# Yet another new 3x3 method?



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

Ive been experimenting, and found that BLD has help me come up with something. Its very easy, only a total of ~30 algs if you do it right. 1 OLL algs required.

1. Solve all corners intuitively. This step should be very easy.

2. Solve as many edges you can on the top and bottom face using only M and U moves. This step should also be easy, and intuitive.

3 (taking stuff from old pochman). Solve the rest of the edges using only the buffer peices and the T-perm. The difference if, you can move the U layer to your liking.

4. Your top layer edges will either be swapped (M,U,M,U,M,U,M,U2,M,U,M,U,M,U,M.), OR Already solved, so all thats left is PLL. 

Correction: After solving a couple of times, you do need some OLLs.


Ive looked around the existing method thread but found nothing like this. This method probably wont be THAT fast, but I find it really fun.
*------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*

All OLL algs that your gonna need. (Badmephisto.com)





M U (R U R' U') M2 (U R U' r')




(R U R' U') M' (U R U' r')




M' U M U2 M' U M
*------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
PLLs
YOU WLL NOT NEED ALL 21 PLLS IF YOU DO THIS CORRECTLY. But still use these anyway
Ill be making my own list of the ones you need. Until then, just use the ones from Badmephisto.com. (An excellent site might I add)
*------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 18, 2009)

Yes, it should be rather fun, but not really a new method. This is basically just combos of other methods. I wish people would stop taking credit for "new methods". I prefer solving with roux/petrus/heise/ pure old pochmann for fun.

Nice idea though.


----------



## blah (Nov 18, 2009)

How is it "intuitive" and "really easy" to do step 1 when most non-cubers can't solve a 2x2x2?


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

blah said:


> How is it "intuitive" and "really easy" to do step 1 when most non-cubers can't solve a 2x2x2?



I'd assume if you can learn the algs required, you can learn to solve corners.


----------



## blah (Nov 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> blah said:
> 
> 
> > How is it "*intuitive*" and "really easy" to do step 1 when most non-cubers can't solve a 2x2x2?
> ...


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

blah said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > blah said:
> ...



Thats not what I meant. If you can learn algs, you already have a basic knowledge of the cube, so it should be relatively easy to do it without algs.


----------



## blah (Nov 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> blah said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...


----------



## Forte (Nov 18, 2009)

blah said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > blah said:
> ...


----------



## rachmaninovian (Nov 18, 2009)

lol just another CF method. sandwich is better :3

EDIT: TICT IS KEWLER


----------



## qqwref (Nov 18, 2009)

T perms? Ya serious? In a speedsolving method?


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Nov 18, 2009)

ha
haha
hahaha
hahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Chuck (Nov 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> Another one? So many timers.




Another one? So many methods.


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

Would it help my case if I wrote a huge long post with an overview, in depth steps, and example solves?


----------



## Inf3rn0 (Nov 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> Would it help my case if I wrote a huge long post with an overview, in depth steps, and example solves?


My opinion is unlikely.


----------



## irontwig (Nov 18, 2009)

Sounds like standard corners first with a really inefficient way to solve the last edges. Also solving R/L edges is faster than U/D edges. Here's a better way to solve the last edges: http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_4.html


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 18, 2009)

ಠ_ಠ


----------



## riffz (Nov 18, 2009)

I think he needs to learn the definition of intuitive.

Sorry dude, your method sucks.


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

riffz said:


> I think he needs to learn the definition of intuitive.
> 
> Sorry dude, your method sucks.



Its slow, but its fun!


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 18, 2009)

This method has many pauses, high move count. This is made up for by using finger tricky algorithms... but even 600 fingertricks < 60 non fingertricks.


----------



## Athefre (Nov 18, 2009)

I come back to this site after a few months and people are still so mean.

If someone enjoys something, leave them alone.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Nov 18, 2009)

If they don't want comments on their method, then I think they should avoid posting it on a FORUM, where the entire POINT is to have discussion.


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2009)

hawkmp4 said:


> If they don't want comments on their method, then I think they should avoid posting it on a FORUM, where the entire POINT is to have discussion.



Constructive criticism/ comments are not the same as being mean about it.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Nov 18, 2009)

Maybe people could be less harsh...but there's only so many ways to say that a method sucks.


----------



## mazei (Nov 18, 2009)

hawkmp4 said:


> Maybe people could be less harsh...but there's only so many ways to say that a method sucks.



Perhaps he wants SP to come.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 18, 2009)

Edward said:


> hawkmp4 said:
> 
> 
> > If they don't want comments on their method, then I think they should avoid posting it on a FORUM, where the entire POINT is to have discussion.
> ...



I've only seen 2 mean comments so far.


----------



## guitardude7241 (Nov 19, 2009)

this reminds me alot of this^^ guy.


----------



## vgbjason (Nov 19, 2009)

@guitardude7241 Looks like noob Roux to me.

Edward, your method is a basic corners first method. It's been done before (by me, and others, I'm sure.) It's cool, but nothing special.


----------



## cmhardw (Nov 19, 2009)

Edward,

A method idea like this might have some potential as a beginner method. I'm currently teaching two younger kids BLD cubing, and they picked up the T perm as long as I presented it as two OLLs. If you're serious about the method, I would try to consider it more as a "beginner method in the works" if you really want it to go somewhere.

As far as fun methods that are slow, I like to use the "solve one color at a time approach". Basically solve one color (*not* one layer), then solve another color, then a third, etc. until the cube is solved. It's actually quite difficult to do.

Don't take the TICT method stuff seriously, these alternative methods are fun to come up with, and I think people can be too quick to judge an idea as "crap" if it's not super fast. I think it's fun to solve the cube in weird, albeit slower, ways too.

Chris


----------



## Edward (Nov 19, 2009)

I will be updating my first post. Right now it lists the possible OLLs, and I'm working on the PLL's. Ill also be putting corner techniques, M edges techniques, and linking to an excerpt of a page that explains buffer pieces way better than I can.

I'm determined to make this a legit CF method. (I had no idea it was CF at first, but since it is, well...) I truly believe if I optimize a few things, this can be AT LEAST sub 40. (My first day practicing I was sub 65 with it.)


----------



## Edmund (Nov 19, 2009)

Chuck said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Another one? So many timers.
> ...



Standing ovation for Chuck...


----------



## Neo63 (Nov 19, 2009)

I tried to solve the cube using a similar method a couple of times. You solve all corners, then using U perm/Z perm/H perm, and occasionally edge flip/OLL, solve all edges. I usually get around 45 seconds with this method and it's really fun.


----------



## riffz (Nov 19, 2009)

I think I should clarify that my comment was strictly based on it being a speedsolving method, not a creative or beginner one.


----------



## guitardude7241 (Nov 19, 2009)

vgbjason said:


> @guitardude7241 Looks like noob Roux to me.
> 
> Edward, your method is a basic corners first method. It's been done before (by me, and others, I'm sure.) It's cool, but nothing special.



You obviously haven't seen the thread where the video creator argued with everybody.


----------



## nigtv (Nov 20, 2009)

Another method poll missing heise...


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 20, 2009)

nigtv said:


> Another method poll missing heise...



What method poll?
I see no method poll in this thread?
:confused:


----------



## Edward (Nov 20, 2009)

Cubes=Life said:


> nigtv said:
> 
> 
> > Another method poll missing heise...
> ...



Wrong thread I guess. I do it all the time. (But I delete it after)


----------

