# Briggs2 (B2) (3x3x3 CP method)



## shadowslice e (Nov 16, 2015)

My latest method developed. It also has an improved CP step.



Spoiler: Brief overview



1) CP+FB (12/12)
2) 1x2x2 in BRD (equivalent to Roux square) and a pair (8/20)
3) BLS (Briggs last slot)- finish SB while solving CP and forcing a 4 flip. (10*/30)
4) LSE (10/40)

*This is the average of the algs I've generated so far which does not use wide moves (for the most part).





Spoiler: Detailed description






Spoiler: 1) CP- the F/F' style



So this step is likely by far the most complex- the reason why it is step 1.

First, you choose the side you wish to build FB (duh) and from there you can plan the first square as normal. You then must predict which piece is in DFR and in the final spot in the FB (DFL) then place the final FB pair in in ULF, the DFL opposite in DFR and DBR opposite in UFR. Now do an F'. You can also do the mirror and use F or B or B' etc. You get the point.

Sorry if this sound complicated. It's not really as bad as it sounds. I'll do a video later this week to clear up any confusion. In the meantime, ask anything you want in the thread.


Spoiler: Sidenote- Do not read this if you're already confused!



You can actually have a series of different positions based on the different 2-gen corner permutations








Spoiler: 2) Square and pair in DBR



This is pretty self explanatory isn't it? Make sure that the pair is with an oriented edge and that you only have one misoriented edge in D so that BLS works

Unless you want to do mirrored BLS in which case you could also do the square in DFR. In which case you have an even more efficient step (although I may have been slightly optimistic and you may get the same efficiency)





Spoiler: 3) BLS (Briggs Last Slot)



This step is only possible due to CP first step. It is essentially a modified form of WVLS so you orient the corners with the last slot as well as performing either a 4Flip or 0 flip on U so that you get an arrow 4flip for LSE which is arguably the best case. 
There are 54 algs for all the cases and they average 10.3 moves. It can be more efficient as well as more ergonomic as the algs I have generated do not use wide moves (mostly).
There is a list of them is the spoiler below. The designation of each alg reflects the number of oriented corners as well as the orientation of each starting from BL. For example, E1xxr indicated the edges are oriented, 1 corner is misoriented , BL is oriented, BR is oriented and FR is facing to the right (equivalent to blinkers).


Spoiler: BLS algs






Spoiler: Edges don't need to be flipped



E0 R' F L' F2 R2 U L' U R' U2 L2 F

E1lxx R U R' U' R U' R'
E1bxx (U') R U' R' U2 R U' R' U2 R U R'
E1xbx SA- R' U' R' U2 R U2 R' U' R' 
E1xrx (U2) R' U2 R' U2 R U2 R' U' R2 U R
E1xxr R U D' R D' R U R' D R' D R'
E1xxf R U' R'

E2lbx (U) R' U' R2 U' R2 U2 R
E2lrx L' U2 R U L U' L' U R' U2 L
E2bbx (U) R' U' R2 U' R2 U2 R
E2brx (U) R U' R' U R U2 R'
E2xbr (U) R2 U' R U L2 D' R D' L2 U' R
E2xbf R' U L' U L' D2 L U2 R U L
E2xrr (U) R U2 R'
E2xrf (U2) R' U2 R U R U' R' U R ' U R2 U R'
E2lxr (U) R U2 R' U' R U2 R' U' R U' R'
E2lxf (U) R U2 R2 U' R U' R' U2 R
E2bxr R U L' U2 L U L' U R' L
E2bxf (U2) R U R' U R U' R U2 R' U' R U' R2

E3lbr R U R' U' R U R' U' R U' R'
E3lbf R U' R2 U' R U' R' U2 R
E3lrr (U') R2 U R' U R' U' R U R U2 R2
E3lrf (U) R U2 R' U R' U' R U' R' U2 R
E3bbr (U2) r U2 r' U2 R U' R'
E3bbf (U) R U' R' U R U' R' U R U2 R'
E3brr R U' R2 U2 R U R' U R
E3brf (U) F U2 L' U2 L F2 R' F R





Spoiler: 4 flip needed



*SA= standard approach- alg above M' U M*
M0xxx (U) R' U' F' U F2 R F' U F R' F' R

M1lxx SA
M1bxx L' U' R U B' M2 U2 R B' L' D x2- this alg needs fixing. It's by far the worst of the sets.
M1xbx (U) F R U2 R2 U' F' U F R F U2 F'
M1xrx F' U' F U R U2 R2 F R U F U' F'
M1xxr SA
M1xxf (U2) F' U' L D F' D' L D' L U L F

M2xbr F2 U2 L U F' L F2 L' U' L' F
M2xbf (U) F' L' U2 L U F U ' F2 L F L' F'
M2xrr SA
M2xrf (U2) F2 U' F2 U F2 U' F R U2 R2 F R (probably better to do this with a y')
M2lxr (U) L U2 F' U2 R' L F R F' L2
M2lxf (U2) F2 L2 F L' F U' R U2 R' F' L' F (although SA is probably faster)
M2bxr F' U2 L F U F' U' L2 U2 L U F (another y')
M2bxf R' F' L2 D F D2 F' D R L U' L F
M2lbx SA
M2lrx (U) F R' F2 U' F L2 F D F' L2 U R
M2bbx (U') F R U' R2 F R2 U2 R' U' F'
M2brx SA

M3lbr (U) R' F' L F' R' D2 L2 B R2 L
M3lbf SA
M3lrr F2 U F L' U R U' R' U2 L U F
M3lrf SA
M3bbr SA
M3bbf (U2) F' U F' L' U' L U F2 R' F U F' (another y')
M3brf (U) F R' F' R2 U2 R2 U' F' U F R











Spoiler: 4) LSE



This step is basically identical to roux LSE although you always get an arrow 4 flip which is arguably the best case as it is easier to pair up either UF and UB or UR and UL while orienting the edges.








Spoiler: Pros



Lower alg count
Low movecount
Ergonomic (especially if some of the BLS algs get fixed)
Fairly good lookahead





Spoiler: Cons



Advanced and somewhat complex first step
Algs are pretty specific to the method.


TL;DR: sort of an advanced Roux

I would love to hear your thoughts, post any questions in the thread and I will do my best to answer them. I will also try to make a video soon with a walkthrough of first step.


----------



## TDM (Nov 16, 2015)

I don't understand your CP+FB at all, or your BLS recognition. Please could you go into a bit more detail? Possibly an example solve would be good too. Text is fine for me.

also pls tell me how to do SB square+pair in 8 moves and I will love you forever


----------



## Berd (Nov 16, 2015)

Wow; this seemed a whole lot simpler when you told me about it on Facebook haha. This could be fast tho. Good work.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 16, 2015)

TDM said:


> I don't understand your CP+FB at all, or your BLS recognition. Please could you go into a bit more detail? Possibly an example solve would be good too. Text is fine for me.
> 
> also pls tell me how to do SB square+pair in 8 moves and I will love you forever


The CP step is essentially reducing the cube to 2-gen while inserting the final pair. On a 2-gen cube there are 3 distinct sets of 3 2 swaps which can occur (discounting mirrors or the order which the two swaps are in): (UBR/UFL,UFR/UBR and DBR/DFR), (UFL/DFR, UBL/DBR and URF/URB) and (UBR/UBL,UFL/DBR and UFR/DFR) the sets of colours would be (if white on top green in front) yellow,green,red with yellow,blue red, green red white with orange green white and white green orange with white blue red. My personal preference is the last set as I find it easiest to convert the swaps to although any of the sets can in theory be used- this would be difficult to do though it can help with the SB in some cases. The F/F' has the pieces on it to convert to this.

With regards to the SB I'll admit I was slightly optimistic as I was going off 6 for square+ 2 for pair. Maybe more realistic would be 10-12 in total but I do mention rotations and reflctions being one way to get to that efficiency for BLS. To counter balance this I was also slightly pessimistic about FB+CP.

The way that I described each of the cases for BLS is basically indicating how each of the corners is oriented. For example, do a R U2 R' U'. This would be noted as E2xrr. Tbh you only have to pay attention to the last 3 letters as they tell you the orientation of the corners. You also recognise whether there is one misoriented edge or 3. It's similar to dot OLL recognition but you recognise a slightly different set of pieces.

I hope this helps a little bit.


Sorry about the lack of example solve but it's late so I'll do one in the morning because I can't deal with notation right now (and everyone know how bad I am with that...)

There's a sort of example solve in the example solve thread although that doesn't do FB+CP as it already had permuted corners (which incidentally makes FB much more horrible).


----------



## penguinz7 (Nov 17, 2015)

Or you could just use Noah's CP Block 2.0


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 17, 2015)

penguinz7 said:


> Or you could just use Noah's CP Block 2.0



Yes, if you want a less efficient method with more steps and algs and harder recognition even when you have mastered each of the steps.


----------



## AlexMaass (Nov 17, 2015)

example solve? the description of the method steps doesn't make sense


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 17, 2015)

Ok, example step 1 solve with explanation (probably won't be particularly efficient as I'm not combining steps so it's easier to understand (and cause im tired as funk...)

Scramble: D2 B2 R2 F2 D B2 F2 U L2 D2 F2 R U2 F D L F R' F' D' R

x'// just making FB more fingertrickable (note, I will be predicting the positions of the corner that will be in FRD and BLD
M2 D'// First square as per normal
R U R' U' R// pair
U2// pair in place for solving CP
R' (F' U F) U' R just a standard 2 swap so all pieces are set up.
(B)// Finished CP


----------



## Praetorian (Nov 18, 2015)

shadowslice e said:


> Ok, example step 1 solve with explanation (probably won't be particularly efficient as I'm not combining steps so it's easier to understand (and cause im tired as funk...)
> 
> Scramble: D2 B2 R2 F2 D B2 F2 U L2 D2 F2 R U2 F D L F R' F' D' R
> 
> ...



was wondering why the solution wasn't working


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 18, 2015)

Praetorian said:


> was wondering why the solution wasn't working



Ok thanks . I've already made my excuses. I'll verbally go through the steps when I get around to doing a video of it.


----------



## Praetorian (Nov 18, 2015)

shadowslice e said:


> Ok thanks . I've already made my excuses. I'll verbally go through the steps when I get around to doing a video of it.



I was actually playing around with the steps you showed with my cube, it seems actually kinda cool but since I don't roux my FB is pretty crappy


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 18, 2015)

Oh, just a sidenote (for the moment, what I'm about to describe is promising so may end up being in the final finished method): you can actually use Pseudopair insertion in a way similar to PCMS except the pairs are off by a D or D'. This is useful as you can insert 3 pseudopairs, do one short thing to the corners and do a D/D' to finish off the whole first two steps (so have a guess what I'm going to call the method ). It seem like this method could be only 15-18 moves for F2B (though not the final pair) which, for obvious reasons, would be insane and reduce this to a 3-step method. Atm I'm trying to find ways to simplify the process but I find it is looking like a real contender for the new way to start the method (and give it even greater efficiency!) 

Updates shortly.


----------



## crafto22 (Nov 18, 2015)

This is a somewhat cool concept, but honestly I preferred your original version. CP-Roux honestly isn't very useful, if at all. The main advantage of the original Briggs Method was the awesome 2-gen F2L/LL. Without anything like that, this method just become a Roux variant that solves CMLL while inserting the last piece of the SB with a more complex FB. Don't know if that's a good trade off. Personally, I don't think L6E has the potential to be any faster than maybe 2-3 seconds. I know GuRoux got a 2.9x average of 12/100? for L6E, but Feliks Zemdegs got similar times for 2-gen scrambles. So really, I think your original version has potential to be faster and it relies less on intuition, which is faster IMO.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 18, 2015)

crafto22 said:


> This is a somewhat cool concept, but honestly I preferred your original version. CP-Roux honestly isn't very useful, if at all. The main advantage of the original Briggs Method was the awesome 2-gen F2L/LL. Without anything like that, this method just become a Roux variant that solves CMLL while inserting the last piece of the SB with a more complex FB. Don't know if that's a good trade off. Personally, I don't think L6E has the potential to be any faster than maybe 2-3 seconds. I know GuRoux got a 2.9x average of 12/100? for L6E, but Feliks Zemdegs got similar times for 2-gen scrambles. So really, I think your original version has potential to be faster and it relies less on intuition, which is faster IMO.


One of the reasons I think this is better is because it is much more efficient than the previous method; especially the first step. It also relies on intuition as much as roux does and no more than the previous method did. In addition it also has fewer algs than my previous method did and the recognition for that is easier. Lastly, the LSE will likely be faster than GuRoux's 2.9 (assuming the same skill level) as it requires 3-5 less turns on average. Also, you maintain the 2-gen from the original method for the most part when doing SB. You could do the original method+ BLS I guess if you want as that will help recognition.


----------



## crafto22 (Nov 18, 2015)

shadowslice e said:


> One of the reasons I think this is better is because it is much more efficient than the previous method; especially the first step. It also relies on intuition as much as roux does and no more than the previous method did. In addition it also has fewer algs than my previous method did and the recognition for that is easier. Lastly, the LSE will likely be faster than GuRoux's 2.9 (assuming the same skill level) as it requires 3-5 less turns on average. Also, you maintain the 2-gen from the original method for the most part when doing SB. You could do the original method+ BLS I guess if you want as that will help recognition.



Nah, BLSing the original method wouldn't be good because it would still provide a 1LLL, which is already supplied through 2GLL.


----------



## gyroninja (Nov 19, 2015)

This method looks pretty cool. I've pretty much figured out how you do the 3 cycle of the corners to fix cp but I ran into a problem. There are some patterns that seem to match the reference picture on jaap's site but aren't in 2gen. Could you explain how you can tell a diag swap from a two gen state. If you just did a y perm the shape be X I which is a valid state? I assume you have some way of detecting which way the pieces are swapped and not just based on the pair exciting over those two locations.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 19, 2015)

gyroninja said:


> This method looks pretty cool. I've pretty much figured out how you do the 3 cycle of the corners to fix cp but I ran into a problem. There are some patterns that seem to match the reference picture on jaap's site but aren't in 2gen. Could you explain how you can tell a diag swap from a two gen state. If you just did a y perm the shape be X I which is a valid state? I assume you have some way of detecting which way the pieces are swapped and not just based on the pair exciting over those two locations.



Yeah, I had this problem initially. Essentially it comes down to the direction which the base pair (the ones which would be in DRF and DRB when they are solved are). Their orientation in the swap they represents dictates the orientation of the rest of the pieces. 

Needless to say, it can be very difficult to do this with a 3-cycle sometimes (which is one of the advantages of the F/F' and D/D' style). It may just be easier in some situations to just do a standard 2-swap on the base pair than to work out the new cycle.


Also, I will post a full summary of the D/D' style (or the D insertion method ) later when I have the time (but I have class soon so I don't have time to type it all out).

For now, however, it is essentially a pseudo pair PCMS/Roux thing. While doing it you insert pseudo pairs which are off by a D or D' apart from the pair in DBR which is the corner you will take a not of and track it's opposite corner and see where it is after the pairs have been inserted as well as looking ahead for the pair that would be in DFR when solved. You then do a two swap to make sure that the set of patterns is met (this is normally~4-5 moves long). It is similar to CPLS except that you don't have to insert the pair and it is also much easier to influence the swap you get and hence the location of the DFR corner so you can get an easy pair.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Nov 19, 2015)

shadowslice e said:


> One of the reasons I think this is better is because it is much more efficient than the previous method; especially the first step. It also relies on intuition as much as roux does and no more than the previous method did. In addition it also has fewer algs than my previous method did and the recognition for that is easier. Lastly, the LSE will likely be faster than GuRoux's 2.9 (assuming the same skill level) as it requires 3-5 less turns on average. Also, you maintain the 2-gen from the original method for the most part when doing SB. You could do the original method+ BLS I guess if you want as that will help recognition.



guroux's LSE is like 2.3 which is average for someone our speed. Mine is 2.5 cuz im bad and blox are life. Alex on the other hand can probably sub 2 consistently.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 19, 2015)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> guroux's LSE is like 2.3 which is average for someone our speed. Mine is 2.5 cuz im bad and blox are life. Alex on the other hand can probably sub 2 consistently.



Oh good. Even better.


----------



## Berd (Nov 19, 2015)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> guroux's LSE is like 2.3 which is average for someone our speed. Mine is 2.5 cuz im bad and blox are life. Alex on the other hand can probably sub 2 consistently.


Nothing to do with cubing is constant with Alex haha.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 26, 2015)

Ok, the D/D' (corner superpostion collapse method) style

This method is a greater improvement to the F/F' style and merges steps 1&2 in the B2 method. It is complex in that it uses pseudopairs in a manner similar to PCMS with the pseudopairs.

Average movecount: ~20

0) inspection- identify the corner set you are working with. This is relatively complex (which is why it is in inspection) basically, work out which corners you will have in DL and DRB by planning pseudopairs and memorising the DBR corner opposite corner.
1a) F3P (first 3 pairs). Essentially, solve pseudopairs in DBL and DFL with the edges correct and the corners off by D/D'. the BR pair can be placed as just the edge as you will already have made a note of the BDR corner. Track the opposite.

1b) Set up for a D/D' to solve CP. You can identify the case by finding what would be solved in DRF. This is easy to spot as it has a separate colour to the rest of the corners. As you have already tracked the opposite of the corner in DBR, you can already identify the case and insert the last corner needed with a sexy, sledgehammer etc depending.

1c) D/D'- Solved CP.


----------



## gyroninja (Nov 26, 2015)

So we are inserting the last corner with a cpls like alg?


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 27, 2015)

gyroninja said:


> So we are inserting the last corner with a cpls like alg?



sort of except it'll be shorter and you already know what the corner is and what to do with it so there'll be no pause for recognition.


----------



## 2180161 (Nov 27, 2015)

Soooo when will you have example solves posted? with a more in-depth explanation that is.


----------



## shadowslice e (Nov 27, 2015)

2180161 said:


> Soooo when will you have example solves posted? with a more in-depth explanation that is.



I'm thinking of way to better explain it in a video ATM. I'll do some example solves when I get the time but no guarantee when that will be.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Mar 30, 2016)

What do SB and FB mean? I see them a lot but no one has ever defined them.


----------



## Jbacboy (Mar 30, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> What do SB and FB mean? I see them a lot but no one has ever defined them.



Second Block and First Block.  Used in Roux, but many other methods use it too (like this one). Essentially a 1x2x3 block on part of the cube.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Mar 30, 2016)

Jbacboy said:


> Second Block and First Block.  Used in Roux, but many other methods use it too (like this one). Essentially a 1x2x3 block on part of the cube.



I'm actually surprised I didn't know this, seems so basic... Thanks


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Mar 31, 2016)

Do you think this is efficient enough to be a main method? Also, why not just orient the edges during BLS? There may not be that many more cases if you adjust the M slice to reduce cases.


----------



## shadowslice e (Mar 31, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> Do you think this is efficient enough to be a main method? Also, why not just orient the edges during BLS? There may not be that many more cases if you adjust the M slice to reduce cases.



It is definitely efficient enough though it will take a lot of work to get good at the CP. For BLS, it works out the algs are worse and the recognition is not as nice. Also, IMO, the Arrow case for EO leads to nicer LSE.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Apr 3, 2016)

How about this:
Use an alg to orient the corners (solving them) and place in UR and UL edges, to be left with an easy L4E case.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Apr 3, 2016)

I used to be able to do the CP right but now I can't... I am inserting the last CE of the FB with F, so what am I doing wrong? (I am also doing 2-gen after that)


----------



## shadowslice e (Apr 4, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> I used to be able to do the CP right but now I can't... I am inserting the last CE of the FB with F, so what am I doing wrong? (I am also doing 2-gen after that)



Are you sure you're lining up the corners in the F face correctly?


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Apr 4, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> Are you sure you're lining up the corners in the F face correctly?



Hm I probably missed that, I only used this method a few times so I could have gotten lucky.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Apr 4, 2016)

Yeah still didn't work.


----------



## crafto22 (Apr 7, 2016)

Yeah I still don't understand how the CP in this method works... I really think you should thoroughly explain it in a video or something because right now it makes no sense to me


----------



## shadowslice e (Apr 7, 2016)

crafto22 said:


> Yeah I still don't understand how the CP in this method works... I really think you should thoroughly explain it in a video or something because right now it makes no sense to me



I'm trying to get around to making a video at some point but haven't found the time yet. It basically comes down to reducing the L6C state to a position in a similar way to Briggs using stuff other than a 3-cycle by using one of 3 things: a sledgehammer, standard insert or a hedgeslammer depending on the corner state. For recognition I will create wills detailed video on what to track


----------



## crafto22 (Apr 7, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> I'm trying to get around to making a video at some point but haven't found the time yet. It basically comes down to reducing the L6C state to a position in a similar way to Briggs using stuff other than a 3-cycle by using one of 3 things: a sledgehammer, standard insert or a hedgeslammer depending on the corner state. For recognition I will create wills detailed video on what to track


Ok, sounds good, thanks!


----------



## AlphaP (Dec 21, 2016)

Did you/anyone else ever make the video explaining how CPFB works? if so, can someone link me to it?


----------



## Sue Doenim (Dec 31, 2016)

Quite recently, a new CP in inspection method has been proposed, as I'm sure you know. Do you think this will increase the method's viability? I really don't know, because I just started looking into CP, and can't compare the two. As far as the bad BLS algs go, most of the OLLCP algs with permuted corners are nice; mostly <R, r, U, M>, and could be used with a standard pair insertion.


----------



## Teoidus (Dec 31, 2016)

If we use the followup to CPFB (which can be done in ~10 STM)

SBsq (~7)
pair (...4?)
CLL + 4flip (10, going to go with shadowslice's stat here)
LSE (11, seems like a reasonable enough estimate as long as the 4flip you're forcing is either arrow or M2arrow)

= 42 STM

Could be pretty good. I'm a little bit worried about CLL+4flip recognition but maybe that will sort of be like OLL recog with time since you are just looking at U/D stickers. The movecount is nice and lookahead decent given that it's basically advanced Roux.

EDIT: Oh right, two other things: first, inspection is obviously hard but the CP is planned entirely in there, so there is no pause to do that stuff. Second, in order to get 10 STM CPFBs you will have to be fully CN. I think this is kind of neat, others may hate it, idk. Figured that's noteworthy.

EDIT: Also the pair making could take more than just 4 moves if you get a really ugly case. Hence why I wonder if it's better to go with: CPFB (10), SBsq (7), CLL + last corner (10), L7E. Don't know how much L7E can be optimized but my intuitive sense is that this might be more efficient, depending


----------



## Sue Doenim (Dec 31, 2016)

BLS algs improved with insertion and OLLCP:

M0xxx-(U) R U2 M' U R' U R U2 r2 U' R U' R' U2 r 
(U') R' F R F' U' L' U' L U L F' L2 U' L U F

M1bxx-(U') R' F R F' r' U2 R2 D R' U R D' R2 U r
(U') R' F R F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' U R U R' F'

Hopefully you get the picture. I took the case, inserted with R U' R', R U2 R', and R' F R F', and did the resulting OLLCP case. Usually, one of the three will yield a nice alg.


----------



## 1001010101001 (Jan 16, 2018)

Solving CP while doing F2B will be great for me, I take ~ 6 seconds with 1-Look CMLL.


----------



## Elo13 (Jan 16, 2018)

1001010101001 said:


> Solving CP while doing F2B will be great for me, I take ~ 6 seconds with 1-Look CMLL.



CPFB isn't worth it for normal Roux. Efficient CPFB is hard (nobody is close to being able to do it hard) and the 2gen CMLLs aren't even the best ones.


----------



## Jamal_69 (May 15, 2021)

Hey, sorry for the thread bump but I really want to learn this method just for fun but can't for the life of me figure out what you meant in the explanation of the CP part. Could you help out?


----------

