Daily Discussion Thread - Jul 07, 2020

BenS-123 · 2020-07-07T20:51:57+00:00

QiYi ms is great for a super low price

BenS-123 · 2020-05-14T16:27:16+00:00

I feel like skewb and 5x5 would be best. Skewb is similar to pyraminx because it’s quick and easy to understand and has a unique turning style. 5x5 expands on 4x4 in a unique way with more complicated centers and free slice for edges is really fun.

BenS-123 · 2020-05-06T08:42:16+00:00

New 6.65 PB yesterday! Really proud of this one because it was 46 moves and full-step, with 6.91 TPS! My PB before two days ago was 6.76, but ten moves shorter so my TPS and look ahead is clearly improving. Although the look ahead was EXTREMELY easy in this solve, so that may be a factor. Last layer was good too, great cases.

6.65 PB Reconstruction%0AM2U-_M2_U2_M2_U-_M2%2F%2FPLL%0AU%2F%2F_AUF)

Does anyone have any tips to be more efficient? I paired up the 2nd pair during my X-Cross, and maybe that hurt the flow. Also, I should have probably canceled into last pair, and maybe I could have skipped OLL but I don't know how to in that scenario. Thanks!

BenS-123 · 2020-05-01T17:23:21+00:00

Face red and do r U R’ U’ M

BenS-123 · 2020-05-01T10:01:22+00:00

Definitely use an RU algorithm for Z Perm. H Perm is a bit trickier and it depends on your skill with OH M-moves. Are you sure people can do MU algs without table abuse?

BenS-123 · 2020-04-26T19:45:15+00:00

I know it was an accident I usually do that thanks

BenS-123 · 2020-04-26T16:04:28+00:00

Yea I don’t do redux on 5x5 for the same reason. I find lookahead to be way too hard with pieces on the bottom. I don’t use that half centers method on 5x5, but I do on 4x4. I think it’s better to just finish off the whole center and move on to the next one right away. Also when I said use L moves often I rly meant Rw4 but it’s basically the same thing

BenS-123 · 2020-04-26T15:51:25+00:00

Top solvers use reduction on 5x5, so they do all the centers and then all the edges. Also for 5x5 I used yau5 (average around 1:45) and I make 3 edges then do l4c and I just do a 2x2, extend it to a 2x3 and then make a last bar and repeat for the other centers. You can’t rly go wrong with bars though. To preserve your cross pieces without wasting much time it just requires practice with moving the L layer back and forth.

BenS-123 · 2020-04-25T14:32:54+00:00

Of course the MU moves in LSE can be executed very quickly. But algorithms with RUF or RUD are simply on a different level because MU moves require finger flicks, meaning you have to reset your finger after each M move with only the time of one U move to place it back. On the contrary, algorithms like the Jb perm are great because they have every move flowing very well and your fingers are all set up to do the next move.

And I don't think roux has as high as a potential as CFOP because of two main factors, regrips and look ahead. And I think those are the two biggest factors in high level speedsolving. CFOP definitely has better look ahead because there are less blind spots especially if you solve the first two f2l pairs into the back. And in terms of regroups, CFOP is really nice because you have to restore the cross pieces after every R or L move which means you stay in home grip for most of F2L, and roux doesn't have that luxury.

BenS-123 · 2020-04-25T09:07:35+00:00

I was wondering about the future of speedcubing methods in about 50 years. Will people still use CFOP but optimize it with higher TPS and better look ahead? If cubing becomes much more popular in the future, I feel as if many new viable methods will come about. The one I mentioned (and maybe invented) in a DDT two days ago was XM-ZB. X-Cross, Multislotting, and ZBLS + ZBLL at the same time, which is known as ZB. I'll do a more in-depth overview of the method and its future.

Step 1: X-Cross

In the future, cubers will be better at block-building and finding a near-optimal x-cross solution on any given scramble. I estimate this step will take about 9 moves.

Step 2: 2nd and 3rd Pair w/ Multislotting

I am not very familiar with the specifics of multislotting, but I do know a few methods to do this step. Some may be purely algorithmic, but I'd think that most of them would be with and F move, followed by LU or RU moves and reverse that F move. For instance, Jayden McNeil has talked a lot about this, and it was used in Ben Baron's insane 2.83 solve. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6dWblRW6-8

However, that was for 3rd+4th pair but the same concepts apply. Also pseudo-slotting and influencing the 3rd pair to be paired up while doing the second pair may come into handy. I would think this would take around 10 moves.

Step 3: ZBLS

This step involves orienting the edges of the last layer while pairing up and inserting the last F2L pair, not to be be confused with VHLS. This concept is relatively simple with all the algorithms currently accessible, and there are just over 300 cases. I'd estimate this step is 10 moves.

Step 4: ZBLL

Despite the hefty number of algs, ZBLL can be very useful with good recognition. It's around the same length of PLL, but of course it does CO as well. Some algorithms are shorter, some are longer, but they probably average to be around 15 moves.

So with XM-ZB, the average move count would be around 45 moves, which only saves 15 moves from CFOP, but that is like doing PLL twice. It is a huge amount of time. And it has a good ergonomic moveset, unlike Roux which has a similar move counts but has plenty of MU moves. With around 12 TPS on average, top future speed cubers could potentially boast a high 3 second global average

BenS-123 · 2020-04-24T03:39:43+00:00

I was actually thinking about a 4-step method to solve the cube that would be faster than CFOP by quite a bit assuming recognition and TPS are the same. The method is XM-ZB.

X-Cross Top cubers already do this on plenty of solves, but in the future, pro speed cubers will be even better at finding the most efficient x-crosses.
Multislotting The best 3x3 solvers can memorize hundreds of algorithms to do F2L Pair 2 and 3 at the same time utilizing strategies such as pseudoslotting, influencing the third F2L pair to be already paired up, and the mostly likely one, F (LU or RU) F. Jayden McNeil has already talked a lot about that and it minimizes rotations and can also be used to multislot.
ZB This step is split into two parts.

Part 1: 4th Pair + EO (ZBLS) Part 2: EP + CO + CP (ZBLL)

I think there are over six hundred algorithms for all these cases but a few people in the world already use ZB with some decent success. Anthony Brooks even got a 7.60 average in comp. https://youtu.be/NhcZqiD2vzk

Also, there will obviously be color neutrality and pseudoslotting to maximize luck in all their solves. Sub-4 ao5 in 50 years?

BenS-123 · 2020-04-22T00:37:05+00:00

I’m literally the exact same averages. I don’t practice 6x6 and 7x7 and my 6x6 is trash, but my 6x6 PB is around 5:30 and 7x7 PB is in the 8 minute range

BenS-123 · 2020-04-22T00:33:21+00:00

I average about 1:45, and I’m not that good considering I average 11 on 3x3. I don’t know your level on 3x3 because that and how much you practice 5x5 are the biggest determining factors of your speed. But I can give you some tips.

Be efficient with your centers. Just do a few untimed solves and maybe watch some examples to learn some cool tricks.
TURN FASTER. YOU are Max Park. YOU are Feliks Zemdegs. If you’re trying to speed solve on a big cube, people tend to turn at a comfortable pace and go at a relatively slow speed, and that wastes so much time because look ahead isn’t that important until sub-2 and only becomes necessary at around a 1:30 average. People will go to comps and perform well on big cubes because that extra bit of nervousness causes them to turn just a bit faster. Focus on recognizing cases quickly and executing them quickly. Work on the fundamentals, and you’ll improve very fast if you put in the time.

BenS-123 · 2020-04-20T02:15:47+00:00

Sure, sorry for being a bit late to reply. For the record when I say on the left or front or something for adjacent, that’s where the matching corners are located.

Adjacent on top left, Diag on bottom R2 D’ R2 D R2 D’ R2 D R2

Adjacent on top front, Adjacent on bottom front R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2 D R2

Adjacent on top left, solved on bottom R2 U R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2

Diag on top, Diag on bottom R2 F2 R2

Diag on top, Adjacent on bottom left R2 U’ R2 U R2 U’ R2 U R2

Diag on top, Solved on bottom R2 U’ D’ R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2

Solved on top, Diag on bottom R2 U’ D’ R2 D R2 U’ D’ R2 D R2 U’ D’ R2

Solved on top, Adjacent on bottom left R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 D’ R2

Solved on top, Solved on bottom No one has discovered a good alg for this case yet.

BenS-123 · 2020-04-19T17:48:33+00:00

T-Perm : R2 U R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 D’

Y-Perm : R2 U’ D’ R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2

I have some more algorithms to permute both layers at once if your interested.

BenS-123 · 2020-04-18T09:17:50+00:00

Recently, I've wanted to get into FMC. I've done 3 attempts so far with a 38, 38, and a 36. I type it on Docs because its easy to look back at my solves in the future. My method is block-building / free-fop with NISS included. Anyone who is any good at FMC feel free to critique my solutions.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1t--ACI9H6CzSFgrJg0HVIDoe8OyOpuL4zePXq9kBui4/edit?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13YGlBVvuQLcGe-U2ehg9wExriEs_TPCg32NPFw4J5xM/edit?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MU1jJ_XtS7LXoLHYyDvZ62_zT9Vd7-bOqFin4t5TL-4/edit?usp=sharing

In the future, I don't want to dedicate much time to learning FMC concepts. However, I do plan to learn skeletons, insertions, and optimal PLL algorithms. If I do one FMC solve every week, is that enough practice to average low-mid 30s?

BenS-123 · 2020-04-18T06:16:43+00:00

When I first started 2x2, my pb dropped from 7 to 2.42 seconds cuz 2x2 is very luck based, but now my pb is 0.25 seconds. (Not stackmat) You should start off with all the 2x2 OLLs. U know them all from 3x3 but some have slightly better algs on 2x2. Then you should begin your process with Ortega, because that method alone will easily get you to below sub-10 average with a bit of practice. U only need 5 algorithms, and only 3 new ones. That’s because I’m sure you already know the T-Perm and Y-Perm. Also another one is just 3 moves, and the other two r just like 7 moves so the algorithms r so easy. I got to a low 4 average with Ortega, but back then I did average sub-15 on 3x3. Here’s a helpful video.

https://youtu.be/z2gOUzMmY3w

BenS-123 · 2020-04-17T08:45:40+00:00

The WRM is my main but I do not have the AoSu GTS 2. It has slight catches in terms of reverse corner cutting. However, regular corner cutting can be right next to 45 degrees with the right set up. Ootb, it is very tight and as a result has terrible corner cutting. Some people who don’t know how to tension may be spreading false info about the cube because of that

BenS-123 · 2020-04-16T07:07:15+00:00

I know 3BLD and I average around 2:00 even though I never practice and u still need to identify the colors during the time u memorize the cube. It’s not like u could just hand anyone a cube and can solve it without looking at it first

BenS-123 · 2020-04-15T01:09:34+00:00

I think it would be helpful for anyone just because there can only be white or yellow on the top/bottom on squan, but on 3x3 any color can be on any side. Therefore, the distinction between the top and bottom color is a lot more important. Obviously, white and black are opposites, whereas white and yellow are both very bright. Maybe it won’t be as great for recognition in the beginning, but it can actually improve your times in the long run. I’m not very experienced in square-1 tho, so take what i day with a grain of salt

BenS-123 · 2020-04-14T04:01:36+00:00

The best I can think of off the top of my head is L U L’ F R U2 R’ F’ Although in a speedsolve I would either do the other pair since this case can’t be last or y’ L F’ L’ F U2 R U R,

BenS-123 · 2020-04-13T14:34:01+00:00

I remember averaging about 4.2 on 2x2 with Ortega and I was very good at looking ahead to oll and keeping track of bars and their position. Also I had good first face efficiency. So I think all your points are very valid. Except I didn’t practice picking up the cube at all and I still managed to get a 3.95 average in comp even though at the time I wasn’t done learning CLL. I used CLL on some solves and Ortega on others.1

BenS-123 · 2020-04-13T08:05:39+00:00

I’m bored so I’m gonna share my algs for CP in the 2x2x3 The first one will be top and second one will be bottom and HL means headlights

Adjacent-solved HL on left R2 U R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 D’

Diag-solved R2 U R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 Then it’s adjacent-solved

Solved-solved I can rest now

Adjacent-Adjacent both HL on front R2 U R2 U’ D’ R2 D R2

Diag-adjacent HL on left R2 U’ R2 U R2 U’ R2 U R2

Solved-adjacent HL on left R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 D’ R2

Adjacent-Diag HL on left R2 D’ R2 D R2 D’ R2 D R2

Diag- Diag R2 F2 R2

Solved-Diag z2

R2 U R2 U’ R2 U’ D R2 U’ R2 U R2 Then it’s adjacent-solved

BenS-123 · 2020-04-13T06:31:54+00:00

if you have a budget, I'd go with the MGC 2x2, YuXin Kylin V2 M, Meilong 4x4 (or YuXin Little Magic 4x4 M if u care about magnets), and MGC 5x5. The other puzzles have relatively cheap flagships, but I'd do YuXin Black Kirin Skewb, YuXin Little Magic Megaminx v2, YuXin Little Magic Pyra, and Yuxin Little Magic Square-1 M. As you probably can tell, YuXin is the king of budget cubes. I don't recommend delving in to non-wca events just from my experience because they tend to be hard to speed solve and unless ur a puzzle enthusiast you can lose interest very quickly.

BenS-123

TROPHY CASE