# does anybody know the weird method of CZZ?



## dingwu hu (Jun 13, 2010)

does anybody know the weird method of CZZ?

sb. has said that he can solve the 3*3*3 in 7.xx s by the CZZ method. he has talked with Haiyan zhuang sometime /recently. and Haiyan has shown their talking in Chinese cube site bbs.mf8.com.cn . 
below is their words, wxl_5188 is Haiyan zhuang,and = ^.^ = is the man. maybe that's their id on MSN or etc.

cool
sory i was away.
Speed solving
avg = 7.68
wxl_5188说:
good
5 times?

= ^.^ = 说:
10

wxl_5188 说:
wow
incredible
how can you get so fast speed?

= ^.^ = 说:
when you alpha V gets here, I will getting 650 ish
and memory prolly 6s ish
so fast bedcause practice
wxl_5188 说:
how about your 100 times avg?
= ^.^ = 说:
Beginers>fridrich> Memorize full oll/pll>{practice
and
i have never tried 100 times
i try right now 

7:34
8:12
6:61
7:21
6:28
8:02
wxl_5188说:
wow
= ^.^ = 说:
6:87
yay
new personal record 
6:23
I doubt ill ever get below 6 though
7:10
6:53
avg=7.031x10 = 7.031 out of 100
wxl_5188 说:
You are not a human.
= ^.^ = 说:

you can do it bld
you already beat me 
wxl_5188说:
I can not
= ^.^ = 说:
you can solve fast and solve blindfold
i can only solve fast

完了，他要颠覆三速的世界了，他只参加过一次比赛，国家暂时保密！不是人！！
If I meet you ever, I must teach you my own method of solving cube so you be fast like me 
[email protected] 说:
really
Thank you very much
Your new method?

= ^.^ = 说:
Yes
[email protected] 说:
Speed solve?

= ^.^ = 说:
How I get fast
Yes
[email protected] 说:
not CFOP?

= ^.^ = 说:
No
I call czz
[email protected] 说:
ok
I See
= ^.^ = 说:
Basically
[email protected] 说:
good
= ^.^ = 说:
You solve cross
Then\




over


----------



## amostay2004 (Jun 13, 2010)

LOL yea a member of the MalaysianCube mentioned this as well. It seems there're like only 5 algs or something to learn


----------



## aronpm (Jun 13, 2010)

That person is lying.



> = ^.^ = 说:
> Beginers>fridrich> Memorize full oll/pll>{practice
> and
> i have never tried 100 times
> ...


WTF.


----------



## dingwu hu (Jun 13, 2010)

yes, they mentioned that it need only 78+21 algs


----------



## dingwu hu (Jun 13, 2010)

aronpm said:


> That person is lying.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




maybe. but i.m curious


----------



## joey (Jun 13, 2010)

I think it's BS too.


----------



## blakedacuber (Jun 13, 2010)

joey said:


> I think it's BS too.[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> I agree


----------



## Cubenovice (Jun 13, 2010)

yeah right...

I am still working on refining my SCC method but have decided to remain silent about it until I can show some vidoe or competition results done with it.

Why try to start an internet hype if you have nothig to show yet?

SCC


Spoiler



Solve Complete Cube


----------



## Owen (Jun 13, 2010)

dingwu hu said:


> and memory prolly 6s ish



Sounds like an publicity stunt for the Memory...


----------



## Robert-Y (Jun 13, 2010)

dingwu hu said:


> yes, they mentioned that it need only 78+21 algs



The 21 algs could account for PLL but what could the 78 algs be?


----------



## rachmaninovian (Jun 13, 2010)

from what i read in the chinese forums, i'm calling this ******** =/


----------



## Sakarie (Jun 13, 2010)

That's what everybody said about Gungz too, that he was lying.

He proved himself in competition, I hope this guy does too. 

(That doesn't mean I believe it, just that it isn't impossible.


----------



## joey (Jun 13, 2010)

I don't think people ever said gungz was lying :/


----------



## DavidWoner (Jun 13, 2010)

Sounds like an optimized Yish method.


----------



## a small kitten (Jun 13, 2010)

Yes, so if Yish gets a hold of this method and uses it he will definitely be sub 5


----------



## Winball (Jun 13, 2010)

You solve the cross. 
Then you stop the timer..


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Jun 13, 2010)

dingwu hu said:


> yes, they mentioned that it need only 78+21 algs



LOL


----------



## nck (Jun 13, 2010)

from what i've read, its kinda like eocross+f2l+wv+pll
although i doubt that this is the case..


----------



## Robert-Y (Jun 14, 2010)

Sakarie said:


> That's what everybody said about Gungz too, that he was lying.
> 
> He proved himself in competition, I hope this guy does too.
> 
> (That doesn't mean I believe it, just that it isn't impossible.



Lying about what?

His times? He already had sub-13 and sub-12 avg of 12 videos posted on his blog before he went to his first competition...


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 14, 2010)

So from what I gather, CZZ is a less efficient version of ZZ.

Nothing to see here...


----------



## RyanReese09 (Jun 14, 2010)

FULL OLL+PLL

57
21
--
78


----------



## rachmaninovian (Jun 14, 2010)

apparently this method has an OLL skip all the time. apparently. I shall force myself to read more chinese later. >_>


----------



## Yichen (Jun 14, 2010)

rachmaninovian said:


> apparently this method has an OLL skip all the time. apparently. I shall force myself to read more chinese later. >_>



You still have your higher chinese paper......hahaha


----------



## r_517 (Jun 14, 2010)

this was what i wanted to tell to Joey a few days ago when my IRC chat room crashed and never got recovered after that

on topic, that random guy said that he didnt like the way making it public, which i thought it was just BS


----------



## rubiknewbie (Jun 14, 2010)

It's very very fast. CFOP is 4 steps. CZZ 3 steps only.


----------



## nck (Jun 14, 2010)

rubiknewbie said:


> It's very very fast. CFOP is 4 steps. CZZ 3 steps only.



Let me guess: 
C-cross
Z-ZOMGWTFBBQPIZZAf2l
Z-ZOMG!!HUSHIDIUW1LLL ?

Seriously, can you please elaborate?
It sounds to me like some method nobody's ever heard of just appeared out of nowhere and kicked cfop in the face.


----------



## riffz (Jun 14, 2010)

nck said:


> rubiknewbie said:
> 
> 
> > It's very very fast. CFOP is 4 steps. CZZ 3 steps only.
> ...



Sounds like BS to me.


----------



## Anthony (Jun 14, 2010)

rubiknewbie said:


> It's very very fast. CFOP is 4 steps. CZZ 3 steps only.



First of all, chances are CZZ is, like most other people are saying, bs.

But, I thought I should point out that while CFOP has four totally different steps, F2L is essentially four steps on its own, making CFOP a seven step method.


----------



## nck (Jun 14, 2010)

Anthony said:


> rubiknewbie said:
> 
> 
> > It's very very fast. CFOP is 4 steps. CZZ 3 steps only.
> ...


Its 11 if you see pairing up and insert as different steps

But essentially f2ls are similar and can be counted as one 'step' while cross, oll and pll are substantially different


----------



## Anthony (Jun 14, 2010)

nck said:


> Its 11 if you see pairing up and insert as different steps



That's just dumb. lol.



nck said:


> But essentially f2ls are similar and can be counted as one 'step' while cross, oll and pll are substantially different


So what if they're similar? Just because they're similar doesn't mean you solve all four F2L pairs at the same time. When it comes to counting the number of individual steps in a CFOP solve, each F2L pair is really one step (especially for slower people who have significant pauses between each pair). As a whole though, CFOP has four unique steps, yes.


----------



## nck (Jun 14, 2010)

Anthony said:


> nck said:
> 
> 
> > Its 11 if you see pairing up and insert as different steps
> ...



hmmm I wonder how many steps roux and zz have


----------



## Toad (Jun 14, 2010)

nck said:


> Anthony said:
> 
> 
> > nck said:
> ...



5 Pieces per block = 10...
CMLL
Orient edges = 1 if you don't suck
UR + UL = Pairing then placing = 2
M slice = 1

15 steps in Roux


----------



## Googlrr (Jun 14, 2010)

randomtoad said:


> nck said:
> 
> 
> > Anthony said:
> ...


I don't understand why each piece is a step and UR+UL aren't 1 D: I'd call it a 6/7 step depending on if you know full CMLL or not. 

Is F2L a 4(cross)+8(F2L)+2(OLL+PLL) step method then?

edit: When I think about it, you were probably wearing your trollface when writing that.


----------

