# New(?) LS + LL Approach



## JackJ (Sep 5, 2013)

Hi all,
Before I start, I've developed this alot more than most that post in the new subset thread, that's why I've decided on a new thread. Just a clarification. 

This is something I've been working on for a few weeks now and I'm finally able to announce it! It's a bit like MGLS & L2L4. 

Essentially, on your last slot you solve EO + F2L corner then you solve F2L edge + CO. 65 cases for the first step and 34 for the second step. 

I've only published about half of the first steps algs, due to a few reasons. It can be done intuitively, the cube images are kind of confusing, and I'm back in school now. No time. 

I've settled on the name JJLS, for now. I need to give a huge thank you to qqwref for generating the algorithms for me and helping me along the way. You're the best!

Anyway, here's an example solve and the link to the website. 



Spoiler



U2 B F2 R L' D' R2 D2 L' R' D' U R B2 R' F2 L' F' U2 R' L2 F L2 F' B'
y x2
R D R' D2 U' F2
U2 L' U L U R' U R
L' U' L U' L' U L
y U2 R U2 R2 U' R2 U' R'
L' U' L y' R U R'
R U R' U2 R U2 R' U2 R U' R'
y' R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2



http://johnstoncubing.webs.com/jjls.htm


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 5, 2013)

Why? Is there any particular advantage in this approach?


----------



## Rubiks560 (Sep 5, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> Why? Is there any particular advantage in this approach?



IMO this is like asking if there is an advantage to using WV. Of course there is. You get an OLL skip.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 5, 2013)

I like it, got a 22-move LS+LL.
I'll be sure to play around with this some more!

Edit:
Another example:

Scramble: B' F' L2 B R2 D2 B' D2 L2 D2 R2 D R2 B F' L U' B2 L2 R' D'

Cross: (x2) B' R2 D R' L F2 (6/6)
F2L 1: F' U2 F R' U' R (6/12)
[I want to do R U R' U F L F' L' to fix EO but don't want to skip steps!]
F2L 2: L U' L' U L U' L' (7/19)
F2L 3: F' U F2 U F' (5/24)
JJLS1: U2 (y') R U2 R2 U' R2 U' R' (8/32)
JJLS2: U2 (y) R U' R' U' R U' R' U R U R' (12/44)
PLL: (y2) Gperm (12/56), not bad.



Spoiler



I was originally going to do this with ZZ but accidentally skipped the EP!

EOLine: z2 R' D' F2 L2 D B2 (6/6)
Right block: L' U2 L R U R U' L U2 R (10/16)
Left block: (y2) R' U2 R' U' R' U R' U' R (9/25)
OLL (with influence to PLL): R' U L U' R U L' (7/32)
PLL: R2 F2 R' B' R F2 R' B R' (9/41)


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 5, 2013)

Rubiks560 said:


> IMO this is like asking if there is an advantage to using WV. Of course there is. You get an OLL skip.


Not sure if you're being sarcastic but I'll reword it. Why is this better than just solving the pair and doing OLL? Skipping OLL doesn't come for free.


----------



## Rubiks560 (Sep 5, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> Not sure if you're being sarcastic but I'll reword it. Why is this better than just solving the pair and doing OLL? Skipping OLL doesn't come for free.



This is less moves than doing insert last pair + OLL.


----------



## JackJ (Sep 5, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> Not sure if you're being sarcastic but I'll reword it. Why is this better than just solving the pair and doing OLL? Skipping OLL doesn't come for free.



In certain situations it's fast. Doing a 3 move EO + corner is definitely better than a normal ~7 move F2L pair. While I haven't crunched any numbers, I'd say CO + edge is about the same movecount as a normal OLL. 

I never claimed an advantage. It's just a different approach much like MGLS in that respect. I'd say they're about even.

EDIT: ninja'd


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 5, 2013)

Ok thanks. I assumed you had a good reason for swapping the edge and corner in MGLS but your site doesn't say what it is, unless it's to make the second step 2gen? Is move count better than MGLS?


----------



## JackJ (Sep 5, 2013)

Actually both CLS & this can be 2gen. If you're wondering about movecount or anything similar, I'd refer you to qqwref. I'd assume they're very close in movecount, though.


----------



## blokpoi (Sep 5, 2013)

I really like this, once all the algs are generated and I play around with it for a bit I may just end up learning it all. It sounds very promising to me!


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Sep 5, 2013)

KLMGLSBNR


Spoiler



Kimda like MGLS but not really


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 5, 2013)

I see this as a trick for ZZ more than anything else.
I think knowing bits of CLS+WV+RSL+this+others are pretty useful for the easiest-to-recognize cases of each set.

I don't think it'd be worth doing all on its own, but it's worth further investigation!


----------



## mark49152 (Sep 5, 2013)

JackJ said:


> Actually both CLS & this can be 2gen. If you're wondering about movecount or anything similar, I'd refer you to qqwref. I'd assume they're very close in movecount, though.


Personally I don't think move count is a big deal. An extra look could be. As you said above, if the corner+EO is short and flows out of F2L with no pause, maybe it's fast. 

Is MGLS widely used?



StachuK1992 said:


> I see this as a trick for ZZ more than anything else.
> I think knowing bits of CLS+WV+RSL+this+others are pretty useful for the easiest-to-recognize cases of each set.


Agreed. With ZZ at least the first step will always be short and fast. Once the first step is done though, you're committed to the second step so I don't see how it's worth learning just a few of the 34 second step cases like it is with WV, VH/ZBLS, COLL etc.


----------



## uberCuber (Sep 5, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> Is MGLS widely used?



I'm sure a decent number of people know/use some of the easiest CLS cases just because they are so nice, but the MGLS method in full? No.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Sep 5, 2013)

I'd like to have a look at the second step algs, some could be useful for my weird mega L2F system. I don't care about images, I'm happy to work out for myself what each alg does.


----------



## BillyRain (Sep 5, 2013)

I'm going to learn like... everything.


----------



## JackJ (Sep 5, 2013)

Glad to hear some are very interested in it!


----------



## antoineccantin (Sep 5, 2013)

I thought this was MGLS?


----------



## vcuber13 (Sep 5, 2013)

No for mgls you do orient the edges while placing it, and orient the corners while placing it. This variation is doing corner/edges then edge/corners.


----------



## Escher (Sep 5, 2013)

Imo for Fridrich users you'll get most utility by just learning the latter step (LE + CO) - it's easy to simply leave a slot that has a corner already done in the middle of your solve, and then make sure by your final pair you've solved EO intuitively too.


----------



## scottishcuber (Sep 5, 2013)

Escher said:


> Imo for Fridrich users you'll get most utility by just learning the latter step (LE + CO) - it's easy to simply leave a slot that has a corner already done in the middle of your solve, and then make sure by your final pair you've solved EO intuitively too.



I like that idea, but how often would that need to be implemented. Would it be worth learning over WV?


----------



## Kirjava (Sep 5, 2013)

JackJ said:


> I've settled on the name JJLS



Should call it Swapped MGLS.

Looks like we have yet another unproven random LS+LL variation. If you look here you'll see how uninspiring this kind of 'development' is.

These LS+LL solutions don't particularly provide anything interesting since they produce systems that are seemingly equal or worse than existing ones. 

Of course this is a usable system, but you won't gain any special advantage from solely using it.


----------



## JackJ (Sep 6, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> Of course this is a usable system, but you won't gain any special advantage from solely using it.


That was all I was proposing. I thought it to be a trick for ZZ or Petrus users mainly, and knowing a few cases may come in handy if the first step is skipped entirely in a CFOP solve.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 6, 2013)

Don't be misguided by the hunt for perpetual motion. Think broader and remember the balance that comes with restriction. Search instead for the imbalance.


----------



## BaMiao (Sep 6, 2013)

Hasn't Last edge + Corner orientation been proposed before? I thought Stachu and Phil Yu worked on that.

Edit: Found what I was thinking of, and it was Last edge + CP, not CO.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 6, 2013)

Who knows, maybe I generated algs at some point. Sounds like me/Phil to make up a random LS+LL method.

In either case, the documentation here is good for future reference! Thanks for that!


----------



## Suratha (Sep 15, 2013)

JackJ said:


> Hi all,
> Before I start, I've developed this alot more than most that post in the new subset thread, that's why I've decided on a new thread. Just a clarification.
> 
> This is something I've been working on for a few weeks now and I'm finally able to announce it! It's a bit like MGLS & L2L4.
> ...


After solving EO and inserting the last slot corner,instead of solving the edge and orienting last layer corners,what if we permute the corners and we can do 2-gll for the rest.Because the case count for the CO is 34 and for permutation it is less than 5 or 6 only.Also if we use this type of approach for zz or petrus it will be easy because they don't have to learn the first step because the edges are pre oriented.Also if you do first step you could get a PLL which may be v-perm,y-perm,e-perm & n-perm which are quite bad cases to execute which can be eliminated by the permutation of corners.


----------



## JackJ (Sep 15, 2013)

If you'd like to start working on that, go for it. I'm done, haha

Anyway, I've finished publishing all the cases. Obviously, some need speed optimization and I'll do that too. 

Check it out! http://johnstoncubing.webs.com/jjls.htm


----------



## JackJ (Dec 26, 2013)

Sorry for the double post; it's been a few months anyway. I've generated some new algs for really bad cases, probably about 6 or 7 new algs. ys

For me, I think this trick is as useful as some others. Maybe even comparable to WV or something like that. Enjoy everyone!


----------



## SenileGenXer (Dec 26, 2013)

Thank you. Nobody says that much someone working on a new LS approach.


----------

