# 2-Side PLL Recog +Hyperorientation= 1LLL Method



## jskyler91 (Jan 3, 2013)

Hey Guys,

So I don't have great luck here with posting new ideas. I want to make it clear that I am not proposing this as new, here to argue or anything else, but I have never heard of anything like what I am about to describe so here you go. With that in mind i am just throwing an idea out there that I had a while back and for which I am currently working on. Its a 1 look last layer method that I am finding to be incredibly easy and very fast with some practice. The basic idea is that it utilizes 2 side PLL recognition to develop a numbering system (1-6) where each number corresponds to one of the six colors you see when doing 2 side PLL recog. 

So for instance, 1 would be the FUL sticker, 2 the FU sticker, 3 the FUR sticker, 4 the RUL sticker, 5 the RU sticker and 6 the RUB sticker.

Then, during your OLL you learn where each of those stickers lie on each OLL (this is only 57 different schemes to learn and many are very obvious and easy). Here are a few examples:







What you would do is first recognize your OLL and then depending on the OLL you would look at the coresponding sticker in order of 1-6 according to that OLL's ordering and then, since you know 2-side PLL you would determine the exact state of your cube and execute as one long alg. This will of course take some serious practice, but learning 57 different schemes is very doable since many are easy, obvious and/or follow a pattern. 

The nice thing is there is no need to memo any new algs or anything, you just need to learn 2 side PLL which is really useful by itself and then just learn each of your OLL's pattern for 1-6 and you can do 1LLL. I will be working on creating a chart of all of my OLL's and there schemes soon and will post it soon (see below for link). I have more than 57 algs for my OLL since I do it from different algles so I will be posting all of them that aren't just mirrors of others, but still even a 100 of these is really not bad at all. Its just learning the hyperorientation of 6 stickers. If you just learn to make patterns out of them it becomes really easy. I only have a few down, but its pretty darn cool.

The only real issue I see with this aside from learning 2-side PLL which only takes a few weeks is learning to visualize the cube and you might need to tilt the cube to find your specific sticker, but that can also be done while executing the OLL so ideally there would be no real let downs and you could recall while executing once you have the colors memoed.

The really nice thing here is that with only 6 stickers you can know your full LL from OLL and recog could start as early as last pair if you wanted it too lol, in fact you could make a similar recog system for last pair and OLL/PLL! So to sum up with only two more stickers than COLL you know your whole last layer including AUF, pretty nice IMO.

Another Few Exps-






This one is really easy to trace because its almost shaped perfectly i.e. the first three pieces are on the F Layer exactly where they should be

Edit: Done!!! took ages to do but here is the link for my algs and the position of the 12 sticker prior to OLL. You guys can choose your own 6 consecutive stickers to recog from; they can either be 1-5,4-9, 6-12,or 10-3. I made it so that the UFL sticker will be 1 and UF 2 etc. going counterclockwise. Let me know which ones you all choose, I will list mine here as I choose them. 

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8dK8hmQEQ68YTRydFFhMVZ1SVE/edit


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 3, 2013)

jskyler91 said:


> So for instance, 1 would be the FSL sticker, 2 the FSM sticker, 3 the FSR sticker, 4 the RSL sticker, 5 the RSM sticker and 6 the RSR sticker where the first letter refers to the face, the middle letter to the layer it is in (S for side) on and the final to the location of sticker as either on the left or the right sticker of that row of three stickers.


 
Why not use existing notation?



jskyler91 said:


> Then, during your OLL you learn where each of those stickers lie on each OLL (this is only 57 different schemes to learn and many are very obvious and easy).



Are many not awkward? When the six stickers are in random places, this could be very difficult.



jskyler91 said:


> What you would do is first recognize your OLL and then depending on the OLL you would look at the coresponding sticker in order of 1-6 according to that OLL's ordering and then, since you know 2-side PLL you would determine the exact state of your cube and execute as one long alg. This will of course take some serious practice, but learning 57 different schemes is very doable since many are easy, obvious and/or follow a pattern.


 
Might be useful for some select easy cases that you are demonstrating, but there will be huge variance with difficulty level as other cases will be horrific.



jskyler91 said:


> The nice thing is there is no need to memo any new algs or anything, you just need to learn 2 side PLL which is really useful by itself and then just learn each of your OLL's pattern for 1-6 and you can do 1LLL. I will be working on creating a chart of all of my OLL's and there schemes soon and will post it soon. I have more than 57 algs for my OLL since I do it from different algles so I will be posting all of them that aren't just mirrors of others, but still even a 100 of these is really not bad at all. Its just learning the hyperorientation of 6 stickers. If you just learn to make patterns out of them it becomes really easy. I only have a few down, but its pretty darn cool.



You need to make a translation matrix to allow this to be usable for actual 1LLL systems. Maybe you can make this work for my system since people keep *****ing about not having a recog system. (I don't personally think corner then edge recog is hard - this could end up being a viable alternative though.)

Cool stuff.


----------



## applemobile (Jan 3, 2013)

Realistically with a 'compound alg' 1 look last layer like this, how much time would you be expecting to save?


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 3, 2013)

You're trying to save time on PLL recognition by making it harder and adding it to OLL recognition. 

Now that I think of it this may only be useful for pure 1LLL systems, which would require further abstraction to be usable.


----------



## Litz (Jan 3, 2013)

That notation is a bit confusing, so you should probably change it to normal notation if you want more people to read it. The idea seems interesting, but tracking and recognizing 6 stickers isn't necessarily easy, depending on the case and the used algorithm. It would be nice to see the result though, if you intend to explore it. Also, as applemobile already asked, how much time do you really expect to save, since you're just moving recognition from PLL to OLL?


----------



## NSKuber (Jan 3, 2013)

I'm kinda fast 2x2 solver(1-look), and it takes about 2-5 seconds to create case image after I've found what side I'll do. On the 3x3, I'll need to realise what stickers I'm looking for(depending on OLL), THEN at least 1-3 secs on creating image(6 pieces here, not 4 as on 2x2), and not to forget about OLL during this. Mindblowing. So I'm afraid you need LOTS, LOTS, LOTS OF PRACTISE to be at least as efficient as standart OLL/PLL. But I can be wrong, we'll see if someone try to use this system seriously.


----------



## Dacuba (Jan 3, 2013)

Am I wrong, or is it as hard as recognizing a 1LLL case?
I once thought about making a table with my eprsonal OLLs and how they influence the permuation of the pieces. But until now I couldn't convince myself it would be worth the effort. But I think the recogniton for corners only should be very fast.



Kirjava said:


> Maybe you can make this work for my system since people keep *****ing about not having a recog system



Just wanted to say how it makes me sad, that people fu'k about _anything_ of your work. Like they don't realize how much effort you put in it. Just like bumping your thread with "when will you be finished?" "Hurry up" etc...


----------



## aznanimedude (Jan 3, 2013)

so wait, by 1LLL you mean more of a, you take a look at your OLL and then know after the OLL what PLL you get, therefore you solve it in 1 look but 2 algorithms, rather than the other way a la ZZLL/ZBLL where it's 1 look -> 1 algorithm 1LLL, correct?


----------



## A Leman (Jan 3, 2013)

Hello, I have a few questions if you don't mind.
1. What made you look into 1lll recognition? I'm just curious since ideas like this normally spur off of an interesting train of thought.
2. Have you tried recognizing 1lll with CLL and ELL recognition methods? 
3. If so, could you tell me some advantages your system would have over that? I find that recognition rather easy even though I don’t have a use for it(and probably never will).
4. This one is based on my experimenting with ZBLL cases.
Are you possibly trying to learn to Algs based on a partial recognition system to increase you chance of skips, but not always get a skip when you use a special case?
5.Also,what are you going to use this recognition for?

Cool idea by the way.


----------



## Escher (Jan 3, 2013)

Hm, would it be easier to recognise if you always solved the permutation of at least 2 corners? 

As in, you recognise the corner case, AUF to solve (opp, adj and diag are the possible cases), and rotate to your desired angle? Step 2/3 can easily be merged, and step 1 should be very easy to train until it becomes natural. This is just speculation but I reckon 1LLL after that would be pretty easy to recognise...


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 3, 2013)

Worth noting that you could use any two adjacent sides for the six stickers, minimizing awkward cases because you have four groups to choose from.


----------



## mDiPalma (Jan 3, 2013)

what if you preoriented edges before finishing f2l (to reduce the number of cases), and then developed some sort of shorter (like 12-13 move) replacement algorithm for each compound-LL case?


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 3, 2013)

aznanimedude said:


> so wait, by 1LLL you mean more of a, you take a look at your OLL and then know after the OLL what PLL you get, therefore you solve it in 1 look but 2 algorithms, rather than the other way a la ZZLL/ZBLL where it's 1 look -> 1 algorithm 1LLL, correct?



This is it exactly!  I will add that exp to the OP lol


applemobile said:


> Realistically with a 'compound alg' 1 look last layer like this, how much time would you be expecting to save?



Not too much maybe a half second to a second, the thing I like most about this is that with only looking at 6 additional stickers you know OLL and your exact location of PLL plus AUF. All during OLL. Thats only two more stickers than for COLL lol and you can solve your whole last layer in one look, plus every bit of time helps right? And this won't be hard to learn, I already memoed like 6 schemes in a few days and I didn't have a good method for finding them at first, now I have a really easy one.



Litz said:


> That notation is a bit confusing, so you should probably change it to normal notation if you want more people to read it. The idea seems interesting, but tracking and recognizing 6 stickers isn't necessarily easy, depending on the case and the used algorithm. It would be nice to see the result though, if you intend to explore it. Also, as applemobile already asked, how much time do you really expect to save, since you're just moving recognition from PLL to OLL?



I forgot standard notation lol, we should definitely use that!!!



A Leman said:


> Hello, I have a few questions if you don't mind.
> 1. What made you look into 1lll recognition? I'm just curious since ideas like this normally spur off of an interesting train of thought.
> 2. Have you tried recognizing 1lll with CLL and ELL recognition methods?
> 3. If so, could you tell me some advantages your system would have over that? I find that recognition rather easy even though I don’t have a use for it(and probably never will).
> ...



Thanks, going in order:

1. Well I have been getting very frustrated with having to pause twice for recognition of OLL and then PLL and I figured hey why not try to make it faster? SO i learned 2- Side PLL and then I just realized that all I need to know to do a 1LLL is the 6 stickers and ya it came from that.
2.Ya, the problem is they require way too many stickers to look at a time. THis may involve a new way of looking at things, but quickly ordering 6 stickers, while not necesarilly easy can be learned easily and just takes some practice to get down. I already have the two exps down to a 2 second recog and I only have been using them for a few days. Thats 1 more second and I can execute the whole last layer without stopping at full speed. Pretty nice.
3. Again I think they involve more stickers right? The point of this is that you could learn to very quickly recog OLL and then scan appropriate pieces to know full LL in only 6 stickers.
4.I will probably use this system to avoid ENV and Y perms when they are coming by learning 57 new algs that solve those cases when they come.


Escher said:


> Hm, would it be easier to recognise if you always solved the permutation of at least 2 corners?
> 
> As in, you recognise the corner case, AUF to solve (opp, adj and diag are the possible cases), and rotate to your desired angle? Step 2/3 can easily be merged, and step 1 should be very easy to train until it becomes natural. This is just speculation but I reckon 1LLL after that would be pretty easy to recognise...



That would make it even easier ya, but I figure with some practice recog will come and that would take extra time if I understand you right. THis method can be used with no additional algs, just a new PLL recog system. I mean how long can it take to scan 6 stickers? Then once you have the order down you do OLL and try to envision PLL while doing it, this gives you an additional second to recog and you likely will never need to stop.

Kir- Worth noting that you could use any two adjacent sides for the six stickers, minimizing awkward cases because you have four groups to choose from.

Good point I had not thought of that thanks!!!



mDiPalma said:


> what if you preoriented edges before finishing f2l (to reduce the number of cases), and then developed some sort of shorter (like 12-13 move) replacement algorithm for each compound-LL case?



Hmm, so many good ideas here lol. I already use edge control and try to disorient corners so my OLL cases are more friendly (I averaged all of the 0,1,2,3 and 4 corners up algs for time and found that 0 and 1 corners were the fastest overall, for me at least and with my algs of course), but not a bad idea at all lol!!!Maybe you could use this recog system for ZBLL as well, not sure how, but maybe. I will have to check that out, I don't really like trying to always have edges oriented though, takes too much effort and slows you down IMO, but I will look into it, I think maybe doing something with corners might be very feasible as well.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 3, 2013)

Video is up, its in the OP


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 4, 2013)

Documentation of the method would be better than a 17 min video explaining what we already know


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 4, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> Documentation of the method would be better than a 17 min video explaining what we already know



Im working on choosing my 1-6's as I type, thanks again for pointing out that there were 4 to choose from that makes this really nice!!

To make things easier I will be using both LF as well as FR 2-side recog. This will make for much more eye friendly patterns on some of harder cases. I could use all 4 sides, but I feel like that would make it harder to visualize.

I'll post my results when they are done. I definitely think this is a very doable and easy way to have a 1LLL.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 5, 2013)

Does anyone know how and or where I might go to find all of the OLL's with just the OLL blackened and a way to view all of the sides at once? Imagine something with a 5x5 grid of squares but with the corner blocks missing and preferably computer generated format so its easy to fill in the blanks? Many thanks in advance, I am not a big computer person so this would help me immensely. I tried visualcube, but I can't figure out how to use it lol


----------



## MWilson (Jan 5, 2013)

If you mean like






then copy "http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=nrgyob&view=plan&case=" into your browser URL bar and add the OLL alg to the end of it, like

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=nrgyob&view=plan&case=FRUR'U'F'"

for


----------



## qqwref (Jan 5, 2013)

Yeah, I'd wanna see standard notation too (e.g. FR for an edge sticker, URF for a corner). Also it wasn't immediately clear from the topic title or introduction but this is a 1LLL _recognition_ method, not a solving method like I expected.

I think the idea of looking for specific stickers based on the case could be a good one - maybe choosing the right group of stickers could make it very easy to recognize certain cases. This could probably also be used for C*LL too (only two pairs of stickers, and for each you need to check if they're the same, adjacent, or opposite) but I have a feeling it won't be as pleasant as existing recognition systems.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 5, 2013)

qqwref said:


> Yeah, I'd wanna see standard notation too (e.g. FR for an edge sticker, URF for a corner). Also it wasn't immediately clear from the topic title or introduction but this is a 1LLL _recognition_ method, not a solving method like I expected.
> 
> I think the idea of looking for specific stickers based on the case could be a good one - maybe choosing the right group of stickers could make it very easy to recognize certain cases. This could probably also be used for C*LL too (only two pairs of stickers, and for each you need to check if they're the same, adjacent, or opposite) but I have a feeling it won't be as pleasant as existing recognition systems.




Ya, this is just a way to recog the entire last layer in 1 Look, so very literally a 1 Look Last Layer Method. I didn't know how else to describe it lol, i am very open to names if anyone has got them and ya I completely agree we should use normal notation, I just forgot it lol, if a mod wants to update feel free, if not I will when I post my patterns.


Dominate said:


> If you mean like
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And thanks that really clears it up for me, my only question is how could I add numbers to them? I want to put 1-12 on each of the non OLL colors so that people can choose their own patterns as well. This way I can just create a list of my algs and the image with where each of the 12 pieces is located before you perform the OLL. I hope that makes sense lol.

And actually is is possible to just show the OLL and leave the other 12 spots blank? That might be easier to work with.


----------



## MWilson (Jan 6, 2013)

You can just change the colors in the "sch=" part.

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=wnnnnn&view=plan&case="







or

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=wddddd&view=plan&case="






Replace the w after sch with y for yellow etc. You can add "cc=w" or whatever color for more contrast as well

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=wnnnnn&cc=w&view=plan&case="






or

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=wnnnnn&cc=d&view=plan&case="







As for the numbers, just use an image editing program to put them on. I don't think visual cube can do that part.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 6, 2013)

Dominate said:


> ~snip~



Your awesome man i think I get how it works now.


----------



## MWilson (Jan 6, 2013)

Inverted is

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=nwwwww&cc=w&view=plan&case="






Or maybe

"http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=nwwwww&cc=s&view=plan&case="






For some reason when I post it puts a space in the middle of the value for sch. So in this post it changed "sch=nwwwww" to "sch=nww www". I'm sure I don't have the space when posting, so I don't know what's doing that. Just remove the space when you put it in the URL bar.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 6, 2013)

Dominate said:


> Inverted is
> 
> "http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/extensions/algdb/vcube/visualcube.php?fmt=png&bg=t&size=200&pzl=3&sch=nwwwww&cc=w&view=plan&case="
> 
> ...


Nevermind I found gimp


----------



## MWilson (Jan 6, 2013)

Gimp should work fine. It's loaded with more than you need but it shouldn't be hard to figure out how to just put numbers down.

ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/v2.8/osx/gimp-2.8.2-dmg-2.dmg


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 6, 2013)

Dominate said:


> Gimp should work fine. It's loaded with more than you need but it shouldn't be hard to figure out how to just put numbers down.
> 
> ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/v2.8/osx/gimp-2.8.2-dmg-2.dmg



Done!!! took ages to do but here the link for my algs and the position of the 12 sticker prior to OLL you guy can choose your own 6 consecutive sticker to recog from; they can either be 1-5,4-9 6-12,or 10-3. I made it so that the UFL sticker will be 1 and UF 2 etc. going counterclockwise. Let me know which ones you all choose, I will list mine here as I choose them. 

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8dK8hmQEQ68eWxaWWlJSWV5b00/edit

I only included distinct algs here so you will have to mirror things yourself, but they are the same algs just mirrored so many of my algs aren't there, but the full regiment of OLL's is plus a few algs i use for U2 away cases.


----------



## mark49152 (Jan 6, 2013)

jskyler91 said:


> I made it so that the UFL sticker will be 1 and UF 2 etc. ...


What's the standard notation for stickers? UFL describes a corner but I don't know which of the three (or two side) stickers that refers to.


----------



## speedpicker (Jan 6, 2013)

Now that is some serious effort! Nice work.

and other poster above, UFL is the U face sticker on the UFL corner, FUL is the F face sticker on the UFL corner, LUF is the left one and so on. Basically the first letter tells you which face the sticker is on, and the other two letters in combination with the first tell you which piece.

Another example RUB = The sticker on the R face of the piece at the corner of R, U and B faces.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 6, 2013)

speedpicker said:


> Now that is some serious effort! Nice work.
> 
> and other poster above, UFL is the U face sticker on the UFL corner, FUL is the F face sticker on the UFL corner, LUF is the left one and so on. Basically the first letter tells you which face the sticker is on, and the other two letters in combination with the first tell you which piece.
> 
> Another example RUB = The sticker on the R face of the piece at the corner of R, U and B faces.



Thanks it was brutally tedious but I got it done. So is the notation right now? I updated the OP again.


----------



## mark49152 (Jan 6, 2013)

Thanks speedpicker, and nice work jskyler91. I was wondering whether I could use this to predict ENVY cases and avoid them, but it looks pretty complicated; since I'm a beginner anyway I think I will stick to basics and do the ENVYs. Plus I just realised it will only work for the specific OLL algs you've listed and I'm still on 2-look for all but cross & dot cases.


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 6, 2013)

jskyler91 said:


> Thanks it was brutally tedious but I got it done. So is the notation right now? I updated the OP again.



No, wtf is the RUR sticker?


----------



## MalusDB (Jan 6, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> No, wtf is the RUR sticker?



[SARC]The right upper right.. obviously.[/SARC]

This is a mad idea, but considering how fast people have gotten at speedblind there is definitely a niche for the truly dedicated cuber to actually push into if you ask me. Just because 99% of people can't make it work for them doesn't mean it doesn't work. Method is only as good as the person executing the solve, and there's no harm in dabbling in new ideas. Dude you get a while hard time on here sometimes for just contributing. inb4 constructive crit., I get that but there's no need for some people on here to be so nasty about how they present their opinions. Wuvv and rainbows, innit.


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 6, 2013)

MalusDB said:


> there's no need for some people on here to be so nasty about how they present their opinions



did you even read the thread?


----------



## MalusDB (Jan 6, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> did you even read the thread?



Along with all the other threads he posted yes. I just felt that deserved to be said too.


----------



## MWilson (Jan 6, 2013)

The top left one in the first image in your OP has a 12 on an edge, which is impossible.

Edit
I will modify an old program to generate and save these images from an alg. Then anyone can use their own algs.

Edit
Here it is http://www.mediafire.com/?eaxofehqvc9w2w6

Enter the algorithm in the bottom text field and press enter, click the image itself to open a save image dialog. Just open index.html in whatever browser to run it.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 6, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> Thanks speedpicker, and nice work jskyler91. I was wondering whether I could use this to predict ENVY cases and avoid them, but it looks pretty complicated; since I'm a beginner anyway I think I will stick to basics and do the ENVYs. Plus I just realised it will only work for the specific OLL algs you've listed and I'm still on 2-look for all but cross & dot cases.



Ya, but once you get this system down you will know when ENVY is coming and you can just use a different alg when thats happening that either avoids it or maybe create some compound OLLs for all fo the ENVY cases and do ZBLL just when ENVY is coming (just thought of this). But ya once you have this system down you could definitely use to avoid ENVY. Also, you can know if an ENVY is coming just with 4 sticker (the corners) btw.This would be using ROLL


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 7, 2013)

MalusDB said:


> Along with all the other threads he posted yes. I just felt that deserved to be said too.



Thanks for the support!!

O and can someone please link me to the notation page lol, I tried a search and didn't see sticker notation, must have missed it but lets just clear this up now


----------



## Litz (Jan 7, 2013)

jskyler91 said:


> Thanks for the support!!
> 
> O and can someone please link me to the notation page lol, I tried a search and didn't see sticker notation, must have missed it but lets just clear this up now


You don't need a notation page if you already know it. You're just confused.

An edge has two stickers, in which each sticker belongs to a face. The notation for the edge is a string of two characters in which each character corresponds to the face of the sticker (D, F, U, B, L, R), starting with the sticker you want to talk about. For example, if your cube is ready to be scrambled (green Front, white Up), the green sticker on the green/white edge is FU, but the white sticker on the same edge is UF. The same thing applies for corners, except corners have three stickers (each sticker in a different face), so you have to name the three stickers (the green sticker on the green/white/red corner would be FUR). That's why RUR doesn't make sense, because it's refering to a corner that has two stickers on the same face (which is impossible).


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 7, 2013)

Litz said:


> You don't need a notation page if you already know it. You're just confused.
> 
> An edge has two stickers, in which each sticker belongs to a face. The notation for the edge is a string of two characters in which each character corresponds to the face of the sticker (D, F, U, B, L, R), starting with the sticker you want to talk about. For example, if your cube is ready to be scrambled (green Front, white Up), the green sticker on the green/white edge is FU, but the white sticker on the same edge is UF. The same thing applies for corners, except corners have three stickers (each sticker in a different face), so you have to name the three stickers (the green sticker on the green/white/red corner would be FUR). That's why RUR doesn't make sense, because it's refering to a corner that has two stickers on the same face (which is impossible).



An excellent explanation thank you very much I will update the OP


----------



## NSKuber (Jan 7, 2013)

You numerated R U2 R' U' R U' R' wrong: 3 should be 4 and 4 should be 3.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 7, 2013)

NSKuber said:


> You numerated R U2 R' U' R U' R' wrong: 2 should be 3 and 3 should be 2.



Thanks!!! I will generate another one and replace it asap although I think you mean 3 and 4 are switched because a 2 is an edge. I did do the 3,4 corner wrong though 

EDIT: Updated alg, let me know if you find others


----------



## MWilson (Jan 7, 2013)

jskyler91 said:


> Thanks!!! I will generate another one and replace it asap although I think you mean 3 and 4 are switched because a 2 is an edge. I did do the 3,4 corner wrong though
> 
> EDIT: Updated alg, let me know if you find others



You didn't fix the 12 I mentioned when I posted the program. Also, you can use the program to generate the image for you, just click the cube graphic.


----------



## MWilson (Jan 8, 2013)

Updated program to allow for practice recognizing the PLL. Now it's shift+click to save PNG, just click to randomize PLL.

Same link for DL: http://www.mediafire.com/?eaxofehqvc9w2w6

Edit: Updated with text field on left for rotation to have the color you want on top. For example, x will put green on top, x2 puts yellow on top, etc.


----------



## IAmAPerson (Jul 7, 2015)

A bit late on this, I know, but I'm actually learning this to attempt to put it into real practice (competition-ready). However, I'm taking an easier approach by using VHLS to orient edges (it's surprisingly quick once you practice enough) and using Pure OCLL algs, so PLL recognition is almost just as quick as normal. What would you call a method that uses this? I think that "CFOP with VHLS, Pure OCLL, and 1LLL by 2-side PLL recog during OCLL recog" is a mouthful when someone asks you what method you use. I would say to call it SLL for "Skyler Last Layer," but SLL is a type of cancer. Anyway, I think if a solver put enough effort into this as to get them to solve as fast as normal OLL+PLL (which I'm going to make a serious attempt to do), the method would get attention.

I just think that there are so many good methods out there that don't get attention simply because people don't try hard enough to put it into normal practice.


----------



## salova12 (Oct 8, 2020)

IAmAPerson said:


> A bit late on this, I know, but I'm actually learning this to attempt to put it into real practice (competition-ready). However, I'm taking an easier approach by using VHLS to orient edges (it's surprisingly quick once you practice enough) and using Pure OCLL algs, so PLL recognition is almost just as quick as normal. What would you call a method that uses this? I think that "CFOP with VHLS, Pure OCLL, and 1LLL by 2-side PLL recog during OCLL recog" is a mouthful when someone asks you what method you use. I would say to call it SLL for "Skyler Last Layer," but SLL is a type of cancer. Anyway, I think if a solver put enough effort into this as to get them to solve as fast as normal OLL+PLL (which I'm going to make a serious attempt to do), the method would get attention.
> 
> I just think that there are so many good methods out there that don't get attention simply because people don't try hard enough to put it into normal practice.


Hi man, How is your progress? Pure OCLL is so bad algs


----------



## Humble Cuber (Oct 8, 2020)

salova12 said:


> Hi man, How is your progress? Pure OCLL is so bad algs


He's not gonna respond, he was last seen 2016


----------



## PetraPine (Oct 8, 2020)

Humble Cuber said:


> He's not gonna respond, he was last seen 2016


was that really necessary?


----------



## Humble Cuber (Oct 8, 2020)

ObscureCuber said:


> was that really necessary?


Idk I was just saying.


----------



## Tao Yu (Oct 8, 2020)

I find it funny to look at the super convoluted 1LLL recognition systems that were proposed back in the day, considering the fact that nowadays, the best method is arguably "just look at the whole case like it's a painting".


----------



## Humble Cuber (Oct 8, 2020)

Tao Yu said:


> I find it funny to look at the super convoluted 1LLL recognition systems that were proposed back in the day, considering the fact that nowadays, the best method is arguably "just look at the whole case like it's a painting".


Ikr


----------



## Tao Yu (Oct 8, 2020)

Also I guess ROLL/JOLL is a method that pretty much achieves the goal of the method in the OP, and is actually considered useful at the top level. Which is interesting because I guess the advantage of ROLL/JOLL is that it doesn't try to be a perfect method. There are times where ROLL/JOLL is enough to fully predict PLL instantly, but where it doesn't it still gives you some useful information. This is much more practical than a method that can fully predict PLL 100% of the time, but requires a recognition pause.

I get the feeling that if more developments are made to CFOP, they'll probably be similar to this; the new methods or techniques would be "imperfect".


----------



## salova12 (Oct 8, 2020)

Tao Yu said:


> Also I guess ROLL/JOLL is a method that pretty much achieves the goal of the method in the OP, and is actually considered useful at the top level. Which is interesting because I guess the advantage of ROLL/JOLL is that it doesn't try to be a perfect method. There are times where ROLL/JOLL is enough to fully predict PLL instantly, but where it doesn't it still gives you some useful information. This is much more practical than a method that can fully predict PLL 100% of the time, but requires a recognition pause.
> 
> I get the feeling that if more developments are made to CFOP, they'll probably be similar to this; the new methods or techniques would be "imperfect".


 I'm interested in PLL prediction. As far as I know, by using roll and joll it is not possible to predict exact pll. You can predict it gonna be one of the 2/2/2/3/4/8. To know what pll you will get you should do zbll/1lll recognition which I find really hard. This method is something different, but probably too hard as well


----------



## Tao Yu (Oct 8, 2020)

salova12 said:


> I'm interested in PLL prediction. As far as I know, by using roll and joll it is not possible to predict exact pll. You can predict it gonna be one of the 2/2/2/3/4/8. To know what pll you will get you should do zbll/1lll recognition which I find really hard. This method is something different, but probably too hard as well



I think George Scholey or Jayden McNeill who told me at some point they were able to sometimes fully predict PLL using ROLL/JOLL. I think it may have been that they used some extra tricks on top of ROLL/JOLL though. 

If you're interested in PLL prediction I think you need to be realistic about how much benefit that can really provide. PLL can be recognized very quickly already, so I would say even at best you could probably only shave off like 0.3-0.5 seconds of time by predicting PLL. Now that's not insignificant, but means that if you spend too much effort trying to predict PLL, you may actually spoil the advantage of knowing your PLL in advance. For example, it's pretty clear that the method described by IAmAPerson is slower than simply doing OLL/PLL because it adds a lot of moves (Pure OCLL algs are quite long, VHLS is inefficient). Even if it saves 0.5 recognition (which is extremely optimistic, I suspect it might even add time) the extra moves probably add about 1-1.5 seconds.

Again, this is why I think ROLL/JOLL was the approach that was adopted by top cubers. It is more practical to use a method that gives partial information for a small amount of effort, than a method that gives perfect information for a large amount of effort. The reason for this is simply that the information of knowing what PLL you are going to get is not guaranteed to save a lot of time.


----------



## salova12 (Oct 9, 2020)

Tao Yu said:


> I think George Scholey or Jayden McNeill who told me at some point they were able to sometimes fully predict PLL using ROLL/JOLL. I think it may have been that they used some extra tricks on top of ROLL/JOLL though.
> 
> If you're interested in PLL prediction I think you need to be realistic about how much benefit that can really provide. PLL can be recognized very quickly already, so I would say even at best you could probably only shave off like 0.3-0.5 seconds of time by predicting PLL. Now that's not insignificant, but means that if you spend too much effort trying to predict PLL, you may actually spoil the advantage of knowing your PLL in advance. For example, it's pretty clear that the method described by IAmAPerson is slower than simply doing OLL/PLL because it adds a lot of moves (Pure OCLL algs are quite long, VHLS is inefficient). Even if it saves 0.5 recognition (which is extremely optimistic, I suspect it might even add time) the extra moves probably add about 1-1.5 seconds.
> 
> Again, this is why I think ROLL/JOLL was the approach that was adopted by top cubers. It is more practical to use a method that gives partial information for a small amount of effort, than a method that gives perfect information for a large amount of effort. The reason for this is simply that the information of knowing what PLL you are going to get is not guaranteed to save a lot of time.


I didnt mean the Pure OLL thing. It is definetly not worth it, it is a lot slower actualy. I was talking about hyperorientation, but this is too hard as well, maybe for some easy caseses it's may be good. I thougt of combine ROLL and hyperopientation, but proboably it do nothing


----------



## Tao Yu (Oct 9, 2020)

salova12 said:


> I didnt mean the Pure OLL thing. It is definetly not worth it, it is a lot slower actualy. I was talking about hyperorientation, but this is too hard as well, maybe for some easy caseses it's may be good. I thougt of combine ROLL and hyperopientation, but proboably it do nothing



I think hyperorientation is similarly flawed. I don't think it saves any recognition time as it simply moves the point where you do the recognition to an earlier time, where it's harder to do. The only way it's supposed to save time is through being able to transition from OLL to PLL instantly, but I think that's far from enough to make up for the harder recognition of PLL during OLL.

I haven't talked to Jay or George about this in a while, but I would guess that the way they are able to fully predict PLL is based on recognizing ROLL+JOLL and then noticing some other pattern about the case, such as some blocks or opposite colors. Maybe this could be thought of as a form of ROLL and Hyperorientation, but I think you would be right in saying that it is probably only good for easy cases (again, I think it's risky to invest too much effort into PLL prediction).


----------

