# Someone learns ZB??



## sz35 (Nov 23, 2009)

I'm now learning ZB (ZBF2L= 114 algs and ZBLL= around 30) and I want to know if there is someone else who learns ZB right now.(besides cubes=life)


----------



## Edward (Nov 23, 2009)

Does ZB_FTW still use ZB?

And I thought ZB had way more algs than that?


----------



## Forte (Nov 23, 2009)

sz35 said:


> I'm now learning ZB *(ZBF2L= 114 algs and ZBLL= around 30)* and I want to know if there is someone else who learns ZB right now.(besides cubes=life)



Naaah.


----------



## sz35 (Nov 23, 2009)

Forte said:


> sz35 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm now learning ZB *(ZBF2L= 114 algs and ZBLL= around 30)* and I want to know if there is someone else who learns ZB right now.(besides cubes=life)
> ...



what? and Edward this is not the number of algs in the method, this is how much I know


----------



## Forte (Nov 23, 2009)

sz35 said:


> Forte said:
> 
> 
> > sz35 said:
> ...



ooooooh ok.


----------



## eastamazonantidote (Nov 23, 2009)

Well, my goal is ZB, though I am at the moment trying to first get sub-20. I know extended VHF2L (standard 32 algs + 16 otherwise tricky cases) and all of COLL. I have also started generating algs and images and started a document with all the algs I have made so far. I have not made any real effort to remember the algs yet.

I actually am able to recognize the ZB cases when performing a COLL. I just have issues with Anti-Sune, Pi, and H. When the time comes I'll figure out some sort of recognition system.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Nov 23, 2009)

LOL!
ZBLL is only like 15.4 algs, with mirrors. wut nubs.

I'd suggest checking out the wiki


----------



## sz35 (Nov 24, 2009)

eastamazonantidote said:


> Well, my goal is ZB, though I am at the moment trying to first get sub-20. I know extended VHF2L (standard 32 algs + 16 otherwise tricky cases) and all of COLL. I have also started generating algs and images and started a document with all the algs I have made so far. I have not made any real effort to remember the algs yet.
> 
> I actually am able to recognize the ZB cases when performing a COLL. I just have issues with Anti-Sune, Pi, and H. When the time comes I'll figure out some sort of recognition system.



Yes, I also can recogniz the ZB case while I'm recognizing COLL for all 8 cases!!
and what 16 algs you know? can you give me the numbers of the cases and the ZBF2L page you learned from?


----------



## Edmund (Nov 24, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> LOL!
> ZBLL is only like 15.4 algs, with mirrors. wut nubs.



I thought it was purely intuitive?!


Not sure if Jason Baum is still learning it, if he gave up, or knows it. But he was learning.


----------



## eastamazonantidote (Nov 25, 2009)

Yes, I also can recogniz the ZB case while I'm recognizing COLL for all 8 cases!!
and what 16 algs you know? can you give me the numbers of the cases and the ZBF2L page you learned from?[/QUOTE]

I'll just give you them all:

VHF2L.Algorithms.pdf

COLL.Algorithms.pdf

Those VH cases are really a pain if you pair up first, so I decided to expand the system to encompass all otherwise non-efficient cases.

The COLL page could have some mistakes in it. I haven't looked at it for a long time.


----------



## nitrocan (Nov 25, 2009)

I remember Chris Hardwick doing some ZB solves. I don't remember anyone using full ZB though.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 25, 2009)

*cough* *cough*
*ahem*
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17077


----------



## sz35 (Nov 25, 2009)

sz35 said:


> I'm now learning ZB (ZBF2L= 114 algs and ZBLL= around 30) and I want to know if there is someone else who learns ZB right now.*(besides cubes=life)*



I know you know all ZBLLs I asked because it's obvious that you use ZB!!!
and another question to you: why you learned ZBLL before ZBF2L???


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 25, 2009)

I was hinting at Nitrocan. d:

Because. ZBF2L is more of a concept, less so of braindead rote memorization.
ZBF2L = Slotting in a specific way and forming F2L in a specific way to accomplish the means. You can memorize the way the slot is formed much faster than memorizing and algorithm. 

ZBLL is super hard, and makes ZBF2L seem really easy.


----------



## nitrocan (Nov 25, 2009)

I'm confused because of your signature. ZBLL is 41 algorithms?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Nov 25, 2009)

nitrocan said:


> I'm confused because of your signature. ZBLL is 41 algorithms?


no. It's 41 sets of lots of algorithms

Think ( COLL ) x ( EPLL ).

41 comes from COLL


----------



## nitrocan (Nov 25, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> nitrocan said:
> 
> 
> > I'm confused because of your signature. ZBLL is 41 algorithms?
> ...



And Cubes=Life knows them all?

If that's true, 

WOW.


----------



## rubiknewbie (Nov 26, 2009)

nitrocan said:


> I'm confused because of your signature. ZBLL is 41 algorithms?



If it's 41 algorithms everyone would have learnt it by now and there won't be OLL and PLL 

I think it's like in 50+ OLL algorithms, there is a subset of 7 algorithms, each of which can be expanded into around 6 COLL algorithms giving around 40 total algorithms, each of which can be expanded into a few ZBLL algorithms giving a total of hundreds of algorithms. 

COLL = 7 OLL x ~6 = around 40 algorithms
ZBLL = 40 COLL algorithms x some number = hundreds of algorithms


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 26, 2009)

PLL subset is 21.
T, U, L, Pi, Sune, Antisune sets are 72 each.
And the rest are in H set.

In total, 490-ish algs.
But like other algorithms, can be reduced.


----------



## iSpinz (Nov 26, 2009)

You need a prize.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 26, 2009)

My own satisfaction and the support of others is the prize~


----------



## iSpinz (Nov 26, 2009)

I have 2 questions

Is recognition hard?

Why choose ZB?


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 26, 2009)

Depends on the recognition method:

EC (Edge Cycle) recognition can be done sub second.

But Dan/Jason's recognition has potential to be as fast, if not faster than PLL because you only look at the case, and 4 stickers.

I chose ZB because I wanted to explore new methods, and also a good challenge.


----------



## Edward (Nov 26, 2009)

Is that a WR record. If so, how would they prove it? 
I wonder...


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 26, 2009)

Edward said:


> Is that a WR record. If so, how would they prove it?
> I wonder...



What world record are you talking about?


----------



## Edward (Nov 26, 2009)

Cyrus C. said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Is that a WR record. If so, how would they prove it?
> ...



Most algorithms learned in the world.


----------



## aronpm (Nov 26, 2009)

That's a very arbitrary world record. Any well-defined move to perform a task is an algorithm. So, R is an algorithm, because it is well-defined move and it performs a clockwise 4-cycle of edges, a clockwise 4-cycle of corners and a clockwise twist of the center. Also, you could just make up commutators while recalling all the algorithms you know.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 26, 2009)

What he said^
That was actually 5 times more well worded than what I was going to say. (x

I have the UWR for ZBLL time attack. You can prove that you know ZBLL that way. That's a record I guess, but it's super trivial. It's also easy to beat at 49 minutes.


----------



## Tim Major (Nov 26, 2009)

Edward said:


> Does ZB_FTW still use ZB?



I have never used ZB!


----------



## rubiknewbie (Nov 26, 2009)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Does ZB_FTW still use ZB?
> ...



Oh! I thought you have it 50% learned or something .


----------



## rubiknewbie (Nov 26, 2009)

They need to set up a new record for knowledge of most different algorithms to complete a LL or something.



iSpinz said:


> I have 2 questions
> 
> Is recognition hard?
> 
> Why choose ZB?



In theory, it allows you to skip steps and so solve in less moves. 
Instead of:
cross + slot1 + slot2 + slot3 + slot4 + OLL + PLL

it is:
cross + slot1 + slot2 + slot3 + ZBF2L + ZBLL



ZB_FTW!!! said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Does ZB_FTW still use
> ...



Oh! I thought you have it 50% learned or something .


----------



## Faz (Nov 26, 2009)

rubiknewbie said:


> ZB_FTW!!! said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...



No, he's just stupid.


----------



## irontwig (Nov 26, 2009)

Edward said:


> Is that a WR record. If so, how would they prove it?
> I wonder...



Hai Yan Zhuang claims to know 1000+ algs.


----------



## eastamazonantidote (Nov 26, 2009)

Question for you guys: Should ZBLL algs include AUF after the alg?

For example: C/C case of T orientation, COLL BBFF:
R' U R U2 R' U2 R' U' R U' R' U2 R U2 R U

Should that U be there at the end? In PLL it is necessary, as you set it up a certain way (having trouble explaining this). With practice of course, you shouldn't need that last U/U'/U2 in the alg itself, as you can recognize from other angles, but the base case (the first one you learned) still requires the AUF after the alg.

However, in ZBLL (Harris/Baum recognition) you don't have a base case - only the top layer matters, not how it is relative to the rest of the cube (well...sorta). It is understood that AUF may be necessary after performing you alg, and as an expert method doesn't need to be explained.

BUT, edge-cycle recognition (at least at first) performs AdL (Adjust d Layers) before the alg so as to line up the UFR corner correctly before performing the case to ease recognition, which is the same principle as PLL AUF inclusions. This form of recognition does have base cases, and so AUF should be included.

So what do you guys think? Hope what I wrote made sense. It's rather hard to put it in words...


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 26, 2009)

eastamazonantidote said:


> Question for you guys: Should ZBLL algs include AUF after the alg?
> 
> For example: C/C case of T orientation, COLL BBFF:
> R' U R U2 R' U2 R' U' R U' R' U2 R U2 R U
> ...



No AUF would make ZBLL 490+ moves less intimidating.


----------



## Cride5 (Nov 26, 2009)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Does ZB_FTW still use ZB?
> ...



That made me lol   :fp


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 26, 2009)

Cride5 said:


> ZB_FTW!!! said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...



Yea, even before ZB_FTW!!! Posted I was laughing at edward.


----------



## 4Chan (Nov 27, 2009)

Eastamazonantidote, I didn't see this thread reply earlier, but I understand completely.

After a while, you can predict it though. Many algorithms even with the AdL, I can predict the final AUF. With enough practice, I assume you could avoid 60% of it.

That number was a guess by the way, but it was an educated guess, based on hundreds of hours of practice.


----------



## Edward (Nov 27, 2009)

Cyrus C. said:


> Cride5 said:
> 
> 
> > ZB_FTW!!! said:
> ...



I assumed he was trying ZB. Look at his user name duh.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 27, 2009)

Edward said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Cride5 said:
> ...



You know what they say about people that assume.

I guess you could say that Felik's uses the faz method, since his username say that it rulz.


----------



## Muesli (Nov 27, 2009)

Cyrus C. said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...


Faz uses TICT, like every other world class cuber.


----------



## Edmund (Nov 27, 2009)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...


I'm switching but I'm having a lot of trouble learning the all those algs. Like the T-perm is killing me.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Nov 27, 2009)

Edmund said:


> Musli4brekkies said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...


Same here, I can't find a good finger-tricky algorithm for it.


----------



## Weston (Nov 27, 2009)

irontwig said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Is that a WR record. If so, how would they prove it?
> ...



I think he uses BH though and the BH algs are pretty intuitive. You just have to understand how commutators work and you can make almost any alg for BH.


----------



## fanwuq (Nov 28, 2009)

Weston said:


> irontwig said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...



Kenneth knows more algs.


----------



## Escher (Nov 28, 2009)

fanwuq said:


> Kenneth knows more algs.



I'm not so certain. The last time I saw he said he knew full EG for 2x2, 20 years before it was 'invented'. Then in a later post, I read that he didn't actually learn individual algorithms for it, he just used sunes, niklas's & corner swapping algorithms.
If the rest of his knowledge is like that, then he certainly isn't the person who knows the most algorithms, he just knows a way to intuitively solve lots of cases.


----------

