# OSPA(New 2x2 Method)



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

This thread is for opinions, improvements, and criticism of a new method for 2x2 I have created.

OSPA stands for *O*rient *S*eparate+*P*ermute *A*UF. Essentially what this method is, is you use the SOAP algs to orient opposite sides that contain opposite colors in each. This is a lot like step one of Guimond where you make a side in the bottom with two opposite colours and step two of Guimond where you use an OLL to orient the top side. But this is done in one step instead of two. The next step is to Separate and Permute the opposite color sides in one algorithm. This combines step 3 of Guimond which is separation of opposite colours into two different sides, then the PBL that is the last step of Guimond and Ortega. This combines them into one algorithm. The only thing after that is the AUF which is able to be predicted.

Seeing that I suck at explaining, these 5 example solves should help you understand how this method works.



Spoiler



Scramble: R2 F2 R F2 U' F U2 F2 R'
Presolve: x2 y'
Orient: U' y' R' U' R U R' U' R
Separate and Permute: z2 y (U R2 U R2' U' R2 U' R2') U2
__________________________________
Scramble: R' F2 U2 F' R2 U' R U2
Presolve: x2 y 
Orient: R U' R' U R U' R' 
Separate and Permute: y' U' R U' R' U' R2 F2 U' R U R
__________________________________
Scramble: F R' F2 U' F2 U R' U R'

Pre-solve: z' y2
Orient: U' (R' U R' U2 R U' R2)
Separate and Permute: U' R U F' R2 F R' F
__________________________________
Scramble: U' R2 U F' U R U' F R'
Pre-solve: y2 
Orient: U (R U R' F R F')
Separate and Permute: y U2 (R2 U' R U F' R2 F R' F) U2
____________________________
Scramble: R' F' R F R2 U' F2 R2 F'
Pre-solve: x' y2
Orient: U' (R' U R U' R' U R) y'
Separate and Permute: U (F2 U R2 U' F2 U R2)



The pros things about this method is that it is only two steps, has between 80-90 algorithms which is less then EG, easy to one look as long as you know what your SOAP algs do, heavy use of the double move(R2, U2...) if you like that, and can have absolutely no intuition or as much of it as you want. 

The only two cons with this method that I see is recognizing the Separate+Permute case and heavy use of double moves if you don't like that. 

Solutions to those could be establishing a recognition system where you realize that opposite colours are the same and the same colours are opposite if you are looking at two different opposite color top(or bottom) stickers. And algorithms that have almost only single move moves(F R U R"...).

As I said before I would like your opinions and suggestions, but please realize I am not done with this method. Also feel free to ask me questions and I will most likely answer them.


----------



## HelpCube (Feb 3, 2012)

Hmm... Pretty cool. Could be really effective. And just so you know, on the second example solve there is no scramble.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 3, 2012)

similar to a bunch of other random 2x2x2 methods you don't really hear about because second step recog is unfeasable

you may aswell document it though so we have algs floating about


----------



## AustinReed (Feb 3, 2012)

Seems kinda cool. However, I think the first step takes more moves on average than the first step of EG-1. Because of that, I'll stick to EG.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 3, 2012)

Is the separate+permute done intuitively or do you actually have algs for that?
I had considered combining seperation and permutation steps a couple of years ago, and someone shot it down telling me that it has a HUGE number of algs. Or is this somehow simplified so that the alg count is reduced?


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

AustinReed said:


> Seems kinda cool. However, I think the first step takes more moves on average than the first step of EG-1. Because of that, I'll stick to EG.


 
The algs I used in the example solves were SOAP which is meant to make two sides of one color each. I am sure if better algs would be generated, it would be more efficient.




Zarxrax said:


> Is the separate+permute done intuitively or do you actually have algs for that?
> I had considered combining seperation and permutation steps a couple of years ago, and someone shot it down telling me that it has a HUGE number of algs. Or is this somehow simplified so that the alg count is reduced?


 
Both. It would take about 30 algs.


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 3, 2012)

Ill make this my main method cause I hate CLL. Just so boring. 

Can you get a PDF or something set with algs so we(community) can start learning?
Lol


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Ill make this my main method cause I hate CLL. Just so boring.
> 
> Can you get a PDF or something set with algs so we(community) can start learning?
> Lol


 
Thank you.

That is what I do not have done and I might need some help generating algs for. I have used this which is not a good generator but I do not know of any good 2x2 generators.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 3, 2012)

I also used ksolve when I was generating algs for soap, but I dont remember if it would work for detecting opposite colors. I think it can though.


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> Thank you.
> 
> That is what I do not have done and I might need some help generating algs for. I have used this which is not a good generator but I do not know of any good 2x2 generators.


 
Um, Maybe i could help you tomorrow. 

Something you need is a Video Tutorial. 
I know im saying a lot, but these are just suggestions. And cause I like videos...


----------



## Jaycee (Feb 3, 2012)

Good to see you finally made this thread 

Like I said in the PM, I'm just waiting for algs and I might try to use this alongside CLL or just make it my main


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Um, Maybe i could help you tomorrow.



That is very nice of you but you don't even know the cases for SP(Separate and Permute) so that wouldn't work out for you. But if you could help me with some opposite color SOAP algs(and find a name for what I am talking about) that would be really nice and helpful.



PandaCuber said:


> Something you need is a Video Tutorial.
> I know im saying a lot, but these are just suggestions. And cause I like videos...


 
Remember this thread is just for suggestiong, help and stuff. I am not done, but I will when everything is finished.

I will do some major work on OSPA tomorrow.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 3, 2012)

Difference from Guimond?


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

Tim Major said:


> Difference from Guimond?


 
Very likely faster and is only two steps instead of four.


----------



## JustinJ (Feb 3, 2012)

http://cube.garron.us/sortega/ ?


----------



## aronpm (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> *Very likely faster* and is only two steps instead of four.


 
Except not. Go back and read Kirjava's post.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> Very likely faster and is only two steps instead of four.


 
Oh my bad, I basically looked at the initials' description and read it as orient, separate, permute.
I thought the + was "and then" rather than just "and".
Anyway, I've forgotten a lot of CLLs, I'll look into this when you post algs.


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

aronpm said:


> Except not. Go back and read Kirjava's post.


 
I see Kirjava's post and it says nothing about speed, only recognition. Even so I will still finish this, document it, learn it my self, then prove that it can be fast.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 3, 2012)

I will take a better look at this method later today, but it seems like a method that I would be intersested in using.

I have just learned som CLL cases, and like Pandacube said, it is very boring. If I can help with something, please let me know.


----------



## emolover (Feb 3, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> If I can help with something, please let me know.


 
Same thing I told PandaCuber, see if you can make up some good OOC algs(orient opposite color) that are efficient and easy to execute. Does not have to be 2gen but can be 3gen using LUR or RUF. 

Also if you find a good 2x2 solving program, that would be wonderful.


----------



## Ezy Ryder (Feb 3, 2012)

So it's like Guimond, but with the last two steps done with one algorithm... It'll probably make solving with one-look easier than in regular Guimond, but probably not as good as in EG/CLL. And considering there were some Sub-3 averages with regular Guimond, it may be fast.
If I understood the description of the method.


----------



## y235 (Feb 3, 2012)

Can you give here a list of the algs that should be changed from SOAP algs to OOC algs?

BTW, for this case:
setup: R U2 R' U2 R U R' can be solved with F' U' F


----------



## Godmil (Feb 3, 2012)

Hmm, it's an interesting idea. However I feel it's a step backwards. If you took this method you could make the final step Alg count and recognition a lot better by doing 0-2 premoves at the start of the solve... Which is soap.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> I see Kirjava's post and it says nothing about speed, only recognition.


 
Recognition doesn't take time?


----------



## aronpm (Feb 3, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Recognition doesn't take time?


 
Not a problem if you don't care about wasting inspection...


----------



## irontwig (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> Very likely faster and is only two steps instead of *four*.


 

The first "step" takes like 0.1 moves per average or something silly like that. The number of steps is pretty uninteresting, but rather how often a method produces 1-look solutions, which I'd think EG does way more often due to its short first step.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 3, 2012)

emolover said:


> Same thing I told PandaCuber, see if you can make up some good OOC algs(orient opposite color) that are efficient and easy to execute. Does not have to be 2gen but can be 3gen using LUR or RUF.
> 
> Also if you find a good 2x2 solving program, that would be wonderful.



Do you mean the same as in this link and only better algs? Beacuse there are already all algs. Or do you mean the second step?

edit: I am also having another question. How many possible cases are there for the second step?


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 3, 2012)

OK I think I understood what you mean.

1. F R F' R' or F R F' R
2. F' U F
3. U' R U R'
4. U' R (F R F' R)
5. U2 R U' (F R F' R)
6. 
7. R U2 F' U F
8. R U' R D' R' D' R'

Here are some other algs for the column to left. I don't know if the algs are really good, but many of them are at least shorter.

Couldn't find a good alg for case 6!

What do you think?


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 5, 2012)

The main trick to this method would be the last step, which is the pbl+separation algs.
I think this method is potentially easier to 1-look than eg but it all depends on that critical last step.

You need to get a list of the actual cases, to prove its not actually some absurd number, and also come up with a recognition method.


----------



## emolover (Feb 5, 2012)

Yes you are right that I need to do some work on the method but I couldn't today because I was feeling really down and I am working on something else for cubing as I work on this method.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 5, 2012)

*Algs for the 3-1 permutation cases*

I think I have found most of the 3-1 permutation cases. 23


Case 1-8
*U R2 U R2' U' R2 U' R2' 
U'F2UR2U'F2 
R'FRU2F2R2UFU'R 
UF2UR2U'F2UR2U2
F2R'U'RF2R'UR 
U2F'UR'U'FU2FRFR' 
R2UR2U'R2U 
R2UR2U'R2U' *


Those cases are used if there are one solved layer (except the piece in opposite colour) at the bottom layer. 

Case 9-16
Haven't done any algs. But it is the same cases as above but at the U-layer

Case 17-20
*FRUF'U2F'R'U'FR2U' (DFL-UFR-UFL-DFR)
FRFU'F2U'R'U'RF2U (DFR-UFL-UFR-DFL)
y'RURUR'UR'U'RU'(DFR-UFR-UFL-DFL)
y'R'U'R'U'RU'RUR'U(DFL-UFL-UFR-DFR)*

Those cases are used if there are two 2x1 block solved at UB & DB

Case 21-24
*FR'U2F2R'U'RF2U'FU (DBR-DBL-DFR-UFR-UBR)
FUFU2F2R2FU'FU2 (DBR-DFL-DFR-UFL-UFR)
FURF2U2R2U2R'U'FU2 (UFR-UBR-UFL-DFR-DFL)
FU'F2R2U'F'RF2U'RU (UFR-UFL-UBR-DBR-DFR)*

Those cases is hard to see what they are doing.

Case 25-28
*FURU'FR2FRU2F'R (UBR-UFL-DFR-DFL)
FUFR'FU2FUR2F'R (DBL-DFR-UFL-UFR)
U'F2U'F2UR2F2U2 (DBL-DFR-UFR-UFL)
U'F2R2UR2UR2U2R2 (UBR-UFL-DFL-DFR)*

Cases if there are one 2x1 block solved at one layer and a Y-perm at the other layer.

Case 29-32
*FUF'RU'FU2F'R'U2R2 (T-perm DL & UL+UFR-DBR)
FU'FR2URF2R'U'RF2 (Y-perm(UFL-UBR & DFR-DBL)+UFR-DBR)
FRFR'URF2RU2F2R2 (T-perm UL& Y-perm DFR-DBL)
FURU'RFU2FU2R2F2 (T-perm DL & Y-perm UFR-DBL)*


Case 33
*U R U' R' U' R2 F2 U' R U R * 

Last alg, couldn't find any similar.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 5, 2012)

Also wanted to post some algs for the orientation step. This site will help you to see which situation it is. Cases in "[]" aren't changed beacuse they are pretty nice or beacuse I couldn't find any nice algs. 

All algs aren't nice, but some of them really are!

1. F R F' R' or F R F' R
2. F' U F
3. U' R U R'
4. U' R (F R F' R)
5. U2 R U' (F R F' R)
6.* [R U' R' U R U'R']
7. R U2 F' U F
8. R U' R D' R' D' R' 

1. F R U' R' or F R U' R
2. R U' R
3. U' F' U' F
4. [R U R' U' R U R']
5. U F' U' F R U' R
6. [y' R' U R U' R' U R]
7. U F' U2 R U' R
8. [R U2 R U' R U2 R]

1. R' F R2 F' U'
2. R F' U2 F
3. [R' U R2 U' R]
4. [R' U' R2 U' R2 U' R']
5. R2 F R2 F
6. [R2 U' R2 U2 R']
7. [R' F R F' R' U R']

1. F U2 F R F' R
2. R' U' F R U' R'
3. y F U2 F R U' R'
4. [R U2 R' U2 R U2 R' U2 R]
5. R
6. y F U' F R U' R'
7. R' U' R U' R

1. F D' F'
2. [x R U R' U' R U R' U']
3. U' R' D2 F' U L'
4. [R U' F R F']
5. [R2 U R' F R2 F']
6. [R U R' U2 R]
7. [R' U R' U R']
8. L' U' L U2 R U' R [R' U' R2 U' R' U' R2]

1. U' y2 F' D F
2. [x U R U' R' U R U' R']
3. y U' F D2 R D' R'
4. [R' D' R' U' R]
5. [F R2 F' R U' R2]
6. [R' U2 R U' R']
7. [R U' R U' R]
8. [R U R U2 R U R]


----------



## emolover (Feb 5, 2012)

Jesus Christ your a lifesaver!


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 5, 2012)

Added 2 cases which I had missed (27&28)


I have also realized that you often can choose between 2-3 cases in the orientation part. That means that you very often can do a short case and it will be much easier to 1-look.


----------



## emolover (Feb 5, 2012)

Here are some crappy visuals with the cases and algs

Cases 1-16

Cases 17-24

Cases 25-32

Cases 33

These are all for the Dot or L cases depending on how you perceive it.


----------



## Jaycee (Feb 5, 2012)

So wait, how many of the Separate-Permute algs still have to be found? I might try to help. I'm really looking forward to being able to use this method in full 

EDIT : @emolover : Those links aren't working for me.


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 5, 2012)

Me neither. 

I cant wait for pics and algs to come out so this can be my new method. 

Sorry Emo for me sucking at generating algs.


----------



## emolover (Feb 5, 2012)

I hadn't changed it to public but now you can view them.

I truly dont know many there are.


----------



## Henrik (Feb 5, 2012)

This method reminds me soo much of some algs I found 3-4 years ago.

I used to call is Guimond2 I think.

Ill try to find the cases tomorrow (after Super Bowl and sleep)

I do not promise that the algs are good (at all)
But I think that I had an idea of recognition.

Something with, do you get a bar in bottom layer or will the one piece over it make a bar with one of the ones just below. (can be seen by opposite colors)
and basically the same for top layer. 
I have no idea if the idea works since I have not gotten around to learning them all.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 6, 2012)

It is hard to say how many cases there are, but I think those 33 are more than the half at least.
When I was playing around with this method yesterday, I got one of those L-cases in about 60-70% of the solves.

It doesn't mean that it is more than the half algs, but it might be.


----------



## Henrik (Feb 6, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> It is hard to say how many cases there are, but I think those 33 are more than the half at least.
> When I was playing around with this method yesterday, I got one of those L-cases in about 60-70% of the solves.
> 
> It doesn't mean that it is more than the half algs, but it might be.


 
If I understand your questions/ thoughts correct the the answer would be 36.

Each layer can end in 6 cases, 6*6 = 36

This is at least for the 3/4 layer cases. (where 3 out of 4 oriented is one color, and the last is opposite)

As promised: my work from April/May 2008:
View attachment Guidmond step 2.pdf

A few notes: as this was made in 2008, my aim of time was completely off it should be less than 2 sec.
Also I have not looked into mirrors/opposites/inverses, I have just listed the cases and how to recognize them.


----------



## Jakube (Feb 6, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> Also wanted to post some algs for the orientation step. This site will help you to see which situation it is. Cases in "[]" aren't changed beacuse they are pretty nice or beacuse I couldn't find any nice algs.
> 
> All algs aren't nice, but some of them really are!


 
What about the Guimond algs: Link
In 90% you can use them.
These Orientation algs are pretty short (3-6 moves), so one-looking should not be that hard.


----------



## emolover (Feb 6, 2012)

Aww man! I thought I was on to something. Doesn't mean we can't find the algs for the other cases.


----------



## Henrik (Feb 6, 2012)

emolover said:


> Aww man! I thought I was on to something. Doesn't mean we can't find the algs for the other cases.


 
What do you mean? You thought you where on to something?
Why are you not on to something?

This is another step in the Orient opposite sides - permute area, and solving form.

The other is CLL/EG one side do all.

I think its good to explore new ideas in the 2x2 area, even though someone might have made the algs (but never published), does not mean it should not be fully developed.

I do think that 3/4 of a side is the easiest to recognize, when it comes to this method, I have not found a good way to do it with other cases, like diagonal-diagonal nor adj-diagonal. Someone might have a good idea for that.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 6, 2012)

Henrik said:


> If I understand your questions/ thoughts correct the the answer would be 36.
> 
> Each layer can end in 6 cases, 6*6 = 36



Yeah, that was my thought from the beginning, but I can't find the last 3.

So if someone can find them it would be nice


edit: oh sorry. I saw the cases in the link.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 7, 2012)

I tried to find out some cases when there are 2 of each colour at each side. I used yellow and white orientation.

I did like that: I seperated up the cases by watching if the 2 white should be next to each other when the cube was solved, or if they were diagonal. And also how the yellow was. 

So there are 3 different groups: 
1. Both white pieces and both yellow pieces at both layer will be next to each other when the cube is solved.
2. White or yellow pieces at both layer will be next to each other when the cube is solved. The other colours pieces is in both layer diagonal if the cube was solved.
3. Both white pieces and both yellow pieces at both layer will be diagonal to each other when the cube is solved.

So here is the beginning of my work:

*F2R2U2 Double T-swap
R2U'RU'RF2R'UR' Solved 2x1 (1)
R'UR'U'RF2RFRU Solved 2x1 (2)
UF'UF'R2FU'F' Diagonal pattern*

4 cases when both the D-layer white & yellow pieces should be next to each other at a solved cube. Of course will also the pieces at top be next to each other when solved. There would be 2 solved 2x1 block at the D-layer if you would do 2 T-perms, thatis why I named the cases as Double T-swap

*U'R'FU'R2UF'R'U2 Double T-swap
R2U2F2U'R2UF2 Solved 2x1 (R)
F2UFU'FR2F'RFU2 Solved 2x1 (2)
R2U'R2U2F2U Diag pattern
*



4 cases when both the D-layer white & yellow pieces should be next to each other at a solved cube. But this time is the bottom pieces diagonal to each other from the beginning.

*R2UR'FR'F2RU'R Double T-swap
F2UF2U2R2UR2U2 Solved 2x1 (R)
F2R'U'FU2F'UR'U Solved 2x1 (2)
F2U2R2U'R2U'R2 Diag pattern
*

4 cases when both the D-layer white & yellow pieces should be next to each other at a solved cube. Here are there one 2x1 block solved at the bottom from the beginning.
*R2U2F2U'R2U2F2U'F2 Double T-swap
F2RUR'F2RF'RU' Solved 2x1 (1)
R2U2 Solved 2x1 (2)
F2U'R'UF'R2FR'F'U2 Diag pattern*

4 cases when both the D-layer white & yellow pieces should be next to each other at a solved cube. Here are there two 2x1 block solved at the bottom from the beginning.

*This is all group 1 cases, I started at group 2 but did not do that much. What do you think about this way to split up the rest of the cases?
Do you understand how I were doing? Have I being do something wrong?

Tips and criticism is welcome!*

If someone haven't understand that, so would those 3 groups of cases complete the total pemutation step.


----------



## emolover (Feb 7, 2012)

I like this way of splitting the cases up and can't wait for the cases to be fully finished. There won't be 36 cases for each but how many do you think there will be?


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 8, 2012)

emolover said:


> I like this way of splitting the cases up and can't wait for the cases to be fully finished. There won't be 36 cases for each but how many do you think there will be?


 

I think it can be somewhere between 40-60 cases for all those 3 groups.

It also depends at the second group, because in many of those cases ( which not are having the diagonal pattern) can you just do R2 to get another case.


----------



## Henrik (Feb 8, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> I think it can be somewhere between 40-60 cases for all those 3 groups.
> 
> It also depends at the second group, because in many of those cases ( which not are having the diagonal pattern) can you just do R2 to get another case.



Just a quick guess on the cases with two-bars of 2 in the bottom and diagonal pattern on top would be 18 cases.
The diagonal pattern gives the opportunity to do a U2 and therefore cutting the cases by half. (from 36 to 18)
(I am not 100% sure, but ill find the last 6 cases I'm missing in my old sheet (Yes I also started that))

Here are the cases for what I call Guimond2-2 
View attachment Guimond step 2-2.pdf
Btw: avg move count: 8 moves

I don't know about 2bars bottom 2bars top cases.

EDIT2:
Would 2bars - 2bars not be just 7 cases? 
You can do a setup like U2R2 or U2L2 and get one of the known PBLs

If you already know how the "seperation" is going to end up, you might as well add U2R2 or what ever makes two full sides, to get a known PBL.
For 2bar-diag pattern you could learn the 18 cases. And if you are crazy  you could also learn the 36 cases for 3/4 patterns.

Right now we are looking at a method with 61 cases for PBL. Maybe it should be Permute and Separate Both Layers (PSBL)
Also I just did some quick calculations, this approach looks like it can be done with an avg of 12-13 moves.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 8, 2012)

@Henrik

Yeah, maybe it is a good idea to just do something like U2R2.

You haven't looked into those cases when there are the diagonal pattern at both sides?


----------



## Henrik (Feb 8, 2012)

Ickenicke said:


> @Henrik
> 
> You haven't looked into those cases when there are the diagonal pattern at both sides?



Oh I had luckily forgotten about them. 

Hmm I wonder how to recognize them. I will have to think about that.

EDIT:

Okay I have looked at the diag-diag patterns, thoughts about it and come up with 7 distinct cases with different algs. The rest of the cases can be oriented into one of these 7 cases. 
I started out with 18 cases (after some thinking, and reducing the logical 36 cases by half), Then sitting with 7 2x2s and messing around with orientations and what not. I had to color-code the algs to keep track 

Here is a messy draft: Algs in bold are the "original" or the one that others can be oriented to. Let me know if I missed anything. (I think I have)
View attachment Guimond step 2-3.pdf


----------



## Henrik (Feb 10, 2012)

A cleaner setup of the 7 cases of diag-diag:
View attachment OSPA 7 cases diag-diag.pdf


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 12, 2012)

Ok, so what advantage does this have over 2-step guimond, if you combine the separation and permutation? Guimond has very short orientation algs, and there are only a few of them. So I'm guessing guimond would be both easier to learn and have shorter solutions (and easier to 1-look). Am I wrong?


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 12, 2012)

2-step Guimond? Isn't this method having shorter solutions?

Average would be something like 12-14 moves I think.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 12, 2012)

Well, guimond orientation step averages about 4 moves, and only has 16 algs.
It looks like this method would probably average about 5 moves for orientation... plus there are like 50~ orientation algs.


----------



## emolover (Feb 12, 2012)

For the first "side" of Guimond it's between 3-5 moves, for the orientation it's about 7 moves, for the separation it's 3-5 moves and the PBL 7-11. So that is between 20 and 28 for a full and normal solve. I too have been getting between 12 and 14 move solves but I quite often get 10 or lower.


----------



## Jakube (Feb 12, 2012)

emolover said:


> For the first "side" of Guimond it's between 3-5 moves.



That's not true. 90% of the time the first "side" (3 stickers of opposite colors on one side) is already made. 10% of the time you'll get a 1 or 2 move solution.


----------



## Ickenicke (Feb 12, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Well, guimond orientation step averages about 4 moves, and only has 16 algs.
> It looks like this method would probably average about 5 moves for orientation... plus there are like 50~ orientation algs.



You can use the Guimond orientation with this method too, but if you don't have 3/4 of a side solved you can still find solutions in about 4-5 moves. I really don't think you have to learn all, but you can learn some of the shortest as an extra thing which can help you.


----------



## Henrik (Feb 13, 2012)

emolover said:


> For the first "side" of Guimond it's between 3-5 moves, for the orientation it's about 7 moves, for the separation it's 3-5 moves and the PBL 7-11. So that is between 20 and 28 for a full and normal solve. I too have been getting between 12 and 14 move solves but I quite often get 10 or lower.


 
Emolover: I think you have messed up/ confused your understanding of Guimond and Ortega.

Ortega: do one side, orient opposite, PBL
Guimond: orient opposite sides, separate colors, PBL

SS combines the two: 3/4 of a side and then doing the separation and orientation in one.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Feb 14, 2012)

I just replaced the orient step in the first two exsample solves with some guimond moves.

Scramble: R2 F2 R F2 U' F U2 F2 R'
Presolve: x2 y'
Orient: U' y' R' U' R U R' U' R (8)
Guimond: U' y' *R2 U' R (4)*

__________________________________
Scramble: R' F2 U2 F' R2 U' R U2
Presolve: x2 y 
Orient: R U' R' U R U' R' (7)
Guimond: *D' R2 F2 U' R' (5)*

As you see the Guimond thing needs less moves. 
Few moves and double moves are a good thing, because the fewer moves you need, the easier it is to predict the final case. 

al least it should be much easier to predict the final case than CLL. (not only because of the number of moves, but also because all corners are already orinted).


Regarding Guimond - you could call it 4 step:
0. Orient 3 opposit-colored stickers
1. Orient 8 opposit-colored stickers
2. Separate
3. PBL

But in fact it is more like a 2 Step methode because
0. this is less than on move on average (if you have to do a move, you have an option to force an fast orientation case most of the time. )
1. has few moves wich makes prediction of Separation case quite easy.


If you need algs ACUBE is decent (set all edges to @?)


----------



## Henrik (Feb 15, 2012)

@ oll+phase+sync: you might want to call "orient" for SS or SOAP instead.


Example 1:
Scramble: R2 F2 R F2 U' F U2 F2 R'
pre solve: z2
Orientation: U' R2 U' R' y' (4/4)
Separation /permutation : R2'y’R2U'R2'UR2 (6/10)
AUF: U' (1/11)

Example 2:
Scramble: R' F2 U2 F' R2 U' R U2
Presolve: x2 y 
D' R2 F2 U' R' (5/5)
y' U'R2U'R2F2U'F2UR2 (9/14)
U' (1/15)

Example 2 - 2:
Scramble: R' F2 U2 F' R2 U' R U2
Presolve: x2 y 
Orient: R U' R' U R U' R' (7/7)
U2 (1/8)
FU'R'F2R'F2R'U'R (9/16)

Cool


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Feb 16, 2012)

Henrik said:


> @ oll+phase+sync: you might want to call "orient" for SS or SOAP instead.



Sorry I don't understand. 

Another question: SS looks like a very solid method to produce 1look solutions to me. For SOAP ... I seen no reason why to use it ... am I missing something?


----------



## emolover (Feb 16, 2012)

You have to solve 3 corners which can take quite a few moves. With OSPA you know what your alg does to all the pieces. If you know exactly where they all go immediately, it makes it easier to 1-look.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 16, 2012)

oll+phase+sync said:


> Sorry I don't understand.
> 
> Another question: SS looks like a very solid method to produce 1look solutions to me. For SOAP ... I seen no reason why to use it ... am I missing something?


 
SOAP only has half as many algs to learn as SS.
Solutions are on overage 1-2 moves longer. That's the trade-off.
They both seem to complement each other well, and could be combined to form an even better method (SSOAP?)


----------



## Zarxrax (Aug 24, 2012)

Today I wrote a solver that can generate algs for the orientation step of OSPA method, so I will try to post some algs soon.


----------



## Zarxrax (Aug 29, 2012)

Here we go: http://www.amvhell.com/stuff/cubes/OSPA_ALGS.html

I didn't really test these algs or try to optimize them. So there is probably lots of room for improvement.
On average, you might save about 1 move whenever you get a bad guimond case, otherwise the guimond cases are usually better.

Maximum move count for OSPA first step is 6 moves, but I think this can ALWAYS be reduced to 5 by choosing a better starting case (you will often have more than 1 case to start from) (and if someone can find a case that needs 6 moves, please show me). So basically, look ahead through usually 5 moves or less during the inspection time to see the final step.
The separation+permutation step doesn't seem to have much worse recognition than CLL. This seems like a valid contender to EG method to me (though with just the guimond algs is ok).


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Sep 5, 2012)

Most of th algs in Your list are not RU. In fact if most of them where RU, there might be an easy way to narrow down the options for Step 2 (seperation and permutation).


----------



## Zarxrax (Sep 5, 2012)

Yea, Its possible to make them all RU, but I don't think its worth the trouble to learn them all. Probably better to stick with just the 16 alg guimond subset (which can also be RU).
I think the only way to reduce the number of cases for step 2 is if you had a bar of 1 color on the left side. Then it becomes something like SORTEGA method.


----------



## cuBerBruce (Sep 6, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Maximum move count for OSPA first step is 6 moves, but I think this can ALWAYS be reduced to 5 by choosing a better starting case (you will often have more than 1 case to start from) (and if someone can find a case that needs 6 moves, please show me).



As I noted [post=152726]here[/post], there are 1152 configurations that do take 6 moves. For example, F' U F2 R2 U R' U' R' requires at least 6 moves to orient with respect to U/D stickers, L/R stickers, or F/B stickers. I note that this particular example, however, only requires a 5-move alg preceded by an alignment move.

I note that your page only generally shows one AUF case instead of all 4 (when applicable). So you seem to be assuming, in general, an alignment move plus an alg. Interestingly, in some cases, your alg starts with a U layer move, so your standard case isn't always even an optimal AUF case.

I also note that apparently you choose a face for the D layer such that it has at least two stickers of some pair of opposite colors. However, you seem to assume this choice will have at least a "bar" of these opposite color stickers. There are 5184 configurations that don't have a face with at least a bar, but rather diagonally opposite stickers only. I see nothing about this case. (Example: U R2 F R2 F2 R F2 U')

Finally I note there is some redundancy. For example, the first case in the "Asym[m]etrical Subset" category is really the same as a Guimond case, only with a different cube orientation. As you are allowing for alignment moves, you need to be very careful if you try to remove such redundancies, though.


----------



## Zarxrax (Sep 6, 2012)

cuBerBruce said:


> As I noted [post=152726]here[/post], there are 1152 configurations that do take 6 moves. For example, F' U F2 R2 U R' U' R' requires at least 6 moves to orient with respect to U/D stickers, L/R stickers, or F/B stickers. I note that this particular example, however, only requires a 5-move alg preceded by an alignment move.


Ah, well noted.



cuBerBruce said:


> I note that your page only generally shows one AUF case instead of all 4 (when applicable). So you seem to be assuming, in general, an alignment move plus an alg. Interestingly, in some cases, your alg starts with a U layer move, so your standard case isn't always even an optimal AUF case.


I haven't really looked at the algs, I just pasted them in. Some of them start with a U, because otherwise I would have to draw a different diagram for the case.



cuBerBruce said:


> I also note that apparently you choose a face for the D layer such that it has at least two stickers of some pair of opposite colors. However, you seem to assume this choice will have at least a "bar" of these opposite color stickers. There are 5184 configurations that don't have a face with at least a bar, but rather diagonally opposite stickers only. I see nothing about this case. (Example: U R2 F R2 F2 R F2 U')


This method as defined in the first post would have at least a bar. That's because it was said that SOAP algs could be used, and SOAP algs would require a bar. Basically all I did above was generate some SOAP algs optimized for opposite colors.

I was mainly just curious if it might end up with a lot of really short cases like guimond has. These do tend to be a bit longer though.


----------



## cuBerBruce (Sep 6, 2012)

cuBerBruce said:


> I also note that apparently you choose a face for the D layer such that it has at least two stickers of some pair of opposite colors. However, you seem to assume this choice will have at least a "bar" of these opposite color stickers. There are 5184 configurations that don't have a face with at least a bar, but rather diagonally opposite stickers only. I see nothing about this case. (Example: U R2 F R2 F2 R F2 U')





Zarxrax said:


> This method as defined in the first post would have at least a bar. That's because it was said that SOAP algs could be used, and SOAP algs would require a bar. Basically all I did above was generate some SOAP algs optimized for opposite colors.



Well, anyway, I confirm that you never need more than one move to make the bar (allowing opposite colors, of course). (SOAP's initial step includes guaranteeing you have a bar.)


----------



## LongRong (Dec 26, 2022)

Ickenicke said:


> I tried to find out some cases when there are 2 of each colour at each side. I used yellow and white orientation.
> 
> I did like that: I seperated up the cases by watching if the 2 white should be next to each other when the cube was solved, or if they were diagonal. And also how the yellow was.
> 
> ...





Ickenicke said:


> I tried to find out some cases when there are 2 of each colour at each side. I used yellow and white orientation.
> 
> I did like that: I seperated up the cases by watching if the 2 white should be next to each other when the cube was solved, or if they were diagonal. And also how the yellow was.
> 
> ...


 i want to know more


----------

