# Does anyone use [r], [u], [f], etc.?



## Lucas Garron (Dec 26, 2013)

Issue #26 on GitHub.

Regulation 12b specifies [r], , [f], *, [l], [d] as rotations, but I rarely see anyone use them (certainly not on this forum).
They might be easier to remember, but we now have FMC sheets that remind you about x, y, and z.

Does anyone have a compelling reason for keeping this notation for rotations in the Regulations?*


----------



## kunparekh18 (Dec 26, 2013)

I guess this notation would be easier to understand for beginners just getting into FMC. Don't find a reason to keep it though, as I've seen not even a single person use this notation.


----------



## Dapianokid (Dec 26, 2013)

I've never seen it before in my life, although I like it. But really, I liked the simplified version of the rotations. X = R, Y = U, Z = F!
Nobody uses the notation you've described.


----------



## ThomasJE (Dec 28, 2013)

I personally don't use them, but I think we should still keep them. It makes it easier for beginners to understand and use, and it doesn't really confuse counting moves if we use both.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Dec 28, 2013)

Radu Făciu suggested that we can get rid of rotations in the Regulations and use, e.g. 3Rw instead (counting it as 0 moves on 3x3x3).

This still seems less than semantically awesome to me, but I thought I'd mention it here.


----------



## ThomasJE (Dec 28, 2013)

Lucas Garron said:


> Radu Făciu suggested that we can get rid of rotations in the Regulations and use, e.g. 3Rw instead (counting it as 0 moves on 3x3x3).
> 
> This still seems less than semantically awesome to me, but I thought I'd mention it here.



No. It's too confusing.


----------



## kunparekh18 (Dec 28, 2013)

Lucas Garron said:


> Radu Făciu suggested that we can get rid of rotations in the Regulations and use, e.g. 3Rw instead (counting it as 0 moves on 3x3x3).
> 
> This still seems less than semantically awesome to me, but I thought I'd mention it here.



I guess that would be tedious. No one would like 3Rw instead of x. This notation could cause some confusion in FMC (miscounting moves). Also one character is always better than 3 (or 2 instead of 4 for anticlockwise or 180 deg turns) because latter could be tedious.


----------



## JasonK (Jan 2, 2014)

I was under the impression that this notation was popular in Japan, although I might be completely off with that.


----------



## DavidCip86 (Jan 2, 2014)

Whoa I've never heard of that :O I'd think that r, f, u would be confused with Rw, Fw, Uw...


----------



## Daniel Wu (Jan 2, 2014)

I only use that kind of notation for Pyraminx rotations. Which I suppose doesn't matter because 12b has to do with NxNxN puzzles.


----------



## TheLizardWizard (Jan 2, 2014)

I used it a while back because I always got x and z confused. Though I don't get them confused anymore, I still use  instead of y.


----------



## Carrot (Jan 2, 2014)

I only use this notation for non-cubic puzzles as it's very easy to understand how it works


----------



## Lid (Jan 2, 2014)

I have seen a few use it when I have checked FMC solutions.


----------



## MatejMuzatko (Jan 2, 2014)

I think it's reasonable... They are good for beginners in FMC... And I think pro people in FMC don't even use rotations, do they?


----------

