# A Full 1LLL pdf



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

This is a FULL 1LLL alg sheet a friend of mine made(go subscribe to his yt channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbfpdplb0KchARDQKsrpfPA)

1LLL pdf: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10ZsfklRWIvr8sbxiA64wXjGGmau0e9WR/view

Full 1LLL contains 3915 algorithms, all listed above in the pdf, except ZBLL. 

Here are some ZBLL recources: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...40FxRNewGnlo8hTHHGQbHP8Mbk/edit#gid=714524521 and https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...3-TiF8MQ0RFSS30d5CUK96PoIwk/edit#gid=34031343

This pdf is very high-quality, me friend put in a lot of effort into this. Hope you enjoy!


----------



## RiceMan_ (Dec 11, 2020)

@LukasCubes would definitely like this pdf


----------



## qwr (Dec 11, 2020)

The PDF is insane. There are so many colors - possible seizure warning lol


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

What's the point of 1LLL smh


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> What's the point of 1LLL smh


to solve the cube faster in 1 step?


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Nir1213 said:


> to solve the cube faster in 1 step?


If someone is willing to spend THAT much effort into mastering last layer, they might as well learn PLL prediction instead of 1LLL


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> It's not much faster because of the recognition time


it would probably take 1 - 2 seconds, and then around 1.5 - 2 seconds to execute

doing the math for the average, it would be 1.5 + 1.75 = 3.25 seconds, which means it takes 3 seconds to solve ll. It could be even lower, to 2 seconds if your recog and/or execution is faster. You dont have to learn the whole thing though, i would reccomend the ones that are good to execute and not that hard to recognize. 
That is pretty fast.


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Nir1213 said:


> it would probably take 1 - 2 seconds, and then around 1.5 - 2 seconds to execute
> 
> doing the math for the average, it would be 1.5 + 1.75 = 3.25 seconds, which means it takes 3 seconds to solve ll. It could be even lower, to 2 seconds if your recog and/or execution is faster. You dont have to learn the whole thing though, i would reccomend the ones that are good to execute and not that hard to recognize.
> That is pretty fast.


Read my edited reply.


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> Read my edited reply.


pll prediction is pretty good, 1LLL is probably faster though if you are really good at execution and recog for the good cases. But for the cases you dont know you could do OLL and PLL prediction to do PLL faster.


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

And mastering last layer isn't even as important as F2L. Would you rather improve by learning thousands of last layer algs? Or working on F2L lookahead and efficiency?


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> And mastering last layer isn't even as important as F2L. Would you rather improve by learning thousands of last layer algs? Or mastering F2L?


mastering f2l of course. But when you are already really good at f2l, maybe a bit improvement on ll might help. Top solvers know zbll and maybe some pure 1LLL.


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Nir1213 said:


> mastering f2l of course. But when you are already really good at f2l, maybe a bit improvement on ll might help. Top solvers know zbll and maybe some pure 1LLL.


ZB > 1LLL. If someone who is *really* good at F2L wants to improve LL and is willing to learn lots of algs, s/he should choose ZB instead. It's fewer algs and pretty much equally as fast as 1LLL.


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> ZB > 1LLL. If someone who is *really* good at F2L wants to improve LL and is willing to learn lots of algs, s/he should choose ZB instead. It's fewer algs and pretty much equally as fast as 1LLL.


its all a matter of choice. You dont have to learn full 1LLL, probably the useful cases, and that shouldnt be that much.


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

I have both ZBLL and 1LLL put up there, imo, COLL to EPLL is faster than both of those


----------



## Nir1213 (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> I have both ZBLL and 1LLL put up there, imo, COLL to EPLL is faster than both of those


coll has some trash algs tho. But some are good


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

Nir1213 said:


> coll has some trash algs tho. But some are good


yes, like the 2 lines Pi case has so many gripshifts omg, but like checkers Pi is a lot better


----------



## DNF_Cuber (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> I have both ZBLL and 1LLL put up there, imo, COLL to EPLL is faster than both of those


How is 2 look and higher movecount better than 1 look and more efficient?


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> yes, like the 2 lines Pi case has so many gripshifts omg, but like checkers Pi is a lot better


2 lines pi case is much faster than checkers


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

DNF_Cuber said:


> How is 2 look and higher movecount better than 1 look and more efficient?


for some of the cases, a spesific pattern won't move or just moved by a little during the alg, so I can sometimes 1 look the last layer, even though it's trchnically 2 algs


----------



## DNF_Cuber (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> 2 lines pi case is much faster than checkers


yes. The really bad cases are mostly Sunes and Antisunes


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> 2 lines pi case is much faster than checkers


what alg do you use?

for 2 lines i use: R U' L' U R' U L U L' U L 
for checkers i use: R' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U2 R' U2 R


----------



## DNF_Cuber (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> what alg do you use?


I don't know about @Alex Davison but I use the Niklas-Cancel into lefty antisune
RU'L'UR'ULUL'UL


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

DNF_Cuber said:


> I don't know about @Alex Davison but I use the Niklas-Cancel into lefty antisune
> RU'L'UR'ULUL'UL


i use this alg too, this alg has a lot of gripshifts which is worse than checkers


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> what alg do you use?


(L' U R U') (L U' R' U' R U' R')
Mirror of the standard "Niklas-Cancel into lefty antisune."


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> (L' U R U') (L U' R' U' R U' R')
> Basically the mirror of the standard


wow, never thought of that, this alg might reduced the problem a bit


----------



## VIBE_ZT (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> What's the point of 1LLL smh



Above all, it's sort of a proof of concept.

1-Look Last Layer is the inevitable next step above ZBLL and OLLCP. It's sort of the idea that... well.... Why not?

And if you think about it, an OLL algorithm with a PLL skip is technically a 1LLL algorithm. And... Some of them are extremely easy to recognize and execute.

Think about these two cases:
F R U' R' U' R U R' F'
F R' F' R U R U' R'

They are both very fast, and very easy to recognize. And there are more than a few easy cases like this. So... knowing some 1LLL is nice.


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

VIBE_ZT said:


> Think about these two cases:
> F R U' R' U' R U R' F'
> F R' F' R U R U' R'



the second one is faster it doesn't have the regrip in the beginning


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

VIBE_ZT said:


> Above all, it's sort of a proof of concept.
> 
> 1-Look Last Layer is the inevitable next step above ZBLL and OLLCP. It's sort of the idea that... well.... Why not?
> 
> ...


I agree that I think SOME 1LLL is good. But after ZBLL, focusing on ZBLS should be priority so that you can use ZBLL more


----------



## qwr (Dec 11, 2020)

This reminds me of a video I can't find at the moment that showed all 3 million plus 2x2 scrambles and solutions.


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> I agree that I think SOME 1LLL is good. But after ZBLL, focusing on ZBLS should be priority so that you can use ZBLL more


imo, ZB and 1L are both kinda fast, they are about the same speed


----------



## VIBE_ZT (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> the second one is faster it doesn't have the regrip in the beginning


....yes but both solve different 1lll cases. That's the whole point. If you do the 2nd alg on the first case, you get a T-Perm. And for one extra move and a ***quick*** regrip, you get a solved LL.


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> imo, ZB and 1L are both kinda fast, they are about the same speed


ZB has less algs, so it's better overall to learn. But yes I agree that they are about the same speed


----------



## Eamon (Dec 11, 2020)

VIBE_ZT said:


> ....yes but both solve different 1lll cases. That's the whole point. If you do the 2nd alg on the first case, you get a T-Perm. And for one extra move and a ***quick*** regrip, you get a solved LL.


oh, i didn't get the point sry


----------



## DNF_Cuber (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> the second one is faster it doesn't have the regrip in the beginning


that's funny, the first is the standard alg.


----------



## Deleted member 55877 (Dec 11, 2020)

Eamon said:


> the second one is faster it doesn't have the regrip in the beginning


The first one (standard) can be executed without a regrip lol. Right thumb push down for F


----------



## qwr (Dec 12, 2020)

qwr said:


> This reminds me of a video I can't find at the moment that showed all 3 million plus 2x2 scrambles and solutions.



Here it is boys: the 1 look 2x2 "tutorial" by @ben1996123 / @Ben Whitmore. I looked through 1 year of chat logs to find it because discord search sucks.


----------



## xyzzy (Dec 12, 2020)

Alex Davison said:


> ZB > 1LLL. If someone who is *really* good at F2L wants to improve LL and is willing to learn lots of algs, s/he should choose ZB instead. It's fewer algs and pretty much equally as fast as 1LLL.


what is this incredibly stupid take

That's like saying EPLL is better than PLL because it has fewer algs and is even faster. An apples to oranges fruit basket comparison, really.

*Wow yikes I misread that, sorry.* I thought you meant ZBLL rather than ZB. Point still partially stands; I think it's fair to say that LS + 1LLL has better efficiency than ZBLS + ZBLL, but a compromise approach (cherrypicking the good ZBLS cases, forcing certain 1LLL subsets) would be ideal.


----------



## Eamon (Dec 12, 2020)

qwr said:


> Here it is boys: the 1 look 2x2 "tutorial". I looked through 1 year of chat logs to find it because discord search sucks.


omg, that's alot of work :O


----------



## Eamon (Dec 12, 2020)

For the other alg sets, like OLLCP, OH OLL/PLL, CMLL, check out this sheet created by teri: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zFnQbFs-YTF0ipi4flYaCJ1vYVXhmcXDqmYnnkF9XP8/edit#gid=0


----------



## JakeCanSolve (Dec 13, 2020)

that's insane, 3915 algs!!


----------



## RiceMan_ (Dec 13, 2020)

JakeCanSolve said:


> that's insane, 3915 algs!!


Dont worry, you dont have to learn 4k algs to be sub-10. You only need to know 30-100 algs depending on what method you use.


----------



## JakeCanSolve (Dec 13, 2020)

RiceMan_ said:


> Dont worry, you dont have to learn 4k algs to be sub-10. You only need to know 30-100 algs depending on what method you use.


ok good


----------



## CodingCuber (Dec 13, 2020)

Did your friend write all of this by hand or did he create a python script or something to put in all the cases? Either way, very impressive.


----------



## Eamon (Dec 13, 2020)

CodingCuber said:


> Did your friend write all of this by hand or did he create a python script or something to put in all the cases? Either way, very impressive.


idk, i just got the pdf, you can ask him, his profile is: https://www.speedsolving.com/members/ruimin_yan.43486/


----------



## CLL Smooth (Dec 13, 2020)

It is an incredible feat to compile a full 1LLL list. For anyone to discount it because such and such alg set is better or faster is just ridiculous and completely misses the point. The majority of this thread looks like nonsense bickering and ignorance. Props to whoever made the list. I’ll probably check it out one day.


----------



## abunickabhi (Dec 18, 2020)

Insane 1LLL PDF, S U M U' M U M2 U' S' .


----------



## Eamon (Dec 18, 2020)

abunickabhi said:


> Insane 1LLL PDF, S U M U' M U M2 U' S' .


thanks!


----------



## Pyjam (Dec 18, 2020)

Eamon said:


> what alg do you use?
> 
> for 2 lines i use: R U' L' U R' U L U L' U L
> for checkers i use: R' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U2 R' U2 R



Double lines : U' R U R' U F' R U2 R' U2 R' F R
Checkers : U' B' R2 U R2' U' R2 U' S R2' F z' (B' with ring finger, thumb on D)


----------



## Eamon (Dec 18, 2020)

Pyjam said:


> Double lines : U' R U R' U F' R U2 R' U2 R' F R
> Checkers : U' B' R2 U R2 U' R2 U' S R2 F z' (B' with ring finger, thumb on D)


this completely solve the problem i was talking about thx


----------



## LukasCubes (Aug 17, 2021)

How am I just now finding this thread? Also I already got one but I will check yours out https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-kf9bSQwUEMFOkyuCuLZj9XNQLzkuk_L/view

yours does seem interesting

Edit: It dont work


----------



## Cubing Forever (Aug 18, 2021)

Pyjam said:


> Checkers : U' B' R2 U R2' U' R2 U' S R2' F z' (B' with ring finger, thumb on D)


F R2 U' R2 U R2 U S R2 f' thumb on D, lefty S.
or just do F R2 U' R2 U R2 U R2 F' into L5EP lol


----------



## Melvintnh327 (Aug 18, 2021)

mad respect for someone who actually learnt all 3915 algs
insane pdf you got there!


----------

