# Interesting idea?



## jackolanternsoup (Jun 29, 2008)

Uh.. Well I was being random one day and thought it would be cool to solve centers on big cubes using the center swithiching 'trick' (M E M' E' on a 3x3x3) by replacing the Ms and Es with r, l, u and d... 

Would that actually be possible or is it just too many things to factor in? I think someone with mega memory can . Imagine solving 6 centers at a time; that'd be fast..

Go Chris Hardwick


----------



## deadalnix (Jun 29, 2008)

Set ups will be very weird !

I think commutators are more powerful for these cases.


----------



## jackolanternsoup (Jun 29, 2008)

Yeah Lol. you're right.. approximately 6-12 setup moves every time..


----------



## blah (Jun 29, 2008)

Which makes it less efficient than commutators in terms of moves per solved piece. The reason no one really uses 5 cycles in BLD is because of retardedly long setup moves that's enough to confuse anyone, and how do you go about "setdown-ing" your setup moves? That'd be fun  But I can picture the efficiency, two algs to solve all the edges on a 3x3x3, I'd love that.


----------



## MistArts (Jun 29, 2008)

blah said:


> Which makes it less efficient than commutators in terms of moves per solved piece. The reason no one really uses 5 cycles in BLD is because of retardedly long setup moves that's enough to confuse anyone, and how do you go about "setdown-ing" your setup moves? That'd be fun  But I can picture the efficiency, two algs to solve all the edges on a 3x3x3, I'd love that.



That is you have 4 3-cycles...What if you have those 2 cycles?


----------



## blah (Jun 29, 2008)

Well according to my experience, half the time you don't. Make it 2.5 algs then... But what am I arguing about? No one uses 5-cycles


----------



## deadalnix (Jun 30, 2008)

I use for 333 corners. They are only 20 cases if you want only an U and a D move as set-up. You can end your corner permutation in 2 algs, and with orientation in 2 alg that I use too, it's quite effiscient.


----------



## blah (Jun 30, 2008)

Ooh sweet I didn't know anyone did that  Now you've gotta teach me those algs, or at least link me to where you got them? I know there's a stickied thread here but I'm pretty sure you've got other sources if you've got as many as 20 algs just for CP! (Ever considered switching to an edges-first method for regular speedsolving?)


----------



## deadalnix (Jun 30, 2008)

I made the method myself.

You can find it there : http://www.francocube.com/deadalnix/speedblind.php but in french. If you are lokking for alg, it should not be a problem.

Don't be affraid by the number of sequences : many are only mirror or standard set-ups moves.

I have posted this method somewhere in this forum but it wasn't a big success. If you are motived to make an english version, tell me.


----------



## joey (Jun 30, 2008)

Thing is, you have to orient first. boo! I wish 5 cycle commutators were easy to make


----------



## deadalnix (Jun 30, 2008)

You cans olve the corner including orientation and permutation in 4 algs each time. And no need to think too much.

How do you do a 5-cycle commutator ?


----------



## blah (Jun 30, 2008)

joey said:


> Thing is, you have to orient first. boo!



Hmm... Good point there. I did a brief mental calculation and I believe 4-step full corner solution is definitely (_THIS_ is how you spell "definitely", I've seen tooooo many posts with misspellings, no personal attack to anyone, just my little rant ) gonna be faster in terms of move count compared to old Pochmann, don't think anyone's gonna doubt that. As for freestyle, I think it's gonna take a LOT of practice to get to the point where you don't take more than 2 seconds to think how to set up the stickers. And then there's R2, which I guess no one else but Stefan himself uses? Don't know much about R2, can't comment, sorry.

So, as compared to all the other corner-solving methods I know of (tell me if there's any I've missed or haven't heard of), I think 4-step full corner solution is a pretty "fast way to get fast" once you're familiar with the algs, which comes naturally with practice. (Freestyle is the slow way to get fast.)

Any other opinions on this?


----------



## AvGalen (Jun 30, 2008)

blah said:


> joey said:
> 
> 
> > Thing is, you have to orient first. boo!
> ...


Perfect summary!


----------



## joey (Jun 30, 2008)

Umm. I don't take more than 2s to setup stickers. Some cases I still solve using old pochmann, I admit, because I need to learn algs/commutators for some nasty cases, but most cases I don't take 2s to think.

edit: Mondo uses R2.


----------



## blah (Jun 30, 2008)

@joey, how long have you been using freestyle corners? I've tried it once, sighted, and I was lost at my first three pieces  I _really_ couldn't picture myself seeing the setup moves blindfolded so I gave up  And do you mean _the_ Ryosuke Mondo? I don't know any other. I'm perplexed. Why would anyone want to use such an error-prone method (my opinion) such as R2 for multiBLD? Or does he use it for normal BLD only?

@deadalnix, Q1: How long did it take you to learn them all? Q2: Can you please take an average of 12 corners-only BLD solves and post it up here? Thanks. I wanna see how long it takes to memorize and process all that information. I did an average of 30 before, the thread's somewhere on this sub-forum, I got an average of 46.xxs, but that was long ago, I probably average ~40s now, not too sure.

And @Arnaud, thanks  So does that mean you're switching to this 4-step corners thingy?


----------



## tim (Jun 30, 2008)

blah said:


> And do you mean _the_ Ryosuke Mondo? I don't know any other. I'm perplexed. Why would anyone want to use such an error-prone method (my opinion) such as R2 for multiBLD? Or does he use it for normal BLD only?



error-prone method? I don't see where you can make any mistakes. I use the old pochmann method for corners which is almost identically to R2. And i haven't done any execution mistakes within the last 100 bld solves.


----------



## joey (Jun 30, 2008)

I agree with tim, I don't see why you think it is error prone?
I dunno how long I've been doing freestyle. Several months? 4? 5?


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jun 30, 2008)

blah said:


> Why would anyone want to use such an error-prone method (my opinion) such as R2 for multiBLD?



Why do you think it's error prone? Why is 3-cycle, old-Pochmann, and any other commonly used method not error-prone? If anything, R2 has very simple cycles.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jun 30, 2008)

Actually, the one thing that made me wonder about trying R2 was the fact that I thought it might be less error-prone than any of the other well-known methods out there. Especially for multiBLD.

But I haven't ever actually tried it - not even a single solve. I should someday.


----------



## blah (Jul 1, 2008)

Okay, my bad. Wrong assumption, I take that back. Then why is it that not many people use R2, other than the fact that half the corners are in R?


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jul 1, 2008)

blah said:


> Okay, my bad. Wrong assumption, I take that back. Then why is it that not many people use R2, other than the fact that half the corners are in R?



I think that's it - half the corners are in R, and they require scary-looking algorithms to solve them. That's what scared me off. I'm sure it's not nearly as bad as it looks, and can probably be mastered fairly quickly. Which is why I want to try it someday - I suspect it's a pretty good method and not nearly as hard to learn as it looks. I'm sure some of the lack of popularity is also the number of moves that seem to be required (although they're not nearly as bad as with Old Pochmann corners).


----------



## blah (Jul 1, 2008)

Actually I think it's because not many have proven it to be _really_ fast yet. That's how it works: People see a few fast guys using Fridrich then they start using it, and then before you know it, the whole world's using Fridrich, even some who are not even sub-minute! Same thing happened for BLD: Alex Yu got 3 of the 4 fastest times in the world with M2 + 3OP, and suddenly so many people have the urge to learn M2 (yeah I admit, I'm one of them ) So what we need now is a few more people to get fast at R2 besides Mondo...


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jul 1, 2008)

Actually, if Mondo would just set the world record in a competition (tough to do now, thanks to Rafal, but it could happen), that would probably do the trick.


----------



## Stefan (Jul 1, 2008)

In case you're scared by the R2 algs, try these first, they're nice and fast and they're each other's inverse:

(R' U R2 U' R' F' R U R2 U' R' F)
(F' R U R2 U' R' F R U R2' U' R)

The others aren't that bad, either.


----------



## fanwuq (Jul 1, 2008)

I guess this is a discussion of different corner methods?

Are there any ugly cases in TuRBo corners?


----------



## blah (Jul 1, 2008)

Actually, Mondo's current time and ranking is enough to convince me to use R2, *if* I hadn't already spent so much time and effort learning so many 3OP algorithms. I've been thinking about this for hours since so many people said R2 wasn't as error-prone as I thought it to be.

Help. Dilemma. Learn something potentially faster and ditch the other one into which I've put so much effort? Or stick to it and hope it gets better? (Bad news is it's been plateauing for quite a while now )

And Stefan, those algs feel *kinda* nice, quite encouraging  but I wouldn't say they're fantastic. Then again, none of my current BLD algs are nice anyway  I'll go check out that R2 section of your page, which I've never bothered looking, now


----------



## deadalnix (Jul 1, 2008)

My tips for awfull case in M2 can be applied in R2 (not for each case, but it's a good begining).

See the improvement for M2/R2 topic for that.

I find 5-cycles much more powerfull than R2, but I'm thinking to change to freestyle commutator, which is more big cube compatible.


----------

