/

Human Thistlethwaite
Ryan Heise came up with a human-executable version of Thistlethwaite's solution. Using short algorithms and intuitive steps, the cube is put into successively stricter groups until it is solved.
http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/human_thistlethwaite_algorithm.html

(Isn't Ryan on this forum?)

By the way, should we add BLD methods? 3-cycle, Pochmann (old), and M2R2 are perfectly good cube solutions (especially the latter).

ZBF2L correction: "solves F2L and then completely solves Last Layer in one go."

And I question this:
Quote:
Petrus: The shortest method in terms of face turns per solve
Full ZB? Heise?

_________________
www.garron.us
Nothing takes time from expanding your knowledge like doing your homework and applying to college...

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 1:13 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Lucas Garron wrote:

(Isn't Ryan on this forum?)

By the way, should we add BLD methods? 3-cycle, Pochmann (old), and M2R2 are perfectly good cube solutions (especially the latter).

ZBF2L correction: "solves F2L and then completely solves Last Layer in one go."

And I question this:
Quote:
Petrus: The shortest method in terms of face turns per solve
Full ZB? Heise?

I may reword the ZB section, unless someone has a better alternative?

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 11:03 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
For the ZB method I was under the impression that you learn f2l algs 93, Including Mirrors. I believe to leave you with the + solved on your last layer. And then ZBLL was 300 Algs, not sure about Mirrors/inversions. You can Solve the F2l-1c/e pair, how ever you like, probably Fridrich though. Zz and Zb are two Different methods.

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:04 am

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Sticky or not, I don't think this would really help. Anyone can find lots of information by searching a bit. And those who don't respect others will just keep asking questions, no matter how easy it would be to find the answer(s).

@LeeMaster:
I don't think posting numbers that you aren't sure about is going to help. And the correct ones have been mentioned multiple times on this forum already, I think.

_________________
for(\$"=@_=split??,"Jrsk an treP rehlohacteu,";\$";\$\="\r"){\$\.=\$.=chr
32+95*rand,\$_-\$"or\$.ne\$_[--\$"%2?-\$"-1:\$"]&&\$"++for++\$|..\$";print}<>

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 3:45 pm

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Norway
Hi

Why not add Jasmine Lee's beginner solution to the list? It's an example of a simple pure LBL (layer by layer) method worth knowing about. It's also a useful stepping stone for the commonly known Fridrich method(CFOP)...

-Per

_________________
"Life is what happens to you while you are busy making other plans" -John Lennon, Beautiful Boy

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:28 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
I was not posting numbers that I was not sure about. I Read up on Zbigniew Zborowski's about there Being 300 no more no less LL algs, And about the 93 was a Number I though I remembered But the the number was actualy 96, Which is Wrong I miss Read something and forgot to do some adding Hah, The actual number is 306, But The ZB method From anything I've Ever read does not Go From A missing c/e Pair To solved in 1 algs, Its defiantly two algs, 606 in total with the ZBF2L and ZBLL, If it were 1 alg to solve from the c/e pair it would be over 91000 algs to remember, The point of ZB was to speed up the LL but still have a "Manageable" (In quotations because 606 is alot) and 91000 is no where near manageable. Thank you

LeeG

*Edit, I think to solve the ZB problem is to add The ZBLL, and ZBF2L and just Make it as one Method, The ZB method? Which is ZBF2L and ZBLL" ZBF2L Leaves you with The Plus solved, And then ZBLL solve the rest in 1 alg*

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 8:10 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
Just to back my self up the the ZB info Here is the Link to Zbigniew's Page on his method http://www.zborowski.republika.pl/exper ... ethod.html . It is where I got my info on the method was. There are Exactly 799 Algs for the whole Method The F2L and the LL, and Including Mirrors and inverses 801 if you include the solved states. I hope this helps Clear this issue with The ZB method up. As with the other methods maybe mention of the Creaters would be nice, Zbigniew and Ron VB?

LeeG

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 9:12 pm

Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 7:59 pm
Lucas Garron wrote:
(Isn't Ryan on this forum?)

No But I do get notification when certain keywords pop up (e.g. "Ryan", "Heise").

perfredlund wrote:
Why not add Jasmine Lee's beginner solution to the list?

Technically, it is "Jasmine's tutorial for a common variant of Singmaster's solution". Jasmine's tutorial was in turn based on a similar tutorial by Dan Knights from around 2000 (I don't remember the exact date), and there was a link/credit once, but that link disappeared around the same time that Dan's old page disappeared. However, I believe the source of this solution can be traced back to Singmaster's 1980 book "Notes on Rubik's Magic Cube" (Someone correct me if I'm wrong), and so I would suggest remembering to credit Singmaster for this solution.

_________________
My rubik's cube and typing records

http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:33 am

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Norway
Hi

I have that Singmaster book. And the solution there is entirely different and is very inefficient. So maybe it's a later more evolved Singmaster method

-Per

_________________
"Life is what happens to you while you are busy making other plans" -John Lennon, Beautiful Boy

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 7:43 am

Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:57 pm

viewtopic.php?t=3877

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:28 am

Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:59 pm
Location: Houston, TX, USA
I noticed that the description of Petrus's LL system seems a little off. It talks about "leaving only seven OLL algorithms to learn", but the system on Lars's site is alot more like a CLL -> 3alg ELL system.

_________________
http://www.geocities.com/sxsk17/umcproject/umchome.html
My website, IT DOESN'T WORK ANYMORE but it used to be the only site with "official" guides for the Helicopter Cube, SuperX, Master Skewb, and many more!

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:36 am

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland
AndrewG wrote:
I noticed that the description of Petrus's LL system seems a little off.

Yeah, there are some weird things in the descriptions. Probably because they were written by someone who uses only Fridrich and not those methods.

_________________
for(\$"=@_=split??,"Jrsk an treP rehlohacteu,";\$";\$\="\r"){\$\.=\$.=chr
32+95*rand,\$_-\$"or\$.ne\$_[--\$"%2?-\$"-1:\$"]&&\$"++for++\$|..\$";print}<>

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 9:52 am

Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:59 pm
Location: Houston, TX, USA
well, yea, it is hard to understand methods well when you don't use them. but by the way, the Salvia method looks really interesting. it could probably be combined really well with something like Roux to help Fridrich solvers switch over or something.

_________________
http://www.geocities.com/sxsk17/umcproject/umchome.html
My website, IT DOESN'T WORK ANYMORE but it used to be the only site with "official" guides for the Helicopter Cube, SuperX, Master Skewb, and many more!

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:44 pm

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:55 pm
AndrewG wrote:
well, yea, it is hard to understand methods well when you don't use them. but by the way, the Salvia method looks really interesting. it could probably be combined really well with something like Roux to help Fridrich solvers switch over or something.

I don't find it hard to understand methods I don't practice.

The obvious combinatin of Roux (or T? ) and Heise wouldn't be much of a difference and it wouldn't be very good because an edge you might need for the FR and BR pair might be at DL. Plus it would have too many rotations or S turns. It would be like a columns first method with an ending like Roux.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 2:52 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Johannes Laire wrote:
AndrewG wrote:
I noticed that the description of Petrus's LL system seems a little off.

Yeah, there are some weird things in the descriptions. Probably because they were written by someone who uses only Fridrich and not those methods.

Any contributions would be appreciated, but you don't approve of this thread so go figure..

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:41 pm

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:00 am
Location: Shanghai, China
Pembo, you are describing the Petrich method in the Petrus method.

The last layer, you are only correct in the fact that the edges are indeed oriented correctly. First, you permute the corners, then orient them, then do edge perm.

Don't forget the Tim Sun (me) method!

It's currently one of my learning tasks, and can be improved greatly. Currently, I average around 23sec with it, not knowing 85% of the total cases. I consider it to be an alternate path from VH in the ultimate ZB/ZZ, whatever you want to call it.

1. Cross, can be improved by X-cross
2. F2L-1, can be improved by Sebastian or Jason's multislotting (they are slightly different)
3. VHF2L, can be improved by ZBF2L
4. Corner Permutation
5. 2GLL (2-generator last layer) or Sune/Anti-Sune combination.

4-5 can be improved by combining into ZBLL, but that's too far from my level.

I currently know only 10/32 VHF2L algorithms, 40/84 of the 2GLL (including reflections/inverses/whatever).

_________________
[02:25] <fusion> does look ahead on a 3x3 make someone faster?
[02:25] <Swordsman_Kirby> Yes.
[02:25] <fusion> maybe i should try that

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:36 am

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Pembo wrote:
Any contributions would be appreciated, but you don't approve of this thread so go figure..

I didn't want to be nitpicky, but here we go:
"F2L Alternatives" seems very odd to me, it's the same thing as Fridrich. As was discussed on this forum a while ago, algorithms don't make the method.
ZBF2L is not a method, ZB is. I tried to correct your mistakes but you just appended my text after yours, so now the description isn't making any sense. And there aren't over 800 algs to learn (but at least it's much closer than what's said here...)
In Petrus: "Basic method is to create a 2x2x3 block on the cube, then proceede to solve a 3x3x2 block, but also flipping the edges on the Last Layer" is a bit vague, bad edges are fixed after 2x2x3 block as a separate step. The title would be more consistent with the others if it was "Petrus method" instead of "Lars Petrus". And as Andrew said, there isn't OLL in Petrus.

There are also a few typos I think.

_________________
for(\$"=@_=split??,"Jrsk an treP rehlohacteu,";\$";\$\="\r"){\$\.=\$.=chr
32+95*rand,\$_-\$"or\$.ne\$_[--\$"%2?-\$"-1:\$"]&&\$"++for++\$|..\$";print}<>

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:30 am

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
you aren't being nitpicky Johannes, this thread is supposed to be a community effort, and more importantly a concise guide for major speedcubing methods. As a non-Petrus user, I expected to get a lot wrong and I am glad some of you Petrus are willing to help me correct the list, in fact, that goes for all the methods.

As you can see, I have rewrote the Petrus section, which I *think* is more accurate than before.

Also, I have added just your submission for ZB, but I seem to be missing a link to the method, any takers?

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:39 am

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:41 am
Zborowski describes the ZB method here:
http://zborowski.republika.pl/expert3x3x3method.html

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:26 am

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: NY, USA
Are we seriously arguing over the number of ZB algorithms to learn? Zborowski says it himself:

Not counting inverses and mirrors, 124 + 176 = 300;
Not counting mirrors, 157 + 269 = 426;
Counting all cases, 305 + 492 = 797.

So it really depends on how good you are at inverting or mirroring on the fly. Inverting is hard, so Zborowski recommends learning the second set, but if you can't mirror on the spot you will have to learn over 300 more cases.

_________________
My official times
Puzzle Solving Service! - a puzzle that has never been scrambled and solved has been wasted.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:42 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
Agreed 100% that Mirroring is Easy to do. I was going to give mention to that when I stated my Numbers, Heh, To late now, Anyway, The list is coming on well. I guess for me its nice to See the ZB thingy sorted out When I added the numbers up on the page I guess I did it wrong (Or was including the solved states).

LeeG

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: WatermanPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 12:22 am

Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 12:19 am
Does anyone know of other videos of the Waterman Method in use? I have seen one of Josef Jelinek at strangepuzzle.com, but that and the aforementioned link are all.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:09 am

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:00 am
Location: Shanghai, China
Huh? There is only one solved state, so why are you adding +2 for the algorithm count?

_________________
[02:25] <fusion> does look ahead on a 3x3 make someone faster?
[02:25] <Swordsman_Kirby> Yes.
[02:25] <fusion> maybe i should try that

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:38 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
Swords, Is that directed at me? If so the reason was that The Numbers given already had the solved states Included so when I added 1 to the Number for what I thought didn't already have the solved state, Therefor +2.

LeeG

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:34 pm

Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:28 pm
Location: Northern Central California
Are there any edges first methods that could be included in the list? For example, the method on Georges Helm's site attributed to Philip Marshall? How fast can the Cube be solved using that method?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:38 pm

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:00 am
Location: Shanghai, China
How do you get +2? For ZBF2L, there is no solved state, otherwise the solver wasn't paying attention.

_________________
[02:25] <fusion> does look ahead on a 3x3 make someone faster?
[02:25] <Swordsman_Kirby> Yes.
[02:25] <fusion> maybe i should try that

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:46 pm

Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:52 pm
for F2l people see the solved state as the pair already in. Not the whole Cube, Basically the C/e pair is already inserted, Thats that C/e Already solved. I Seen the number (That was already including this "Solved" State). Not realizing that it was already included. I added another one For the "Solved" state, that i though was already not there. Am I making sense?

LeeG

_________________
Woo! Broke 3 on a 4x4x4.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:33 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Bump for great justice!

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:58 pm

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:55 pm
Pembo wrote:

Gilles Roux Method:

Another unique method, but works in blocks like the Petrus method. You start by solving a 1x2x3 block and then solve another 1x2x3 block on the other side of the cube. Next you solve the last 4 corners and finally the edges and centers.

Roux Method: http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Intro.html

Another unique method. It works with block building, similarly to Petrus, but in a different fashion. You start by solving a 1x2x3 white-faced block on the left hand side, followed by an identical block on the right side with Orange as your U face. Thereafter you permute and orient all remaining Last Layer corners using CMLL. The next step consists of orienting all remaining "bad edges", which is also similar to Petrus, but must be done in a different manner: there is an in-depth set of algorithms that not only orients the edges left but also permutes the White/Orange and Yellow/Orange edges, therefore eliminating the coming step. After orienting the "bad edges" you place the White/Orange and Yellow/Orange edges simultaneously above their corresponding 1x2x3 blocks. The last, and shortest, step is permuting the final 4 edges, and this cannot be done unless you have correctly oriented all the edges in the prior step.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:26 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
I will use that, but the parts about the colours is a load of rubbish. Infact, when Gilles does FMC (which he is very good at) he often solves one 1x2x3, and then do the other one upside down. I do believe he even uses this for speedcubing at some point.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:31 pm

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:55 pm
Pembo wrote:
I will use that, but the parts about the colours is a load of rubbish. Infact, when Gilles does FMC (which he is very good at) he often solves one 1x2x3, and then do the other one upside down. I do believe he even uses this for speedcubing at some point.

Well I apologize for that, I was going from second hand information from a video, so I probably should have left it out. But I will say it does help quite a lot in later steps, along with trying to recognize that peices you need.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:41 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
But you are limiting yourself to one block...
Block building methods suggest colour neutrality to reduce move count, less moves is generally faster.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:47 pm

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:55 pm
Ah! But I can debate that by using the same color scheme, I can quicken my recognition, because I'm always looking for the same pieces, so you can pick the out faster, as compared to having to readjust to the new colors every time.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:30 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Politely Owned wrote:
Ah! But I can debate that by using the same color scheme, I can quicken my recognition, because I'm always looking for the same pieces, so you can pick the out faster, as compared to having to readjust to the new colors every time.

You don't have to adjust if you are neutral.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:37 pm

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:55 pm
Well if you're neatral sure, I guess, but theres no way to be completely neutral, its just so difficult..

But I will say you have the upper hand, assuming you [anyone attempting], has the ability to be very neutral to the colors, but its very difficult to do that, so I would suggest you do keep the colors unless you can be neutral.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Speed Cubing MethodsPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:00 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
You only see it as so difficult because you're used to using only certain colours and you started like that.

If you are colour neutral from the beginning, it poses no difficulty whatsoever in allowing you to continue using it. Even switching should not be that hard. Many people are neutral.

Partial neutrality like dual-colour solving or NMCMLL is a good middle ground.

_________________
#

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 2 [ 62 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next

 All times are UTC - 5 hours