# At last, ZZ-D method has been COMPLETED!



## KimOrbit (Jan 25, 2012)

Hi every body.
I have completed ZZ-D's method and I am proud that I can be the first one who has done it fast for speedcubing. 

Here is my documentation with every thing needed for using my method. I have explained how to recognize each case, and how to perform it fast.

*Please read this documentation before sharing your Idea. Im sure most of the questions are answered in the documentation.*

please feel free to ask me any question about my method by the contact information released in the documentation.

http://www.mediafire.com/?nkgp5lz915ltujf

Well, Name of this method is ZZ-Orbit too. then my last method will be destroyed forever. forget about that  there were some problems in my last method.

BUT ITS COMPLETED ZZ-ORBIT. means completed ZZ method


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 25, 2012)

ZZ was already complete.

What you call 'ZZLL' is really 2GLL.

For everyone else; new stuff here is CPF2L.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 25, 2012)

May I see an example solve? Like how you would solve it...


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 25, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> ZZ was already complete.
> 
> What you call 'ZZLL' is really 2GLL.
> 
> For everyone else; new stuff here is CPF2L.



well, to correct that I should say "ZZ-D has been completed!!!!" 

and I will share an example solve soon


----------



## a small kitten (Jan 25, 2012)

What do you average?


----------



## Specs112 (Jan 25, 2012)

You invented a new method that isn't actually a new method, gave it a sensationalist title, don't use proper grammar, and don't say anything about whether you're even good with it.

That's cute.


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 25, 2012)

Example Solve:
scramble: F2 D2 L2 F2 D F2 D' R2 D L2 U' B L D B' R U2 L B F2 L U (generated by prisma)

EOLine: R D B R D2 F'

Left 3x2x1 Block: U R' U' L2 U' L2 U' R' L2 U2 L'

Right 2x2x1 Block: R' U R2 U R2 U R2

Set up F2L pair: R' U' R' U' R2 U R U R2 U R' U

Corner permutation: U' R U' R'

ZZLL: U2 R' U R2 U R' U R' U' R U' R' U' R U R U' R' U

using 59 moves.
------------------------------------------------------------

well, thank you for your Ideas. And to talk about average, Im not an speedcuber now. My finger's speed is slow. my normal average is 35 seconds. but using this method my average of 5 was 32. but Again I say, My finger's speed is slow.

And I have a question. how my method is not a new method??  I have solved the missing link 

and about "sensationalist title", you are true  It was because of happiness and nothing else. It was the first sentence that came to my mind in that time 

I need 2 weeks to completely master this method. after that time I will share my averages with this method. currently we are 3 speedcubers using this method in my city


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 25, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> And I have a question. how my method is not a new method??  I have solved the missing link


 
If someone generates algs for CLL+1, that doesn't make it a new method. That makes it a documented method. 

What you have done is is provided CPF2L documentation, and misnamed some things.


----------



## a small kitten (Jan 25, 2012)

> Example Solve:
> scramble: F2 D2 L2 F2 D F2 D' R2 D L2 U' B L D B' R U2 L B F2 L U (generated by prisma)
> 
> EOLine: R D B R D2 F'
> ...



This is a lot number of moves coming from a "method" that capitalizes on efficiency.


----------



## Escher (Jan 25, 2012)

a small kitten said:


> This is a lot number of moves coming from a "method" that capitalizes on efficiency.


 
I don't understand how his one example solve has anything to do with the methods potential which has anything to do with 'move count'.


----------



## a small kitten (Jan 25, 2012)

I'm just commenting on the 12 move setup for a pair. That's a lot of moves. Of course, this has little to do with the method's "potential".


----------



## mDiPalma (Jan 25, 2012)

only 56 moves because of cancellations

but im pretty sure COLL and EPLL is more efficient than all of this.


----------



## emolover (Jan 25, 2012)

mDiPalma said:


> only 56 moves because of cancellations


 
I can get that fairly easy with CFOP. I also just did a 39 move Petrus solve so 56 moves is not efficient.


----------



## mDiPalma (Jan 25, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> Example Solve:
> scramble: F2 D2 L2 F2 D F2 D' R2 D L2 U' B L D B' R U2 L B F2 L U (generated by prisma)
> 
> EOLine: R D B R D2 F'
> ...



you can replace that with

U' R' U2 R U R' U2 R U R' U R U' R' <<COLL
U M2 U' M U2 M' U M2 U <<EPLL

which saves 3 moves, i think.


----------



## Pyjam (Jan 26, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> Example Solve:
> EOLine: R D B R D2 F'
> Left 3x2x1 Block: U R' U' L2 U' L2 U' R' L2 U2 L'


From there, maybe it would be shorter if you complete the right block this way :
R' U R U2 R2 U' R' U' R
How do you finish in this case ?


----------



## Raiz (Jan 26, 2012)

Nice! this is pretty cool!


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 26, 2012)

Good job man, your hard work is greatly appreciated. Don't worry about the haters, the point is that you completed the missing link which is awesome.


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 26, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> Good job man, your hard work is greatly appreciated. Don't worry about the haters, the point is that you completed the missing link which is awesome.


 
thank so much!! at last some one has seen the point 

PLEASE NOTE that I have written "A new approach to ZZ-D" well, I mean my method is all about ZZ-D.

*If you dont want to change your method, or if you want to ignore a new method, thats your problem. please dont push problems on a method!!*

about that example solve: my example solve was done in 1 AM. then I couldn't really even see the stickers because I hadn't slept for 2 days to complete this method. I was too tired. but I did it for you to see it. If you OPEN YOUR EYES you will see that its pure ZZ. only 0-4 additional moves are added to complete the missing link.

My method is ALL ABOUT MISSING LINK. its completely about permuting corners. pages 7-18 are describing how to do pure ZZ-D. in that step when you have your F2L pair set upped you need to do at least 4 moves to put that pair inside and this method is done by 4-10 moves in my documentation!! IT IS NOTHING?? DOING ZZ-D'S MISSING LINK WITH ONLY 0-6 MOVES. ITS NOTHING??

and then my method. I have found problems inside ZZ-D and I have solved them. I have reduced cases from 30 to 6. AND ITS FANTASTIC. you can permute all your corners with only 0-5 moves in this step of my method. they are completely described in pages 19-23. *THESE 4 PAGES ARE MY METHOD DESCRIPTIONS.*

well, next part, ZZLL. i have searched all the internet and I could find only 1 good source for ZBLL. here is that source ZBLL Algorithms v2.57. but because All my attempts was to make 2-Gen last layer then I have completed my method and I have shared 2-Gen Last layer algorithms. WAS IT BAD THAT I HAVE GAVE YOU FREE ALGORITHMS THAT CAN HELP YOU SOLVE YOUR LAST LAYER 1 LOOKED?? then I can remove it if you want, then you should search all of the internet to find those algorithms.

last part. I have written "Its not a part of my method" and its only a sharing of algorithms. then it is not related to my method. Its exactly my last documentation.


Well, If you want to do something easy and with less algorithms then _* YOU ARE LAZY *_. an easy case for those lazy people. why you should work on Rubiks cube?? that needs lots of time. If you are lazy then you can put the cube away  and if you want less algorithms then why do you want to learn 40 algorithms for COLL and 4 algorithms for EPLL?? in that step you can simply do 7 OLL cases and only 21 PLL cases. it will be reduced to 28 cases. Isn't it better for those lazy people??


........PLEASE THINK BEFORE TALKING........


----------



## nickvu2 (Jan 26, 2012)

KimOrbit, you've obviously done a crap load of work to put this together and I am very grateful that you are willing to share it. I'll go through it when I get some time. 

It looks like you're fairly new to the forum so it might help that you understand that it's not rare for someone to start a thread saying, "I've invented a new method!" and it ends up just being COLL, or keyhole, or a bad variation on a well know method, or just gibberish, or whatever. So it's only natural that many are skeptical, and unfortunately unnecessarily harsh, when people come making big claims. And it makes sense that you feel deflated after investing so much time into this and then don't get the response you were expecting. But hold your head up. If what you presented works well, people will begin adopting it and you will be recognized for making a big contribution. But that takes time, and none of us are going to abandon our main methods or commit to learning a bunch of algs before scrutinizing a new idea. So be patient as we tinker with it and challenge it and see if it holds up. If it's as strong as you think it is, we'll eventually figure it out.

asmallkitten, I consider you an authority on ZZ-d and would like to hear your opinion after you get a chance to look though the doc. 

Viva la ZZ! XD


----------



## Pyjam (Jan 26, 2012)

Nobody hates you. We appreciate the effort, for the most.

It's just that you don't sleep for two days to complete your documentation (great work) but you chose an example in 5 minutes which gives a poor demonstration of the possibilities of your method.
You said the cost of the missing link is 0-6 moves, but your example is 59 moves long (52 with cancellations).
Here are three ways to do better (in spoiler).
For this reason, I asked you about the following if you complete the right block with R' U R U2 R2 U' R' U' R, if possible.

Also, I suggest you come back with half a dozen of good examples (and include them in the documentation).

I repeat, great work and nice documentation. Congrats.



Spoiler



ZZ-A = 41 HTM
R D B R D2 F'
U R' U' L2 U' L2 U' R' L2 U2 L'
R' U R U2 R2 U' R' U' R
U R U R2 U' R2 U' R2 U2 R U' R U' R' U2
Last 24 moves in <R,U>

ZZ + COLL + EPLL = 48 HTM (3 moves could be cancelled)
R D B R D2 F'
U R' U' L2 U' L2 U' R' L2 U2 L'
R' U R U2 R2 U'
R' U R U R' U R2 U2 R' U' R U' R' (back AntiSune + Front AntiSune = COLL T)
R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2 U2 (PLL U)
Last 31 moves in <R,U>

ZZ + OLL + PLL = 48 HTM
R D B R D2 F'
U R' U' L2 U' L2 U' R' L2 U2 L'
R' U R U2 R2 U' R' U' R
U r U R' U' r' F R F' (OLL T)
R2 u' R U' R U R' u R2 y R U' R' U' (PLL G)


----------



## nitay6669 (Jan 26, 2012)

i cant see how this is a solution...
the point was to do it just after the first block, and mehtods for first making the left one, then making half the right one then permute already exists... CPLS...
and the closest thing that exists so far is the kind of ZZD in stachu's site... which is 6-7 moves...
as far as i can tell this is just a weird kind of CPLS?


----------



## tx789 (Jan 26, 2012)

you no r u 2 gen isn't that good to memeriose and it would b better for one hand


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 26, 2012)

well, thank you for your replies. I got disappointed when I saw every one telling me its too bad to use.

and Again, I should say that I have completed main ZZ-D's idea. which you should build 1 2x2x1 block on each side and then permute corners while creating left side's 3x2x1 block. the algorithms I have inserted are the most optimal one, all of them are 5-8 moves.
but I have changed that idea to permute all the corners during insertion of last f2l pair. It will help you to reduce cases to 6 cases, then its better to recognize, and easier to learn. but there is also 6 parity cases to help you go throw your cube If you have done some thing wrong. well, complete ZZ-Orbit has only 12 algorithms which 6 of them are only mirrored of other 6 ones.

Well, after every thing, I know that I have made some thing interesting as my post's topic, and it was all because that Zborowski has appreciated my method. Cause I am in contact with him using EMail.

And isn't solving a method that no one has done it before, a worthy thing?? No one had a documentation on how to do ZZ-D on fly. but Today after learning full cases of ZZ-D (obviously my own algorithms) I made an average of 20 with my method and I got 21 seconds. its notable that my normal average of 20 was 32 seconds 2 weeks before using a method between Fredrich and CLL+ELL. ( here i say this for those who was talking to me about COLL, My main cube was 2x2x2 for 2 years and I have mastered all of those cases both in 2x2x2 and 3x3x3. well Be sure I have thought about that too. )

I dont say my method is GOOD and I dont say my method worth learning. I only say that my method is completed form of ZZ-D which was an unsolved method. those who said "and the closest thing that exists so far is the kind of ZZD in stachu's site... which is 6-7 moves..." how this method is solved and Zborowski himself doesn't know that his method is solved?? then dont fake. thank some thing like ZZ?? I didn't say there were nothing. just try this algorith: <L U' R' U L' U' R> which is the first algorithm that I have learned in world of Rubik's cube and permute your corners with this. then my first solves was with all edges flipped correctly and all corners permuted correctly, I can give you sample solves, but does it means that my method was ZZ-D??? there is lots of algorithms to permute your corners during each step you want, but This is all I know about ZZ-D "It was done before, but no one could solve it virtually on fly" then it was not fast. but actually the method of recognition that I have released is a method that I use in 2x2x2. and I have added looking ahead tips. then you can do it on a fly same as me. cause now I can do it my self.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this text was written by Zborowski and I have just copied it from my mail box:
When it comes to zz-d there is a small problem - there is a missing link which *nobody has solved yet *
The idea of zz-d is as follows:
1. EOLine
2. 1x2x2 on the left
3. finish 1x2x3 on the left and at the same time remaining six corners permutation (only two additional moves is needed on average - *nobody knows how to do that in flight;* this is the missing link...); after this step you have two-move-generation situation
4. 1x2x2 on the right
5. finish 1x2x3 on the right (at this point you have got f2l with oriented edges (cross) and permuted corners
6. finish last layer (permute edges and orient corners - these situations are really nice to remember and make)

short characteristic:
1. small number of moves on average - *47 HTM*
2. small number of algorithms - 88 for the last step; steps 1-5 intuitively
3. ergonomics is perfect - since step 2 we use RUL moves, since step 4 we use RU moves

When it comes to permute all corners during insertion of last f2l pair, I call this variant zz-e, but I regard this as introduction to zz-d.
*I have never prepared algorithms for zz-e *
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
well, every thing is visible for me, I dont know this about you. I can't understand how ZZ-D has been done before me while Zborowski (father of this method) doesn't know about this. (*then please dont be faker*). and move counts, I have done my example in 56 moves (52 with cancellation) which is only 9 moves more than what Zborowski expect for *AVERAGE* move counts. when that comes to average it will goes up and comes down. then doing only 5 moves more than what Zborowski expect is great while you are tired of not sleeping for 2 days.

and you are true, Im new to this forum. But I am addicted to forums. I take place in lots of forums on internet. and there is always one rule: "be polite, and think before talking" isn't that rule available in this forum?? I have came here and I have name my post "At last ZZ-D method has been completed". is it fake?? i think nope. it was not complete and I have completed it myself. then this title was 100% real. wasn't?? tell me and I will remove my post and I will remove my document and I will stop speedcubing. just prove your Ideas.

And for those who made me disappointed because of new ideas: "Wait until next year, I have started my hard practices to perform a sub-10 record with my method. after that I think there will be a shame on all of you."


----------



## Cubenovice (Jan 26, 2012)

Another rule on forums is that you should try to use proper punctuation, grammer and some structure in your posts 
Your chaotic style of writing doesn't help to get your point across.

I'll have a look later, here at work my PC goes berserk over that upload site...
Don't spend to much time on haters, cubing is supposed to be fun; do what *you* like.

Just post a series of example solves (a single one is never a good representation) perhaps even comparing some LL methods.
Video would be cool too.

Happy cubing!


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 26, 2012)

thank you so much  and I am sorry for my English mistakes, because im Persian and I have learned English from books and videos  then there are some problems in my English and they are not my willing, they are what I have learned from English. but again sorry for my English. we are human we human can have mistakes.

another solve example: (here its for those who loves few moves in speedcubing)
scramble: D B2 D R2 B2 U L2 U B2 U' L D B2 R F R' B U2 R F2 D' (generated by prisma)
EOLine: D F R' B L2 D (6 moves)
Left 3x2x1 Block: R2 D2 R' U R L' U R' D2 L' (10 moves)
Right 2x2x1 Block: U2 D R D2 L' F2 L D (8 moves)
Set up F2L pair: U2 R U2 R' U2 (5 moves)
corner permutation: R U2 L' U R' U' L (7 moves) (only 4 moves to permute corners. because you need to do at least 3 moves to put that pair inside)
ZZLL: B2 U R L' B2 R' L U B2 (9 moves)

*move counts: 45*

Is 45 moves good??

here I want to make you laught  then Im joking in this part.
If you want to solve your cube in few moves then take part in fewest moves tournaments. it will be good for you  speedcubing is not a place for few moves. Im not a Fridrich user. I know only 7 PLLs and only 10 OLLs and All the time I used block building and I have never used F2L. (Of-course after mastering the layer by layer method) but I have heared Fridrich's average moves are more than 65. you are using Fridrich method and saying my solve (52 moves) is bad??

Here is a fewest moves for you that I have done 4 or 5 month ago: (It tooks me around 2 month to find this solution for this scramble)
scramble: R F U2 R2 L2 U' D' B2 F2 R' L' F' U D2 F2 D L2 R2 B2 U' R' U' D2 R L' (25 moves)
solution: F B' D2 L2 F2 L' F' R' B U' B2 D' B' U2 L' U2 D2 R2 (18 moves)
then It means I must spend 2 months to solve a rubiks cube with sub-20 moves to solve a cube in tournament??  but I was joking.



tx789 said:


> you no r u 2 gen isn't that good to memeriose and it would b better for one hand



I forgot to tell, He is true. 2-Gen algorithms are not good for some cases. for example if a formula has lots of R2 then its not good for two hand solving. or <R U'> repeatedly. I my self am learning both 2-gen and 3-gen or 4-gen algorithms. it helps me choose best one that fits my hands better.


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 26, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> finish 1x2x3 on the left and at the same time remaining six corners permutation (only two additional moves is needed on average - *nobody knows how to do that in flight;* this is the missing link...);


 
People seem to think I'm a 'hater' for pointing out that this is the only new documented thing here. Getting attacked for being realistic is not cool.

By the way, this 'missing link' was already filled in with CPLS.


----------



## Godmil (Jan 26, 2012)

Hmm... well done completing your project.


----------



## DYGH.Tjen (Jan 26, 2012)

Hi KimOrbit, does this look like it can solve the 'missing link'?


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 27, 2012)

DYGH.Tjen said:


> Hi KimOrbit, does this look like it can solve the 'missing link'?


 
well, It do the same. but it has lots of algorithms (around 80) that cannot be done really fast. I told you that the missing link was solved, but not fast. I have found some new results. you dont need even to learn parity cases. you just need to learn 6 algorithms of normal cases. then you can do CPLL, missing-link, ZZ-D or what every you want to call it. 

I think 6 cases are better than even 7 cases. because its easier to recognize. and its my reason that I have changed ZZ-D's idea to this method.

 so simple. today, I can do corner permutation (or what every you want to call it) really fast. It takes me only 1 second to recognize. well, every thing is getting better for me 



Kirjava said:


> People seem to think I'm a 'hater' for pointing out that this is the only new documented thing here. Getting attacked for being realistic is not cool.
> 
> By the way, this 'missing link' was already filled in with CPLS.


 
was already filled, but not fast. were you willing to learn CPLS?? i guess nope. because that is slow.


----------



## Cubenovice (Jan 27, 2012)

Be careful who you mention “fewest moves” to 
I may hijack your thread.
Currently I cannot check your 18 move solution but I sure will later this week.
If you still have your notes on how you got to this solution please let me know. (Or perhaps just a breakdown on the steps taken)
Looking forward to seeing you compete in the FMC competitions on this forum and on fmc.mustcube.net
In the forum you have the 1 hour time limit but on the 2nd website you can spend up to a week in the “classic FMC” event.

[nitpicking]
It doesn’t matter that your English is not perfect, we’re not all native English speakers anyway.
But using proper punctuation and structuring of content are not related to how good you are at a specific language.
[/nitpicking]

Will try to download you page this weekend and have a look at it.
I think it is always interesting to see something new and then let time be the judge of how good / valuable it is for cubing.
Pun intended


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 27, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> was already filled, but not fast. were you willing to learn CPLS?? i guess nope. because that is slow.


 
Where is the evidence that shows that this is fast and that CPLS is slow?


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 28, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Where is the evidence that shows that this is fast and that CPLS is slow?


 
well, there is no evidence on that. that is my personal Idea about that method, since most of my cubing life has been spent on 2x2x2 cube which mean it has only corners, then I can understand every thing about corners really fast. and all I have found about doing CPLS and its recognition was some thing hard to do for me. well, I have spent most of my time understanding corners, and I think at least I should be able to recognize CPLS cases fast. but I couldn't and I can't and Im trying and Im sure I wont be able to do that in the future too.

but now, I am recognizing my 6 cases, in sub-1 second and It means I have all my corners permuted after all of my F2Ls now.

I dont know what do you want, and what can you do. but I can do this step in sub-1 second, which means Its fast.

And I am thinking about making a tutorial video for my method (from EOLine to ZZLL) and I think you can wait until releasing that video, and you will be able to see that I am doing that step fast.


----------



## nickvu2 (Jan 28, 2012)

Here are my initial thoughts after reading the document and trying a few solves. This is coming from 1) a speedcubing perspective and 2) someone who hasn't gotten used to this sub-method. 

*In F2L, I'm required to solve the back blocks first...even if front blocks are already paired they have to be ignored and inevitably broken up.
*Setup appears to take a lot of extra moves. We've mostly concluded that Winter Variation is inefficient because of corner/edge block setup. For orbit you're setting up 2 blocks, which for me required a lot of shuffling and hiding. 
*I've gotten pretty quick with ZBLL and 2 side PLL recognition, but this system is entirely different. After setup, you have a reference corner and need to 1) find its opposite 2) find its relationship with another top layer corner. To get good at this you would have to be able to identify corners with only 2 stickers, find and track opposite corners during the setup, and figure out some quick way to determine corner relationship even when the corners are twisted around.

These are the aspects that I'm having difficulty with, which I attempted to state as objectively as possible. It is my _opinion _that _I_ would be faster with simple OLL+PLL even after lots of practice with orbit.

Sidenote: We'll eventually need to work with kimorbit's wiki entry, but I think that would be better left until this topic settles a bit.


----------



## KimOrbit (Jan 29, 2012)

well, thank you for attending. In F2L, you dont need to set your back pairs first. Its an experiment that I have earned these days. you need to set your last block up, no matter where it is, and no matter what color your front side is.
well, for me Setup moves takes me only nothing and only changing a turn. while I push last edge inside and set it's corner with algorithms down here:
R U R' U' R U R' U' R <U'> R' (1 move changed)
R U' R' <U'> (1 move reduced)
R U2 R' U R <U'> R' (1 move changed)
well, actually there is no set move for me. I dont know how do you set your pair up. but I have showed you, I have even reduced one move for setting up.
and actually, I agree. recognition is a bit hard. But i have explained how to recognize your corner with 2 sticker, which is exactly what I have done in 2x2x2 and its something good to know for a speedcuber. 

I am sure you will be able to recognize it fast, as far as Im doing that in sub-1 second currently. all my solves are ZZ-Orbit solves now, and every thing is fine with me. even recognition.

 let me know your Idea. please share your experiences with me.


----------



## Hendo (Apr 9, 2012)

Hi everyone,
#KimOrbit, you mentioned about making a video tutorial for your method. Is it still current? If it is, please share with us with your work. ZZ-d(ZZ-Orbit?) seems to be really interesting, but hard to understand for a cubenoob like me.
And by the way, why did the topic died? Four pages of posts in four days, then nothing new in two months. I'm really curious what's the thing. Please answer guys.
Sorry for my english, 
Cheers from Poland


----------



## A Leman (Apr 9, 2012)

I noticed a lot of mistakes in your PDF. ZZ-a does not need zbf2l because ZZ-a starts the solve with eo-line. ZZ-b is supposed to use phasing to easily reduce the zbll set into ZZLL, 2gll had nothing to do with it’s development. Also, ZZLL is the subset of ZBLL after phasing and what you are calling ZZLL is 2gll which means the corners are already permuted. Also, ZZ-d is not the most effecient method, ZZ-a is. And 2gll has 80 cases(12 for each sune except H) and you would still need Pll so ZZ-d DOES use more LL algs than OLL/PLL.(page 2)



> Corner orientation on right side’s block .
> This step was completely made by me, Both Idea and algorithms. In this step you can freely choose which COLL case you want for your last layer. It moves average is 12 HTM. I think it’s not efficient to use this method, because you have to learn 27 algorithms for just orienting corners since there are only 7 COLL algorithms when you have your corners permuted.(pg 33)


This is called winter variation and a bunch of people know it. 



> Corner permutation: U' R U' R'


And in your posted example of how you fix permutation, the permutation was already correct.

I still have alot of respect for your effort and see how you are using Nikolas while you insert the last f2l pair(it is a realy cool idea), but this is still not as easy as CPLS because of recognition and because you have to reduce the last f2l into a pair. I think just doing a Nikolas after f2l would have the same movecount.Either way, Good luck with your method!


----------



## oll+phase+sync (May 15, 2012)

KimOrbit said:


> http://www.mediafire.com/?nkgp5lz915ltujf


 
File seems to be gone?

I'm really interested how recognition works!

I calculated the 6 algs, too, when I first wanted to improve my Petrus ( 6/12 additional algs sounded much better than 21 (PLL) or 42 (COLL) ).
But I didn't manage to recognize cases fast.


I believe I already asked - but again: Does anybody know to apply ZZ-d on a 2x2x2 ( no EOLINE, missing Link could be solved during inspection,..., just 7 LL cases)


Regarding "missing link" in ZZ-d : I think ORBIT and CPLS both don't fill the gap - because <RU>-right block + <RU>-LL just sounds very different.


ASIDE:
I believe cubing beginners have a greater love for "Do something usefull, while inserting the last corner-edge pair (winter, phasing, ...)" than advanced cubers, maybe because they tend to pause after setting up the pair.


----------



## jla (Sep 2, 2012)

Does the file still exist?


----------



## Petro Leum (Sep 2, 2012)

jla said:


> Does the file still exist?




believe me; you dont miss anything...

kinda strange its gone now though, i could access it like 1-2 months ago.


----------



## somberabyss (Oct 16, 2012)

oll+phase+sync said:


> ASIDE:
> I believe cubing beginners have a greater love for "Do something usefull, while inserting the last corner-edge pair (winter, phasing, ...)" than advanced cubers, maybe because they tend to pause after setting up the pair.



Phasing does not require the corner and edge to be paired. When using phasing algorithms, only one look is necessary.


----------



## benskoning (Oct 16, 2012)

Bring the file back please.


----------



## A Leman (Oct 16, 2012)

I saved a copy of this file when I first read this thread, but the file is 61 pages long and would completely fill my attachment file. I don't want to give up my attachment ability for a huge file full of blatent errors originally posted by someone else who removed it; but if you give me an email or come up with another solution, I could send it to you.


----------



## Cyragia (Jul 26, 2013)

I know this is an old thread...
But i wanted to know if anyone still has the file, because i'm quite interested in it.
Also, if this method is considered 'bad' then could the link on the wiki be removed ? Because a link to a thread without information is kinda pointless. If it's considered 'good' then I think we should make the documentation accessible and make a decent wiki page about it or something.
Anyway, I'm still interested in reading the file.


----------



## Pyjam (Jul 26, 2013)

did you try to contact the author by PM ?


----------



## Cyragia (Jul 27, 2013)

I did not, I tought this would reach more people and has mare chance of being read.
And i had to post anyway, because of the second part of my post.


----------



## Pyjam (Jul 27, 2013)

Cyragia said:


> I know this is an old thread...
> But i wanted to know if anyone still has the file, because i'm quite interested in it.


I've uploaded the file here : ZZ-Orbit


----------



## Cyragia (Jul 27, 2013)

Thanks!


----------



## GaDiBo (Jul 27, 2013)

Hey Pyjam, please up file to Mediafire because in your page I can not download


----------



## Pyjam (Jul 27, 2013)

Why you cannot ? It works for Cyragia.


----------



## Cyragia (Jul 27, 2013)

If anyone's interested I could write a simple guide about ZZ-Orbit on the forum so there atleast is some decent documentation even if it's only to complete the wiki. (It'd be my first guide, so don't expect too much.)
Maybe i could generate some alternative algs too while I'm at it.
I think I understand the method, but the recognition isn't great, I suppose it won't be hard once you get used to it though...

Alternative download for GaDiBo (Sorry, no mediafire)

EDIT: ACube doesn't seem to be able to generate algs for this. If anyone knows a way to generate algs for this, please let me now.


----------



## GaDiBo (Jul 28, 2013)

Cyragia said:


> If anyone's interested I could write a simple guide about ZZ-Orbit on the forum so there atleast is some decent documentation even if it's only to complete the wiki. (It'd be my first guide, so don't expect too much.)
> Maybe i could generate some alternative algs too while I'm at it.
> I think I understand the method, but the recognition isn't great, I suppose it won't be hard once you get used to it though...
> 
> ...



Thankss you so muchsssssssss

I read the document and I see alot of alg, I really excite to give up CFOP for ZZ but I face a lot of alg and I really really confuse


----------



## ryn ball (Jul 28, 2013)

GaDiBo said:


> I read the document and I see alot of alg, I really excite to give up CFOP for ZZ but I face a lot of alg and I really really confuse



At normal ZZ you need only 28 algs investment 7 OCLL+21 PLLs which you already know from CFOP, that variant comes with lots of algs cuz of lots of case from permutation of corners, and if you want to 1L the LL, the interesting part in ZZ is the LL so many ways to attack this from 1L to 2L. Atm I'm in normal ZZ


----------



## OtterCuber (Nov 11, 2022)

benskoning said:


> Bring the file back please.


After a decade of waiting, here it is. Posted with permission from KimOrbit.


----------



## KimOrbit (Nov 11, 2022)

Greetings, dear Rubik's cube enthusiasts!
Some of the members of this forum contacted me regarding this method. At first, I was shocked, seeing that this method piqued some interest. I tried answering the questions regarding the ZZ-Orbit method and was notified that the original document was no longer accessible and there were no longer any resources on this method.
I tried to find the original documentation I made nearly 11 years ago, and shared it with some enthusiasts, and with my permission, they have posted it here.
I had to study the matter further because I had forgotten all about Rubik's cube since I am no longer solving the Rubik's cube for more than eight years.
During my studies, and reviewing this topic, I felt the urge to make a few comments.
First and foremost, I should apologize for the inappropriate behavior I have shown here. And also, the criticism regarding my lack of punctuation and proper usage of English grammar was valid. So I sincerely apologize regarding these two matters.
After that, I should apologize for the way I used to explain the method, at the time I wasn't quite good at explaining a matter and getting it through to my audience. In my original document and my further comments, There were a few miscommunications, that have led the community to misunderstand the true purpose behind the ZZ-Orbit method.
ZZ-Orbit was at its heart, an academic/educational method. I tried using it for speed solving, but the attempt was mostly directed at solving a matter that was actively talked about at the time. And a problem, already having a solution, doesn't mean it can't be further optimized or devalue any attempts at doing so. ZZ-Orbit at the time was solely an attempt at fixing the missing link.
The method was indeed developed personally for myself, and I made a failed attempt at sharing the method. There are a few points I would like to mention about this method:
1) It was generally aimed at color-neutral people. I came from a 2x2x2 background, where color neutrality is the first thing one should practice. When you are color neutral, you can find the easiest blocks, regardless of the situation. That made a huge misunderstanding about the method and I failed to address that matter properly.
2) I generally never mentioned anything about the steps leading to the formation of FDL and FDR blocks. Before switching to the ZZ method, I was using the roux method, and I had shared my modified roux method here as well. The way I usually went about solving on my own was by building two 2x2x1 blocks on BDL and BDR, doing the ZZ-Orbit method, and then fixing all the edges using one single algorithm which I was quite fast, at the time.
For the sake of turning it into a purely ZZ variation, I made a few changes.
It is worth mentioning that the newly developed EOcross method doesn't change anything. Simply make the EOcross, add the BDL and BDR F2L pairs and you'll arrive at the same spot.
3) The document contains my old method as well as the ZZ-Orbit method. Pages 33 to the end are all explanations of the old method.
4) For each permutation case, two algorithms are provided. That's to give the user freedom of choice between multiple algorithms. Indeed both algorithms were chosen by two different speed solvers based on how easily they could perform the algorithms.
5) Recognition matters were explained poorly, I struggled a bit until I remembered how it was supposed to work. I should apologize for that.
----------------------
To simply clarify what this method was all about, you had your normal ZZ solve up until two F2L blocks are left, FDL and FDR.
ZZ-Orbit method:
Step 1) Then you make the FDL block and place it in its place. (30 algorithms, pages 10 - 19)
Step 2) Then you make the FDR block and place it in its place. (12 algorithms, 6 parity cases, pages 21 - 24)
Step 3) With the preparations made during steps 1 and 2, the cases in this step have been greatly reduced, which was an optimization at the time. you were left with 71 2-Gen algorithms, to permute and orient all the pieces of the last layer. (pages 26-32)
----------------------
I agreed to share the method once more simply because of educational purposes and I don't make any claims about its speed and its efficiency. Just trying to answer the curiosity made around this method.
I would be glad to answer any questions regarding this method.


----------

