# New Method "Layer Perm Method"



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

I've devised a new method and was wondering if it had a potential. If you have suggestion for algs or tips for inproving, please tell me!

Basically, you solve the first layer without orienting the pieces. Then, you put F2L pieces, but not in the correct slot. All the cubies with the top layer's color on then should NOT be in any F2L slot. Then you do OLL. Then, you do PLL on the top and bottom layer. Then, you use the alg (R2 U2 R2) to put the F2l parts right. But, I've encountered a parity error. On some of the layers, you get the "Void" cube parity. (Where 2 edges are switched) My only solution to that is to take out a part on the top layer and put it back in, but it takes so long and isnt worth it. 

Any solutions to this problem should be posted and I really would like help for this "New" method. (I want some algs to permute the top and bottom layers at the same time, but I'm not good at devising algs)

My "Name" for this method is "Layer Perm Method"

(And, if you remeber me from like August, I've changed. Im not the same annoying kid who was bugging people with extrenious comments. My vocabulay had myrad of words and is more mature sounding. Please give me a chance! Thanks!)


----------



## Edward (Nov 14, 2009)

Why do that. Its just Fridrich but solving the cross and f2l wrong. If I'm wrong please please please correct me.


----------



## Stefan (Nov 14, 2009)

Sounds very counter-intuitive. Why do you think it would be any good?


----------



## Muesli (Nov 14, 2009)

Is this like reducing the 3x3x3 to a Domino cube, then solving the middle layer last?


----------



## Faz (Nov 14, 2009)

Ya, seems a bit complicated.



Spoiler



[12:59:32 PM] Feliks: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?p=266355#post266355
[12:59:34 PM] Feliks: lul
[1:01:19 PM] Feliks: ya so i don't get it
[1:01:20 PM] Feliks: like
[1:01:22 PM] Feliks: make a face
[1:01:30 PM] Feliks: no
[1:01:34 PM] Feliks: unoriented face
[1:01:37 PM] Feliks: then
[1:01:39 PM] Meep: it's basically make an unoriented first layer
[1:01:42 PM] Feliks: randomly put edges
[1:01:44 PM] Meep: messed up E layer edges
[1:01:46 PM] Meep: lol
[1:01:47 PM] Meep: then yeah
[1:01:49 PM] Feliks: then oll pll
[1:01:51 PM] Feliks: if that works
[1:01:56 PM] Feliks: i got a corner twist
[1:02:01 PM] Meep: lol
[1:02:04 PM] Feliks: and a misoriented edge on top
[1:02:10 PM] Meep: My ring method was able to fix those
[1:02:12 PM] Feliks: because of my frist thing
[1:02:14 PM] Meep: lol
[1:02:14 PM] Feliks: first(
[1:02:17 PM] Feliks: then i redid those
[1:02:21 PM] Feliks: did oll and pll
[1:02:26 PM] Feliks: with the parity thing
[1:02:29 PM] Meep: lol
[1:02:34 PM] Feliks: and then solved the last 4 edges in like 10 second
[1:02:35 PM] Meep: his parity would just be M2 U2 M2
[1:02:40 PM] Feliks: THAT METHOD IS SO BEAST
[1:02:45 PM] Meep: inorite
[1:02:49 PM] Meep: let's all use it


----------



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

*Method Reasons*

I feel that this method has a strong potential, although it's very intuitive.

1.) Solving 1 layer (unoriented) is very simple for me and takes a very short time to complete.
2.) For the "F2L" stage, almost always, there is only 1 or 2 edges that have to be inserted.
3.) OLL is the same, pretty fast/
4.)PLL is also very fast is you know all 21 of them. (If there are algs for permuting both layers at a time it would be very fast, considering the inspection time needed to determine which alg to use.)
5.) Fixing "F2L" at the end would be quite simple and fast to preform, as it only uses R and U moves. (Ocasionally L)


I've done an average of 5 with this method, compared to an average of 5 with regular F2L, 2 look OLL and 2 look PLL.

Fredrich: Average: 21.56
Later Perm Method: Average: 30.68 (Take into consideration that I've just figured this out so I'm not an expert at it yet.)


----------



## qqwref (Nov 14, 2009)

Solving a group of pieces into each other's slots and then permuting them later is only at all useful if you can save time by permuting more than one thing at once (such as in Ortega where you permute both layers in one step). Otherwise, it's going to be faster to just solve them into the right places at first.


----------



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

If there is somebody out there that can devise some algs for permuating both top and bottom layers please write some algs here! I really want to help this method get to it's feet and run. (Would be like Ortega for the 2x2) I feel that this new method will become fast as more algs are discovered. I would also like to find/figure out an alg for the "parity" error that occurs! Thanks for the support of the "Layer Perm" Method!


----------



## Edward (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> If there is somebody out there that can devise some algs for permuating both top and bottom layers please write some algs here! I really want to help this method get to it's feet and run. (Would be like Ortega for the 2x2) I feel that this new method will become fast as more algs are discovered. I would also like to find/figure out an alg for the "parity" error that occurs! Thanks for the support of the "Layer Perm" Method!



I'll bet If you made ALL the algs, It would be more than ZB.


----------



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

I would just like some algs that are kind of like 2 look PLL. Lust do like one, then use 1-2 to do the rest. (Only a few algs) The rest of the method is highly intuitive.


----------



## Edward (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> I would just like some algs that are kind of like 2 look PLL. Lust do like one, then use 1-2 to do the rest. (Only a few algs) The rest of the method is highly intuitive.



It would still be alot.


----------



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

Well, we would need 1 universal alg, like the T-Perm, but it does that for both layers. Then, we would need like 3 algs like the U-Perms, but again, do it to both layers.


----------



## Anthony (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> I feel that this method has a strong potential, although it's very intuitive.


Yeah, of course orienting and permuting the top and bottom layers (especially at the same time) is very intuitive. Sounds like it's got a lot of potential to me.


cuberkid10 said:


> 3.) OLL is the same, pretty fast/


Yeah, of course OLL is the same, who cares if a lot of the time you just get really random shapes that you've never seen before because the bottom layer is unoriented.


cuberkid10 said:


> 4.)PLL is also very fast is you know all 21 of them. (If there are algs for permuting both layers at a time it would be very fast, considering the inspection time needed to determine which alg to use.)


Yeah, parity will only occur sometimes and only slow down half your solves and confuse you every now and again.


cuberkid10 said:


> 5.) Fixing "F2L" at the end would be quite simple and fast to preform, as it only uses R and U moves. (Ocasionally L)


There's no difference between 2 gen and 3 gen nowadays, especially when you have to involve cube rotations.


cuberkid10 said:


> I've done an average of 5 with this method, compared to an average of 5 with regular F2L, 2 look OLL and 2 look PLL.
> Fredrich: Average: 21.56
> Later Perm Method: Average: 30.68 (Take into consideration that I've just figured this out so I'm not an expert at it yet.)


Yeah, so consider sticking to Fridrich if you want to get fast. I'm sure I could think of some silly method right now if I wanted to and get some "decent" averages with it, but that doesn't mean it has potential. But if you really want to be unique, by all means, go for it..


----------



## Truncator (Nov 14, 2009)

I can't help but laugh.


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 14, 2009)

It seems intriguing.


----------



## CL_Pepsi (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> I feel that this method has a strong potential, although it's very intuitive.
> 
> 1.) Solving 1 layer (unoriented) is very simple for me and takes a very short time to complete.
> 2.) For the "F2L" stage, almost always, there is only 1 or 2 edges that have to be inserted.
> ...



How do you get almost sub 20 with 2 look PLL and OLL? Im barely sub 25 with Full Pll and 2 look OLL.:confused: I want to see video of you F2L


----------



## Edward (Nov 14, 2009)

CL_Pepsi said:


> cuberkid10 said:
> 
> 
> > I feel that this method has a strong potential, although it's very intuitive.
> ...


He'd need a 10-13 second F2l. Its possible. (I average 15 sec F2L, and if I improve my cross I'd be sub 20)


----------



## yogonu (Nov 14, 2009)

I like the method, I don't know about speed solving with it but Its interesting.

And the "parity" is easily fixed by doing M2 U2 M2 U2 as fazrulz already pointed out.


----------



## Rubixcubematt (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> If there is somebody out there that can devise some algs for permuating both top and bottom layers please write some algs here! I really want to help this method get to it's feet and run. (Would be like Ortega for the 2x2) I feel that this new method will become fast as more algs are discovered. I would also like to find/figure out an alg for the "parity" error that occurs! *Thanks for the support* of the "Layer Perm" Method!



I haven't seen any support in all the posts, except the last one. Please point out the supportive comments to me.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Nov 14, 2009)

Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned, but I think I'd still prefer XG over this.


----------



## AndyRoo789 (Nov 14, 2009)

Anthony said:


> cuberkid10 said:
> 
> 
> > I feel that this method has a strong potential, although it's very intuitive.
> ...



Agreed with everything Anthony said, especially the bit about getting weird cases in OLL, you didn't explain how to fix that.




Edward said:


> cuberkid10 said:
> 
> 
> > If there is somebody out there that can devise some algs for permuating both top and bottom layers please write some algs here! I really want to help this method get to it's feet and run. (Would be like Ortega for the 2x2) I feel that this new method will become fast as more algs are discovered. I would also like to find/figure out an alg for the "parity" error that occurs! Thanks for the support of the "Layer Perm" Method!
> ...



You would need to learn 176 algs + Adjustment of U/D face before the alg + Having to do an x2/z2 if the case is upside down, unless you want to learn how to do the alg upside down.
E.g. R U R' U' upside down = R D R' D' or L D L' D' etc. (depending on which direction you want the alg to be preformed)

Otherwise, if you don't want to do a x2/z2 or upside the alg, its 441 algs.


This information may not be right, its late and I'm really tired at the moment..


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 14, 2009)

Or you could just use Fridrich. No, seriously, just stick with Fridrich.


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 14, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Or you could just use Fridrich. No, seriously, just stick with Fridrich.



I say experiment and see what's best for you yourself, and make sure it doesn't have an excessive amount of algs XD.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 14, 2009)

Wow, I'm jealous of you.
When I proposed the ZBLD method, I only got one comment. 0:

Good luck with this, though it does seem like conventional methods are better, I still wish you luck.


----------



## cmhardw (Nov 14, 2009)

cuberkid10 said:


> If there is somebody out there that can devise some algs for permuating both top and bottom layers please write some algs here!



One useful tip, if you want your new method idea to take off never wait around for other people to come up with algs for the cases for you. Learn to use ACube and Cube Explorer (Read the help files that come with the programs).

Chris


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 14, 2009)

Chris is definitely correct. 
Acube doesn't have a graphical user interface, and takes a little getting used to.

CubeExplorer does though, and is a little more user friendly.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 14, 2009)

Cubes=Life said:


> Wow, I'm jealous of you.
> When I proposed the ZBLD method, I only got one comment. 0:
> 
> Good luck with this, though it does seem like conventional methods are better, I still wish you luck.



ZBLD didn't get a lot of comments because it's retardedly hard to use (how many people know ZBLL AND would actually have a chance of applying it to BLD?), not because it's a bad method. I think this got a lot of comments because a lot of people have tried stuff like this before and it doesn't work out too well. In general, though, speedsolving methods are much easier to use, so they'll get much more response.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 14, 2009)

Ah yuss.
You're definitely right.

Very logical reply. >.<


----------



## riffz (Nov 14, 2009)

How is this highly intuitive? You have to learn an obscene amount of algorithms.

So you have to perform OLL and PLL twice, or learn tons of algs and possibly have to do a z2 cube rotation.

And you can get tons of OLLs that you don't know from Fridrich because both layers are unoriented.

No thanks.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 14, 2009)

I actually think that recognition would be a lot worse.


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 14, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> I actually think that recognition would be a lot worse.



Recognition's always bad at the start.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 14, 2009)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > I actually think that recognition would be a lot worse.
> ...



True.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 14, 2009)

how do you average 30 with this?
I tried it for the heck of it..
how is it intuitive?
I have nooo idea how to perform OLL on a mess like that. I always end up with either 3 or 1 edges oriented and a random corner sometimes.
Explain?


----------



## cuberkid10 (Nov 14, 2009)

*Answers*

1.) I average 21-25 seconds with fredrich because i am contantly practicing. I have a good sppedcube and barey any pauses in F2L. (F2L is usully completes within 12-17 seconds)
2.) The support thing, i was thanking in advance.
3.) Im not using this method for sppedcubing, im stiking with fredrich


----------



## KwS Pall (Nov 17, 2009)

what about finishing Cross oriented, then corners without orientation, then F2L with orienting the Corners (fast lookahead as you only look for one piece), then OLL/PLL?


----------



## KConny (Nov 17, 2009)

Me and my friends sometimes play the game "Who can come up with the stupidest method". And this method been discussed a couple of times.

KwS Pall: First inserting a corner, then later taking it out of the first layer to pair it with an edge uses a lot of unnecessary moves that cancels out in normal F2L.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 17, 2009)

ಠ_ಠ


----------



## riffz (Nov 17, 2009)

Kirjava said:


> ಠ_ಠ



You contribute a lot to discussion with this.


----------



## Edward (Nov 17, 2009)

Sandbest said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Ranzha V. Emodrach said:
> ...



Not impossible, just difficult.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 17, 2009)

riffz said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> > ಠ_ಠ
> ...



I actually just broke out laughing.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 17, 2009)

Your going to have parity issues, although what you could do is:

• Do the bottom layer thing
• Actually solve the middle layer (it takes the same amount of time)
• Now orient bottom & top edges (less than 10 algorithms)
• Orient bottom & top corners (less than 30 algorithms)
• Permute bottom & top corners (less than 10 algorithms)
• Permute bottom & top edges (Less than 20 algorithms)

This is still algorithm heavy for being a 2-look equivalent. Fridrich requires about the same amount of algorithms for a full version. Although if you feel like being different & experimenting a bit more, go for it! I don't understand the method name though...

Heres one of my wacky methods while we're on the subject:

• Solve corners
• Solve middle layer
• Move edges to their right side of the layer.
• Orient & permute all the edges

Pretty algorithm heavy & also intuitive.


----------



## MistArts (Nov 18, 2009)

Cyrus C. said:


> Your going to have parity issues, although what you could do is:
> 
> • Do the bottom layer thing
> • Actually solve the middle layer (it takes the same amount of time)
> ...



I would do this to loosely reflect his method:


Solve E layer

Seperate U and D colors into their respective layers using <R2,U,D> moves (Repair the two edges on the R layer and E slice while doing the last moves)

Orient all corners

Orient all edges

Permute all corners

Permute all edges

...And I don't like it...


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 18, 2009)

MistArts said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Your going to have parity issues, although what you could do is:
> ...



I fixed it actually, so now it's a bit less algorithm heavy.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Nov 18, 2009)

Man, my memory is bad today. Hasn't there already been an attempt at solving a 3x3 like a square 1? Separating the layers and permuting. Who did that?


----------



## Athefre (Nov 18, 2009)

Just about every method that people post has already been thought of and or posted. It feels strange when someone posts some simple idea, that many cubers have considered before and even posted about, then the method gets named after them only because they were the one to make it popular.

Anyway, this method is very similar to Human Thistlethwaite, by Ryan Heise, to answer hawk's question.

EDIT: Of course I mean no offence to those people. I regret posting that.


----------

