# 3OP edge cycle methods?



## rjohnson_8ball (Apr 15, 2009)

Since last September I have been usually cycling (UR,UL,UF) using R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2 because it is 2-gen and not uncomfortable. I do the lefthand mirror image of the algorithm to go the other way. Sometimes it is more convenient to set up for the cycle on the left face or right face or the bottom, then turn the cube to perform the algorithm. I have gotten used to the setup moves for the U permutation.

Recently I wondered about cycling (UB,UF,DF) using M' U2 M U2 (and the inverse to go the other way). I think I decided the setup moves to these positions is not so bad, compared to what I was doing before. But, it seems to me that once a person gets used to it, it should go much faster because the algorithm is quicker. Also, if I get distracted during the 2-gen U perm (by a person trying to get my attention or cube locking up) then I might mess up. The M' U2 M U2 is tough to mess up.

Any comments?


----------



## byu (Apr 15, 2009)

Hm... I think you may be right. I'm going to do an edges only solve with this right now.

EDIT: I tried this, and I found setups actually HARDER than doing a normal UF UL UR cycle.


----------



## rjohnson_8ball (Apr 15, 2009)

I thought the setup was tough at first too. But I think it's just because I am used to my regular method more than the new one. For training, I made an 11-cycle like (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11) and used (UB,UF,DF) or (UB,DF,UF) to cycle, and it was not so bad. It was awkward because I had to pay attention more than my regular method, but I think it might become more automatic with time.

Since this solves 2 pieces each time, is it comparable with M2 with setup, speed, and complexity? Currently I orient edges before permuting them, but I suspect someone could perform the orientations with the permutations.


----------



## byu (Apr 15, 2009)

Oh I just realized what I was doing wrong that made setup moves so hard. I didn't pre-orient, so I was trying to bring different pieces up in different orientations! I'm so used to non-pre orienting methods like Old Pochmann that I forgot to pre-orient. This should change things A LOT.


----------



## blah (Apr 15, 2009)

y' U2 R2 U M U' R2 U M' U y / y' U2 R2 U' M' U R2 U' M Dw'
y' U M U' R2 U M' U' R2 y / y' U' M' U R2 U' M U R2 y
U M U M U2 M' U M' U'

And their inverses. I posted this sometime last year but I can't seem to be able to find the original post anymore  Basically, it's TuRBo.


----------



## rjohnson_8ball (Apr 15, 2009)

blah said:


> y' U2 R2 U M U' R2 U M' U y / y' U2 R2 U' M' U R2 U' M Dw'
> y' U M U' R2 U M' U' R2 y / y' U' M' U R2 U' M U R2 y
> U M U M U2 M' U M' U'
> 
> And their inverses. I posted this sometime last year but I can't seem to be able to find the original post anymore  Basically, it's TuRBo.



I cannot dispute that TuRBo is fast, but setup/setdown for M' U2 M U2 can be intuitive without memorizing algorithms. (Or are the algorithms intuitive for you?) Anyway, I am not yet accustomed to memoing (and performing) orientations of the edges at the same time as the permutations. I will eventually combine them (for 4x4 and larger cubes).

Did I see your algs in a YouTube description?


----------



## blah (Apr 15, 2009)

rjohnson_8ball said:


> blah said:
> 
> 
> > y' U2 R2 U M U' R2 U M' U y / y' U2 R2 U' M' U R2 U' M Dw'
> ...



I don't do TuRBo. Just found the algs, that's all. With these algs, setup/setdown can be intuitive _and_ short.

And umm, no. I've never put these up on YouTube before.


----------



## aegius1r (Apr 15, 2009)

rjohnson_8ball said:


> Since last September I have been usually cycling (UR,UL,UF) using R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2 because it is 2-gen and not uncomfortable. I do the lefthand mirror image of the algorithm to go the other way. Sometimes it is more convenient to set up for the cycle on the left face or right face or the bottom, then turn the cube to perform the algorithm. I have gotten used to the setup moves for the U permutation.
> 
> Recently I wondered about cycling (UB,UF,DF) using M' U2 M U2 (and the inverse to go the other way). I think I decided the setup moves to these positions is not so bad, compared to what I was doing before. But, it seems to me that once a person gets used to it, it should go much faster because the algorithm is quicker. Also, if I get distracted during the 2-gen U perm (by a person trying to get my attention or cube locking up) then I might mess up. The M' U2 M U2 is tough to mess up.
> 
> Any comments?



DF - UL - UR : U M' U2 M U
DF - UR - UL : U' M' U2 M U'

these two algs should be fast and easy.
though I usually use UF as buffer, I use these algs very often


----------



## cuBerBruce (Apr 15, 2009)

I use DF as the buffer position, and think of it as:
set up to (UB,UF), M' U2 M, and undo from (UF,UB).

For certain cases like (FR,BR) you have to be careful that your undo setup is consistent with the setup.


----------



## byu (Apr 15, 2009)

cuBerBruce said:


> I use DF as the buffer position, and think of it as:
> set up to (UB,UF), M' U2 M, and undo from (UF,UB).
> 
> For certain cases like (FR,BR) you have to be careful that your undo setup is consistent with the setup.



I think I still find doing M' U2 M U2 and not having to undo from different positions much more intuitive, easier, and faster.


----------



## spdcbr (May 3, 2009)

What's with the puma? Are you an advertiser?


----------



## GermanCube (May 3, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> What's with the puma? Are you an advertiser?



No comment ....


----------

