# Is my BLD method freestyle?



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Oct 23, 2009)

I talked about freestyle with Chrise .He said my method is not freestyle .I have fixed buffer,and ererytime I solve two edge.There have 432 pair off edges (maybe ,I am not sure) and 378 pair off corners. So I have 810 formula.
All the formula is the best formula.I can finish every formula in 2 seconds ,and I can finish many of the formula in 1 seconds.Actrually I have 1000+ formula. So ,when I solve the cube I just need remenber all the edge pair. When I remember one edge pair I can use the corresponding formula immediately,enen if I need not to think.So if my hand fast enought the BLD speed should fast than speed solve.But my hand is not fast enough.

I think even if using the method "freestyle",the best way is to find the fastest speed to solve each paird of edge. If you have remember all the fastest formula before the solving.You really can get fastest speed.So I think maybe my method is freestyle.I just to make every step of the solve to use the best formula.

Actrually,I have never wrote out may formula.I am not good at writting formula,and I'm fed up with writting formula .If I retired someday. All my formula will lost in the wind.


----------



## Chuck (Oct 23, 2009)

Wow, hi Hai Yan! 
It's very rare that you appear on Speedsolving forum.

By the way, I don't have any idea for answering your question, because I'm still using "braindead" M2 & Classic Pochmann right now. But in my opinion, it doesn't matter whether your method are freestyle or not, your amazing speed records is what matters.

Please tell Tong Jiang, "Wicaksono Adi say hi."


----------



## Marcell (Oct 23, 2009)

You use a fixed buffer and you use fixed algorithms ("forumlas") - this isn't really freestyle, more like the BH method.


----------



## deadalnix (Oct 23, 2009)

For me it's freestyle. Braindead freestyle but freestyle 

You seems to use BH. Maybe, if you are bored to write all the formulas, you can just write down which one is different from chris's : http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/bhcorners.html and http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/bhedges.html


----------



## cmhardw (Oct 23, 2009)

Hai Yan Zhuang said:


> I talked about freestyle with Chrise .He said my method is not freestyle .



Hello Hai Yan! It's good to see you posting on the forum here, and nice to meet you!

I wonder if you mean me when you said you talked to someone. If you mean me I feel bad, because I do not remember this conversation. I have searched all of my e-mail and personal messages and can't find a correspondence between us. :-S I'm not sure I would say that your method is not freestyle. You and Daniel Beyer and I all have the same idea, to solve from a fixed buffer using braindead algs, but we restrict ourselves to using commutators for all possible 3 cycles. This, I think, is a slightly slower version for 3x3x3 because you could often do U perms or something easier than a commutator. The reason we use commutators though is to allow us to use the same exact method on a 5x5x5 (or a 7x7x7) before having solved the center pieces.

I wonder if you also independently discovered the same method as Daniel Beyer and I! If so perhaps we're all using the BHZ method, or the ZBH method, Z for Zhuang ;-)

Let me know your thoughts on this. I don't want to take away from your ideas if you discovered this on your own, but your idea seems very similar to what Daniel and I use. Are you using only commutators? Or do you use whichever algorithm or formula is fastest?

Chris


----------



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Oct 23, 2009)

It's nice to meet you too.
I mean chrise in BeiJing. He is from American,he is WCA delegate.
My formula is not the shortest but is the fastest. I mean I try my best to finish all my formula in 2 seconds.I can finish some formula in 0.7s.
I try every formula for each edge pair,and try to find the fastest formula .Normally I do not use commutators ,I use cube software to find the formula .But all my formula are in line with commutators.When I find a good formula I can add u(formula )u',or R(formula )R' to get another good formula ,it can make me get fastest speed. Actrually the commutators sometims have some limitations,it make some formula can not be executed quickly.

I leaned the basic idea form 'Cheng Hao'(China).He found freestyle in 2006.I add some of my idea to make BLD freestyle just like CFOP.Cheng Hao said I make it like CFOP. To make all the formula fastest but not the shortest.



I talked with 'Yu Hui Xu' ,a cuber ranked second in the world.I have told all my method to him.We think the multiBLD WR should be 40 or so.
And maybe someday he will give you a pleasantly surprised,to solve 20 or 25 cube during multiBLD competition. I think 'Yu Hui Xu' can do that .It is the things of time.Maybe it need 6 months but I think he can do that.


----------



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Oct 23, 2009)

deadalnix said:


> For me it's freestyle. Braindead freestyle but freestyle
> 
> You seems to use BH. Maybe, if you are bored to write all the formulas, you can just write down which one is different from chris's : http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/bhcorners.html and http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/bhedges.html


I think even no one formula same with chris.My formula is not the shortest but is the fastest. I mean I try my best to finish all my formula in 2 seconds.I can finish some formula in 0.7s.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 23, 2009)

Thanks so much for posting, Hai Yan. This makes me feel much better. I was feeling guilty before because I said you were using BH, and then I found out you were apparently using more ordinary freestyle instead. But now I see that you're using what I personally consider to be essentially BH anyway. As Chris says, technically, BH uses exclusively optimal commutators, but you use optimal algorithms for speed instead, so yours is a little different. So it really is freestyle. But it also means that when someone else came on this forum a while back and said you only know some small number of algorithms, they were incorrect - you really do know optimal speed algorithms for every case.

I'm trying to use a method very similar to yours now. I started on corners with pure BH, but now I'm trying to replace my move-optimal algorithms with speed-optimal algorithms, to speed up. I have a very long way to go to catch up to you, though - my personal best is 1:15.

It's really nice to know my current approach to BLD has the potential of getting as fast as you someday!

Your incredible BLD success is a real inspiration to me.


----------



## Chuck (Oct 23, 2009)

Hai Yan Zhuang said:


> I talked with 'Yu Hui Xu' ,a cuber ranked second in the world.I have told all my method to him.We think the multiBLD WR should be 40 or so. And maybe someday he will give you a pleasantly surprised,to solve 20 or 25 cube during multiBLD competition. I think 'Yu Hui Xu' can do that .It is the things of time.Maybe it need 6 months but I think he can do that.



Ah, so Yu Hui is capable of doing multi too? And you want to tell me that he can do better than Tong Jiang? Oh my God. That's very interesting!!! 

This really makes me want to start practicing multi again.

Time to buy more cubes.


----------



## blah (Oct 23, 2009)

China is the only place in the world where you can have a 44.88 for BLD and end up second in a competition


----------



## deadalnix (Oct 23, 2009)

Most of the BH formulas are very fast. I doubt you can find faster for many of them. (anyway, lokking at your performance, maybe, but I assume many formulas are the same).


----------



## KJiptner (Oct 23, 2009)

Haiyan, thank you for that interesting post! I already figured your method works like that, when seeing lucas' reconstruction of your WR. For the cornes I'm using a similar approach: I memorized all 376 solutions by heart, but it's about 60 basic algs applied from diffrent angles and with a D, D, D2 setup sometimes. I will definitely learn something like that for edges as well (using deadalnix advanced M2-concept).
I don't consider your method as 'freestyle', but that term is vague anyway. It came up when ville, rowe and others started to blindsolve using mostly commutators and no fixed buffer (like 3-cycle but without orienting).
About doing 40 cubes multi... Remember you have to memorize those cubes too. 40 cubes is like memorizing a 800 digit number...


----------



## yoruichi (Oct 23, 2009)

look freestyle = 3 cycle
therefore haiyan uses freestyle
k thanks


----------



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Oct 24, 2009)

KJiptner said:


> Haiyan, thank you for that interesting post! I already figured your method works like that, when seeing lucas' reconstruction of your WR. For the cornes I'm using a similar approach: I memorized all 376 solutions by heart, but it's about 60 basic algs applied from diffrent angles and with a D, D, D2 setup sometimes. I will definitely learn something like that for edges as well (using deadalnix advanced M2-concept).
> I don't consider your method as 'freestyle', but that term is vague anyway. It came up when ville, rowe and others started to blindsolve using mostly commutators and no fixed buffer (like 3-cycle but without orienting).
> About doing 40 cubes multi... Remember you have to memorize those cubes too. 40 cubes is like memorizing a 800 digit number...



My insterest is memory now.I want to lean memory playing card in 30 second.
And by the way it can help multiBLD.
I think people can memory 1000 digit number in 30 minutes.so the WR should be 40 cubes.And I think if you want than you can do that.


----------



## qqwref (Oct 24, 2009)

Hai Yan Zhuang said:


> It's nice to meet you too.
> I mean chrise in BeiJing. He is from American,he is WCA delegate.



Maybe you mean Chris Krueger?


----------



## masterofthebass (Oct 24, 2009)

Just because you've practiced enough to know how to do every case, doesn't mean that you aren't doing freestyle. Anyone who's good enough at BLD knows how to do cases without have to think every time. I think it can be compared to f2l. Just because you worked out your solutions intuitively, and now can recall them as 'algorithms' every time you see the case, doesn't mean that you learned an algorithm for every case. You've just done it enough so that each case becomes an alg, instead of slowly figuring out what to do every solve.


----------



## Anthony (Oct 24, 2009)

Hai Yan Zhuang said:


> I talked with 'Yu Hui Xu' ,a cuber ranked second in the world.I have told all my method to him.We think the multiBLD WR should be 40 or so.



lolwut?

That's insane. 15 is a lot, 25 is way more, and 40 is ridiculous. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but that's like, unfathomable for me.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 24, 2009)

Anthony said:


> Hai Yan Zhuang said:
> 
> 
> > I talked with 'Yu Hui Xu' ,a cuber ranked second in the world.I have told all my method to him.We think the multiBLD WR should be 40 or so.
> ...



I think he's not far off. I think 40 will be a master performance, likely to take quite a few years for someone to get to, and will be very difficult to ever beat. But I suspect the limit is probably somewhere around there, yes.

I hope to get to 25 someday - I still think it's possible for me. And if I can get to 25 someday, I really think someone with talent can do 40.

Remember back when Rowe tried 8 cubes at the 2007 US Open and it seemed like an insane amount?  (And that one was without the hour time limit!)


----------



## blah (Oct 24, 2009)

40 = 1:30 per cube


----------



## Chuck (Oct 24, 2009)

KJiptner said:


> About doing 40 cubes multi... Remember you have to memorize those cubes too. 40 cubes is like memorizing a 800 digit number...




For me it's only 40 storybooks (with 400 characters doing 400 things ).



Mike Hughey said:


> I hope to get to 25 someday - I still think it's possible for me.




Go for it, Mike! I know you can. 



blah said:


> 40 = 1:30 per cube




Yeah, speed is the main problem with 1 hour time limit.

Good luck to Yu Hui.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 24, 2009)

Chuck said:


> KJiptner said:
> 
> 
> > About doing 40 cubes multi... Remember you have to memorize those cubes too. 40 cubes is like memorizing a 800 digit number...
> ...



Each cube requires approximately 20 pieces of information with 24 possibilities per piece. So your 800 digit number is 800 digits in base 24.

Consider hour cards. The world record is 1404 cards by Ben Pridmore, and that's with 52 possibilities per card. So if you can be as efficient memorizing cubes as you can be memorizing cards (and I don't see why it shouldn't be possible), then if you were Ben Pridmore you should be able to memorize 40 cubes in about 34 minutes. That should leave enough time for someone like Hai Yan to solve them all. (I wouldn't have a chance, though. )


----------



## deadalnix (Oct 24, 2009)

With a dual letter table, you can memorise with a 24² base easily with some practice.

I think with much more practice, you can handle 24³ item table (You have to memorise it once, and then you can use it all the time). I sounds like an huge task, be doable.


----------



## KJiptner (Oct 24, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> Each cube requires approximately 20 pieces of information with 24 possibilities per piece. So your 800 digit number is 800 digits in base 24.



That somewhat implies, using a 24^2 system is slower than the 10^2 system that is standard for memory athletes who memorize numbers. I think that both equal in speed with practice. 
What I don't think though is that you can memorize a cube at the same pace as a series of numbers or a deck of cards. The reason is that memorizing a cube requires you to search pieces when having new cycles and flipped things in place. Cards are always a row (even though you have to physically shift them, that's slower than looking at diffrent sides of the cube).


----------



## cmhardw (Oct 24, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> Consider hour cards. The world record is 1404 cards by Ben Pridmore, and that's with 52 possibilities per card. So if you can be as efficient memorizing cubes as you can be memorizing cards (and I don't see why it shouldn't be possible), then if you were Ben Pridmore you should be able to memorize 40 cubes in about 34 minutes. That should leave enough time for someone like Hai Yan to solve them all. (I wouldn't have a chance, though. )



Yes, but if I remember correctly they have something like 10 minutes of recall allowed after memorizing (which does not effect their memorization time). We don't have that luxury. I do think the Multi BLD limits are very high, but 40 also seems very high to me. Perhaps sup-30? I'm guessing here, but consider that memorizing so break neck fast will slow down recall a bit.

Chris


----------



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Oct 24, 2009)

40 is the limiation. Maybe 30+ is not difficult someday. I saw a person use 4 seconds to memory 52 pice of playing cards. I mean 4 seconds.He is the king of gamble in china. His speed is faster than the playing cards WR 24+s. I do not know how can he do that.He said he use image.I want pay a visit to him next month.I need to make sure he do not cheat me.He is a famous person in china. Many people know him.He is my friend.When I meet him 3 days ago ,I am not aware of he use memory method to remember the playing card.I think it is the skill of gamble .But when I talk with him and want to lean how to cheat others by using skill of gamble ,he said he realy remember all the playing card in 4 seconds.He do not cheat anybody. He realy know all the secpuence of the card.It is inconceivable.
I realy want to lean some method about memory from him. If he realy do not cheat me. Then ....................................


----------



## Mike Hughey (Oct 24, 2009)

4 seconds to memorize 52 cards would require some sort of "speed memory" or "flash memory" - you couldn't possibly process the 52 cards in some meaningful form that fast. What that means is that (kind of like Chris is saying with the hour cards, but on a bigger scale) you would need to process what you had memorized in those 4 seconds for a while (probably a minute or more) just to commit them to long-term memory. So I don't think this is a particularly useful skill for doing big BLD attempts, if it is even for real.

I'm not saying it is for real - I think it sounds very hard to believe - but it does seem like 4 seconds for 52 cards might be possible as a sort of "speed-flash" memorization, but again it wouldn't be possible to memorize a bunch of decks that fast, I think.

And Chris, I see your point, and I forgot about the time between memorization and recall - I agree that could help. So maybe 35 cubes would be more achievable. 

Oh, and you say that break-neck memorization would slow down recall, but then how do you explain Ville's amazing big cube BLD times?

I still must admit that I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed a monster amazing 40 cube solve someday, though. It's so often true that these things are more attainable than you think they are - 40 still seems like a good guess for the absolute limit to me.


----------



## Anthony (Oct 24, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> Oh, and you say that break-neck memorization would slow down recall, but then how do you explain Ville's amazing big cube BLD times?



Ville's quick memo is pretty incredible, but a 40 cube multibld is still much more to memo than one big cube BLD solve..


----------



## cmhardw (Oct 25, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> Oh, and you say that break-neck memorization would slow down recall, but then how do you explain Ville's amazing big cube BLD times?



Who's to say Ville couldn't memorize twice or three times as fast if he were allowed 10 minutes to *recall* the cube state (not solve it)? That's more what I mean.

Chris


----------



## DavidWoner (Nov 2, 2009)

cmhardw said:


> Mike Hughey said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, and you say that break-neck memorization would slow down recall, but then how do you explain Ville's amazing big cube BLD times?
> ...



Ville is a robot. I have stated this many times and he has not denied it. I have no choice but to accept it as truth.


----------



## Sakarie (Nov 16, 2009)

I can't even understand how he can see all the cards in four seconds? How do he even shift them so fast? 

Remember that even if a cuber doesn't have a special time to recall the memorization, you can still use the time when you solve your first two/three/four letters (or whatever you use), to recall the next four.


----------



## yoruichi (Nov 16, 2009)

use a card fan to seem them all at once


----------



## Stefan (Nov 17, 2009)

cmhardw said:


> Mike Hughey said:
> 
> 
> > Consider hour cards. The world record is 1404 cards by Ben Pridmore, and that's with 52 possibilities per card.
> ...


It's 120 minutes and you probably mean the 15 minutes between memorizing and recall to allow *for the collection of the packs of cards*, not for helping them with their memory. I think it's more likely a *disadvantage*, having to wait without being able to write.



Hai Yan Zhuang said:


> I saw a person use 4 seconds to memory 52 pice of playing cards.


Video or it didn't happen (I do trust you, but not him).


----------



## Hai Yan Zhuang (Dec 21, 2009)

I think maybe he use magic cheat me.So I want see him again.I will by playing cards myself.


----------



## yoruichi (Dec 21, 2009)

yes there are marked decks which are easy to tell what the card is from the back


----------



## dbf (Apr 18, 2010)

Lol. I'm a magician and what he does is a great magic trick. But require practice, it's not simple that you think. I shuffle the deck, you cut the deck and i know the order of every single card. not a marked deck, just a very good trick 

Anyway i'm praticing BLD for introduce in my show. Very good forum


----------

