# What is your BLD method?



## pjgat09 (Mar 19, 2006)

I use Stefan Pochmann's method. My PB is 5:41. What are yours?


----------



## Joël (Mar 19, 2006)

Hi Peter...

I use Stefan Pochmann's method as well.. My best time is 2:20.91.

However, that best time was done with a small adjustment of his method. I solved the edges in three cycles, mostly.

I am working on learning a '3-cycle' method for BLD. Not by first fixing the orientation first, but Pochmann Style... I believe this can be done for both edges and corners. Maybe I'll make a page about it some day...

I wonder if more members are interested in this subject 

Bye!

Jo?l.


----------



## pjk (Mar 19, 2006)

Can you guys send me a link to that method? I would be interested in learning. Thanks
Pat


----------



## Joël (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by PJK_@Mar 19 2006, 11:32 PM
> * Can you guys send me a link to that method? I would be interested in learning. Thanks
> Pat *


 Sure Patrick. The method is here.

Some people find it confusing... Especially if you have never seen another BLD method before, and have little cubing experience, it's quite confusing I must say. If you need help, just ask in this forum.

Good luck,

Jo?l.


----------



## pjk (Mar 20, 2006)

I'll check it out. About how many algs do you need to memorize for that? Thanks


----------



## Scott (Mar 20, 2006)

Guys, im tempted to learn BLD. How hard is it?


----------



## Joël (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott_@Mar 20 2006, 01:21 AM
> * Guys, im tempted to learn BLD. How hard is it? *


 Well, Scott, how hard is it to learn how to solve a cube? Not hard, right? But it did take you some time to get the hang of it!

The same thing applies to blindfold cubing. You will have to put some effort into learning it.. But once you get the hang of it, it's not really that hard... Ok, it's a bit harder than normal cubing, because it takes more from the brain. But the brain will get used to it.

- Jo?l.


----------



## CraigBouchard (Mar 20, 2006)

Hey All, First post here...

I use the Pochmann method, learned it quite quickly with the help of Joel...Yay...and my PB is 2:19.xx and I'm about to go and do a crazy style solve...

Craig


----------



## pjk (Mar 21, 2006)

Once I get better at solving it non-blindfolded, I'll work on this


----------



## Pedro (Mar 24, 2006)

I use the 3-cycles method, were you orient and them permute the pieces...
my best time is 1:49.52, but I know I can do better if I execute faster...


----------



## CraigBouchard (Mar 24, 2006)

Hehehe, watch out, I'm gunna get a lot faster soon  hehehe...I love secrets


----------



## Kirjava (Mar 26, 2006)

I use the NB method 

~Thom


----------



## UberStuber (Apr 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jo?l_@Mar 19 2006, 11:28 PM
> * Hi Peter...
> 
> I use Stefan Pochmann's method as well.. My best time is 2:20.91.
> ...


 Do you just use RL'UR'U'LR'FRF' and its varients for this? I tried this about a month ago and could barely do it with my eyes open :blink: 
The set up moves are a pain, and I don't even want to think about doing it for corners.
Maybe you have an easier way of doing it?


----------



## Joël (Apr 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by UberStuber+Apr 1 2006, 06:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>*QUOTE* (UberStuber @ Apr 1 2006, 06:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Jo?l_@Mar 19 2006, 11:28 PM
> * Hi Peter...
> 
> I use Stefan Pochmann's method as well.. My best time is 2:20.91.
> ...


Do you just use RL'UR'U'LR'FRF' and its varients for this? I tried this about a month ago and could barely do it with my eyes open :blink: 
The set up moves are a pain, and I don't even want to think about doing it for corners.
Maybe you have an easier way of doing it? [/b][/quote]
I use all kinds of algorithms that cycle three edges. That alg is one of the examples... But I believe RUR'U' r R'URU' r' has the same result as that alg you gave.


----------



## UberStuber (Apr 2, 2006)

wow, I'm changing my Oll...


----------



## Cubefactor (Apr 3, 2006)

I use the cycles method, though I'm not that good -yet-. Best time is 6:20. Anyone else in here use the PAO method? Peg System? Any special memory techniques. PAO has been a blessing for my memorization time.

-Richard "The Yellow Dart" Patterson


----------



## Prabal Baishya (Mar 6, 2018)

For 3BLD I currently use M2/OP as my main method and PB is 39.81secs.


----------



## JustAnotherGenericCuber (Mar 6, 2018)

12 year revival


----------



## FastCubeMaster (Mar 6, 2018)

JustAnotherGenericCuber said:


> 12 year revival


That's honestly a record


----------



## Dancing Jules (Mar 7, 2018)

Joël said:


> I am working on learning a '3-cycle' method for BLD. Not by first fixing the orientation first, but Pochmann Style... I believe this can be done for both edges and corners. Maybe I'll make a page about it some day...



Did that guy just invent 3-style three years earlier?


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 8, 2018)

Dancing Jules said:


> Did that guy just invent 3-style three years earlier?


Very probably. Joël was a legend - almost as much so as Stefan. Although I wouldn't be surprised if it was "invented" by a number of people independently, and Joël was just one of them. I suspect Stefan Pochmann knew it was potentially a practical method as well, as did several other people.

Right after 3-style actually caught on, there was some talk about the possibility of using 5-cycles instead of 3-cycles. Wouldn't it be interesting if someday 5-style actually became a thing?  To make that possible, the big challenge would be to get where you can "see" how 5-cycle algorithms work, much as people currently "see" 3-cycles in their head now. I wonder if it's possible to do that generically?


----------



## Dancing Jules (Mar 8, 2018)

Mike Hughey said:


> Although I wouldn't be surprised if it was "invented" by a number of people independently, and Joël was just one of them



Shouldn't we stopp calling it "Beyer-Hardwick" then? Or at least change some info in the wiki? After all we also stopped calling CFOP "Fridrich" for the exact same reason.


----------



## Alex B71 (Mar 8, 2018)

Dancing Jules said:


> Shouldn't we stopp calling it "Beyer-Hardwick" then? Or at least change some info in the wiki? After all we also stopped calling CFOP "Fridrich" for the exact same reason.



It mainly has stopped being called BH, it's usually known as 3style or speed optimized comms. BH, if i'm not mistaken is meant to be completely move optimal.


----------



## Alex B71 (Mar 8, 2018)

Mike Hughey said:


> Very probably. Joël was a legend - almost as much so as Stefan. Although I wouldn't be surprised if it was "invented" by a number of people independently, and Joël was just one of them. I suspect Stefan Pochmann knew it was potentially a practical method as well, as did several other people.
> 
> Right after 3-style actually caught on, there was some talk about the possibility of using 5-cycles instead of 3-cycles. Wouldn't it be interesting if someday 5-style actually became a thing?  To make that possible, the big challenge would be to get where you can "see" how 5-cycle algorithms work, much as people currently "see" 3-cycles in their head now. I wonder if it's possible to do that generically?



Sorry about this essay in advance.

I've been thinking about 5-cycle corners recently, just as a fun thing to do. And i don't have a clue... It's well beyond my mental ability. But here's what i made and wrote down after a few hours of trying to work out what i believe would be one of the more simpler cases.

I wrote this when looking at this case (UBL - UFL - FRD - LDF - BLD) and it seems to work for all cases where 1-2 are in the U layer and the last 3 on the D layer in a particular orientation.

[(R U' R' L' U' L) D]

Pieces 1 and 2 (In order of the Comm direction, in this case UFL and FDR)
get solved together in minimal moves (Stay in accordance with general
Commutator rules). 1 of the first two pieces are moved aside, not to be used until the final moves, whilst the other is used around the "LOOP"... A sort of traveling buffer piece. In
this case piece 1 is used to swap out piece 4 so it may be placed into the
position of piece 5 then placing piece 5 into the buffer position... If
all done correctly, the loop piece will move on to interact with the
pieces swapped out in the first few moves, when reversing the moves, to finish it's journey as a traveling buffer having no where else to go but back to where it began
traveling. all whilst still following comm rules, i think... maybe, i don't know. That's the best i can
explain that...

R U' R' ( L' U' L D L' U L R U R') D'
\ 1 / -- \ 2 / \3/ \ 4 / - \ 5 / \6/

1. F2P (First 2 pieces)
2. Start of the Loop & start of main Comm
3. Interchange
4. End of main comm & mid point of the loop
5. End of loop, solving all remaining pieces relative to each other
6. Undo Interchange
() = the "loop" thing/traveling buffer

This only saves 2 moves over the two 3 cycles i would normally use and it's terrible in terms of speed, Here's another example that operates on the same principle but saves 4 moves over my normal two 3 cycles and is actually quite a bit faster IMO.

UBL - FLU - RDF - FDL - LDB
[D' (L' U' L2 U L')]

Sorry about the way i write comms, and also i think iv'e taken this as far as i can. A smart, experienced person should have a better look at this, they'd be cool to see. I have a few other's of this type... But that's as far as i can generate with intuition.

Any further input is welcomed.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Mar 8, 2018)

Alex B71 said:


> It mainly has stopped being called BH, it's usually known as 3style or speed optimized comms. BH, if i'm not mistaken is meant to be completely move optimal.


Actually, I think it's very reasonable to keep calling move-optimized commutators BH. BH is a clearly defined but now somewhat inferior method. Unfortunately for me, I basically still do BH, not optimized 3style. (There are about 6 algs that I use that are not move-optimized commutators - mostly the Per Specials.) These days, the fast people use speed-optimized algs for 3-cycles, not move-optimized, which is definitely not BH. BH is by definition (as defined by its creators) move-optimized commutators for every single case.

@Alex B71 - Those are some mind-blowing commutators. Those examples just serve to confirm my suspicion, though, that it probably never would be practical. It seems like there are probably only a relatively small subset of 5-cycles (percentage-wise) that would actually be better for speed than a pair of 3-cycles. I can see us getting where the very best people learn that subset and use them to shave off milliseconds from their solves, but I doubt we'll get where you would always do your first 5-cycle with a single commutator. Still, it would be really cool if I was wrong about that.


----------



## abunickabhi (Mar 24, 2018)

I use freestyle method.
I want to avoid 3-style as much as I can as it is addictive and I will settle for that method permanently.

Freestyle , has some good attributes that top BLDers are developing like premoves, floating buffer, parity cancellation, setups to ZBLL and some pure piece 4 cycles.

I love this method but it is taking too long time to develop.


----------



## abunickabhi (Mar 24, 2018)

CraigBouchard said:


> Hehehe, watch out, I'm gunna get a lot faster soon  hehehe...I love secrets


Hehe,

But, secrets cannot beat plain practice!
You have to preserve and develop the secret as well as practice on it and the conventional method at the same time!

5 cycles are feasible!


----------



## abunickabhi (Mar 11, 2019)

abunickabhi said:


> Hehe,
> 
> But, secrets cannot beat plain practice!
> You have to preserve and develop the secret as well as practice on it and the conventional method at the same time!
> ...



To prove my feasibility point,

To accelerate the learning rate, I have developed the Yo notation to memorize the algorithms.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bfDsydw6pxBftd8Xwik95FNjILGkdrJMBO5EORbftII/edit?usp=sharing

I will be also documenting my progress on the fingertricks that I get for each case like in this video: 



Since I am just starting out drilling, not all algs are sub-1ed by me, but I think they can be sub 1.5ed since most of the algs are no more than 14 moves.

Right now, I am 8000 algs down, and I need to memorize ~118000 algs more.
https://github.com/abunickabhi/5-style/blob/master/5-style-edge.pdf

With the Giiker cube coming out last year, I can drill even more algorithms faster and randomly, and save time.


----------

