# NMCMLL (New Recognition)



## Athefre (May 6, 2010)

06/20/2010 Update: With much help from Gilles Roux, the page has been simplified and is now easier to learn and understand. Also, I added an image for the two-look version at the bottom of the post. Added a credit page here.

http://www.athefre.110mb.com/NMCMLL.html

The problem I've had with other non-matching corner recognition types is that you have to find the stickers that are supposed to be on U. That's fine for a regular Roux solve, or even when you have an opposite block, but it's very difficult to find those stickers with adjacent non-matching blocks. I wanted to find something that worked for all blocks but was still as simple as COLL recognition. So with this new way, you are checking the orientation of the L and R colors, then you look at four specific stickers for each orientation.

Pros:

- Works perfectly for _all_ block types - Normal, Opposite (R2), and Adjacent (R).
- Recognition takes about the same amount of time as the common COLL recognition style.

Cons:

- 83 cases - So it's only useful for Roux solvers using all block types and 2x2 pseudo-layer/face CLL. It wouldn't make sense to learn this if you just want to use COLL for regular Petrus or ZZ.

I probably have some mistakes on the page, please let me know and I will fix them. I have went over the page a couple of times to check. I think I even still have some mistakes on the original NMCMLL page on Gilles' site, and I've rechecked that whole page four or five times.



Spoiler



If you don't like the four spots I chose for each orientation, you can change them to what is easiest for you. I tried to keep it so you are checking as many stickers on U as possible. If you change them, remember that this works by having two "opposite" or "same" stickers on the L color corners and two "opposite" or "same" stickers on the R color corners.



Gilles has proposed a two look version to make it easier to get started learning. I created an image based on his post, some sequences were changed. The image is in the spoiler tag below.



Spoiler


----------



## Escher (May 6, 2010)

This will be useful for 2x2 CLL methinks.


----------



## cincyaviation (May 6, 2010)

Escher said:


> This will be useful for 2x2 CLL methinks.


how exactly would it be?
for some reason i dont really get the concept of non matching blocks either, but sort of i think i know it


----------



## Athefre (May 6, 2010)

cincyaviation said:


> Escher said:
> 
> 
> > This will be useful for 2x2 CLL methinks.
> ...



From Gilles' site:

Normal blocks (What most Roux solvers do):






Non-matching blocks:






Notice that the blocks are different from each other and the corners on U don't match?

Also, I think what Rowan meant is that you could create a "pseudo-first layer". It saves moves, but it has a problem. You have to add about 1.5 moves to the total, because the ending of the solve will be something like U'R2 or UR.


----------



## Escher (May 6, 2010)

Athefre said:


> Also, I think what Rowan meant is that you could create a "pseudo-first layer". It saves moves, but it has a problem. You have to add about 1.5 moves to the total, because the ending of the solve will be something like U'R2 or UR.



Yeppers, that's what I meant. It also works to an extent with EG too...


----------



## cincyaviation (May 6, 2010)

Escher said:


> Athefre said:
> 
> 
> > Also, I think what Rowan meant is that you could create a "pseudo-first layer". It saves moves, but it has a problem. You have to add about 1.5 moves to the total, because the ending of the solve will be something like U'R2 or UR.
> ...



EG, with less moves, 
i scared


----------



## Athefre (May 6, 2010)

Escher said:


> Athefre said:
> 
> 
> > Also, I think what Rowan meant is that you could create a "pseudo-first layer". It saves moves, but it has a problem. You have to add about 1.5 moves to the total, because the ending of the solve will be something like U'R2 or UR.
> ...



I hadn't considered this for EG. I would be interested in seeing if the move count changes any. Compared to not using NMCLL, you have to add .75 to the total for the final R (or L or F or B) adjustment (the final U adjustment wouldn't count, CLL and EG has that too). So can the pseudo first layer make up for that .75?


----------



## DavidWoner (May 6, 2010)

Athefre said:


> I hadn't considered this for EG. I would be interested in seeing if the move count changes any.



Of course the movecount changes. It would be stupid to use a psuedo-layer/face in a situation that wouldn't be better than normal.


----------



## Athefre (May 6, 2010)

I meant "enough".


----------



## Tim Major (May 6, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> Athefre said:
> 
> 
> > I hadn't considered this for EG. I would be interested in seeing if the move count changes any.
> ...



But this way it would be much easier to predict the case, so no recognition time really. Even if this was 1 or 2 more moves, I think if practiced it could be faster. But it does seem to make sense it would be less moves.


----------



## Escher (May 6, 2010)

I've been using an intuitive way of recognising EG/CLL pseudo-blocks, but only for Opposite (R2), not Adjacent (R). I think I should get my act together and learn it properly though


----------



## Athefre (May 14, 2010)

I'm not going to claim that using full non-matching blocks and this recognition system is superior to using the same blocks every time. But, where are the Roux users? Do they not understand it? Do they think I'm just linking to the same page that's on Gilles' site? Did I scare them off?


----------



## masterofthebass (May 14, 2010)

this is pretty similar to hyperorientations, just with the same colors every time. My issue with NMCMLL is recognizing the orientation case, not necessarily the CMLL. I think thats where the main disadvantage comes from using nonmatching blocks.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 14, 2010)

I agree with Dan, I can do CMLL pretty easy with normal recog. or if nothing else 2LCMLL however i have issues with orientation.


----------



## Athefre (May 14, 2010)

masterofthebass said:


> this is pretty similar to hyperorientations, just with the same colors every time. My issue with NMCMLL is recognizing the orientation case, not necessarily the CMLL. I think thats where the main disadvantage comes from using nonmatching blocks.



I don't think this is similar to Hyperorientations at all. Gilles' NMCMLL recognition system came first right? My inspiration was Gilles' NMCMLL (Check L/R orientation, then U color orientation) and COLL (Check U color orientation, then check the pattern of the same four colors). Hyperorientations is more like COLL in that you are first checking the orientation of the U colors then check some stickers (but based on the FUL sticker).

With this new way you first find the orientation of the L and R colors (just as easy as finding the U color orientation in COLL), then you check same four stickers for each orientation (Just like COLL). Example:

COLL Scramble: R'U'RU'R'U2R2UR'URU2R'

U colors at UFL, UFR, RBU, and LBU
Pattern at UBL, UBR, FUL, and FUR

Hyperorientations Scramble: R'U'RU'R'U2R2UR'URU2R'

U colors at UFL, UFR, RBU, and LBU
Pattern at UBL, UBR, FUL, and FUR

Hyperorientations Adjacent Block Scramble: (R')R'U'RU'R'U2R2UR'URU2R'

U colors at.............hold on............UFL, UFR, RBU, and LBU
Pattern at................................................I don't even know how you would check this.

NMCMLL (New) Scramble: (R')R'U'RU'R'U2R2UR'URU2R'

L/R colors at LUF, RUF, BUL, BUR
Pattern at UBL, UBR, FUL, and FUR

Hyperorientations is great for normal and opposite blocks because it's easy to see the U color orientation. But with adjacent blocks, it's much more difficult to find the colors that are supposed to be on U. Do RURU2R'U'RU'R' on your cube and try to find the U colors. You have to check the L color corners and see what colors they have in common then you have to check the R color corners and see what colors _they_ have in common...it just takes too long for a speedsolve. With this new way of recognizing non-matching corners, U color orientation isn't involved at all. I'm having a hard time explaining that this is exactly like COLL, except with L/R colors instead of U colors.

EDIT: My goal when creating this, and the whole point of this recognition system, is to remove the idea of checking the stickers that are supposed to be on U, _because_ it's so difficult to recognize fast. The biggest problem with non-matching blocks has been the corner recognition, that was the reason I made this, I wanted to remove that problem.


----------



## Athefre (May 14, 2010)

Am I just delusional?


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 14, 2010)

no you are not, I dont think there are many roux users that use NMB tho.

For now i dont plan on learning NCMLL or using NMB. Im not fast enough to justify that. At some point if i ever get sub-15ish ill def look into it.


----------



## Athefre (May 14, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> I dont think there are many roux users that use NMB tho.



Definitely. Because there have been three big problems with using all block types:

- It takes a little while to get used to making any block type for the second block. But once you do, it's as easy as doing the same blocks every time.
- Corner Recognition - Which is now fixed.
- LSE edge orientation recognition - The L/R edges can make this take a little more time than with matching blocks. But, same as the second block, this can be gotten used to and will be quick and easy.

I used to use all block types with Gilles' recognition system, it was much more fun than doing the same matching blocks every solve. And I was averaging 43 moves for the total solve. But whether it's faster, I wouldn't be able to say.


----------



## masterofthebass (May 14, 2010)

hmmm, I guess I misunderstood this method. Seems plausible to do, but yeah, there are a lot of cases.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 15, 2010)

Athefre said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont think there are many roux users that use NMB tho.
> ...



Hmm well I plan on looking into this at some point. I really do like the idea.

I need to be able to do blocks sub-10 constantly before i even think about this tho lol.


----------



## Athefre (May 15, 2010)

I was suggested to simplify the colors. Here is what the table would look like with Pink/Purple as the pattern:

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/Athefre/NMCMLLTwoColorPattern.png

Is that easier to understand?

Yes it's 83 cases, but it's the only way I know of where you can recognize all types of non-matching corners as quickly as COLL.


----------



## Kirjava (May 16, 2010)

I'd learn it if I was going to do blocks other than R2, but I'm still getting used to using those for regular solves.

It'll be a while before it's worth me learning the 83 cases. Since you explained some stuff to me though, I've done a lot more nmblox.


----------



## gogozerg (May 17, 2010)

I think we should propose a 2-look strategy for people to give a try at solving corners when side blocks don't match and realize it's not very complicated.

============

*) First step: "Orientation", considering L/R colors (yellow/white) instead of U color.

The table on http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_3.html gives the orientation pattern.

A- R'U'RU'R'UR'UR'U2R
B- LU'R'UL'U'R
C- L'URU'LUR' 
D- R'U'RU'R'U2R
E- UF(RUR'U')2F'
F- UFRUR'U'F' 
G- U2FRUR'U'F'

B and C are symmetrical, E, F and G are similar, A and D are the Sune brothers... very easy to learn.
Now you get a kind of H orientation, with only white/yellow on L/R sides (after U adjustement).

*) Second step: Final permutation

See sequences B1-1, B1-2, B2-1, B2-2, B2-3, B3-1, B3-2 on http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_3j.html

============

Starting from this basic 2 look and 14 sequence strategy, you can progressively learn optimal sequences for every configuration.
You should realize that fast case recognition is possible, based on the position of colors that match (U colors) or that don't match (F/B colors).

Stop talking. Just cube it!


----------



## Athefre (May 17, 2010)

That's what I was planning on working on next, a two look for people to start with. Now I don't have to do the work


----------



## Athefre (Jun 20, 2010)

Update. The page has been simplified and is now easier to understand. New information added to the first post.


----------

