# M2 vs Free-Style Edges



## philkt731 (Dec 18, 2007)

I've been wondering about this comparison for a while now trying to see which really is faster. Since each requires pretty much the same memo (in a way both orientation and permutation), to see which is faster we have to look at execution. 

M2: 
Pros- No thinking, can plow through, short algs: average of about 3 or 4 moves predetermined setup, followed by a fast M2 move then undo, 
Cons- 2 cycle: means "twice as much work," side effects with the centers, breaking into new cycles requires two more algs, some tricky flipped M slice cases

Free-Style:
Pros- Not including setup, has a fast alg, 3 cycle means 2 solved at a time ("half as much work") and no side effects, no breaking into new cycles
Cons- Much thinking done for setups (and undoing), long setups, some tricky cases requiring orientation algs and/or 2 2-cycles

So which do you think is faster?


----------



## AvGalen (Dec 18, 2007)

No thinking has been pretty much proven (Fridrich) to be faster.

So I would say M2 is faster in the beginning, but with a lot of training/experience Free-Style will also become "without thinking" and will become faster.


----------



## malcolm (Dec 18, 2007)

If you use turbo setups are extremely easy, but i have trouble working out which alg to use. I use EO then EP, EO is normally only 2 algs and take me about 10 seconds, then EP is very fast and setups are easy after you've done it for a while, and its 7 moves stm per alg, and an average of 1 setup move, so thats 4.5 moves per edge, so 49.5 moves on cube per average, as normally at least one edge is permuted. EO is 16+12 moves stm, = 28 plus maybe 4 setup moves = 32, giving a total of 81.5 moves. I think turbo is better, but its too hard for me. M2 has the advantage of success rate.


----------



## Pedro (Dec 18, 2007)

just do "normal" edge cycles with no EO 

you gotta "think" less than pure free-style, just setup the stickers and do the cycles


----------



## LarsN (Dec 18, 2007)

Pedro said:


> just do "normal" edge cycles with no EO
> 
> you gotta "think" less than pure free-style, just setup the stickers and do the cycles



I've recently switched to doing just that. Setups are only slightly more tricky then the setups for EP after EO, and for the tricky setups I use commutators instead. I've found that skipping EO also eased the memo a lot.


----------



## alexc (Dec 18, 2007)

I was thinking about posting a thread like this, except I would have done M2 vs. TuRBo. I am pondering about seriously practicing TuRBo. I think TuRBo has some advantages over M2 like freestyle. (No side effects, solves 2 pieces at once.) But I think TuRBo has some advantages over freestyle, too. (Easier setups, doesn't matter what orientation the pieces are in.) The hard part about TuRBo is knowing what case you have. But I think that if you practice a lot with TuRBo it can be just as fast or maybe even faster than M2. What does everyone think about this?


----------



## Lucas Garron (Dec 18, 2007)

M2 and TuRBo are freestyle, with different buffers. You're just restricting yourself to certain sypes of commutators.

I decided to skip over M2 and go for freestyle; I practice a lot of commutatoring without blidfold... however, I DNF a lot. But I'm not sure I would do better with 3-cycle.

M2 with M-slice comms is very tempting, though; it's just annoying that it uses a different buffer...
It seems like the best tradeoff, though, like what Mike is using for r2 on 4x4x4 (cogratulations on the average!).


----------



## LarsN (Dec 19, 2007)

I think this is the fun part about blindfoldcubing. Thinking up algs that fits you best. At the moment I'm 3-cycling stickers using free setups, sometimes I use commutators, sometimes U-perms and sometimes I use an edge only OLL (OLL 57 is a really fast 3-cycle). So I guess it's a mix of freestyle, commutators and TuRBo, nothing is proven to be the best so go with the style that fits you.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Dec 19, 2007)

Lucas Garron said:


> It seems like the best tradeoff, though, like what Mike is using for r2 on 4x4x4 (cogratulations on the average!).



Thanks - I've started using it on 5x5x5 as well. It appears to be helping my accuracy there too! (I've been 50% on it since I've been using it - 3 out of 6.) It seems like part of the help is that there's a little less thinking, so my overall memorization stays more secure.

This approach seems easier on the big cubes than on the 3x3x3 to me, though - maybe just because it feels like there's more freedom to find commutators on the bigger cube. That may just be my faulty perception, though. I haven't practiced commutators enough on the 3x3x3 to get very good at it.


----------



## joelwong (Aug 3, 2010)

M2 is good for beginners, freestyle for experts. I am a noob


----------



## Edward (Aug 3, 2010)

joelwong said:


> M2 is good for beginners, freestyle for experts. *I am a noob*



Yes you are. 
You just bumped a ~3 year old thread with nothing relevant to say.


----------



## JeffDelucia (Aug 3, 2010)

joelwong said:


> M2 is good for beginners, freestyle for experts. I am a noob



Don't bump threads this old. especially when you have no useful info to give.


----------



## Gaétan Guimond (Aug 11, 2010)

*M slice & method*

M2: 
Pros- No thinking, can plow through, short algs: average of about 3 or 4 moves predetermined setup, followed by a fast M2 move then undo, 
Cons- 2 cycle: means "twice as much work," side effects with the centers, breaking into new cycles requires two more algs, some tricky flipped M slice cases


So which do you think is faster?[/QUOTE]

I love the bld M slice 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Wt49ckCU8


----------



## iRiLLL (Aug 11, 2010)

I still using this algo

DF-UL-UR = U M’ U2 M U
DF-UR-UL = U’ M’ U2 M U’
DF-UL-RU = y U’ L2 U M’ U’ L2 U M y’
DF-RU-UL = y M’ U’ L2 U M U’ L2 U y’
DF-UR-LU = y’ U R2 U’ M’ U R2 U’ M y
DF-LU-UR = y’ M’ U R2 U’ M U R2 U’ y
DF-LU-RU = M U’ M U2 M’ U’ M’
DF-RU-LU = M U M U2 M’ U M’


----------



## yoruichi (Aug 12, 2010)

3 cycle ftw


----------



## MrMoney (Aug 12, 2010)

Those are really fast ones which everyone should learn. There are lots more, but then again that would make it more freestyle causing more thinking which some people do not like.


----------

