# 42- Method Proposal



## shadowslice e (Aug 16, 2017)

So some of you have probably heard something about this method before. I've been working on it for a while and I've spoken to a few people about it. Let's go through what this method is:



Spoiler: Why 42?



The simplest version of this method takes 42 moves on average using 42 algorithms (also something to do with Deep Thought )- this is discounting any beginner variations





Spoiler: What are the steps?




First Block
Exactly the same as Roux, no fancy CP, EP, CO, EO, BLD tracing etc, just a standard 1x2x3 in DL

Second Block Square+ 1 oriented LL corner
The second block square is again exactly the same as the in Roux. For beginners you will need to build a block in BDR and orient *any* LL corner and place it in UBR then do an R.
For more advanced solvers, the block could be built directly with the R move off.
The corner orientation will frequently be skipped (just under 1/3 of the time)

Conjugated CMLL/BT-redux
This sounds scary but it really isn't. all you do is recognise what case you have and execute an algorithm exactly as you would with COLL, CMLL, TTLL etc. You don't even need any weird tricks for cycle recognition or anything. You don't have to know a thing about Commutators or Conjugates. You just recognise by looking at the sticker in RDB and then what CLLesque pattern of orientation and what opp/same colours there are.
If you know all the algorithms for any CxLL, you already know all the necessary algorithms for this step so it is simply a matter of learning new cases to associate with that algorithm.

Conjugated CMLL/BT-redux cases (Word version)
Conjugated CMLL/BT-redux cases (PDF version)
*BT-redux is a slightly more general and advanced

Last 7 Edges (L7E)
This step is very similar to LSE in roux and there are many ways to do this. my personal favourites are:
EO+FR: This is quite similar to EOLR with Roux where you combine 4a+4b so you solve EO for all edges while solving the FR edge. This essentially reduces the step down to oriented LSE which is fast and easy.
2opp EO: this could be considered slightly more advanced than the previous but only fractionally more. You solve any 2 edges which are opposite each other (so whatever slots are in ULUR or UFUB (or even DFDB but i'm not sure I can recommend this).

Of course you can always do this algorithmically like in LMCF or WaterRoux but I don't find much improvement (at least movecountwise)
I will be releasing an "alg" set for EO+FR or 2opp EO (or both) soon.







Spoiler: Pros




Ergonomic movesets
Very low movecount (especially for the number of algs)
Very low algorithm count (especially for the number of moves)
Relatively simple recognition
Easy obvious extension (especially compared to Roux)
Can look proportionally further into the intuitive part of the solve than most methods
Almost every benefit Roux has






Spoiler: Cons




Multiple cases per algorithm can be difficult to get used to.
Lower chance of lucky solves do to more of the cube being solved in final steps where lucky cases are more beneficial (if you can really call this a disadvantage as it leads to much more consistent solves)






Spoiler: Additional observations/extensions/improvements




If you use TCMLL then you don't even have to orient the corner with SB
Algorithms for each "set of cases" are not optimised for this method and just use CMLLs/COLLs from other methods so there is room for further optimisation
Any potential Roux techniques can be applied to this method
Nonlinear blocks may be more practical to implement than in Roux or FreeFOP etc because there is less to blockbuild at a time
NMB is much easier than with Roux as the recognition presented above is not as affected- this mean that you can easily build any of the 4 possible SBsquare which will make it easier to plan further into the solve when a solver becomes reasonably proficient at FB
It is possible that the solver could use F/B moves rather than L/R moves which could lead to better blocks or better L7E etc
This could also be a reasonably effective method for 2x2






Spoiler: Video













Spoiler: Video tutorials/descriptions






Spoiler: BT-redux/conjugated CMLL recognition













Spoiler: OH L7E













Spoiler: Additional links




Wiki page
BT-redux/Conjugated CMLL (Word)

BT-redux/Conjugated CMLL (PDF)
42 playlist
Reddit proposal


----------



## Sion (Aug 16, 2017)

I dunno.. I might try to switch, I love the number 42!


----------



## Dr_Detonation (Aug 17, 2017)

The number is just a coincidence, right...? Right?


----------



## greentgoatgal (Aug 17, 2017)

Maybe I'll learn because I love the whole 42/Big Thought bit  Sticking with CFOP as my main though


----------



## I_<3_SCS (Aug 17, 2017)

But the answer and the question can't exist in the same universe????


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2017)

Dr_Detonation said:


> The number is just a coincidence, right...? Right?


Maybe

And maybe this is just a coincidence as well...


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2017)

Video detailing my current method for recognising step 3 (BT-redux or conjugated CMLL)


----------



## efattah (Aug 17, 2017)

Seems like a nice compromise method, but I see a problem with the later step, solve FR and orient the other edges. Crafto and I tried that in one of our WaterRoux variants, and there was no way to recognize edge orientation. Solving DR (rather than FR) and orienting the edges can be done (180 degree offset), but the 90 degree offset of the FR edge confounds the edge orientation recognition. Perhaps you found a way around that-- I would love to learn more if you have solved it. There were some workarounds, like forcing the FR edge into a specific location/orientation then examining the other pieces, but it was cumbersome...


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2017)

efattah said:


> Seems like a nice compromise method, but I see a problem with the later step, solve FR and orient the other edges. Crafto and I tried that in one of our WaterRoux variants, and there was no way to recognize edge orientation. Solving DR (rather than FR) and orienting the edges can be done (180 degree offset), but the 90 degree offset of the FR edge confounds the edge orientation recognition. Perhaps you found a way around that-- I would love to learn more if you have solved it. There were some workarounds, like forcing the FR edge into a specific location/orientation then examining the other pieces, but it was cumbersome...


There will be a video detailing this as well as quite a few other things about the method (keep checking the playlist to see when it goes up) that I will be posting in the next few weeks (I tried to get the bare bones resources out there before announcing but I will be fleshing out and making more over the coming weeks).


----------



## Arc (Aug 17, 2017)

Do you think it would be too difficult to use this on a case by case basis with Roux?


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2017)

Arc said:


> Do you think it would be too difficult to use this on a case by case basis with Roux?


Do you mean solve to F2B-1, see if you know the case and solve otherwise continue to full F2B?

Because if so then yes. My reasoning is that you have some set up for this case and if you focus on recognition then it wouldn't be very easy to continue the lookahead. This was one of my reasons for considering this a method seperate to roux.

@efattah what do you mean by this being a "compromise" method?


----------



## Arc (Aug 17, 2017)

shadowslice e said:


> Do you mean solve to F2B-1, see if you know the case and solve otherwise continue to full F2B?
> 
> Because if so then yes. My reasoning is that you have some set up for this case and if you focus on recognition then it wouldn't be very easy to continue the lookahead. This was one of my reasons for considering this a method seperate to roux.
> 
> @efattah what do you mean by this being a "compromise" method?


No I was thinking just when the situation arose where you got the setup for free while solving the first square of SB.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2017)

Arc said:


> No I was thinking just when the situation arose where you got the setup for free while solving the first square of SB.


If you know all the cases then yes it's posiible to use it but given how often you skip the setup for free you may just as well use 42 all the time.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 18, 2017)

I had a few people ask me how L7E could be done OH so here a video


----------



## TDM (Aug 18, 2017)

shadowslice e said:


> I had a few people ask me how L7E could be done OH so here a video


Woah this is cool


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 19, 2017)

If anyone want videos on any specific parts of the method be sure to post it here or PM me on any of my accounts and I'll make a video on it in the near future.


----------



## shadowslice e (Jan 19, 2018)

I finally got around to learning the cases for Beginner's 42 yesterday.


----------



## shadowslice e (Jan 30, 2018)

Beginner's 42 tutorial part 1


----------



## Reed Merrill (Jan 30, 2018)

Looks pretty cool! It's nice that it's so similar to roux. Is advanced 42 your main method now, or do you want it to be?


----------



## shadowslice e (Jan 31, 2018)

Reed Merrill said:


> Looks pretty cool! It's nice that it's so similar to roux. Is advanced 42 your main method now, or do you want it to be?


Atm roux is still my main method. I am in the process of learning the cases for vanilla 42 (so far I've done the T and O sets) and it is definitely possible I will switch in the near to mid future especially if my times are the same with both methods.

I will also be releasing recognition videos for each set of 6 cases as I learn them (so expect the T cases soon).



Spoiler



The recognition is near identical to 3 sticker recognition in CMLL so it's actually pretty easy- you only have to take into account U layer stickers as well.


----------



## Solvador Cubi (Feb 1, 2018)

shadowslice e said:


> Beginner's 42 tutorial part 1



The video mentions the beginners variation uses 13 algs instead of 42. Can you point out what those 13 are? 
I see the doc, but it seems to show even more than 42, so I don't get it yet.

thanks.

-= Solvador Cubi


----------



## shadowslice e (Feb 1, 2018)

Solvador Cubi said:


> The video mentions the beginners variation uses 13 algs instead of 42. Can you point out what those 13 are?
> I see the doc, but it seems to show even more than 42, so I don't get it yet.
> 
> thanks.
> ...


Oh yes. 7 of them are OCLL doing normal OCLL things.
These are the 6 cases you'll need to learn

I will be updating it and turning it into a text tutorial eventually but it functions reasonably well as a cheat sheet for now. They are also the cases which I demonstrate in the later half of the video.


----------



## Solvador Cubi (Feb 1, 2018)

Thanks so much, I'll try it out.


----------



## Solvador Cubi (Feb 12, 2018)

Using those 6 L5C algs makes sense for me now, thanks!
so it looks like the avg movecount using the 13 algs, would be about 18 moves.

I'm also looking forward to you posting an "alg set" for EO+FR or 2opp EO.

thanks for you work on this.. keep it coming!


----------



## shadowslice e (Feb 13, 2018)

First video of a series which go through recognition for each case of BTR


Spoiler


----------



## alexela (Apr 5, 2018)

Really a GOOD method. 28 STM


Spoiler: Roux BT-redux - 28 STM



y' x2 // Inspection
R U F' // First Square (3/3)
M2 U2 M B // First Block (4/7)
U' R2 // Second Square (2/9)
U F' L F L' U2 L' U2 l // CMLL (BTredux L5C) (9/18)
U2 r' // Second Block (2/20)
U M' U M' U M2 U2 M2 // LSE (8/28)
https://alg.cubing.net/?alg=y-_x2__//_Inspection R_U_F-_//_First_Square_(3/3) M2_U2_M_B_//_First_Block_(4/7) U-_R2_//_Second_Square_(2/9) U_F-_L_F_L-_U2_L-_U2_l_//_CMLL_(BTredux_L5C)_(9/18) U2_r-_//_Second_Block_(2/20) U_M-_U_M-_U_M2_U2_M2_//_LSE_(8/28)_&setup=L_R2_D-_U2_B2_F2_R2_B2_F2_D_U_L-_F-_R_U-_L-_D2_F-_R_U-

Week 172 Scrambles
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1482303418674425/?ref=bookmarks


----------



## _zoux (Jun 30, 2018)

Are you from ukraine?


alexela said:


> Really a GOOD method. 28 STM
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Roux BT-redux - 28 STM
> ...


----------



## alexela (Jul 1, 2018)

_zoux said:


> Are you from ukraine?


Yes (Так)


----------



## Sion (Jul 1, 2018)

I want to switch from columns to 42 but it looks a little bit complicated. any good way to transition?


----------



## alexela (Jul 1, 2018)

Sion said:


> I want to switch from columns to 42 but it looks a little bit complicated. any good way to transition?


Try Roux (42 - its variant)


----------



## _zoux (Jul 1, 2018)

УРАААААА! Дай будь ласка свій діскорд якщо в тебе є 8)


alexela said:


> Yes (Так)


----------



## _zoux (Jul 1, 2018)

Sion said:


> I want to switch from columns to 42 but it looks a little bit complicated. any good way to transition?


Since you do collumns i recommend trying SSC. And about 42, do roux first for a bit, and learn CMLL, (since 42 is a roux variant) and now, learn 2LBTR, and finnaly start learning full recognition.


----------



## alexela (Jul 1, 2018)

_zoux said:


> УРАААААА! Дай будь ласка свій діскорд якщо в тебе є 8)


Discord немає


----------

