# [Video] New 3x3 method, still has no name



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

I have made up a new method for the 3x3 cube. I looked through every method I could find to make sure that this method was different. I could not find any so I made algorithms and here it is. 





The first thing is the algorithms are not on a website yet. Apart from the coll's that can be found on a few people's sites. Hopefully I can get them up quickly.

Outline of method: 
Four F2L pairs
CLL
Orient all edges
Permute all edges
OR
Four F2L pairs
Orient all edges
Permute all edges
L4C

I will warn you before the example solve that the amount of moves in my solution will be higher than after I practice it and get a bit better
One colour example first
Scramble- D' F B' R2 L' U D' F U' D B L' F2 D' R2 L' B R2 F2 U' R2 D' R L' B2
x2 U' B U' R2 U' R2 U R2 U2 R U' y' M2 U' M2 R U2 R' U2 y' M' U M y' R U' R'
y U2 M' U M' U M U M
U' M' U2 M y M2 U M2 y
R' F2 U F2 U F2 U' F2 R
y' l' U R' D2 R U' R' D2 R2
57 Moves if you count M moves as one

Scramble-R' F2 B D F' L2 U F2 R F2 U D2 B' F D' U F' L2 D U2 B2 U' R B2 F'
R B R' L U' L' F U F2 z R2 U M2 U' F' U F y' U2 M' y' L' U2 L 
S2 M2 U M' U M' U M U M 
U' R2 F2 R2 F2 R2 F2 U2 y' M' U2 M U y'
R' F2 D R2 U R2 D' F2 R
y2 L U2 B' R B R' U2 L' B' U2 B2 U2 B'

Scramble- D' U' B U D' L' R' B' F' R D' U' L R F' L R' B' U L' D2 U' B U' L2

Scramble- L' U' D L2 U R2 F U2 B' L D' L D L2 D' B2 L' F2 L' D' R2 U B2 U2 L'
Scramble- D2 B' F U2 B2 U F R D' R' B U R U2 F U2 L2 U R' L' D2 L' F R' L2
Scramble- B F D B2 D U' F B L B F D F' D F' D' B U2 D2 F L' R D' R' U'
Scramble- F2 L U2 L U2 F2 R U' R' B U' D2 L U' F' B' U B R2 U' L2 R2 U2 F2 U
Scramble- F2 B2 D' R2 L2 F2 B R' L2 U' R2 B2 F2 L U2 B' R D2 L2 R B2 L R2 B L
Scramble- R' L2 D' L2 R' F' D2 F2 U L2 F R' F B U L U R D' L' R D2 L' U F2
Scramble- D L' U2 B L2 F' R' B2 U F' L' R' U2 F D' B U2 B' U' L2 D B U2 L' U2
Scramble- D2 L U2 F2 U B' R' U D' B2 L D B' U L' R2 U2 R' U L B D U L D'
Scramble- R' L2 U B R B D' R2 B' F' U' F2 U' B L2 U F2 L D B R' F2 R' L B'


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 28, 2010)

Can you just give a quick outline? I have no volume here, and I also don't want to watch a 14m video on something that could be explained in maybe, 10-20 words + an example solve?


----------



## Edward (Nov 28, 2010)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> Can you just give a quick outline? I have no volume here, and I also don't want to watch a 14m video on something that could be explained in maybe, 10-20 words + an example solve?


 
4 f2l pairs
Orient all edges
Permute all edges
CxLL

I think that was it. 
Erm, it feels like a hybrid ;-;


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Nov 28, 2010)

Edward said:


> 4 f2l pairs
> Orient all edges
> Permute all edges
> CxLL
> ...


 
No cross?!
If there is, that's 3/4 of Fridrich right there, using the same algorithms.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> No cross?!


 
No cross. It does not need to have cross


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 28, 2010)

I'd do Fridrich-ish Roux instead of your "method". It's more efficient.

Scramble: U2 F' R L F B' L F' B' R' L' F2 B L2 R' F2 L' B R F' L F B R B
(wow, qqTimer dished out a FRLB scramble with a U2 to start. Wow.)

F2L 1: x2 F' M D M' F
F2L 2: L2 U' L2 U L2
F2L 3: y' R U R' U y R' U' R U
F2L 4: y' R U2 R' U' R U R'
CLL: R U R' U R U2 R'
Stupid L7E:
FL: U M U M2' U2 M y' M' U M
ELL: F R U R' U' S U R U' R' f' U'

50 moves, STM.
There is a cancellation of three moves notated between F2L 4 and CLL.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> I'd do Fridrich-ish Roux instead of your "method". It's more efficient.
> 
> Scramble: U2 F' R L F B' L F' B' R' L' F2 B L2 R' F2 L' B R F' L F B R B
> (wow, qqTimer dished out a FRLB scramble with a U2 to start. Wow.)
> ...


 
I got a 54 move solution but didn't look at it too hard to find a better solution


----------



## RCTACameron (Nov 28, 2010)

F2L takes a lot longer when the cross isn't done, because there are often F2L edges where the cross would usually be.

So how many algorithms do you need for orienting/permuting 8 edges? Seems like it would be a lot.


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 28, 2010)

RCTACameron said:


> F2L takes a lot longer when the cross isn't done, because there are often F2L edges where the cross would usually be.


M'
Edit: Only because I don't see that the centres need to be solved. If you have a pair, anywhere on the cube, the first pair is done if you don't care about the centres.


----------



## RCTACameron (Nov 28, 2010)

I guess, but if wanted to keep the centers in the same place, you'd have to do M' U M. It's still significantly slower than normal F2L.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Nov 28, 2010)

You'd have to find all COLL cases that don't affect edge permutation. I think you'd be better off doing CLL/ELL, although you mention all edges, as in cross edges too. You could so a roux style last edges I suppose. That should probably be after CLL though.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

There is 14 orienting algorithms and 21 permuting algs but I may have missed some of the permutation algs


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

I just realised that COLL doesn't keep edge pemutation. Is there some algorithms that solve the corners and keep orientation and permutation of the edges


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 28, 2010)

cubefan4848 said:


> I just realised that COLL doesn't keep edge pemutation. Is there some algorithms that solve the corners and keep orientation and permutation of the edges



[wiki]L4C[/wiki]. 84 algs. Good luck.


----------



## Faz (Nov 28, 2010)

Or you could just do CLL before L8E


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

fazrulz said:


> Or you could just do CLL before L8E


 
The only reason I didn't want to do CLL first is because then it sort of turns into the columns first method.


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 28, 2010)

cubefan4848 said:


> The only reason I didn't want to do CLL first is because then it sort of turns into the columns first method.


 
Dude... >_>
OMG, AM MAKE METHOD. AM MAKE IT SLIGHTLY WORSE THAN AN ALREADY EXISTING METHOD SO I CAN NAME IT AFTER ME.
<_<


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Nov 28, 2010)

cubefan4848 said:


> The only reason I didn't want to do CLL first is because then it sort of turns into the columns first method.


 
So you'd rather make a method with an obvious disadvantage just to avoid it being too much like a different method? You might as well find a different way to build the F2L pairs since it's too much like CFOP. With the way your method appears, I think if you took a look at CLL/ELL, you would be happy with using that for the last layer, and building a cross is still fast (but F2L won't be rotation-less like in your method).


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

Obviously CLL is the way to go by what everybody is saying.


----------



## qqwref (Nov 28, 2010)

L8E is icky. I've tried it, and you can do it fast, but it's wayyyy inferior to L6E.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

Does anyone think it is worth learning L4C for the last step


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

qqwref said:


> L8E is icky. I've tried it, and you can do it fast, but it's wayyyy inferior to L6E.


 
I chose L8E because I am very slow at L6E for some reason


----------



## Attila (Nov 28, 2010)

Interesting method. I think, possible an other easy outline:
1. 4 F2L pairs.
2. Complete this pairs for 2 blocks, similar of Roux method.
3. CMLL.
4. 6E4C.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

Attila said:


> Interesting method. I think, possible an other easy outline:
> 1. 4 F2L pairs.
> 2. Complete this pairs for 2 blocks, similar of Roux method.
> 3. CMLL.
> 4. 6E4C.



In the video I said this was one of the options that I do if it happens to turn up


----------



## Meep (Nov 28, 2010)

I used to play with a method similar to this,

4 F2L pairs
CLL
Orient edges while placing D edges
U/H/Z perm


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 28, 2010)

cubefan4848 said:


> I chose L8E because I am very slow at L6E for some reason


 lol
i suck at 6 edges so lets ad 2 more edges : D...
>.>

Also the example solve doesnt work:

Solution fail.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

I fixed the example solve now. The reason L8E is different is that I make 3 solved edge pieces on the bottom and then use one alg to solve all edges


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 28, 2010)

What one COULD do:

1.) EOLine
2.) F2L Pairs
3.) COLL
4.) L6E, with edges ARREADY ORIENTED! =D


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 28, 2010)

i think im going to come up with some crap method now : O


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 28, 2010)

2 opposite 1x2x2 blocks
1x2x3 block in the back or front.
CMLL EO(keeping the D layer edge correctly permuted)
L5E

EXAMPUL:
D' U' B' D2 L' U2 R U L2 R' D2 F2 B' D2 B2 D F' D' L R2 B F L' F2 L2

zx2 R'Fu'ru'/RB2U'BU'RU2R2
BMU2BM'UB2M'UMyUR'U2RU'R'URy'
U2RUR'URU2R'
M'UMU'M'UM 
M2U'MU2M'U'M2U'

54 MOVES WOOT.


----------



## BigSams (Nov 28, 2010)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> What one COULD do:
> 
> 1.) EOLine
> 2.) F2L Pairs
> ...


 
+1, was thinking on the lines of EO as well. Not sure how far this method can go though. Kinda confused about how you did the L8E orientations substeps and L8E permutations substeps. Can you write it down?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Nov 28, 2010)

or you can make 2 1x2x3 blocks on L and R then do CLL but it doesn't need to preserve the M and U edges. Then You fix the rest. Nah I think this way it slower


----------



## Systemdertoten (Nov 28, 2010)

lolwaffo


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 28, 2010)

BigSams said:


> +1, was thinking on the lines of EO as well. Not sure how far this method can go though. Kinda confused about how you did the L8E orientations substeps and L8E permutations substeps. Can you write it down?


 
You don't get it. You're doing EOLine on L and R, then pairs. This gets you Rouxblox without building blox. And then COLL, because it preserves orientation. An then L6E. xP

Basically, nub hybrid. I wasn't serious about any of that, tbh.

@Waffo: I heard of someone getting sub-20 averages with it. It might be good sooner or later.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 28, 2010)

>center perm before EO
>EP before corners
>U perm instead of a sune for EP

lern2cube


----------



## buelercuber (Nov 28, 2010)

wait isn't it like k3?

cross, f2l, cll, fix edges, and corners......


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 28, 2010)

no


----------



## BigSams (Nov 28, 2010)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> You don't get it. You're doing EOLine on L and R, then pairs. This gets you Rouxblox without building blox. And then COLL, because it preserves orientation. An then L6E. xP


 
I understood you fine. Everything after the first sentence was directed to the OP. my bad for not being clearer.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Nov 28, 2010)

Olook, Salvia!


----------



## ryo (Nov 28, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> or you can make 2 1x2x3 blocks on L and R then do CLL but it doesn't need to preserve the M and U edges. Then You fix the rest. Nah I think this way it slower


 
Sounds like the method of a guy I met who seems really serious about it... Gilles something... 
But he was only getting 12.xx or 11.xx seconds solves all the time, so it's not THAT good...


----------



## qqwref (Nov 28, 2010)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> What one COULD do:
> 
> 1.) EOLine
> 2.) F2L Pairs
> ...


This is a cool idea. A similar one:
1) EO only
2) build roux blocks, ZZ style, M2 is allowed
3) COMLL
4) L6E (w/ edges oriented)


----------



## Lucas Garron (Nov 28, 2010)

qqwref said:


> This is a cool idea. A similar one:
> 1) EO only
> 2) build roux blocks, ZZ style, M2 is allowed
> 3) COMLL
> 4) L6E (w/ edges oriented)


That reminds me of a trick from ZZ-TOP

How about:

1) EOLine, except the line may consist of any edges that belong either in the M slice or on U.
2) Roux blocks, no M2 needed.
3) COMLL
4) L6E with edges oriented


----------



## ryo (Nov 28, 2010)

Lucas Garron said:


> How about:
> 
> 1) EOLine, except the line may consist of any edges that belong either in the M slice or on U.
> 2) Roux blocks, no M2 needed.
> ...


 Not bad, I was practicing that just now.
You just have to compare your EOline with your L6EO step in Roux to find out what is better.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 28, 2010)

'rio said:


> You just have to compare your EOline with your L6EO step in Roux to find out what is better.


 
blocks are different too.


----------



## Athefre (Nov 28, 2010)

I'm not trying to seem...uh.....arrogant? Honestly. But, it's very rare for me to see an idea that I haven't thought of. Many times a popular member will make a post or post a topic about a new method, it gets praised (even if just a little), and I feel a little upset that I haven't posted the thousands of method ideas and variations I've explored because I figured they were obvious ideas that have been mentioned and criticized before. But, I guess most people haven't turned that search into an obsession like I had, it's a good thing they haven't. And I guess it wouldn't be fair for me to claim everything.

Something new I like is Thom's CLL + 1 edge, L3E idea. That's interesting


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 28, 2010)

Has anyone thought of any name for this method yet.


----------



## ryo (Nov 28, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> blocks are different too.


 
Yes, just a little, but you're totally right. I think it's depend how you made them. I don't use Roux often, so it's just better for me because recognition is easier but for a Roux expert it may be longer (I mean for the move count).


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 29, 2010)

The orientation algs are up at:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OozsImk9rYSmvMPG935hnsVCcXGc1Zm119CyuLZtSuc/edit?hl=en

I just made a google doc because it was the quickest way to get things up


----------



## irontwig (Nov 29, 2010)

L4C sucks for speed; as a rule of thumb for speed you want to leave edges and for FMC you want to leave corners.


----------



## gogozerg (Nov 29, 2010)

cubefan4848 said:


> Outline of method:
> Four F2L pairs
> CLL
> Orient all edges
> ...


Hum...
I see 2 rather different algorithms.
Many people thought about the first one that keeps 8 edges (and centers) unsolved for the end part. It looks interesting because edges sometimes can be efficiently managed in <U, D, M> without touching other pieces (think "last 6 edges") and symmetries are obvious, but it's hard to find a practical method, and it's difficult to locate pieces all around the cube. By the way, people proposed to do the first part through different means, for example 8 corners+4 edges or starting with E slice.



> I will warn you before the example solve that the amount of moves in my solution will be higher than after I practice it and get a bit better
> One colour example first
> Scramble- D' F B' R2 L' U D' F U' D B L' F2 D' R2 L' B R2 F2 U' R2 D' R L' B2
> x2 U' B U' R2 U' R2 U R2 U2 R U' y' M2 U' M2 R U2 R' U2 y' M' U M y' R U' R'
> ...


Please propose an average of 12, 1 solve is not very eloquent.

z2x'R2U'x2Ur2B
r'U'R2'UrURU2RU'M2U'r
R'FRF'RU2R'U'F'U'F
M'UMU2MUMU'M2



> Has anyone thought of any name for this method yet.


I think it was called "Dead End #56" ;-)


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Nov 29, 2010)

Athefre said:


> Something new I like is Thom's CLL + 1 edge, L3E idea. That's interesting



What's the concept of CLL + 1 (didn' find the threat). Sounds like a lot of cases (42 times 8 is maybe to high as an upper bound )
Or is it anbout using MUM' conjugation? 





jms_gears1 said:


> 2 opposite 1x2x2 blocks
> 1x2x3 block in the back or front.
> CMLL EO(keeping the D layer edge correctly permuted)
> L5E



"2 opposite 1x2x2 blocks" - if I were able to plan ahead this in 15 sec (even with non matching side colors ) in up to 12 moves, I would do it... 

roux ending

"EO5 + L5E" - I'm doing this if I get an D edge accidentially soved during an Roux solve, others maybe too?

"1x2x3 block in the back or front" - that I'd hate because it means to refocus on a new color (not R/L color).



cubefan4848 said:


> Does anyone think it is worth learning L4C for the last step



L3C is much better 23 cases but only 7 essetially differnet ones, also regognition is much easier, movecount much lower, and acceptance for your 

methode maybe much higher.

P.S. When doing Placeing your last Slot altering between URU'R' , U²RU²R' (R'FRF') will always ensure at least on oriented corner in last layer, but 

you have to try out if that might help you

Question: do You asume center pieces to be solved from the very beginning of the solve




Meep said:


> I used to play with a method similar to this,
> 
> 4 F2L pairs
> CLL
> ...



I was also trying this (did Center placement after CLL ), but never reached my friedrich times (I'm not even a regular friedrich solver)


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 29, 2010)

oll+phase+sync said:


> What's the concept of CLL + 1 (didn' find the threat). Sounds like a lot of cases (42 times 8 is maybe to high as an upper bound )


 
42*8 is silly because we want any edge, not a specific one. 

I've been trying to think of the best way to do it and haven't quite hit it yet - I estimate that it would be no more than ~80 algs though.


----------



## Athefre (Nov 29, 2010)

gogozerg said:


> cubefan4848 said:
> 
> 
> > Has anyone thought of any name for this method yet.
> ...



lol


----------



## irontwig (Nov 29, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> 42*8 is silly because we want any edge, not a specific one.
> 
> I've been trying to think of the best way to do it and haven't quite hit it yet - I estimate that it would be no more than ~80 algs though.



Cases =/= Algs


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 29, 2010)

42*8 is a silly estimation for either algs or cases.


----------



## irontwig (Nov 29, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> 42*8 is a silly estimation for either algs or cases.


 
Upper Bound =/= Estimation


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 29, 2010)

42*8 is a silly upper bound or estimation for either algs or cases


----------



## Carrot (Nov 29, 2010)

42 is a silly upper bound or estimation for Kirjava =D


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 29, 2010)

oll+phase+sync said:


> Question: do You asume center pieces to be solved from the very beginning of the solve


 
They don't have to be but I normally do because I really suck at everything.


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 29, 2010)

New method ideas mean only L3C at the end easy to learn and execute 

The start can now be four F2L pairs then orient
Or alternative start orient ZZ style then solve the four F2L pairs, this one means no rotation during first and second step.

Third step can be changed to intuitively make a 1x2x2 block on top. This can be made easier by different last F2L insertion and normally only takes about 3-6 moves but makes it L3C at the end after permutation is finished.

I suck at explaining things so if this is unclear hopefully I could make a "short" video


----------



## cube980 (Nov 30, 2010)

I believe there is a method like this already http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/PCMS
Although PCMS is a more advanced. Yours is a slightly different version (personally I think the one you suggested needs improvement).


----------



## cubefan4848 (Nov 30, 2010)

cube980 said:


> I believe there is a method like this already http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/PCMS
> Although PCMS is a more advanced. Yours is a slightly different version (personally I think the one you suggested needs improvement).


 
PCMS is pretty much what I based the method off but tried to make it different. The newest version is definitely better for algs but yes could still use a bit of improvement. Do you have any suggestions


----------



## Ranzha (Nov 30, 2010)

Cubefan4848:

This is basically taking a mashup of substeps from a variety of methods and mashing together. These mashups tend to be terrible and (if anything) promote learning about a whole spectrum of tricks. This "method you created" is only a hybrid, and it's not nearly efficient as the speedsolving methods already discussed today.


----------



## maggot (Nov 30, 2010)

imagine: 
noob: "what method do you use? its lyk so uber kewl!!!1one!"
expert: "i use dead end #56" (with serious sly, cool reaction)
noob: "omfg, that one with like 80+ algs just for one small substep? omg ur kewl!"

dead end #56... i want to learn it! it sound like some pirate movie~! ARGH!

and super LOL @ kirjava. "42*8 is a bad estimation of algs/cases" LMAO~

and to OP, what about trying to make a bld algs? i mean, youre spending all this time on a dead stewpot disaster~! but at least your knowledge of cubing is growing! if you do find something, be sure to keep posting! but, sorry kid, this one is a dead one.. i'd rather learn 80 zbll algs @[email protected]


----------

