# The JAA method



## Jaysammey777 (Dec 2, 2009)

This is the JAA method
Pronounced: jay
there are 8 fast steps (nine including the only cube rotation.
Algorithms- 86

Step 1: 1x2x2 block
1a. find the edge you want to start with, Called the key edge, and postion the piece in the DL position. And put the color you want on the bottom on the D face. NOT THE CENTER
1b. postion the corrner in the DLF postion.
1c. pair up the last edge and it's corasopnding center. Using only Rw and Uw moves to place them next to the paired edge and corrner

Step 2: Form a 1x2x2 block on the opposite side.
2a. if on the middle layer use an M or M' move.
2b. if flipped wrong postion in the UF postion and do an M'
2c. if in the LB position use a B' move
2d. form an F2L pair using the MUB and somtimes R B at beginning only and R moves at the beging or end

Step 3: Get the white bar
3a. use and combantion of M and U moves to get the other white pieces to form a bar then at the end you should get a cross with two corrners on the bottom
3b. presurving during step 2- This is extreamly hard for a beginner. While doing the F2L pair put 1 or both of the edges in an easy to get to postion. I have no algorithms for this. I do it intuitively.

Step 4: Do a y turn

Step 5: Postion the BR F2L pair
4a. use intuitve or the 40 F2L casses

Step 6:Correct all bad edges
6a. bad edges are edges the dont match up with the U and R centers.
6b. if 2 postion them in the UL and RF positions. Then use F' U' F
6c. If 4 postion all on top and use M' U M' U M' U M' U' M' U M' U M' U M'
If you have a faster non-cube rotation algorithm for step 6.c please post

Step 7: Postion last F2L piece
7.a Use 2-gen only (R and U moves only)

Step 8: Use Coll
8a. 40 algorithms

Step 9: permute edges
9a. 4 algorithms

Variations-
Mgls- replace step 8 and use Pll
Fredrich- Step 8 and 9 OLL and PLL

Example solve
White as U layer and Red as F
scramble: F2 R' F' U' B2 D' L B2 R' F' L R2 F U2 L' R' U' L' B L' B2 D F2 U D

Step 1:
I'd postion the the White blue edge piece with white on bottom as my key edge (Orange on front and Blue on top)
U2 to get corrner in position)
L' U' L To correct the corrner
Then I'd do a Rw to pair it up Then a Uw'
*for the record I see that there are easy cases for the Roux method so I'd do that insead, but I will go on using this method

Step 2:
R U M' to correct it the a U R2
B' U to get the edge on the M layer and do a M'
U2 M U' M' Rw U Rw' to fiish the edge and preserve the Red and orange pieces so they are on the U layer and fliped so the White is not showing

Step 3:
U2 M2 U M' to do it in under 5 moves with presurving the piece

Step 4:
y

Step 5:
U2 to pair up
R' U R To pair up
U' B U' B' To postion it in

Step 6:
U R To get all on top then the algorithm M' U M' U M' U M' U' M' U M' U M' U M'

Step 7:  
Normally I would do a R' to put the correct F2L pair back
BUT I would just have to do a R after it so there is no point.
U to pair it
R' U R U' R' to postion it

Step 8:
Coll case:R' U2 (R F U' R' U' R U F' U2

Step 9:
Counter clockwise edge- M2 U M U2 M' U M2

this method is for not many cube rotations and a faster way variation of the petrus method. It lowers my time on the petrus by 5seconds


----------



## Muesli (Dec 2, 2009)

Why not just make 3x3x1 blocks like you would in Roux? This method seems to complicate roux unnecessarily.


----------



## Erik (Dec 2, 2009)

Jaysammey777 said:


> Variations-
> Mgls- replace step 8 and use Pll
> *Fredrich*- Step 8 and 9 OLL and PLL



Just had to point this out... it's *Fridrich*


----------



## Edward (Dec 2, 2009)

The example solve didnt work. Either I messed up, or something is wrong with the algs.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 2, 2009)

Edward said:


> The example solve didnt work. Either I mess up, or something is wrong withthe algs.



you messed up, so did i the first time
 
and i kinda like it, not really as a speedcubing method but its interesting lol

please people be nice >.>


----------



## JLarsen (Dec 3, 2009)

Try not to take offense to this, but exactly why do you feel as though you have merit to make a speedsolving method?

Could you explain this white bar? Are you making a 2x2x3 block with the pre existing 1x2 blocks by inserting the last edge?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 3, 2009)

Sn3kyPandaMan said:


> Try not to take offense to this, but exactly why do you feel as though you have merit to make a speedsolving method?
> 
> Could you explain this white bar? Are you making a 2x2x3 block with the pre existing 1x2 blocks by inserting the last edge?



kinda, basically what happens is a double x-cross

so you do double x-cross, insert one pair orient edges with some long alg so that it orients four edges and insert the f2l??? why not just pair up the edge then do ZBLL its pretty intuititve. then do CLL and ELL


----------



## Muesli (Dec 3, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> Sn3kyPandaMan said:
> 
> 
> > Try not to take offense to this, but exactly why do you feel as though you have merit to make a speedsolving method?
> ...


As a roux user, this should be pretty simple. If I understand it correctly this is Roux, but with 2x2x1 blocks instead of 2x3x1 blocks.


----------



## puzzlemaster (Dec 3, 2009)

Jaysammey777 said:


> This is the JAA method
> Pronounced: jay
> there are 8 fast steps (nine including the only cube rotation.
> Algorithms- 86
> ...



Shouldn't that be a U?


----------



## hawkmp4 (Dec 3, 2009)

Why/how is this method an improvement over existing ones?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 3, 2009)

Musli4brekkies said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > Sn3kyPandaMan said:
> ...



yea the first part is but then he turns it into a double X-cross
honestly why not just use roux for both 1x2x3 blocks, well you might as well do COLL early then EO, that way would be faster and more move efficient.

and while your at it why not just place the UR and UL pieces and then you can solve 4 edges at the same time seems like a pretty fast method right?


----------



## JLarsen (Dec 3, 2009)

If you're going to make a 2x2x3 block, then I think you should go with the more efficient, ergonomic petrus finish. The point of making a 2x2x3 block is to reduce the cube to RU, why not use it? As of right now you are essentially doing Petrus with direct 2x2x3, but then skipping EO and Fridriching the end?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Dec 3, 2009)

This sounds pretty much like Petrus, except you build the 2x2x3 differently.


----------



## rowehessler (Dec 3, 2009)

Jaysammey777 said:


> This is the JAA method
> Pronounced: jay
> there are 8 fast steps (nine including the only cube rotation.
> Algorithms- 86
> ...



LOL


----------



## wrbcube4 (Dec 3, 2009)

Not going to be a major method but, a very creative one. I like it!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 3, 2009)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Why not just make 3x3x1 blocks like you would in Roux? This method seems to complicate roux unnecessarily.



Exactly. It's morphing Roux and Petrus together. And it's not even doing it well. Like 1x2x2, 1x2x2, centers and back edge while doing EO, and then finish Petrus wouldn't be so bad. But this.


----------



## JLarsen (Dec 3, 2009)

Just going to explain a point I've made like a bajillion times to people who hybridize roux and petrus, and why it doesn't work as well. (Not attacking, trying to give understanding)

Okay, so firstly, in Roux, when you make 2 opposite 1x2x3 blocks, what are you really doing? You're reducing the cube to two layers, M and U. This is where the fastest stages of the solve come yes? This is how Roux catches back up with Fridrich in the sense that blocks are harder to make than crosses (opinion of most), because the finish is faster.

Now with Petrus, the point of a 2x2x3 block is to reduce the cube to two layers. These are R and U with Petrus. Again, step 4 is incredibly fast, as well as the last layer as well.

So when you merge these two methods, you've still got potential to make efficient blocks, but you lack the 2 gen finish that really hits these methods home.

I like the direct 2x2x3 idea, I just think a Petrus finish would do it more justice. You could even do all three types of 2x2x3 in your building, and that would be plausible. For instance, consider these sub steps; 1x2x3 > 2x2x3, 1x2x2, opposite 1x2x2, insert last 2 edges, and of course 2x2x2, 2x2x3. If you actually used the other building types, you could call it like....freestlye 2x2x3, although it would definitely be petrus of course, but still unique. 

Did I help?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 3, 2009)

Sn3kyPandaMan said:


> Just going to explain a point I've made like a bajillion times to people who hybridize roux and petrus, and why it doesn't work as well. (Not attacking, trying to give understanding)
> 
> Okay, so firstly, in Roux, when you make 2 opposite 1x2x3 blocks, what are you really doing? You're reducing the cube to two layers, M and U. This is where the fastest stages of the solve come yes? This is how Roux catches back up with Fridrich in the sense that blocks are harder to make than crosses (opinion of most), because the finish is faster.
> 
> ...



I think ZZ counts as the only plausible hybrid between Roux and Petrus


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 3, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> I think ZZ counts as the only plausible hybrid between Roux and Petrus



I see ZZ as Roux's evil little brother. Instead of M and U it's R L and U. I do believe that they are related though.


----------



## ostracod (Dec 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > I think ZZ counts as the only plausible hybrid between Roux and Petrus
> ...


I think of ZZ as an extended form of the EO idea in Petrus. Instead of block building, EO, block building, a ZZ solver does EO first then easier block building. Doing EO first is trickier, of course, but helps improve usage of inspection time.

The JAA method reminds me of Petrus, Roux, and something like VH all at the same time (since edges are oriented right before placement of last c/e pair). It seems like too much of a mashup to be really unique, but I dunnnnno.


----------



## Ness (Dec 4, 2009)

I don't think ZZ is EO first then block building. I think it's more EO + easy F2L. Because block building with restricted moves is not really block building anymore... 

back to topic:
For me this method looks like a mixture of roux + petrus... I don't think it's more effective or even faster than one of the two.


----------



## a small kitten (Dec 4, 2009)

> Because block building with restricted moves is not really block building anymore...



lol

Why can't it be easier block building? Just because the edges are oriented doesn't mean it's not block building. You make a 2x2x1 and then a slot. The 2x2x1 is a block. If you ever make that block when you ZZ, you are block building. 

On topic: That's been said before. Many times.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 4, 2009)

a small kitten said:


> > Because block building with restricted moves is not really block building anymore...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Agree.


----------



## ostracod (Dec 4, 2009)

I would consider something to be block building if you don't put the whole cross in place first; however, I know that a few people do actually make a cross first in ZZ instead of just a line, and thus they are not block building (and are ruining the fun, IMO!). Step 4 of the Petrus method is block building, and is basically the same as in ZZ. So there, the dead horse has been beaten.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 23, 2009)

sorry if this is a bad bump but for JAA to see this isnt new, well for the most part, and for anyone else wondering what the F2L part would look like and need a vid here: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sJfnlP2-0Y&feature=related


----------



## Rubixcubematt (Dec 23, 2009)

puzzlemaster said:


> Jaysammey777 said:
> 
> 
> > This is the JAA method
> ...


:fp, no. U' is an anticlockwise move, which is needed to pair up the edge. Unless you use some weird notation, or did the solve wrong, he had it right the first time.


----------

