# SOAP 2x2 Method



## JustinJ (Oct 17, 2009)

A while I had an idea for a method where you’d separate colours first, then orient them. I’ve found all the algs for it and I think it has some potential. I don't think this idea has been thought of before.

1. Separate two opposite colours into their own layers, with at least two adjacent pieces oriented. This sounds a bit weird, but basically, you need a bar, and two pieces beside that bar that are the same colour as it.
2. Orient all the pieces
3. PBL

I kind of used an OFOTA style name, so SOAP stands for Separate, Orient All, Permute.

One of the advantages of this method is it has a fairly low alg count. In total, there are 7*8 - 3 = 53 cases, but 7 of those are Ortega, 16 (8 without reflections) of them are SS (easy ones you should learn anyway), and the remaining 30 you need to learn, but 8 of those 30 are reflections, so if you can reflect algs, there’s only 22 cases you need to learn.

This method can be used fairly well as a supplement to Ortega, since it allows for two corners to be twisted in the FL.

One issue I see with this method is that most of the cases are one move away from an SS case, but this does have fewer algs, and is more of an intermediate method than advanced method.

Algs can be found here. I used the MGLS numbering for the odd OLLs, since I didn't know of any other standard naming system. I'm sure there are some better algs for some cases, let me know if you have any good ones and I'll add them.

I'm planning to learn the algs for when I get these cases, since a first step skip is somewhat common, and it'd be nice to be able to force an OLL skip.

Some examples:

I’ll just do the separation, since the rest is obvious.
Scramble: U R2 F' U R' F2 U' F' R2 
Solution: U’ R2 or x y2 U2 R’

Scramble: U' R2 U' R U' R U R' F U’
Solution: x2 z U2 R2 or z2 R U2 R

Scramble: F2 U' F2 U' R2 U' F' U F2
Solution: U’ R2 or z2 y U R2


----------



## Anthony (Oct 17, 2009)

It took you a while to "announce it." 

Anyway, it doesn't look like that many algorithms so I'll consider learning some of it. If you start getting some insane times with it you'll probably be able to convince me to learn it all though.  But, I have to wait for my 2x2's to come in first. :/

Oh, like Justin said, if anyone finds a few better algs, post them!


----------



## dbax0999 (Oct 17, 2009)

Anyone know the average move count?

Also, could you write up some example SOAP solves?


----------



## Edmund (Oct 17, 2009)

Justin are you going to switch to this? (or just use it as a back-up for easy cases). I think I'll stick with CLL and learn some ss (thats not uber basic). But I'd like to see where it goes.


----------



## Anthony (Oct 17, 2009)

Edmund said:


> Justin are you going to switch to this? (or just use it as a back-up for easy cases). I think I'll stick with CLL and learn some ss (thats not uber basic). But I'd like to see where it goes.



CLL ftw. 
Although, this method could be really fast in some cases.


----------



## JustinJ (Oct 17, 2009)

dbax0999 said:


> Anyone know the average move count?
> 
> Also, could you write up some example SOAP solves?



The first step's around 2 moves on average, I think, and the second step is 6.425, Then PBL is 7.8.

So in total it's about a 16.235 move solve on average (I think, correct me if I made any mistakes). Plus AUF comes to 18.485 (for all three AUFs)

I'll write up some example solves in a bit. Edit: I added them to the first post.



Edmund said:


> Justin are you going to switch to this? (or just use it as a back-up for easy cases). I think I'll stick with CLL and learn some ss (thats not uber basic). But I'd like to see where it goes.



Yeah, it's just for certain cases. CLL is faster than this, but this can be very useful in some cases.


----------



## Edmund (Oct 17, 2009)

Yalow said:


> dbax0999 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone know the average move count?
> ...


Thanks for clearing that up for me. Are you learning (or done learning) ss?


----------



## dbax0999 (Oct 18, 2009)

Thanks for the examples. If my 2x2 ever stops breaking and I can finish CLL I'll start looking into this  Ugh stupid mini ds mod


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

GO SOAP!


----------



## Cride5 (Oct 18, 2009)

Interesting method, and good job creating the algs! I've put up a page for it on the Wiki here. Its just a stub really, so could do with some extra padding out..


----------



## JustinJ (Oct 18, 2009)

Edmund said:


> Thanks for clearing that up for me. Are you learning (or done learning) ss?



Nah, I think I'll learn this first.



Cride5 said:


> Interesting method, and good job creating the algs! I've put up a page for it on the Wiki here. Its just a stub really, so could do with some extra padding out..



Thanks a lot, I really appreciate it


----------



## Deleted member 2864 (Oct 18, 2009)

Nice method. Cool name too XD


----------



## Edmund (Oct 18, 2009)

aznmortalx said:


> Cool name too XD



Yes very cool name!


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 19, 2011)

Big bump here, but I feel that the SOAP method has really been overlooked.
I think that this is really an excellent (and fun) method for solving 2x2x2 which more people should take seriously.

I have spent the past couple of weeks researching this method further, and generating better algorithms. 
You can read my thoughts about SOAP, including a detailed description of the steps, and a comparison with the SS and OFOTA methods, here.
You can get my algs here.

Some of the algs are the same ones that Justin found, but I didn't really like lots of his algs, so I think some of mine are a lot better. They average 6.2 moves. I think EVERY SINGLE alg is quite fingertricky, and most of them should be possible to sub-1.

I was originally planning to learn all of the algs before I published this, but knowing me, that could take a year. I do intend to learn this though.
As far as I know, no one has learned this full method yet. It would be great to know if anyone else commits to learning this along with me.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 19, 2011)

IMO no advanced PreBL method is worth learning in its entirety. For example, this alg is kind of sucks RU2R'U2RU2R'U2R (it's just SS anyway). Separation + 9 moves is too many for PreBL, and there would likely be something better. But a lot of these are nice, I'll learn some of the easier subsets probably.

Though I will say that SOAP is nice in that it's insanely easy to get one-look solves if it's a 2gen case, since predicting PBL is LOLeasy when stuff is separated.


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 19, 2011)

Yes, that particular case is kind of bad, but its the longest alg out of the entire thing. And on the positive side, its one of the easiest algs I have ever learned. I seriously did it once, and I will know it for life <3


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 20, 2011)

Ok Woner, you've got me stumped here. What does being 2-gen have to do with predicting PBL? I can't figure it out. I see that the 2 pieces on the bottom left wont change... but everything else can still change. 
By the way, a LOT of the non-2-gen SOAP algs can be made 2-gen just by increasing their move-count by 1.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 20, 2011)

2 gen algs don't affect CP. I already know some of these cases from CLS, I think I'll learn more of the easy ones, just for the lucky solves and such. Thanks for bumping Zarxrax.


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 20, 2011)

Cyrus C. said:


> 2 gen algs don't affect CP.


Of course they can. Look at this one for example: R'URUR'
It swaps the 2 pieces on the bottom right.


----------



## JustinJ (Jan 20, 2011)

But if a 2-gen alg swaps the two in the bottom layer, it will always do a diagonal swap on the top layer.


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 20, 2011)

Now that IS quite interesting.
It might be worthwhile to try and make a fully 2-gen version of soap, just to see how it turns out. I would bet that some of the algs might be stupid-long, like 10 moves though.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Jan 20, 2011)

It would be a bit similar to Sortega at that point 

For your bar/no bar subsets, you could also call them chameleon/headlights subsets (for on bottom). Really it's just semantics and doesn't matter, but I suppose fits slightly better (but I suppose that's just a matter of preference ).


----------



## Gaétan Guimond (Jan 20, 2011)

Cool job Justin

Who is Ortega ? nickname ? human ? 

Here the operation of the 2x2 I'm the creator 

One can see without using your cube it is difficult to solve.

http://pages.videotron.com/toulou/gaetan/

My domain name is already since 2000 but my web page is open now. 2011 my god...A small beginning lol

http://www.rubikscuberecord.com/

Great method for fewest move challenge 

method (1982)

http://www.kostkarubika.net/2x2x2-guimond-dwie_scianki.html 

great cuber with my method 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KD38T-8qRM



GG


----------



## stinkocheeze (Jan 20, 2011)

Gaétan Guimond said:


> Cool job Justin
> 
> Who is Ortega ? nickname ? human ?
> 
> ...


 
And if you look to your left, you will see a crazy guimond...


----------



## Forte (Jan 20, 2011)

OMFG JUSTIN GOT HIGHEST PRAISEEEEEEEE


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 21, 2011)

Just to make sure here,
If you have a 2gen alg that swaps 2 pieces on bottom, then you get a diagonal swap on top.
And if nothing is swapped on bottom, then nothing will be swapped on top?

So far this has been whats happened with a few algs I checked.

So if this is indeed the case, would it actually be best to try to generate only algs that don't swap any pieces at all?


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 21, 2011)

I finished generating 2-gen algs (with no regard as to whether or not they swap anything), and some of them are pretty nasty. Lots of 9-move cases and 2 11-moves.
Average across all cases is 7.35.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 21, 2011)

Zarxrax said:


> So if this is indeed the case, would it actually be best to try to generate only algs that don't swap any pieces at all?


 
No, prediction is equally easy in either case, as long as you know what the effect on the DR corners will be. It might be useful to have an alg for each case though.


----------



## Zarxrax (Jan 21, 2011)

Ok I updated my algorithm list with 2-gen algs for every case, and an indicator about whether it causes a swap. 
I'll try to add alternative 2-gen algs for every case (if possible) soon.


----------



## Godmil (Jan 24, 2011)

Zarxrax said:


> It would be great to know if anyone else commits to learning this along with me.



Just got my first 2x2 and just couldn't decide which advanced method to go for. I like the PBL finish and not having to be dealing with opposite colours, plus the low number of short algs in this method is nice. Also with a few attempts I've decided it is easy enough to recognise the orientation during inspection. Ok, what the hell, I'll learn this method.

Thanks for listing all those cool algs Zarxrax. I'll learn the first two subsets this week. Then I should be on track to learn the rest before the end of Feb.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Jan 24, 2011)

Godmil learn ortega first. Rowan can easily sub4 Ortega, but that takes a good bit of practice. Ortega will get you used to PBL recognition, and you don't have to learn any other algs (than PBL).


----------



## Godmil (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks fatboyxpc, I already learned Ortega, only took 30mins or so. I think it's a lot of fun, which is why I'm going to start on SOAP, cause it feels like a nice extension of Ortega. I could spend some time just getting fast with Ortega, but I like jumping in at the deep end (which is why I learned full Fridrich before I was sub-50), I find it more interesting 

EDIT: of course Ortega will also be my main method while I'm learning soap, so I'll still get my PBL practice in


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Jan 24, 2011)

Ortega is just learning 5 PBL cases, 2 of which you (should) already know, one being 3 moves, one being 3 moves + AUF + repeat those 3 moves, and the last being move + F2 + undo move. PBL is quite easy to learn 

I suggest learning the SS subset first. Learning multiple 2x2 methods will really help you out in the long run, if you plan to get good at it. This also means learning Guimond, SS, etc. Learning full Guimond isn't difficult, and can get you a sub3 average with enough practice. Honestly, if you want to get really good at multiple 2x2 methods, talk to David Woner.


----------



## Roux_Over_CPOF (Jan 28, 2018)

It seems that the link for the SOAP lags is not working... Can anyone send and updated one?


----------



## Sue Doenim (Jan 28, 2018)

Roux_Over_CPOF said:


> It seems that the link for the SOAP lags is not working... Can anyone send and updated one?


I found this website with the algs on it. Out of curiosity, why are you looking to learn it? I think it's generally accepted as an inferior method to CLL, or onward to EG, or *ahem* HD. On a side note, welcome to the forums!


----------



## Roux_Over_CPOF (Feb 7, 2018)

Thanks for the link! I want to learn SOAP because I thought it sounded interseting, after looking more into it I found this discussion and decided I wanted to learn it. (Also there are only 30ish algs!)


----------

