# DuckubingCuber347's POGression thread. | Learning ELL and L5EP



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 10, 2021)

As of creating this I average mid-high 18. Here I'll post goals, quests, algs learned, and other things that go on with me and cubing.

If you want to see my sub-17 Ao5 day 1 check my profile.

Day#2




Got an amazing 11.91 single PB#2 and best Full-step single and best scramble generated solve.

R2 F' B2 R2 B2 D' F' U2 R F2 L2 B L2 F' U2 R2 F' D2 F D2 L2
Red cross

Could have been a PB but I locked up on an E perm which had incredibly fast recognition.

Edit: I forgot to mention, it only took 10 solves to get the 16.87

Edit: I now average low 18's

8/16/21: I now average high 17.

8/26/21: I've been averaging mid-low 17 for about a week.

9/16/21: Low-17

11/7/21: Low-16

11/20/21: Sub-16

4/14/22: Sub-13.5

7/7/22: Sub-12

9/17/22 Sub-11


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 11, 2021)

Gee, thanks @BenChristman1.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 11, 2021)

Day 3:


Only took 12 solves. It looked good and I figured I had nothing to lose so I went on.



and got a sub-16 Ao5. (yay)



I also got a 13.69 on the first solve. Pretty good. Maybe I'll blast my way through averaging 18 to 17.

I also casually broke my 6x6 PB yesterday from 5:37.39 to 5:10.90. Just goes to show I don't do 6x6 enough.


----------



## Waffles (Aug 12, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I also casually broke my 6x6 PB yesterday from 5:37.39 to 5:10.90. Just goes to show I don't do 6x6 enough.


Like me and clock. Every day now I set a new PB#2


----------



## LBr (Aug 12, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Day 3:
> View attachment 16599
> 
> Only took 12 solves. It looked good and I figured I had nothing to lose so I went on.
> ...


You are sub 18.


----------



## PiKeeper (Aug 16, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Do you recommend the MGC or the Valk? I'm not just looking at the price.


The MGC is much cheaper and is arguably better than the valk. I would 100% recommend it.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 16, 2021)

Mathsoccer said:


> The MGC is much cheaper and is arguably better than the valk. I would 100% recommend it.


I get the MGC is cheaper, that's why I said I wasn't looking at the price. But I've tried a Valk 5m and it was amazing so I'm wondering what sets the MGC apart other than price. In my opinion it's hard to beat the Valk feeling.


----------



## the dnf master (Aug 16, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I get the MGC is cheaper, that's why I said I wasn't looking at the price.


Isn't price one of the biggest factor in cubes? Besides the price, the MGC is one of the best cubes on the market, and comparable to the valk.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> But I've tried a Valk 5m and it was amazing so I'm wondering what sets the MGC apart other than price. In my opinion it's hard to beat the Valk feeling.


That's what people thought before the MGC came out. There was a time where people believed that the Wushuang was the perfect 5x5, but when a better one came out people started to notice problems with it. I only have the MGC, and have never touched a Valk 5 M. But even it is slightly better for me, it doesn't justify being twice the price.

So I recommend the MGC way over the Valk.


----------



## cuberswoop (Aug 16, 2021)

I am only like 2 seconds slower than you.



TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Here it is.


Nice 13 btw.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 16, 2021)

the dnf master said:


> Isn't price one of the biggest factor in cubes? Besides the price, the MGC is one of the best cubes on the market, and comparable to the valk.
> 
> That's what people thought before the MGC came out. There was a time where people believed that the Wushuang was the perfect 5x5, but when a better one came out people started to notice problems with it. I only have the MGC, and have never touched a Valk 5 M. But even it is slightly better for me, it doesn't justify being twice the price.
> 
> So I recommend the MGC way ovee the Valk.


Again, I specifically stated that price is not playing a factor in my decision. I adore the Valk feel and I am wondering what the YJ MGC offers, beside being more affordable, that the Valk does not. I want to get a cube that I am 100% satisfied with, if I get the MGC and am not the biggest fan I'll buy the Valk so it's not really cheaper if I don't enjoy it. I know that I enjoy the Valk and will be satisfied with my purchase. Meanwhile I no nothing about the MGC other than that it's extremely popular and I've grown to be careful about buying puzzles that people seem to enjoy a lot. I got the YJMoyuMFJSRS3M2020 and was extremely disappointed, I tried the Gan 11 m Pro and was severely disappointed I was also a little disappointed with the X-man Wingy skewb, meanwhile cubes that weren't as hyped or lost their popularity I really enjoy. Like the Qiyi MS 3*3 and the Valk 5 M (It's still well known but has since faded more and more into the background as the MGC asserted it's base.)


----------



## the dnf master (Aug 16, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Again, I specifically stated that price is not playing a factor in my decision. I adore the Valk feel and I am wondering what the YJ MGC offers, beside being more affordable, that the Valk does not. I want to get a cube that I am 100% satisfied with, if I get the MGC and am not the biggest fan I'll buy the Valk so it's not really cheaper if I don't enjoy it. I know that I enjoy the Valk and will be satisfied with my purchase. Meanwhile I no nothing about the MGC other than that it's extremely popular and I've grown to be careful about buying puzzles that people seem to enjoy a lot. I got the YJMoyuMFJSRS3M2020 and was extremely disappointed, I tried the Gan 11 m Pro and was severely disappointed I was also a little disappointed with the X-man Wingy skewb, meanwhile cubes that weren't as hyped or lost their popularity I really enjoy. Like the Qiyi MS 3*3 and the Valk 5 M (It's still well known but has since faded more and more into the background as the MGC asserted it's base.)


If price isn't a factor and you tried and loved the Valk, then definitely get it. The MGC, besides being cheaper is pretty much on par with the Valk in terms of performance. I've heard that the MGC is faster than the Valk while being less stable, but that's pretty much it, since I don't have the Valk so I can't compare them directly myself.


----------



## Melvintnh327 (Aug 17, 2021)

I hope there's a "Dude, I'm slow" option in the polls


----------



## BenChristman1 (Aug 17, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> View attachment 16598
> 
> Gee, thanks @BenChristman1.


Well, it was an option, so I chose it.


----------



## Waffles (Aug 17, 2021)

Wait... I didn’t know I was faster than you! Weird


----------



## Donovan749374 (Aug 20, 2021)

I need to do a daily sub 20 ao12 quest.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 26, 2021)

I think this deserves an update. I ended the challenge as the Ao5 became almost trivial. I actually got a couple sub-17 Ao100s.

Here's some current screenshots.

 




I've been focusing on 2x2 a lot lately and have lowered my times from 4.7-8 to 4.4 on average. My 5x5 times (which I don't practice as much as I thought I would) have lowered from struggling to get sub-2:50 to Sub-2:35 and I can definitely keep going. 4x4 I average 1:20 and am really close to being sub-1:20. My OH time are all over the place as I don't practice it much and my Master Pyra time plummeted from 1:30 to 1:00-1:05 but the last time I did an Ao5 I hurt my wrist and am currently on a short break from cubing.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 16, 2021)

Currently learning NCLL. I learned L and U and am currently working on T. I'll save A and AS for last. r2 D r' U r D' r2 B r U' r' B' is a really neat alg for "Solved" (diag swap) but I'm having trouble getting the time down to what I average on Y-perm.

Finally got a hold of my Megaminx and had to relearn all the 4LLL cases that I know. After NCLL I'll try to learn full 4LL and then I will move on to L5EP for Nautilus. After that I will look at about 1-2 hundred example solve for FB to get an idea of what to look for and then I'm hoping to start transitioning to Nautilus. 

I've been using the Valk Elite after I set it up and will be doing most solves on it until I feel like setting up my MS. I set it to strong magnets and strong elasticity and it's really nice. So controllable.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Sep 17, 2021)

Tip #1: Get the valk 5 and some DNM37. Re-lube it every 10-15 solves with a drop or two. This will keep it incredibly fast, and you can do longer sessions
Tip #2: Switch to Hoya for 4x4 and 5x5. Besides being better than redux and Yau, it is also a lot more fun, and will help keep you interested in the event.
Tip #4: Don't use nautilus as your main method unless you are ok with being slow for a long time. Use it as a secondary method, that you can use when you get a good scramble.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 17, 2021)

CubableYT said:


> Tip #1: Get the Valk 5 and some DNM37. Re-lube it every 10-15 solves with a drop or two. This will keep it incredibly fast, and you can do longer sessions


10-15 solves bit a bit much, maybe every 25. I prioritize controllability over speed so it's not like I want it insanely fast all the and there wouldn't be a ton I could take advantage of with the speed of DNM on 5x5 given my times. I find my current set-up on 5x5 great. I did previously have DNM so I know when the right time for me to use it is.


CubableYT said:


> Tip #2: Switch to Hoya for 4x4 and 5x5. Besides being better than redux and Yau, it is also a lot more fun, and will help keep you interested in the event.


I honestly haven't been really interested enough to get good at Yau and I have never tried Hoya. If I decide to step up my medium cube game then I'd definitely do it, maybe Yau for 4x4 and Hoya on 5x5.


CubableYT said:


> Tip #4: Don't use Nautilus as your main method unless you are ok with being slow for a long time. Use it as a secondary method, that you can use when you get a good scramble.


So I'm just supposed to use boring vanilla CFOP until after about 500 solve spaced out over many months? If I mainly use CFOP I'll never catch up with to it with Nautilus since all my practice is going towards CFOP. If I only use it with good scrambles the techniques won't drill into my mind as fast if at all. Of course I'm going to be slow with Nautilus at first. You always are if using a new method. I'm cubing for fun, not to be world-class. I think Nautilus is a fun and interesting method and I genuinely want to switch to it. If I'm really slow for a few months that's fine because I'll be enjoying myself more. No I probably won't learn a Nautilus big cube method but for 3x3 I don't think I need to be advised to "not use it". Maybe it's not for everyone but I stated how I wanted to transition and I am aware of all the downsides.

Edit: You also said that Hoya, a less popular and proven method with fewer resources is better than Yau, a more popular, proven, more resourced method but then say that I should be wary of Nautilus, a method with very few resources and users, and that I probably shouldn't main it over CFOP, the most popular, resourced, proven method.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Sep 17, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Edit: You also said that Hoya, a less popular and proven method with fewer resources is better than Yau, a more popular, proven, more resourced method but then say that I should be wary of Nautilus, a method with very few resources and users, and that I probably shouldn't main it over CFOP, the most popular, resourced, proven method.


As long as you are not trying to be very fast that is fine, but with a lesser known method, limits have not been set in place. Only now, after years of CFOP being the main method for thousands, are we starting to see where the limits are. The problem with a method like that is there could be a 7-8 second limit(which is fast, but not in comparison to the big 3), and you will have spent hours and hours of your life trying to get there.
If you are having fun, I'm not gonna try to discourage you, but if you ever want to get world class, I would let the method get more developed.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 17, 2021)

CubableYT said:


> As long as you are not trying to be very fast that is fine, but with a lesser known method, limits have not been set in place. Only now, after years of CFOP being the main method for thousands, are we starting to see where the limits are. The problem with a method like that is there could be a 7-8 second limit(which is fast, but not in comparison to the big 3), and you will have spent hours and hours of your life trying to get there.


The thing is, I'm not trying to get there. My goal is simply sub-15 if I never reach sub-10 then I'm perfectly fine with it.


CubableYT said:


> If you are having fun, I'm not gonna try to discourage you, but if you ever want to get world class, I would let the method get more developed.


People have to be interested in the method for it to develop. It's got to start somewhere. I'm not going to wait around until the method loses it's mystery and you have several really fast users that I'll never compare with. One reason I'm so interested in Nautilus is that it's not as explored or proven.

I guess I'm more of a "cuber" not a speedcuber. I only learn things that will make it more enjoyable. I'll never learn ZBLL simply because I don't have interest. If I wanted to be world-class I'd stick with CFOP and eventually learn ZBLL but at that point it will just feel forced and not like a hobby.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Sep 17, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> The thing is, I'm not trying to get there. My goal is simply sub-15 if I never reach sub-10 then I'm perfectly fine with it.
> 
> People have to be interested in the method for it to develop. It's got to start somewhere. I'm not going to wait around until the method loses it's mystery and you have several really fast users that I'll never compare with. One reason I'm so interested in Nautilus is that it's not as explored or proven.


Alright! Have fun then and keep us updated!


----------



## PiKeeper (Sep 17, 2021)

Because Nautilus is quite similar to Roux, I think you can get a relatively good idea as to the potential of the method. I would say that if it's slower, it's only by about 0.5 seconds at most, which isn't that big of a deal.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 12, 2021)

NCLL is now learned I had a 2 week delay because of school and sickness but I did it. Much faster than what it took me for PLL.

Next step is L5EP which should be very easy since the average movecount is 7.38 and on top of that I already know EPLL and the trivial case making it only 11 cases to learn. After that I'll learn how to plan a somewhat efficient FB (~8) during inspection and than I think I'll be confident enough to switch. 

On the CFOP side I now average well under 17 seconds and often get sub-16.

One question I have is, is there a Document or set of algs for Nautilus LS or should I just brute force good solutions?


----------



## cuberswoop (Oct 12, 2021)

@TheCubingCuber347 do you mean something like This?


----------



## Cubing Forever (Oct 12, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> One question I have is, is there a Document or set of algs for Nautilus LS or should I just brute force good solutions?


iirc @voidrx had one but idk


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 12, 2021)

cuberswoop said:


> @TheCubingCuber347 do you mean something like This?


By L5EP yes that's what I mean. I'll be using this though.


----------



## tsmosher (Oct 12, 2021)

A word of advice on L5EP: If you just learn the beginning of the algorithm, the last trigger is always intuitive.

So, for example, in the spreadsheet you just linked, if you look at the bottom right case (called a Qb permutation), you just need to learn/memorize:

U (M' U2 M) U ...

Looking at the top of the cube at this point, the rest will be intuitive.

It will either be: (M' U2 M), (M U2 M'), (M' U2 M'), or (M U2 M).

Learning L5EP this way is only 5 algs (and one of those 5 is just a mirror of another).


----------



## voidrx (Oct 12, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> iirc @voidrx had one but idk


I think @GodCubing has one


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 13, 2021)

I wish a company would make a modern 57 mm 3x3. *sigh* That would feel so nice for us people with bigger hands/wings. An even better thing would be a mix, a 3x3 with adjustable size. 55.5, 56, and 56.5 mm. It offer a compromise between people who like smaller cubes and those with large hands. 55.5 to 57 would be to large of a difference but not many younger cubers would want a 3x3 that's 57mm.

I got a little to cocky and ended up forgetting S, AS, and Pi so I'm going to take a break from learning algs and try to ingrain it deep into my memory.


----------



## voidrx (Oct 13, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> An even better thing would be a mix, a 3x3 with adjustable size. 55.5, 56, and 56.5 mm


Like that one company did with a 2x2? I can't remember what company it was but someone did that with a 2x2


----------



## GodCubing (Oct 14, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> NCLL is now learned I had a 2 week delay because of school and sickness but I did it. Much faster than what it took me for PLL.
> 
> Next step is L5EP which should be very easy since the average movecount is 7.38 and on top of that I already know EPLL and the trivial case making it only 11 cases to learn. After that I'll learn how to plan a somewhat efficient FB (~8) during inspection and than I think I'll be confident enough to switch.
> 
> ...


I actually made an alg sheet, but it isn't polished yet. It's kinda an forgotten project of mine. I could try to finish it today. Or just give you the unpolished one


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 14, 2021)

GodCubing said:


> I actually made an alg sheet, but it isn't polished yet. It's kinda an forgotten project of mine. I could try to finish it today. Or just give you the unpolished one


I'm fine with whatever. If you think it's useable as is I'll take it now.


----------



## tsmosher (Oct 14, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I'm fine with whatever. If you think it's useable as is I'll take it now.



I know that I, for one, would take an unpolished one...


----------



## GodCubing (Oct 15, 2021)

ok, here ya go...
just a disclaimer, the algs were genned with trangium's batch solver, so some might not be great for look ahead








Nautilus Last Slot (NLS) Algs for L5E Variant


Image Alg Image Alg R U' R' R U' R' r U r' r U r' U r U2 r' r U r' U r U2 r' r U R r' U' R' r U r' U R U2 R' r U r' R U R' U' R U R' R U R' U' R U R' U' R U2 R' U2 R U R' U' R U2 R' U2 R U R' r U r' U' R U R' r U' r' U' R U R' F' U' F R U R' F' U' F U2 ...




docs.google.com


----------



## GodCubing (Oct 15, 2021)

Ok, I spent a few minutes and polished up the first half of my new NLP algsheet. We're making progress, or POGress in this thread


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 18, 2021)

Going to try to get into Square-1. Started yesterday and forget all the algs but have relearned most of them. I average sub-45ish.
I can do CS under 12 seconds every solve and usually get sub-10, parity takes 5-6 seconds.

I'm going to be switching to Lin as it is an insane amount of fun compared to Vandenburg also less alg, more intuitive, and lower slice count.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Oct 18, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Going to try to get into Square-1. Started yesterday and forget all the algs but have relearned most of them. I average sub-45ish.
> I can do CS under 12 seconds every solve and usually get sub-10, parity takes 5-6 seconds.
> 
> I'm going to be switching to Lin as it is an insane amount of fun compared to Vandenburg also less alg, more intuitive, and lower slice count.


Do you wanna race to sub 20? I also recently started square 1 and currently average 40-45.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 18, 2021)

CubableYT said:


> Do you wanna race to sub 20? I also recently started square 1 and currently average 40-45.


Sure I guess. I don't see myself getting there anytime soon but maybe this would push me a little to get faster.

I don't count any old PB's so I currently don't have one. I've done about 30-40 handscramble and I don't count those but my best was a 25.


----------



## LBr (Oct 18, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Going to try to get into Square-1. Started yesterday and forget all the algs but have relearned most of them. I average sub-45ish.
> I can do CS under 12 seconds every solve and usually get sub-10, parity takes 5-6 seconds.
> 
> I'm going to be switching to Lin as it is an insane amount of fun compared to Vandenburg also less alg, more intuitive, and lower slice count.


I have also begun sq-1 and also switched to lin for a very similar reason. average low 30s. A lot of plls can be solved in J/J or J/N triggers, which is satisfying. Another thing to do is blockbuild FB on the bottom only as it saves a slice, from Helmer's video


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 22, 2021)

Kind of sad it wasn't sub-20, if only I knew full EP.
**21.13 PB single**

(1, 0) / (5, -1) / (1, -2) / (-1, -1) / (-3, 0) / (3, 0) / (0, -2) / (-3, 0) / (6, -3) / (-2, 0) / (2, 0) / (-2, -4) / (-5, 0)



20/0-2/20/24/-2-1/33/ // 6-2/Star (6)
4-3/ // CO Adj/Adj(1)
3-3/3-3/03/-30/30/-30/ // CP -/J(6)
/-1-1/03/11/0-3/-1-1/01 // EP (6)
/-3,0/0,3/0,-3/0,3/2,0/0,2/-2,0/4,0/0,-2/0,2/-1,4/0,-3/ //Parity because I don't know full EP (13)
33 // AUDF


32STM / 21.13sec =1.51TPS 


[view at CubeDB.net]( https://cubedb.net/?puzzle=SQ1&titl...full_EP_%2813%29
33_//_AUDF&logosticker=derpy )


----------



## LBr (Oct 22, 2021)

a better way to do 6-2/star would be to slice through the middle into paw/paw instead of setting it up into scallop/scallop


----------



## LBr (Oct 23, 2021)

I didn't mean to force a lucky case, but in general you should do paw-paw


----------



## Eli Apperson (Oct 25, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I never made an official announcement that I *had* switched I just said I _was_ going to be switching. I want to learn CP+DF before I switch and have two more to learn. I'm pretty busy so I haven't had to much time and most of my free time has been spent reading. I just got done with _1984_ and maybe I'll take a short break before I tackle an 800 page biography on George H. W. Bush.


Nice.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 25, 2021)

LBr said:


> hmmmmmmm, is CP-DF where you solve the df edge and do epll?


It's the step where you insert DF edge while permutating the corners... Oh wait... you typed CP-DF...

I think recognition would be worse so probably wouldn't be good.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 25, 2021)

LBr said:


> if it does DF edge with CP it is absolutely not worth it and you should just learn PLL


That's literally the basic Lin method. Why would you insert DF without doing anything else and risk getting a bad LL when you can permutate corners while inserting it without adding any extra slices *and* getting a much better LL?

In certain cases PLL would be the way to go like when DF is already inserted or it flows well but you should also use CP+DF in most solves unless you know PLL+1.


----------



## cuberswoop (Nov 4, 2021)

I can still beat you.


----------



## Cubing Forever (Nov 5, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> View attachment 17573
> Sub-9 on skewb now. It's pretty amazing considering just under two weeks ago I averaged twelve seconds. I think I'll finally learn Sarah's intermediate now. (For real)
> 
> @cuberswoop


I was scared for a moment, then I noticed that it was skewb.
Thank god you're still only a second faster than me on 3x3.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Nov 8, 2021)

Wesley McCorkels Cubing PeeBs


Sheet1 Last Updated:,April 10, 2022,OFFICIAL EVENTS OFFICIAL EVENTS OFFICIAL EVENTS Event,Cube,Method,Single,Mean of 3,Average of 5,Averag...




docs.google.com





Finally made a PB sheet. Thanks to @BenChristman1 for the sheet. Events with "?" are either currently unknown or I have not been added yet.


----------



## BenChristman1 (Nov 8, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Wesley McCorkels Cubing PeeBs
> 
> 
> Sheet1 Last Updated:,April 10, 2022,OFFICIAL EVENTS OFFICIAL EVENTS OFFICIAL EVENTS Event,Cube,Method,Single,Mean of 3,Average of 5,Averag...
> ...


Dude, you slow


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Nov 19, 2021)

Passed 1000 solves on my main session!

I don't know if I'm ready to call myself sub-16 but I have been able to consistently have my Ao50, 100, and 250 under that and I feel like I got a bad solve if it's over 16.1.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Nov 29, 2021)

Updates on my averages:

2x2: 4.4-4.9
3x3: 15.8-15.9
4x4: Sub-1:15
5x5: Sub-2:30
6x6: 5:10-5:45 (I don't practice enough to be consistent)
OH: Sub-30
Skewb: ?8.7? (I haven't had time to practice Skewb at all)
Square-1: Sub-35 (Hopefully I'll pick it up more after I get the MGC)

PB's singles:
2x2: 1.76
3x3: 10.07
4x4: 55.36
5x5: 2:12.42
6x6: 4:37.76
OH: 19.71
Skewb: 2.21
Sqaure-1: 21.13

Check my signature for everything else!


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 1, 2021)

Ended up finishing OLL (Awkward Shapes and L Shapes) yesterday. All that's left is to learn better algs for some Dot cases.

Once finished I will try to make a document with all my algs, same with PLL.


----------



## cuberswoop (Dec 1, 2021)

What method are you planning on switching to?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 1, 2021)

cuberswoop said:


> What method are you planning on switching to?


The Nautilus method. I think it has a ton of potential and it's also really fun.

Steps:
1. FB (same as Roux)
2. 2x2x2 block on dbr
3. LS (can be combined with step two)
4. NCLL (CO + CP)
5. L5E

I've already learned NCLL but I've been putting off L5EP so I will try to do that by the end of December (as the thread title suggests I will be switching at the end of the year no matter what). I'd also like to learn some, it not all of NCOLL and start working on easy L5E subsets. I'm also planning on learning Tripod for U and T. In total I have about:

Fifty NLS cases
Forty NCOLL's
Twenty-two Tripods
Eight OLL's
and
Four more L5EP's

to learn (124).

This might seem like a lot in just one month but the remaining L5EP's should be very easy, most of NLS is intuitive, I will already know some Tripods and I actually might not even learn T Tripod (11 cases). I will probably keep four of my Dot case algs, and several NCOLL's are just normal NCLL's and I probably won't learn the bad cases.

So in total I will probably only end up learning around fifty to sixty cases in December.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 1, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> The Nautilus method. I think it has a ton of potential and it's also really fun.


Nautilus is basically just Roux but you have the extra restriction of preserving DB. IMO it is an OK method but it does not have as much potential as Roux due to this restriction. Since the two methods require very similar skill sets, I would say just go for Roux. Or you could try other methods, like Petrus and ZZ both which have plenty to offer!


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 2, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> Nautilus is basically just Roux but you have the extra restriction of preserving DB. IMO it is an OK method but it does not have as much potential as Roux due to this restriction. Since the two methods require very similar skill sets, I would say just go for Roux. Or you could try other methods, like Petrus and ZZ both which have plenty to offer!



I've actually been thinking about it a lot myself the past few weeks and I just don't think it has as much potential as I originally thought, the NSB step just isn't that good and it's tough to be efficient and fluid during this step. NLS is pretty restricted compared to Roux LS and it would probably be better to make SB>LS>DB in which case you basically have Roux. The only real advantage is zero blind spots after NSB and L5E can be done with a single algorithm compared to Roux where a more advanced solver would take two steps. I'm not to confident with ZZ's potential, especially with ZB being a thing. Petrus on the other hand isn't the greatest on it's own but with APB is a fantastic improvement and I think it may be better than Nautilus. 

I'm seriously considering switching to APB instead just because I think it has *way* more potential the Nautilus. The only thing that was holding me back from switching is that the ultimate goal is to learn ZBLL which has 493 (this may be wrong that's just what I have in my head) algorithms and it seemed formidable to me. But, due to a method I started using learning algs is really easy. The method was efficient enough that I learned seventeen OLL's in only two days but I think I could learn up to ten algs a day and the method would work great with ZBLL. 

There is also a lot that can be done with APB. 223 can be planned in inspection, something that can't really be done with Nautilus's FB>NSB and it's easier to track pieces building a 2x2x2 than with a 1x2x3 (IMO). While creating your Pair you can recognize edge orientation and be ready to perform the necessary EOpair alg, and, while doing the alg it's easy to trace the pieces so you can go straight into L3P and finish with a ZBLL. 

Nautilus, I now feel is better for OS. You could be method neutral between Nautilus and Roux fairly easily and get the same results if using the right method with the right scramble and with Nautilus and APB you can OS between them if you build your 223 on the back and use the Nautilus EO variant.

I haven't made my decision yet but I'm leaning more towards APB everyday.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I'm not to confident with ZZ's potential, especially with ZB being a thing.


I would just like to point out that the majority of ZBLS is pretty trash, and influencing EO even earlier than LS is difficult to do on the fly and is not worth it. ZZ takes care of EO right off the bat, only adding ~2 HTM to the cross solution.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Petrus on the other hand isn't the greatest on it's own but with APB is a fantastic improvement and I think it may be better than Nautilus.
> 
> I'm seriously considering switching to APB instead just because I think it has *way* more potential the Nautilus. The only thing that was holding me back from switching is that the ultimate goal is to learn ZBLL which has 493 (this may be wrong that's just what I have in my head) algorithms and it seemed formidable to me. But, due to a method I started using learning algs is really easy. The method was efficient enough that I learned seventeen OLL's in only two days but I think I could learn up to ten algs a day and the method would work great with ZBLL.


I would suggest joining the ZMS discord server, many people there (myself included) in the process of learning ZBLL and can help with the process! ZBLL developments are actively happening there, with algs constantly being genned, and recently new recog systems have been proposed by OreKehStrah and me.
Anyway, the nice thing about ZBLL is that you don't have to learn it in its entirety to be able to use it. OCLL/PLL is a fast alternative if you do not know the ZBLL alg.
Also, besides LS>ZBLL, there are many other EOLSLL systems.
APB seems like a great method if you like EOLSLL, but prefer a blockbuilding approach.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 2, 2021)

Why the eye roll?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 2, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> Why the eye roll?


Hold on I'm in the middle of writing a rant.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 2, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> I would just like to point out that the majority of ZBLS is pretty trash, and influencing EO even earlier than LS is difficult to do on the fly and is not worth it. ZZ takes care of EO right off the bat, only adding ~2 HTM to the cross solution.
> 
> I would suggest joining the ZMS discord server, many people there (myself included) in the process of learning ZBLL and can help with the process! ZBLL developments are actively happening there, with algs constantly being genned, and recently new recog systems have been proposed by OreKehStrah and me.
> Anyway, the nice thing about ZBLL is that you don't have to learn it in its entirety to be able to use it. OCLL/PLL is a fast alternative if you do not know the ZBLL alg.
> ...


Sorry for the late reply I had some things to take care of.

You have asked me to join the ZMS Discord like three times already. The alternating R-to-L moves are pretty difficult to do effectively and people like Tymon have shown the CFOP F2L isn't actually bad and you can do a ton of advanced stuff that ZZ kind of shuts down due to needing to plan EO. And of course you wouldn't learn ZBLS in it's entirety, it's just not worth it, but you should be able to find a balance in between to different LL approaches. Tymon often does solves where if he gets a bad OLL he'll orientate the edges with an ACO (I don't know if you can call it anything else EOO?) alg and while doing it he's mentally choosing the right ZBLL to do next.

If you're able to plan a EOxxcross in inspection and know full ZBLL than ZZ-a is _probably_ the best method but that's a very uncertain probably. If you're good with efficiency like Tymon then CFOP (or PCFZ) is the best method, if you have really high TPS then ZZ is the best due to no rotations, if you're good at blockbuilding and M slices than Roux will be the best by far.

In a Monkey League interview Matty was saying how he would use ZBLS occasionally but only if it flowed well. So maybe instead of saying ZB will be the main method of top solvers I should have said CFOP with LS *influencing*. ZB is more like CFOP with LL interference since your deliberately making LS not that great so you can have a solved cross on top and it's just not always optimal to do that as you pointed out.

Next, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying but APB isn't an EOLSLL method. You do EO during the first pair LS is (If you manage to solve DR during EOpair) just normal unless you want to do some kind of OLS trick.

CFOP vs ZZ: Vanilla CFOP and ZZ are both pretty bad but with advanced algorithms, planning, F2L, etc. they are both really good and it would really just come down to the solver for which is the best method is. Like I said if you can plan EOxxcross with the two pairs on the left being solved I think ZZ-a is the way to go (WR was technically this) but that is extremely hard to do consistently and even doing an EOxcross is challenging (but possible) to do most times. CFOP F2L is easier during the first step and I feel like you can track pieces easier and I think you're really only benefitting from EO during LS when there isn't as much freedom and there are so many ways to effect LL that it can be overwhelming. I know PapaSmurf wrote this great argument for ZZ but there is a ton of iffy things in there that aren't necessarily false but they aren't fact either.

CFOP vs Roux: These method are so drastically different that I don't think I can compare them and I'm not really experienced enough with the Roux method to really compare them but I do have positive feeling with Roux in general. The same applies with ZZ and Roux.

Big-3 vs Other methods: I believe that APB and Mehta currently have the most potential but any argument for them is really just theory since it hasn't showed results near to other methods (especially CFOP and Roux). This post isn't really about this anyway so I think I'll just leave this to.

tl;dr: I'm not allowed to have Discord so it gets a little irksome when you tell me to join some kind of server repeatedly although I guess I can't blame you for stumbling across the few posts I made stating this.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Bruh you've asked me to join the ZMS Discord like three times already.


My bad, I didn't remember inviting you so many times.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> The alternating R-to-L moves are pretty difficult to do effectively and people like Tymon have shown the CFOP F2L isn't actually bad and you can do a ton of advanced stuff that ZZ kind of shuts down due to needing to plan EO.


I belive CFOP F2L and ZZ F2L are roughly equal. CFOP F2L is kind of like "boneless" ZZ F2L. You get more flexibility but to be able to put that to good use is difficult and in practice the movecounts are roughly equal. If you try to be efficient with CFOP F2L you cannot TPS spam. Also, I'd like to point out that ZZ gives lots of opportunities for efficiency as well. EOcross is not required: you can just as easily take advantage of blockbuilding stuff (if not more easily since the EO backbone is set) as in CFOP xcross/xxcross/etc blockbuilding.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> And of course you wouldn't learn ZBLS in it's entirety, it's just not worth it, but you should be able to find a balance in between to different LL approaches. Tymon often does solves where if he gets a bad OLL he'll orientate the edges with an ACO (I don't know if you can call it anything else EOO?) alg and while doing it he's mentally choosing the right ZBLL to do next.


ZZ guarantees ZBLL *every* solve though, without needing to influence anything. Less thinking, 100% guaranteed good LL


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> If you're able to plan a EOxxcross in inspection and know full ZBLL than ZZ-a is _probably_ the best method but that's a very uncertain probably. If you're good with efficiency like Tymon then CFOP (or PCFZ) is the best method, if you have really high TPS then ZZ is the best due to no rotations, if you're good at blockbuilding and M slices than Roux will be the best by far.


You only have to plan XEOcross to have perfect lookahead in ZZ. This is roughly equivalent in difficulty as XXcross. You do not need to plan further than XEOcross because you have perfect lookahead (meaning you have information on every single piece just by seeing 3 adjacent faces). The point of planning is to make solve execution smoother/faster...if you plan XEOcross you are already all set.
"if you have really high TPS then ZZ is the best due to no rotations". This is simply just wrong. ZZ allows for high TPS thanks to the majority of the solve being 2 gen (LU or RU). Rotations are fast. The lack of rotations being a main benefit of ZZ is a common misconception.



TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Next, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying but APB isn't an EOLSLL method. You do EO during the first pair LS is (If you manage to solve DR during EOpair) just normal unless you want to do some kind of OLS trick.


After EOpair you can do LSLL with EO done, i'm pretty sure.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Big-3 vs Other methods: I believe that APB and Mehta currently have the most potential but any argument for them is really just theory since it hasn't showed results near to other methods (especially CFOP and Roux). This post isn't really about this anyway so I think I'll just leave this to.


Mehta is literally just Petrus in disguise...


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> tl;dr: I'm not allowed to have Discord so it gets a little irksome when you tell me to join some kind of server repeatedly although I guess I can't blame you for stumbling across the few posts I made stating this.


I apologize for any annoyances I have caused. I was only trying to help.


----------



## cuberswoop (Dec 2, 2021)

I didn't mean to star WWIII but Okie Dokie.


----------



## OreKehStrah (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Sorry for the late reply I had some things to take care of.
> 
> Bruh you've asked me to join the ZMS Discord like three times already. The alternating R-to-L moves are pretty difficult to do effectively and people like Tymon have shown the CFOP F2L isn't actually bad and you can do a ton of advanced stuff that ZZ kind of shuts down due to needing to plan EO. And of course you wouldn't learn ZBLS in it's entirety, it's just not worth it, but you should be able to find a balance in between to different LL approaches. Tymon often does solves where if he gets a bad OLL he'll orientate the edges with an ACO (I don't know if you can call it anything else EOO?) alg and while doing it he's mentally choosing the right ZBLL to do next.
> 
> ...


Personally I really, really hate the argument against ZZ F2L being RUL and bad. The first reason is that most of the time, it’s actually RU pair building and then just the basic L* U* L* insert, not the RUL thing most people think of due to people perpetuating that idea vs researching what people do in modern speedsolves. It makes zero sense to compare OLD ZZ to modern CFOPers. The second reason is that EVERY possible ZZ F2L case is a subset of what happens in CFOP F2L. You can look through a ton of CFOP solves that use the same idea of solving a left pair with RUFD gen ( righty turning basically) and then just doing a lefty insert just like what modern ZZ does.
Hopefully thing doesn’t start the cubing method war saga 7, but I wanted to cover this point because I find people constantly badger ZZ based on perpetuated ideas compared to modern CFOP.


----------



## Swagrid (Dec 2, 2021)

Alright here we go time to nitpick short sentences from a wall of text poggers



TheCubingCuber347 said:


> The alternating R-to-L moves are pretty difficult to do effectively


R/L switches are honestly not that bad with time and practice. Seriously. It's not something that's usually used all too often as most won't encounter a scenario where they need to, and in algs people would rather translate L to r. But if you do ZZ for a while, your R/L switching comes along.
Edit: forgot to mention, as OreKehStrah said, RUL is hardly every the case. Most of the time each pair is either RU, RUD, LUD, or RU with one LU insert. 


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> you can do a ton of advanced stuff that ZZ kind of shuts down due to needing to plan EO


As for stuff planned in inspection - sort of. More on that later. Not the exact same argument but I'll put it here because it's similar and I want to rant about it. People often say that ZZ can't do nearly as much as CFOP in F2L, due to preserving EO. The thing is, ZZ may have less tricks, but they show up more frequently and are far more often. Keyhole and pseudoslotting are braindead techniques in ZZ, and they're almost standard.



TheCubingCuber347 said:


> CFOP vs ZZ: Vanilla CFOP and ZZ are both pretty bad


I don't know much about the base potential of CFOP, but vanilla ZZ is still good. Eocross, F2L, ocll, pll is still a very strong solve. ZBLL saves a fairly small amount of time - approximately 0.5 seconds in theory. So, in practice, vanilla ZZ can achieve very good results. And it has.

Now about earlier, people often say that planning further into a solve is harder in ZZ due to EO. The truth is that after EO, everything is much easier to plan. It's harder to plan eocross vs cross, but adding one pair on top of that is easier for ZZ because the mental load required to solve one pair is far less (not to say that eocross+1 is easier than cross+1, just that the jump from eocross to eocross+1 is easier than the jump from cross to cross+1). Now, this will be more and more prevalent with every pair. As we go further, each pair is easier to add for the ZZer. EO is a hurdle more than a step.
see attached graphs + overlayed image

Yeah so this was me nitpicking sentences out of a larger message so I can pointlessly ramble about small sentiments. Swagrid out.


----------



## UNO_FASY (Dec 2, 2021)

ZZ bad, I'm faster with ZZ than any of this guys /s


----------



## Yoruba (Dec 2, 2021)

Here waiting for the 'eo is 6 moves, cross is 6 moves so eocross is 12 moves' card


----------



## voidrx (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> something that can't really be done with Nautilus's FB>NSB


At what level? Advanced? It's the same for planning 223, that's an advanced thing, an advanced Mehta solver should be able to plan FB + 3QB, why shouldn't an advanced Nautilus solver be able to plan Shell? Planning FB + SS is getting more and more likely these days, Shell is just another edge added.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 2, 2021)

Oh boy the ZZ gang is here. And Uno too.



zzoomer said:


> I belive CFOP F2L and ZZ F2L are roughly equal. CFOP F2L is kind of like "boneless" ZZ F2L. You get more flexibility but to be able to put that to good use is difficult and in practice the movecounts are roughly equal. If you try to be efficient with CFOP F2L you cannot TPS spam. Also, I'd like to point out that ZZ gives lots of opportunities for efficiency as well. EOcross is not required: you can just as easily take advantage of blockbuilding stuff (if not more easily since the EO backbone is set) as in CFOP xcross/xxcross/etc blockbuilding.



I think I agree with this statement for the most part. But I don't see what you mean by not being able to TPS spam with CFOP F2L. There is no truth in that.



zzoomer said:


> ZZ guarantees ZBLL *every* solve though, without needing to influence anything. Less thinking, 100% guaranteed good LL


I guess you could say you always get a good LL especially with ZBLL but I get around the same times with CFOP LL and ZZLL



zzoomer said:


> "if you have really high TPS then ZZ is the best due to no rotations". This is simply just wrong. ZZ allows for high TPS thanks to the majority of the solve being 2 gen (LU or RU). Rotations are fast. The lack of rotations being a main benefit of ZZ is a common misconception.



I don't really see what's so wrong with RUF F2L. I did two Ao50's with an xcross already solved. One for ZZF2L and one for CFOP F2L. It was around the same for each although CFOP F2L was a bit faster. You could say it's because I'm used to CFOP F2L but that doesn't make any sense at all because ZZF2L is easier than CFOP F2L. F moves can be very fast if they flow nicely.



zzoomer said:


> Mehta is literally just Petrus in disguise...


Oh how I hate this... While it's fair to compare Mehta-TDR to Petrus Mehta-OS is at least an original idea. Just because the both begin with a 223 doesn't mean it's Petrus. Why don't we call ZZ with cross a CFOP variation (Before you attack me on that I think that comparison is even worse then what you just made) Or Nautilus a Roux variation or maybe APB literally just EONautilus.

While the differences aren't massive they are difference that make them unique enough to be different methods and I think it's unfair to call someone's (and later the communities) brain child that they spent a lot of time inventing just to have it called a Pseudo Petrus. It's not like V Achyuthans methods where he doesn't spend more than a day on it and the method dies right away.



Swagrid said:


> I don't know much about the base potential of CFOP, but vanilla ZZ is still good. Eocross, F2L, ocll, pll is still a very strong solve. ZBLL saves a fairly small amount of time - approximately 0.5 seconds in theory. So, in practice, vanilla ZZ can achieve very good results. And it has.



Vanilla ZZ has EOline. EOcross is good but for a six second solve it's pretty hard to get that result consistently with Vanilla (Line).



UNO_FASY said:


> ZZ bad, I'm faster with ZZ than any of this guys /s


I feel like Roux uses hate ZZ more than anyone. But at the same time it is somewhat viable to say that. You've proven the Roux is extremely and have gotten at least two sub-3's, something only two other people have done before (Max Park and Ben Barron) including the WB single. ZZ on the other hands hasn't shown these results. I like the counter argument that there aren't as many users so there is less of a chance of some god-level cuber using it but it also means that the potential of the method is still just theory and we have yet to see the results.



Yoruba said:


> Here waiting for the 'eo is 6 moves, cross is 6 moves so eocross is 12 moves' card


That's what *Jperm* said!! Do you watch him too? ( I luv Jperm sew mujh!)



voidrx said:


> At what level? Advanced? It's the same for planning 223, that's an advanced thing, an advanced Mehta solver should be able to plan FB + 3QB, why shouldn't an advanced Nautilus solver be able to plan Shell? Planning FB + SS is getting more and more likely these days, Shell is just another edge added.


Sure, I guess it's possible. I've planned an xxxcross in inspection before and so have other cubers but that doesn't mean we can do it consistently. Again, it's all just theory. If you want to go and switch back to Nautilus and prove that it's possible go ahead! 223 Is easier than FB+NSB though so I don't know why you're comparing those. FB+NSB is like a 223+ a slot. It's even harder than FB+3QB.


----------



## voidrx (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> RUF F2L.


RUFy* F2L.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> but that doesn't mean we can do it consistently.


It gets harder and harder to plan xxxcross as you add a pair, because it is so inefficient compared to other methods, sure you can blockbuild xxxcross but then is it CFOP?


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> but I get around the same times with CFOP LL and ZZLL


ZZLL is kinda bad... of course you would get similar times with CFOP LL.


----------



## Swagrid (Dec 2, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Vanilla ZZ has EOline


Well, this is a different debate in itself. You can argue that Eoline is vanilla because it was what was originally proposed by Zbigniew Zborowski in 2006,but then Ryan Heise proposed eocross in 2003 (see attached). But then, something being how it was initially proposed doesn't define the vanilla. It can change over time. Eocross has been the standard for years. Look at CFOP - when first widely publicised on Jessica Fridrich's website, it was proposed with cross and F2L on top. Now, beginners will do cross on top as a bad habit, but the community would never accept cross and F2L on top as vanilla cfop. Cross on bottom, and F2L on bottom, is the vanilla.

"vanilla" is just a standard and standards change with time. That's why I call eocross vanilla.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 3, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Oh how I hate this... While it's fair to compare Mehta-TDR to Petrus Mehta-OS is at least an original idea. Just because the both begin with a 223 doesn't mean it's Petrus. Why don't we call ZZ with cross a CFOP variation (Before you attack me on that I think that comparison is even worse then what you just made) Or Nautilus a Roux variation or maybe APB literally just EONautilus.


First of all, ZZ is a _subset_ of CFOP. All of the stuff you do in ZZ can be done in CFOP, but not vice versa. On the other hand, Mehta and Petrus are pretty much identical. All the funny variants of Mehta can be applied in Petrus, or any EO223 method in general.


----------



## UNO_FASY (Dec 3, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I feel like Roux uses hate ZZ more than anyone.


this is not entirely true and kinda generalized roux users as a whole. I don't hate ZZ, I just hate that some users talk so loud about their method with barely efforts to try to improve it. Like they have big talks like ZBLL, high tps, etc. Like they feels so out of touch of cubing sometimes. Other than that I love this guys


----------



## Sevilzww (Dec 3, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I feel like Roux uses hate ZZ more than anyone. But at the same time it is somewhat viable to say that. You've proven the Roux is extremely and have gotten at least two sub-3's, something only two other people have done before (Max Park and Ben Barron) including the WB single. ZZ on the other hands hasn't shown these results. I like the counter argument that there aren't as many users so there is less of a chance of some god-level cuber using it but it also means that the potential of the method is still just theory and we have yet to see the results.


Roux users are too busy not cubing and for the active roux users, they don't theorycraft on methods like every jperm viewer does


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 3, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> First of all, ZZ is a _subset_ of CFOP. All of the stuff you do in ZZ can be done in CFOP, but not vice versa.



Hmm, so I guess Mehta-TDR, Petrus, CFOP, ZZ, Nautilus ZBLL, ZB, APB, and other similar methods are all just subsets of FreeFOP.



zzoomer said:


> On the other hand, Mehta and Petrus are pretty much identical. All the funny variants of Mehta can be applied in Petrus, or any EO223 method in general.



So are all ZBLL and L5E methods the same? They share similar characteristics and you can apply the same algorithms with them. But hey, all methods solve the cube eventually so what really differs them?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 3, 2021)

I've decided to switch to APB instead of Nautilus. I don't really see any benefits with Nautilus over APB although I'm sure in the right hands they could be equals. I just think that NSB is inefficient and the FB approach isn't _my_ personal favorite, it's still a solid step, I just don't like it. I'll try to learn EOpair this month and I think I'll do 223 on the left. I'll be going with the main (LL) variant and do plan on learning ZBLL.


----------



## ruffleduck (Dec 3, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Hmm, so I guess Mehta-TDR, Petrus, CFOP, ZZ, Nautilus ZBLL, ZB, APB, and other similar methods are all just subsets of FreeFOP.


This is true.


TheCubingCuber347 said:


> So are all ZBLL and L5E methods the same? They share similar characteristics and you can apply the same algorithms with them. But hey, all methods solve the cube eventually so what really differs them?


I do not understand your argument here. ZBLL requires EO + F2L to be done; L5E requires F2L - DF edge, and LL corners solved.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 3, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> I do not understand your argument here. ZBLL requires EO + F2L to be done; L5E requires F2L - DF edge, and LL corners solved.


Sorry I worded that wrong. What I meant was are all ZBLL methods the same, and are all L5E methods the same? Those were two separate things. (L5E can also be DR or FR)


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 5, 2021)

Just realized I was saying ZZLL not knowing that was a subset of ZBLL.

I learned EOpair (11 cases) last night for the cases where the pair is inserted so I can now do beginners APB. I also optimized some F2L algs for 2Gen cases to preserve EO.

I managed to learn TUL COLL today although half of L is NCLL and the other half I figured out intuitively so I can't really count that. I'm planning on learning H and Pi tomorrow and I probably won't learn COLL for S and aS due to the algs being so fast that the recognition time wouldn't be worth it.

Edit: Forgot to mention, I switched to Yau and am currently averaging around 1:20 but with a little more practice I can easily get my old times.


----------



## Cubing Forever (Dec 5, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I probably won't learn COLL for S and aS due to the algs being so fast that the recognition time wouldn't be worth it.


You would want to learn the recog though. It will help you later when you learn S/AS ZBLL(which imo are worth learning since the algs are kinda shorter compared to the average TUL afaik).


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 5, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> You would want to learn the recog though. It will help you later when you learn S/AS ZBLL(which imo are worth learning since the algs are kinda shorter compared to the average TUL afaik).


That is true and the algs are pretty good for S/aS but I will definitely be putting them off for last. It would be worth learning the extra COLL algs for two other reason too, more alg knowledge, and more bragging rights.


----------



## OreKehStrah (Dec 5, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> You would want to learn the recog though. It will help you later when you learn S/AS ZBLL(which imo are worth learning since the algs are kinda shorter compared to the average TUL afaik).


Or you can use my CP-less ZB recog instead


----------



## cuberswoop (Dec 6, 2021)

So how is your skewbing going?


----------



## OtterCuber (Dec 6, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> I would suggest joining the ZMS discord server, many people there (myself included) in the process of learning ZBLL and can help with the process! ZBLL


Hey, can I get an invite to the ZMS server? Thank you.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 14, 2021)

Full-step OH PB single.





Spoiler: Recon



*CFOP:*
z2 // Inspection
U' R' U2 z x' F2 U' L2 R' F2 R // xcross [9/9]
U' R' U' R // P2 [4/13]
y' L' U L U2 L' U L // P3 [7/20]
y L' U L // P4 [3/23]
R U R' U R U' R' U' R' x U R U' x' // OLL [12/35]
R U' R U R U R U' R' U' R2 U' // PLL [12/47]
*47 STM*

47STM ÷ 19.22 = 2.44 STPS
53ETM ÷ 19.22 = 2.75 ETPS



The LL had pretty slow TPS considering I got my highest TPS PLL and a very good OLL but I'm pretty happy about the result regardless considering it was full-step and had an amazing F2L that I didn't butcher.

Edit: Previous PB was a 19.71 with a PLL skip


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 22, 2021)

Well, I've been slacking with my EOpairs so I don't think I can learn it by the end of the year. I still only know the EOpair (solved) cases. Reasons: Spending to much time on forums / procrastinating / Spending a lot of time hiking and folding origami / lazy / busy.

On the positive side I'm approaching sub-15 with CFOP which has always been my goal in cubing. I've been working a lot on efficiency in my F2L and cross and I changed my turning style to something more relaxing and I've become better at more advanced fingertricks. I'm hoping to get the The Valk The Valk 3m, the Dayan Zhanchi Pro m (green), and the XMD CH Tornado v2m so maybe I'll get a new main but I think the Qiyi MS will always be my favorite 3x3 of all time.


----------



## cuberswoop (Dec 22, 2021)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Well, I've been slacking with my EOpairs so I don't think I can learn it by the end of the year. I still only know the EOpair (solved) cases. Reasons: _spending to much time on the forums_ / _procrsinating_ / Spending a lot of time hiking and folding origami / _lazy_ / busy.
> 
> On the positive side I'm approaching sub-15 with CFOP which has always been my goal in cubing. I've been working a lot on efficiency in my F2L and cross and I changed my turning style to something more relaxing and I've become better at more advanced fingertricks. I'm hoping to get the The Valk The Valk 3m, the Dayan Zhanchi Pro m (green), and the XMD CH Tornado v2m so maybe I'll get a new main but I think the Qiyi MS will always be my favorite 3x3 of all time.
> 
> ...


I got those same problems.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jan 1, 2022)

Thread topic change and new signature for the new year.

*2021 Reflection:*
I went from averaging just under 30 seconds at the start of the year with LBL to 15 flat, and can almost call myself sub-15, but I won't because I'm ditching CFOP to use an awesome method called Petrus-APB (or just APB)! I managed to learn full OLL, PLL, NCLL (almost switched to Nautilus L5E), COLL, PBL, F2L, EOpair (solved), Sarah's Intermediate, and I'm hoping to learn a lot more this year including,

full EOpair (dBR), full LXS (dfR) (formally L3P), EO Tripod, TUL ZBLL, good WV algs, Sarah's Advanced, Full L4E, Megaminx 4LLL, Square-1 stuff (maybe not full EP but at least some of it), CLL and EG-1.

I will also try out some more 4x4 methods like Triforce, K4, Meyer, MI4, and OBLBL

My full list of goals can be found right here.

I've gotten a lot of help on the forums and without them I'd still be using CFOP and only know about the big-4. I've discovered a ton of cool methods, algs, and subsets. A bunch of tips, software's, and friends. On top of that I assisted in the rise of the Duck Revolution and found out I was one of the four. I'm hoping to learn a lot more this year and becoming a more knowledgeable cuber on top of becoming at least sub-15 with Petrus-APB but hopefully beyond. My entire cubing journey will from here on until it is accomplished is to prove Fahmi Aulia Rachman as incorrect.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jan 16, 2022)

I received numerous things yesterday as gifts from relatives and I am very pleased.

Puzzles:
CH XMD Tornado v2 m
Dayan Zhanchi Pro m (green)
YJ MGC Square-1

Others:
TC mat (Dark mode)
Angstrom Mini mat
TC Platypus logo (goes to a good cause too!)

I'll briefly go over my thoughts on these things and will hopefully make a review on the CH XMD and Zhanchi Pro in the future.

Others: The Platypus logo looks great on my Qiyi MS and is very visually appealing. It's extremely high quality and gives the cube a nice personal touch.
The Mats are gorgeous and are of a much higher quality then the drab Speedstacks mats. I put the Dark mode mat (It's fairly large) over my desk and put the Angstrom mini mat over it. The Dark mode mat isn't very cushioned especially when comparing it to the awesome Angstrom mat but it does look nice as a sort of cloth to up the comfort of your solving. It's makes it feel more relaxing.

Cubes:

YJ MGC Square-1: I have not done any speedsolves on this yet so I will not say much but out of the box it is way to fast and loose. Still and instant main and leagues better than the YLM. I'm a little disappointed by the matte finish and the small size (YLM is to big and this is to small) but I can put up with it.

The Dayan Zhanchi Pro m (green) Is a nice, fast cube similar to the Tengy v2 (There is still a noticeable difference). The green pieces look absolutely stunning, and the silicone inserts offer better grip than I would have thought possible. I haven't broken it in yet or gotten used to the color of the cube to get my usual results on it as recognition is currently not great on it but if I can improve that I may main it, if not for 2H than perhaps OH. I won't go to in depth on it, but I would like to point out that it is pretty large, I believe it is actually 57mm since it appears to be large than the MS which measures at approximately 56.5mm.

The color is more of a minty green similar to what kitchen counters were in times past. The white also appears to be almost pink in lower lighting which is pretty cool.

CH XMD Tornado V2 m: This is an insanely good 3x3 out of the box and I did not experience any of the alleged corner cutting problems that it is known for making me think it's mostly just people set on thinking this because "that's what Jperm and CubeHead say". Of course, this is the CH version which is (drastically I would say, but I've never tried a standard TRND v2) better but not enough that the problem would completely cease. That's not to say it isn't perfect, it still is not quite as good as other flagships (and since 2020 most budgets) 3x3's but it does not affect performance at all. Methinks that the way the cube is built sacrifices corner cutting for a very soft, extremely quite cube.

I was expecting the smaller size to be a problem, but the cube is built in such a way that the smaller size is actually very nice and compliments it's turning phenomenally.



Spoiler: Super controversial conclusion: BEWARE 



The Tornado is currently my new main. It's just that good, that I would use this over my beloved MS. The MS is still my favorite cube and will always have special place in my life but I get better results on the TRND, I still enjoy the feel of it, and it's less bothersome to others.


----------



## cuberswoop (Jan 16, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I received numerous things yesterday as gifts from relatives and I am very pleased.
> 
> Puzzles:
> CH XMD Tornado v2 m
> ...


So twas' just a long post.


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Jan 16, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> found out I was one of the four.


So that's why you changed your pfp! I've always been curious about it ever since you did


----------



## Garf (Jan 24, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I received numerous things yesterday as gifts from relatives and I am very pleased.
> 
> Puzzles:
> CH XMD Tornado v2 m
> ...


No... I switched from the Tornado because I just couldn't get the speed I like after I got the RS3M 2021.
Also, the corner cutting is just really hard to fix.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jan 25, 2022)

Well, this is a bit awkward. I'm back to maining my beloved MS after a short stint with the CH Tornado. I still use the CH Tornado as an OH main but no longer 2H. I'll also still use it around others due to its quietness and it's a nice cube for learning algs. Do you guys prefer certain cubes when learning algorithms or is it just me?


----------



## Garf (Jan 25, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Well, this is a bit awkward. I'm back to maining my beloved MS after a short stint with the CH Tornado. I still use the CH Tornado as an OH main but no longer 2H. I'll also still use it around others due to its quietness and it's a nice cube for learning algs. Do you guys prefer certain cubes when learning algorithms or is it just me?


Is it because of the platypus logo?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jan 25, 2022)

TheEpicCuber said:


> Is it because of the platypus logo?




Maybe it is maybe it's not.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Jan 25, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Well, this is a bit awkward. I'm back to maining my beloved MS after a short stint with the CH Tornado. I still use the CH Tornado as an OH main but no longer 2H. I'll also still use it around others due to its quietness and it's a nice cube for learning algs. Do you guys prefer certain cubes when learning algorithms or is it just me?


I love using the Tornado for learning algs and just slow turning. You are not the only one


----------



## cuberswoop (Jan 25, 2022)

CubableYT said:


> I love using the Tornado for learning algs and just slow turning. You are not the only one


NGL I actually like using cheaper cubes to learn algs. Like those $4 ones on TC.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jan 27, 2022)

Can we resurrect Kilominx? It's such a fun puzzle. I personally don't have one but I'm using a Qiyi QiCheng with the edge and center stickers peeled off until I get one. I got into yesterday and I'm approaching sub-50 already. I'm going to be optimizing my LL which is the big thing holding me back. @cuberswoop, @CubableYT, and I are going to be racing too sub-20. We've been discussing it a lot on the Speedsolving.com Chat and we managed to get a hold of a Kilominx LL doc that we're editing to be more optimal.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Feb 1, 2022)

Got a PB while doing some FreeFOP solves! 8.30 with a PLL skip (so it would technically be FreeFALL).


R2 U' F2 R2 U B2 D2 R D2 R D' L' D2 B' D2 F D' B2 D' B'

FreeFALL:
y' // Inspection
R2' U' r U x' y U' U' x U R2' U' x' R' U R U' M' U M y U U R U R' U2' R U R' // F2L-1 [25/25]
U R' U' R U R' U' R // LS [8/33]
U R U R' U' R' F R F' // OLL [9/42]


42STM / 8.3sec =5.06TPS 


[view at CubeDB.net]( https://cubedb.net/?puzzle=3&title=...LS_[8/33]
U_R_U_R-_U-_R-_F_R_F-_//_OLL_[9/42] )


Luckily, I accidently had my camera running so I got it on cam:








8.30 single.mp4







drive.google.com


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Feb 1, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Got a PB while doing some FreeFOP solves! 8.30 with a PLL skip (so it would technically be FreeFALL).
> 
> 
> R2 U' F2 R2 U B2 D2 R D2 R D' L' D2 B' D2 F D' B2 D' B'
> ...


That's awesome! Such a cool way to get a PB


----------



## OtterCuber (Feb 1, 2022)

Did you design the platypus logo yourself?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Feb 1, 2022)

OtterCuber said:


> Did you design the platypus logo yourself?


No it's actually available to purchase on TheCubicle, it was part of a fundraiser and I thought the platyus one was adorable.









Cubicle Platypus Logo


This is a special logo designed for our Support Australian Wildlife Logos Collection. 100% of proceeds from this logo will be donated to Wires Wildlife Rescue to help victims of Australia’s recent fires. Available only while supplies last.




www.thecubicle.com


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Feb 2, 2022)

I was chatting on the SS Hangouts about PLL and it turns out my PLL's are... a little different than what most people use. I learned PLL from an old sheet that no longer exists and I decided why not create a new sheet containing all the algs? Can you guys let me know if there are any PLL's I need to switch? 









TheCubingCuber347's PLL's


PLL Aa,R' B' R2 D R' U' R D' R' U R' B R Ab,R' B' R U' R D R' U R D' R2' B R E,R' F R B' R' F' R B l' U' R D' R' U R D F,R' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' U' R U R' U R Ga,R2 u R' U R' U' R u' R2 y' R' U R Gb,R2 D L2 D F2 L D R' D2 L D' R' U' Gc,R2 F2 R U2 R U2 R' F R U R' U' R' F R2,R2' u' R U' ...




docs.google.com


----------



## Eli Apperson (Feb 2, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I was chatting on the SS Hangouts about PLL and it turns out my PLL's are... a little different than what most people use. I learned PLL from an old sheet that no longer exists and I decided why not create a new sheet containing all my algs? Can you guys let me know if there are any PLL's I need to switch?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


...
Ab, Aa, E, H, JB, Na, Ra, Rb, T, Ua, Ub, V, F


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Feb 2, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I was chatting on the SS Hangouts about PLL and it turns out my PLL's are... a little different than what most people use. I learned PLL from an old sheet that no longer exists and I decided why not create a new sheet containing all the algs? Can you guys let me know if there are any PLL's I need to switch?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What in God's name is that H perm!?


----------



## Cubing Forever (Feb 4, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I was chatting on the SS Hangouts about PLL and it turns out my PLL's are... a little different than what most people use. I learned PLL from an old sheet that no longer exists and I decided why not create a new sheet containing all the algs? Can you guys let me know if there are any PLL's I need to switch?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


wth are those??!!
Change everything except the Nb, A perms and Z ig


----------



## Garf (Feb 4, 2022)

Plot twist: it is a big joke to shock everyone and then gain reactions.
I agree: change the PLLs. I would recommend watching JPerm's vid on PLL, Cubehead's vid on PLL; basically any other PLL algs besides those. A, Nb, and Z are good, like @Cubing Forever mentioned.


----------



## OtterCuber (Feb 4, 2022)

I've been looking at Ruihang-styled PLLs recently. Some of them are quite nice.


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Feb 4, 2022)

These PLLs must be reaaaally outdated. They look mostly (particularly <RUB> algs) like algs people discovered when trying to work out how to solve the case for the first time, or when there was little to no documentation of algs anywhere.
(Idk that's just my theory so take it with at least a pinch of salt)


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Mar 2, 2022)

Haven't updated in a while. I've learned CLL for 2x2 and am currently on EOTripod, I have TUL down and will be working on S/AS today.
I'm going to _try_ to learn EOpair this month, something I've been procrastinating and I'm also going to try out Triforce for 4x4. I'm also sub-40 on kilo and should be able to get sub-35 with a little bit of practice.

*Goals for March:*

Finish learning Tripod (58 alg)
Learn EOpair (63 algs (I think)
Relearn the LXS cases with the corner inserted in D (30 some algs)
Sub-2 with Triforce
Get better with CLL
sub-35 on Kilominx and get a sub-25 single on cam
Maybe try out LEOR-b for OH
Learn 1-Flip for Pyraminx and possibly WO
Learn M2 for 3BLD
Eat Tameles
Finish my Jay-style PLL videos but with obnoxiously bad algs.


----------



## cuberswoop (Mar 2, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Haven't updated in a while. I've learned CLL for 2x2 and am currently on EOTripod, I have TUL down and will be working on S/AS today.
> I'm going to _try_ to learn EOpair this month, something I've been procrastinating and I'm also going to try out Triforce for 4x4. I'm also sub-40 on kilo and should be able to get sub-35 with a little bit of practice.
> 
> *Goals for March:*
> ...


It pains me there is no closing bracket on the 2nd goal.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Mar 4, 2022)

Decided to switch to Triforce full time. It's insanely fun and I already average sub-2, running towards sub-1:50 and I have two sub-1:30 solves.

I can now sub-4 CLL consistently except when I get a few cases I need to work on yet.

About 1/3 of the way done with my PLL videos, and I'm getting a better understanding of M2, still need to work on my knowledge of the M layer and how that works.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Mar 24, 2022)

Generated By csTimer on 2022-03-24
solves/total: 12/12

mean of 3
best: 11.39 (σ = 1.73)

avg of 12
current: 12.64 (σ = 1.19)

Time List:
1. (9.57) L' U B2 R2 D' U' F2 L2 D L2 B2 D L' U2 R' U2 R' F D U L' 
2. 13.01 R2 B2 D L2 D2 F2 D' B2 D L2 F2 R F2 U B L' B' F U' L2 F2 
3. 11.60 F2 L2 F D2 L2 B L2 B2 F2 U2 R2 L' U2 R' D2 L' U' B2 L' F 
4. 13.45 R L2 F' L' B' U R' L2 U F2 D L2 D' R2 U2 B2 D B2 U2 R U' 
5. 12.82 L2 R2 U2 L2 U' R2 B2 D R2 D2 R' D2 F' D2 L' D' F2 D2 R' B2 
6. 13.49 U2 B' R' U' F' L' B' F2 R2 L2 U F2 R2 D' R2 U R2 F2 D2 F 
7. 12.45 R B L2 B R2 F L2 B2 R2 F' L2 F' L' B' L U' B F' U R' 
8. 12.84 F2 L R2 D2 B2 R2 D2 U2 R' F2 D2 B' D U' F D' L D2 L2 R2 
9. 9.81 F B L' D R2 L B' L2 F2 B2 D' L2 F2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R' B2 
10. 14.05 L2 D' L2 B2 U' F2 R2 U' L2 F2 D2 R2 F' L B U2 B' L2 D B2 L' 
11. (15.73) R2 B2 U' F2 L2 D' B2 R2 D' B2 D U B' L2 R B2 D' U' L' B2 R 
12. 12.86 D' L2 F' U2 R F B2 D' R' B' U R2 U2 D' L2 D' B2 L2 U L2 U

Old PB Ao12 was 13.43.

The only word I can say is, Woaj.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Mar 29, 2022)




----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 6, 2022)

SCDB

16.92 OH PB single:


F' B' U2 B' D B' L2 U2 R B' L2 D2 L2 F U2 B' L2 B2 D2 L2

x2 // Inspection
U' U' R U R // Cross [5/5]
y' U R U' R' // P1 [4/9]
U R' U' R U' R' U R // P2 [8/17]
z U R U' R R U R' U' // P3 [8/25]
R R U' R U R' U' R U z' //P3 [9/34]
r' U' R U' R' U' U' r // OLL [8/42]
U R U R' U' D R R U' R U' R' U R R R U R R U D' // PLL [21/63]
63 STM ÷ 16.92 = 3.72 STPS

L'il mess up on PLL but I'm happy.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 7, 2022)

U L F2 D' R2 F2 D2 B D' R B2 U2 L2 B2 D2 L D2 L' U2 L2 F2

Got a 15.91 a couple solves later. I can't seem to recon now, but I know it's not a miscramble because I was able to do a quick recon right after the solve, I didn't take the time to write it down because I was in the middle of a 1v1. I also got a 20.66 Ao5 and a 19.56 Mo3. I'm going to start grinding for sub-20 OH, what's the best place to learn OH OLL?


----------



## OreKehStrah (Apr 7, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> U L F2 D' R2 F2 D2 B D' R B2 U2 L2 B2 D2 L D2 L' U2 L2 F2
> 
> Got a 15.91 a couple solves later. I can't seem to recon now, but I know it's not a miscramble because I was able to do a quick recon right after the solve, I didn't take the time to write it down because I was in the middle of a 1v1. I also got a 20.66 Ao5 and a 19.56 Mo3. I'm going to start grinding for sub-20 OH, what's the best place to learn OH OLL?


OH OLL is kinda oof tbh. If you want a better CFOP like solve, look into oh CFCE. A lot of CLL algs are also CMLL algs, which are very nice for OH and ELL is nice for OH.


----------



## OtterCuber (Apr 7, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> U L F2 D' R2 F2 D2 B D' R B2 U2 L2 B2 D2 L D2 L' U2 L2 F2
> 
> Got a 15.91 a couple solves later. I can't seem to recon now, but I know it's not a miscramble because I was able to do a quick recon right after the solve, I didn't take the time to write it down because I was in the middle of a 1v1. I also got a 20.66 Ao5 and a 19.56 Mo3. I'm going to start grinding for sub-20 OH, what's the best place to learn OH OLL?


Have you studied Max's solves?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 11, 2022)

Got a bunch of peebs yesterday.



Spoiler: Mo3 9.56



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
mean of 3: 9.956

Time List:
1. 9.108 B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
2. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
3. 9.673 B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R





Spoiler: Ao5 10.47



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
avg of 5: 10.475

Time List:
1. (14.208) L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
2. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
3. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
4. 9.673 B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
5. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2





Spoiler: Ao12 11.62



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
avg of 12: 11.621

Time List:
1. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
2. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
3. (14.208) L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
4. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
5. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
6. 9.673 B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
7. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
8. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
9. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
10. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
11. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
12. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F





Spoiler: Ao25 12.28



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
avg of 25: 12.285

Time List:
1. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
2. 10.120 D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
3. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
4. (15.688) F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
5. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
6. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
7. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
8. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
9. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
10. 9.673 B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
11. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
12. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
13. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
14. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
15. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
16. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
17. (16.760) U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
18. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
19. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
20. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
21. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
22. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
23. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
24. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
25. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2





Spoiler: Ao50 12.83



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
avg of 50: 12.835

Time List:
1. (18.040) U2 L2 F D2 L2 F L2 B2 D2 B' R2 F2 R B2 D' U2 L' U' F' R B' 
2. 11.734 B' L R2 U' L2 F2 L2 B2 U' B2 L2 D R2 B' U' L2 B R2 B' D2 
3. 13.399 R U2 F2 U2 B2 R' U2 L' B2 L' U' L' F' D L' R D2 B D' F 
4. 12.645 F L2 F2 D2 F2 D R2 D2 U' L2 B2 D' L' B' D F2 R' B D' R 
5. 10.189 L2 B F' L2 R2 B U2 L2 F L2 F2 U' F U2 R' U' R2 F2 L B' 
6. (17.526) U L2 R2 U2 L2 U' B2 F2 L2 U R2 D R' U' R' F' R' F' U2 B' 
7. 13.615 F2 U F2 D B2 R2 B2 U R2 U' R' B' D2 L2 U2 L U R' U2 
8. 12.419 R B R2 B D2 R2 B' D2 U2 R2 F' U2 R' F R2 U F2 L' R2 D' 
9. 11.976 F' U2 L B2 L2 D' F2 D B2 D' F2 D' B2 U2 B' D' U L2 F' U2 L' 
10. 11.095 U D' R' U2 R B' R2 L D F U2 B' R2 F' L2 D2 F2 D2 F D2 F 
11. 13.457 L2 U2 F2 L' D2 R' F2 R' U2 L' F2 U2 D' L2 R U F L B U R2 
12. 12.378 U2 R' B' D2 R2 U2 F' D2 F' R2 U2 B2 R2 B' U R D L' D' B R' 
13. (18.252) U2 F2 U2 L2 D2 R2 U2 B' D2 B2 R2 L D' F2 D2 R D U L' R' 
14. 12.158 R' B' R2 B L2 F2 R2 D2 F2 D2 B D2 R U B2 D B' F D' R' B 
15. 10.790 R2 D' L2 F2 D' B2 U' L2 B2 R2 F2 R2 F' R' D2 B L' U B' D 
16. 15.722 B R' B L' B U2 R F U F D2 R2 D2 F2 B' D2 F' U2 B 
17. 14.585 L' B D2 L2 R2 F2 U2 B L2 R2 D2 B' U' L' F' D2 R2 D R' U' 
18. 14.290 B2 R2 D' R2 B2 L2 U2 B2 D' L2 U' L' R' F' D' U R' U' B' L' 
19. 12.798 L2 D' U' L2 B2 F2 U B2 F2 R2 D' B2 F D' B' F' U' R U2 B2 R 
20. 13.066 R' F2 L D' L D L B' R2 B2 D F2 U2 B2 L2 B2 D F2 L 
21. 15.052 R B2 R2 F2 D' L2 F2 D B2 D2 F2 U' B L R' B' D L2 U' R' 
22. 12.883 D2 F L2 U2 B L2 F' U2 L2 B D2 R' F' U' R' D' R B D' F2 R 
23. 13.336 B2 F2 R2 F2 R' F2 R' U F' R B F' R U L' F' D2 
24. 13.333 R B D2 F D L2 U' R' B2 L2 U2 R2 U F2 D L2 D2 R2 D' B2 
25. 13.044 U2 R2 D2 R2 F R2 U2 B' F' R2 B2 U' L' U' L B2 U2 F' D F' 
26. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
27. 10.120 D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
28. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
29. 15.688 F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
30. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
31. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
32. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
33. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
34. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
35. (9.673) B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
36. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
37. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
38. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
39. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
40. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
41. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
42. 16.760 U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
43. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
44. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
45. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
46. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
47. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
48. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
49. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
50. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2





Spoiler: Ao100 13.33



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-11
avg of 100: 13.339

Time List:
1. 11.681 B2 U2 L R F2 R U2 F2 D2 F2 L' U R' B' D' F2 L2 D R 
2. 14.062 R L2 F2 U L2 U F2 R2 B2 U' F2 D B U B2 R2 B D' R B' L 
3. 13.389 U2 B L2 F' D2 R2 B U2 L2 B2 F2 D' F' R2 U2 L D2 R2 B' L2 D' 
4. 12.428 D2 F D L2 F2 D' U2 F2 R2 U2 R2 D R2 U2 L B2 F R' B' R' D 
5. 12.914 F' R L' B L' F2 U' L D' B' U2 F2 L2 F R2 D2 F R2 F D2 
6. 14.337 L' D L2 D' R2 B2 U' B2 D L2 F2 R2 B U' L' F D2 F U' F 
7. 13.081 L2 D2 R2 U' L2 F2 L2 D2 B2 R2 F' R U B D2 L' D2 L' F U2 
8. 12.620 R' B' U' F2 R2 B2 F2 R2 U L2 U' B2 L' F U2 L' R' F D' U L2 
9. 14.782 F D' U2 L' R2 U2 B2 L' F2 D2 U2 L U2 D' B D R' F' L' U 
10. 12.439 B L U' B2 L B' U F2 L' B2 R' D2 R' D2 R U2 R' U B2 
11. 15.149 U2 R' U2 B2 F U2 B L2 B2 R2 D2 R2 F2 U L2 R2 F2 R' F L2 D 
12. 15.491 B F2 L F2 L D2 L2 R' U2 B2 F' D' R2 B2 L D2 R D 
13. 12.913 U L2 B2 D2 U2 F' D2 B F' D2 R2 F2 L' D2 F R D R2 U' B2 D 
14. 12.176 F U' L2 B' L2 B' U2 B D2 B' F2 L2 B2 U L D2 R2 U' R F2 
15. 15.662 B' D' R' U' D' R' L F' R F D2 B2 R2 F D2 F' D2 F' U2 D2 
16. (21.169) U2 L' F2 D' R2 U2 L2 B2 R2 U R2 D L2 F' U B L' B' F' L' 
17. 13.935 B' L U2 R2 U' B2 D' R2 D' R2 U B' L R U R' D F2 R 
18. 10.921 D' U2 L2 F' U2 F L2 F U2 F U2 F' R2 L D U2 L' F L' U' 
19. 13.995 F2 D B2 L2 F2 U2 R2 U' L' D' R' U' F' U L' D F U2 
20. 13.733 R2 U2 F' L2 D2 B2 R2 U2 R2 F' D2 U' F' R U' R' B R2 D' B' 
21. 13.544 L B' L2 F U2 R' F2 L2 D' B2 D2 R L2 B2 R' L' B2 U2 L 
22. 14.119 D2 R U' L2 U F2 R F2 L2 F' L2 B' U2 R2 F U2 B' R2 D2 L' 
23. 12.999 L' D F R' L U' B R2 F2 U R2 B2 U2 B2 U B2 D L2 R F R 
24. 14.417 F B R F U2 L D2 B' D' F2 L2 F2 D2 L2 U F2 D2 F2 L2 R F2 
25. 14.291 L2 F R2 F2 D B2 L2 D' R2 D' B2 U2 L2 R D' F2 L F L2 R2 
26. 15.296 D F' B2 R' D2 F' U D R U B2 R2 U' D' L2 D' B2 U' L2 F2 L2 
27. 13.871 U R F2 D B2 U2 B2 F2 U R2 U' R2 U' F' L' F2 D' L R B' U' 
28. 15.443 R2 D2 B D2 L2 R2 B L2 B2 L2 F R2 D R' F U L' D' R' B L2 
29. 11.924 F2 L2 U2 L F2 L' D2 B2 D2 R' U2 R2 D L' U2 F' U F D2 R 
30. 11.568 D R2 F' R' B2 D2 R2 D R D2 R2 B2 D2 F' R2 D2 B' U2 F2 B U2 
31. 11.918 U B2 U' F2 U' R2 F2 R2 F2 B L' R U R' D2 L F2 U' B2 
32. 12.419 F2 R' U2 L B2 D2 L D2 R' B2 D2 R' B D2 U R' D' L2 B F2 D 
33. 13.355 B2 U B2 L2 U' F2 U2 B2 D R2 B2 R U' L F' L2 R B F' D' 
34. 14.174 R' F2 L F2 L2 F2 D2 R U2 L' R2 F2 D L2 R B2 R U2 F D' 
35. 15.550 D L2 B2 D R2 D B2 U' R2 U B2 F2 L U' B2 U' R2 F L2 D' B2 
36. (18.726) L B' D2 R2 F2 U' R2 B2 F2 U' R2 B2 F2 L B2 U L2 R' U2 F' R2 
37. 13.417 R2 F2 D L U B' U L2 U' D R2 U2 F2 D2 F2 D2 
38. 12.267 F' D B2 U2 R2 F2 R D F2 U2 F2 B2 U2 L' F2 R D2 R2 
39. 12.693 U' D2 L' F2 R' D2 R D2 R' D2 F2 R2 F' U R' U L F' U' 
40. 11.753 B2 R2 U' B2 L2 F2 U2 B2 D L2 D' B F' D' U2 L2 R' F' U2 B' U2 
41. 14.233 F L2 D2 R2 B' R2 B U2 L2 U2 B' F2 U' R D2 R' B D2 R' F' L' 
42. 13.224 D L F' R2 D L2 D' L2 B2 F2 D' U' R' D2 B R2 D2 L2 R' 
43. 14.080 D2 F' L' D R F' D2 R F' L2 B D2 F' D2 F2 D2 F L2 D2 
44. 14.715 D R2 B2 L' D' B' D B U2 F2 L2 U2 L2 D2 F L2 B L2 U2 R' D2 
45. 14.626 R L' U' L2 B' L D R U F U' B2 U' L2 F2 R2 B2 D' L2 U2 
46. (18.132) L' B' U2 B2 R2 D2 R2 D' B2 R2 B2 U' B' U2 L B' L' R F' L 
47. 16.718 R' F2 L B L B2 U' F2 R F2 B2 R L' B2 D2 R' D2 R U' B2 
48. 12.597 L2 D B2 U2 L2 B2 L2 F2 L' F2 R' D F' R D F R2 D 
49. 16.113 L B2 U R' F' B' D F' U2 L F2 B2 D2 R' F2 R F2 D2 R2 U2 F' 
50. 11.489 L2 F2 U B2 U2 R2 D F2 U B2 F2 R2 F L F' L U' F' L2 R U' 
51. (18.040) U2 L2 F D2 L2 F L2 B2 D2 B' R2 F2 R B2 D' U2 L' U' F' R B' 
52. 11.734 B' L R2 U' L2 F2 L2 B2 U' B2 L2 D R2 B' U' L2 B R2 B' D2 
53. 13.399 R U2 F2 U2 B2 R' U2 L' B2 L' U' L' F' D L' R D2 B D' F 
54. 12.645 F L2 F2 D2 F2 D R2 D2 U' L2 B2 D' L' B' D F2 R' B D' R 
55. (10.189) L2 B F' L2 R2 B U2 L2 F L2 F2 U' F U2 R' U' R2 F2 L B' 
56. 17.526 U L2 R2 U2 L2 U' B2 F2 L2 U R2 D R' U' R' F' R' F' U2 B' 
57. 13.615 F2 U F2 D B2 R2 B2 U R2 U' R' B' D2 L2 U2 L U R' U2 
58. 12.419 R B R2 B D2 R2 B' D2 U2 R2 F' U2 R' F R2 U F2 L' R2 D' 
59. 11.976 F' U2 L B2 L2 D' F2 D B2 D' F2 D' B2 U2 B' D' U L2 F' U2 L' 
60. 11.095 U D' R' U2 R B' R2 L D F U2 B' R2 F' L2 D2 F2 D2 F D2 F 
61. 13.457 L2 U2 F2 L' D2 R' F2 R' U2 L' F2 U2 D' L2 R U F L B U R2 
62. 12.378 U2 R' B' D2 R2 U2 F' D2 F' R2 U2 B2 R2 B' U R D L' D' B R' 
63. (18.252) U2 F2 U2 L2 D2 R2 U2 B' D2 B2 R2 L D' F2 D2 R D U L' R' 
64. 12.158 R' B' R2 B L2 F2 R2 D2 F2 D2 B D2 R U B2 D B' F D' R' B 
65. 10.790 R2 D' L2 F2 D' B2 U' L2 B2 R2 F2 R2 F' R' D2 B L' U B' D 
66. 15.722 B R' B L' B U2 R F U F D2 R2 D2 F2 B' D2 F' U2 B 
67. 14.585 L' B D2 L2 R2 F2 U2 B L2 R2 D2 B' U' L' F' D2 R2 D R' U' 
68. 14.290 B2 R2 D' R2 B2 L2 U2 B2 D' L2 U' L' R' F' D' U R' U' B' L' 
69. 12.798 L2 D' U' L2 B2 F2 U B2 F2 R2 D' B2 F D' B' F' U' R U2 B2 R 
70. 13.066 R' F2 L D' L D L B' R2 B2 D F2 U2 B2 L2 B2 D F2 L 
71. 15.052 R B2 R2 F2 D' L2 F2 D B2 D2 F2 U' B L R' B' D L2 U' R' 
72. 12.883 D2 F L2 U2 B L2 F' U2 L2 B D2 R' F' U' R' D' R B D' F2 R 
73. 13.336 B2 F2 R2 F2 R' F2 R' U F' R B F' R U L' F' D2 
74. 13.333 R B D2 F D L2 U' R' B2 L2 U2 R2 U F2 D L2 D2 R2 D' B2 
75. 13.044 U2 R2 D2 R2 F R2 U2 B' F' R2 B2 U' L' U' L B2 U2 F' D F' 
76. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
77. (10.120) D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
78. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
79. 15.688 F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
80. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
81. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
82. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
83. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
84. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
85. (9.673) B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
86. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
87. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
88. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
89. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
90. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
91. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
92. 16.760 U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
93. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
94. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
95. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
96. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
97. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
98. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
99. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
100. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2


----------



## OtterCuber (Apr 11, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Got a bunch of peebs yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Amazing progression. Keep it up!


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 12, 2022)

Spoiler: Ao50 12.69



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-12
avg of 50: 12.694

Time List:
1. 13.336 B2 F2 R2 F2 R' F2 R' U F' R B F' R U L' F' D2 
2. 13.333 R B D2 F D L2 U' R' B2 L2 U2 R2 U F2 D L2 D2 R2 D' B2 
3. 13.044 U2 R2 D2 R2 F R2 U2 B' F' R2 B2 U' L' U' L B2 U2 F' D F' 
4. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
5. 10.120 D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
6. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
7. 15.688 F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
8. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
9. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
10. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
11. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
12. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
13. (9.673) B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
14. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
15. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
16. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
17. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
18. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
19. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
20. (16.760) U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
21. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
22. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
23. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
24. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
25. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
26. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
27. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
28. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2 
29. 13.523 D2 L F2 U2 B2 L2 D2 L R2 D2 R2 B' U F' U2 F U2 L' D2 
30. (17.785) R' L U2 D B' R2 U L' U' L2 F2 D F2 U B2 R2 L2 D2 R2 B D2 
31. 12.019 B U F2 U D F L' D B' R' U2 R B2 R' F2 L' F2 L B2 L' 
32. 11.268 R' D' L F2 D2 F D2 F' R' D L2 F2 D' B2 D F2 U2 F2 R2 
33. 13.367 L2 F2 U B2 F2 L2 D F2 U2 R2 B2 F U L' D2 R B2 F U' B 
34. 13.383 R2 D2 F' R D B D2 L U L2 B2 D' B2 D' B2 R2 B2 D' R 
35. 12.681 F L F' B' L' F2 D' R F U2 L2 U2 L2 B' L2 F2 U2 R2 B2 D' 
36. 11.811 F' L2 D2 R2 U2 B2 R2 B2 U' L2 U L2 B2 L' F' U2 R B U' R F 
37. 12.520 F2 B2 L B' U B' R U' D2 F' D2 R2 F' R2 F' D2 L2 B2 D 
38. 14.957 F D2 U2 R2 F' D2 L2 F' R2 B2 F' D' F2 L F2 D' U F2 U2 L2 
39. 12.417 L2 B' L' U2 L2 D2 F2 D B' R2 U' R2 U D L2 D' L2 F2 B2 
40. 11.416 B R F2 B2 D' F' U' R D L2 U B2 D' F2 U2 F2 D' B2 
41. 14.086 L2 B2 U' B2 U2 F2 L2 D' B2 F2 D R' D' R2 D B' R F D F2 U 
42. 12.182 L' F' U' B2 D2 B2 L2 U' R2 D' B2 D' R2 B' L D' U' B R' D 
43. 12.623 B2 D' L2 R2 F2 D L2 B2 U F2 L2 U R' F L D' F' U L R B2 
44. 14.213 L B U2 R2 F' R2 B' U2 F' R2 U2 B2 U R' B F U' R' D2 L2 
45. 12.485 D2 R B2 L2 F2 L' D2 L' B2 U2 R U B L' B2 L2 R U2 B R2 
46. (21.380) B L' F2 R F' B' D R U B U2 R2 D R2 U' R2 U' L2 D' B2 
47. 12.366 D2 F2 U' R2 F2 R2 B2 R2 U L2 U2 L' D F R' B U B2 L' U 
48. 12.122 U R2 D' F2 D' L2 U2 F2 U' B2 F2 U' R' B F2 R' D L2 B' R2 D 
49. 13.697 F2 U R U B2 D L2 D R2 D' U L2 R2 F2 L B F' L' F2 R2 U2 
50. 11.682 R B' U R2 U B2 R2 U2 L2 F2 U R2 B2 F' D2 U2 R B U' L2 D'





Spoiler: Ao100 13.02



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-12
avg of 100: 13.026

Time List:
1. 13.336 B2 F2 R2 F2 R' F2 R' U F' R B F' R U L' F' D2 
2. 13.333 R B D2 F D L2 U' R' B2 L2 U2 R2 U F2 D L2 D2 R2 D' B2 
3. 13.044 U2 R2 D2 R2 F R2 U2 B' F' R2 B2 U' L' U' L B2 U2 F' D F' 
4. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
5. 10.120 D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
6. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
7. 15.688 F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
8. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
9. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
10. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
11. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
12. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
13. (9.673) B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
14. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
15. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
16. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
17. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
18. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
19. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
20. (16.760) U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
21. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
22. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
23. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
24. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
25. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
26. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
27. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
28. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2 
29. 13.523 D2 L F2 U2 B2 L2 D2 L R2 D2 R2 B' U F' U2 F U2 L' D2 
30. (17.785) R' L U2 D B' R2 U L' U' L2 F2 D F2 U B2 R2 L2 D2 R2 B D2 
31. 12.019 B U F2 U D F L' D B' R' U2 R B2 R' F2 L' F2 L B2 L' 
32. 11.268 R' D' L F2 D2 F D2 F' R' D L2 F2 D' B2 D F2 U2 F2 R2 
33. 13.367 L2 F2 U B2 F2 L2 D F2 U2 R2 B2 F U L' D2 R B2 F U' B 
34. 13.383 R2 D2 F' R D B D2 L U L2 B2 D' B2 D' B2 R2 B2 D' R 
35. 12.681 F L F' B' L' F2 D' R F U2 L2 U2 L2 B' L2 F2 U2 R2 B2 D' 
36. 11.811 F' L2 D2 R2 U2 B2 R2 B2 U' L2 U L2 B2 L' F' U2 R B U' R F 
37. 12.520 F2 B2 L B' U B' R U' D2 F' D2 R2 F' R2 F' D2 L2 B2 D 
38. 14.957 F D2 U2 R2 F' D2 L2 F' R2 B2 F' D' F2 L F2 D' U F2 U2 L2 
39. 12.417 L2 B' L' U2 L2 D2 F2 D B' R2 U' R2 U D L2 D' L2 F2 B2 
40. 11.416 B R F2 B2 D' F' U' R D L2 U B2 D' F2 U2 F2 D' B2 
41. 14.086 L2 B2 U' B2 U2 F2 L2 D' B2 F2 D R' D' R2 D B' R F D F2 U 
42. 12.182 L' F' U' B2 D2 B2 L2 U' R2 D' B2 D' R2 B' L D' U' B R' D 
43. 12.623 B2 D' L2 R2 F2 D L2 B2 U F2 L2 U R' F L D' F' U L R B2 
44. 14.213 L B U2 R2 F' R2 B' U2 F' R2 U2 B2 U R' B F U' R' D2 L2 
45. 12.485 D2 R B2 L2 F2 L' D2 L' B2 U2 R U B L' B2 L2 R U2 B R2 
46. (21.380) B L' F2 R F' B' D R U B U2 R2 D R2 U' R2 U' L2 D' B2 
47. 12.366 D2 F2 U' R2 F2 R2 B2 R2 U L2 U2 L' D F R' B U B2 L' U 
48. 12.122 U R2 D' F2 D' L2 U2 F2 U' B2 F2 U' R' B F2 R' D L2 B' R2 D 
49. 13.697 F2 U R U B2 D L2 D R2 D' U L2 R2 F2 L B F' L' F2 R2 U2 
50. 11.682 R B' U R2 U B2 R2 U2 L2 F2 U R2 B2 F' D2 U2 R B U' L2 D' 
51. 14.854 U' R2 U B U' F2 U' L F2 D' R2 U' F2 L2 F2 B2 U R2 B2 
52. (16.492) U B2 F2 L2 D' U2 F2 R2 D' F2 B L D' F R B' U' R2 B L' 
53. 13.424 F D' U2 R2 U2 B2 D2 R B2 F2 U2 L2 R' F2 D F2 U' R2 F R D' 
54. 15.634 R2 U' B2 L2 R2 U' L2 D F2 D F' L2 R2 B L' F2 D' B F 
55. (9.872) B L2 F' U2 F U2 B R2 D2 F U2 D' L F' D' L D' F' R U2 
56. 13.960 F' R2 D B2 L2 D' B2 D L2 U' L2 F2 U L' B F2 U2 R D' B L 
57. 14.372 D2 L' D2 R2 D2 F2 R2 B2 U2 L B2 D' B R' D2 U R' D B' R 
58. 13.120 U R U F2 B U B U' L F2 D2 B R2 F' L2 D2 R2 F2 U2 D2 
59. 13.452 B2 D F B' D2 R2 F R' U2 B2 L2 B2 D2 L2 U D2 L2 D' R2 F2 R 
60. 13.450 L U2 B2 L' F2 R2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 F U B2 D' U2 L' R B' D 
61. 14.243 D2 F' L2 B2 F2 L' U2 R2 B2 L B2 L' U2 F' D L D' F' L D 
62. 12.437 R B' L' F2 L U2 L' F2 U2 L2 U2 R' U2 R' D R D2 B' D F' U 
63. 14.096 D2 B2 D2 B' U2 F D2 R2 F R2 F' L2 R' B L B D2 B D2 U R' 
64. 12.003 R U' B' D B' R' F' B2 U2 R D2 L F2 B2 L2 B2 L' D2 B2 D F2 
65. 13.826 B R2 B D F U2 B R2 D' F2 L F2 B2 U2 F2 R L2 F2 R' U2 L2 
66. 12.148 F' B2 R2 B2 L F2 L' U2 F2 U2 F2 U2 L U F2 U2 L2 F' U R' D2 
67. 12.636 U' R2 F2 D B2 U' L2 U F2 R2 U' B2 L' F D' B' R F' R2 D' R2 
68. 16.301 B2 R2 D2 F2 D U R2 F2 R2 D' B' L2 U' L' R2 D B2 F' U' R' 
69. 14.183 L2 U' B' D F B2 U' B2 U2 F2 D2 L D2 L' D2 L U2 R2 D' 
70. (16.718) D2 U2 L2 F2 R F2 R U2 L2 F2 D2 F L' D B2 L2 U2 R' F2 U 
71. 14.112 F D2 L' D2 U2 L2 F2 L B2 R' B2 F2 R' F' D2 U' L' D' B' L2 B 
72. 15.014 U R2 U B2 D' L2 F2 U' F2 D' B2 U' B U' B2 F R B U' B' 
73. 12.774 L' B2 R2 B2 L2 U' F2 L2 D' R2 B2 D2 B2 R' F' D2 R2 D R' B' D' 
74. 12.552 B U' L F' B D2 B' R F' U2 R2 B2 U L2 F2 U L2 U L2 B2 
75. 14.120 F2 R2 U D' B L' D2 F L' U2 F' R2 B' U2 B L2 F2 R2 F2 
76. 11.784 U' F2 R' B2 U' L' F' B2 U' F2 L2 F2 U R2 U' F2 R2 D2 L2 R' U 
77. 12.108 U L F2 D2 F2 D' B2 U' R2 B2 R2 U' F L' D R2 U' B' D2 
78. 15.718 L2 B U2 R' U2 R2 B2 F2 R B2 R' D2 U2 F' U' L' D F R' D L2 
79. 16.211 L2 U2 L2 F' D2 F L2 F2 U2 R2 L D2 F L' R' D F' L2 U R2 
80. 12.111 F B D2 R' U2 F' R D' F2 U2 B D2 B' D2 B2 U2 B' R2 F2 
81. 12.127 D R' D F R U D' F2 R' L2 B R2 B' U2 L2 F' D2 L2 
82. 13.340 L U2 R2 D B2 U' R2 U2 R2 B2 U' R2 D' L' B' F2 D L' F D U2 
83. 11.040 D2 L F2 R2 U F2 B R' L2 B2 R2 D L2 U L2 F2 B2 U' F2 L2 R 
84. 13.691 R B R2 D L2 D2 U' B2 D R2 F2 R2 D B L' U L F L R' F' 
85. 13.352 B R2 U2 R' D2 F2 R U2 F2 U2 R2 U2 F' R B' D L2 R' B' U2 
86. 13.153 U B' R' U L2 U' F' U' F2 R' U2 L B2 U2 D2 L D2 R' U2 B 
87. 12.938 U2 L2 F2 D2 F2 D F2 D' F2 L2 R' B2 U' F D2 U R2 D R U 
88. 13.204 U' R2 F B2 U' L2 U F2 L2 U L2 D2 F2 L' D L B' R2 B' R2 
89. 12.590 R2 F' L2 F L2 F' L2 F D2 B U2 R U2 F U L2 R D' F D2 U2 
90. 14.091 D R L2 U' R2 D2 L2 U' R2 U' L2 U F L' R B D' U2 L2 D 
91. 14.402 F2 U L2 U' B2 U R2 B2 R2 D2 R2 F' U' L' B' U2 F R2 F2 L' 
92. 10.926 B2 R2 D2 R2 U F2 R2 U' F2 U R D' L' U' R U L2 R' F 
93. 11.619 R2 B2 R' D2 F2 U2 B2 L R2 D2 R F R B2 F2 D' B2 U' F2 U' 
94. 13.354 L' U2 F' D2 L2 D F2 R2 B2 R2 F2 U F2 L2 R' D2 F2 L' F L' R 
95. 12.178 L2 D2 B2 D' L2 U F2 L2 D L2 B2 U' B' L U2 L R D' L U L' 
96. 12.288 D L' D' R F' R2 D' B D F R2 B2 U2 F' L2 F U2 R2 B2 D2 L2 
97. 14.709 U2 F2 L2 F2 R2 F2 D' F2 D R2 U' L B' R2 D U B F D L' 
98. (10.061) L F B2 U F' L' F' U2 L2 F2 L2 D2 B2 D2 F2 U B2 F R 
99. 11.679 F2 R2 B2 U L2 U F2 D2 L2 F2 L2 F' L' R B R U F2 D L' U2 
100. 12.480 D F2 D' B2 U B2 L2 B2 L2 U L2 U L B' L R F' L2 F D2 R2





Spoiler: Ao200 13.25



Generated By csTimer on 2022-04-12
avg of 200: 13.253

Time List:
1. 12.428 D2 F D L2 F2 D' U2 F2 R2 U2 R2 D R2 U2 L B2 F R' B' R' D 
2. 12.914 F' R L' B L' F2 U' L D' B' U2 F2 L2 F R2 D2 F R2 F D2 
3. 14.337 L' D L2 D' R2 B2 U' B2 D L2 F2 R2 B U' L' F D2 F U' F 
4. 13.081 L2 D2 R2 U' L2 F2 L2 D2 B2 R2 F' R U B D2 L' D2 L' F U2 
5. 12.620 R' B' U' F2 R2 B2 F2 R2 U L2 U' B2 L' F U2 L' R' F D' U L2 
6. 14.782 F D' U2 L' R2 U2 B2 L' F2 D2 U2 L U2 D' B D R' F' L' U 
7. 12.439 B L U' B2 L B' U F2 L' B2 R' D2 R' D2 R U2 R' U B2 
8. 15.149 U2 R' U2 B2 F U2 B L2 B2 R2 D2 R2 F2 U L2 R2 F2 R' F L2 D 
9. 15.491 B F2 L F2 L D2 L2 R' U2 B2 F' D' R2 B2 L D2 R D 
10. 12.913 U L2 B2 D2 U2 F' D2 B F' D2 R2 F2 L' D2 F R D R2 U' B2 D 
11. 12.176 F U' L2 B' L2 B' U2 B D2 B' F2 L2 B2 U L D2 R2 U' R F2 
12. 15.662 B' D' R' U' D' R' L F' R F D2 B2 R2 F D2 F' D2 F' U2 D2 
13. (21.169) U2 L' F2 D' R2 U2 L2 B2 R2 U R2 D L2 F' U B L' B' F' L' 
14. 13.935 B' L U2 R2 U' B2 D' R2 D' R2 U B' L R U R' D F2 R 
15. 10.921 D' U2 L2 F' U2 F L2 F U2 F U2 F' R2 L D U2 L' F L' U' 
16. 13.995 F2 D B2 L2 F2 U2 R2 U' L' D' R' U' F' U L' D F U2 
17. 13.733 R2 U2 F' L2 D2 B2 R2 U2 R2 F' D2 U' F' R U' R' B R2 D' B' 
18. 13.544 L B' L2 F U2 R' F2 L2 D' B2 D2 R L2 B2 R' L' B2 U2 L 
19. 14.119 D2 R U' L2 U F2 R F2 L2 F' L2 B' U2 R2 F U2 B' R2 D2 L' 
20. 12.999 L' D F R' L U' B R2 F2 U R2 B2 U2 B2 U B2 D L2 R F R 
21. 14.417 F B R F U2 L D2 B' D' F2 L2 F2 D2 L2 U F2 D2 F2 L2 R F2 
22. 14.291 L2 F R2 F2 D B2 L2 D' R2 D' B2 U2 L2 R D' F2 L F L2 R2 
23. 15.296 D F' B2 R' D2 F' U D R U B2 R2 U' D' L2 D' B2 U' L2 F2 L2 
24. 13.871 U R F2 D B2 U2 B2 F2 U R2 U' R2 U' F' L' F2 D' L R B' U' 
25. 15.443 R2 D2 B D2 L2 R2 B L2 B2 L2 F R2 D R' F U L' D' R' B L2 
26. 11.924 F2 L2 U2 L F2 L' D2 B2 D2 R' U2 R2 D L' U2 F' U F D2 R 
27. 11.568 D R2 F' R' B2 D2 R2 D R D2 R2 B2 D2 F' R2 D2 B' U2 F2 B U2 
28. 11.918 U B2 U' F2 U' R2 F2 R2 F2 B L' R U R' D2 L F2 U' B2 
29. 12.419 F2 R' U2 L B2 D2 L D2 R' B2 D2 R' B D2 U R' D' L2 B F2 D 
30. 13.355 B2 U B2 L2 U' F2 U2 B2 D R2 B2 R U' L F' L2 R B F' D' 
31. 14.174 R' F2 L F2 L2 F2 D2 R U2 L' R2 F2 D L2 R B2 R U2 F D' 
32. 15.550 D L2 B2 D R2 D B2 U' R2 U B2 F2 L U' B2 U' R2 F L2 D' B2 
33. (18.726) L B' D2 R2 F2 U' R2 B2 F2 U' R2 B2 F2 L B2 U L2 R' U2 F' R2 
34. 13.417 R2 F2 D L U B' U L2 U' D R2 U2 F2 D2 F2 D2 
35. 12.267 F' D B2 U2 R2 F2 R D F2 U2 F2 B2 U2 L' F2 R D2 R2 
36. 12.693 U' D2 L' F2 R' D2 R D2 R' D2 F2 R2 F' U R' U L F' U' 
37. 11.753 B2 R2 U' B2 L2 F2 U2 B2 D L2 D' B F' D' U2 L2 R' F' U2 B' U2 
38. 14.233 F L2 D2 R2 B' R2 B U2 L2 U2 B' F2 U' R D2 R' B D2 R' F' L' 
39. 13.224 D L F' R2 D L2 D' L2 B2 F2 D' U' R' D2 B R2 D2 L2 R' 
40. 14.080 D2 F' L' D R F' D2 R F' L2 B D2 F' D2 F2 D2 F L2 D2 
41. 14.715 D R2 B2 L' D' B' D B U2 F2 L2 U2 L2 D2 F L2 B L2 U2 R' D2 
42. 14.626 R L' U' L2 B' L D R U F U' B2 U' L2 F2 R2 B2 D' L2 U2 
43. (18.132) L' B' U2 B2 R2 D2 R2 D' B2 R2 B2 U' B' U2 L B' L' R F' L 
44. (16.718) R' F2 L B L B2 U' F2 R F2 B2 R L' B2 D2 R' D2 R U' B2 
45. 12.597 L2 D B2 U2 L2 B2 L2 F2 L' F2 R' D F' R D F R2 D 
46. 16.113 L B2 U R' F' B' D F' U2 L F2 B2 D2 R' F2 R F2 D2 R2 U2 F' 
47. 11.489 L2 F2 U B2 U2 R2 D F2 U B2 F2 R2 F L F' L U' F' L2 R U' 
48. (18.040) U2 L2 F D2 L2 F L2 B2 D2 B' R2 F2 R B2 D' U2 L' U' F' R B' 
49. 11.734 B' L R2 U' L2 F2 L2 B2 U' B2 L2 D R2 B' U' L2 B R2 B' D2 
50. 13.399 R U2 F2 U2 B2 R' U2 L' B2 L' U' L' F' D L' R D2 B D' F 
51. 12.645 F L2 F2 D2 F2 D R2 D2 U' L2 B2 D' L' B' D F2 R' B D' R 
52. (10.189) L2 B F' L2 R2 B U2 L2 F L2 F2 U' F U2 R' U' R2 F2 L B' 
53. (17.526) U L2 R2 U2 L2 U' B2 F2 L2 U R2 D R' U' R' F' R' F' U2 B' 
54. 13.615 F2 U F2 D B2 R2 B2 U R2 U' R' B' D2 L2 U2 L U R' U2 
55. 12.419 R B R2 B D2 R2 B' D2 U2 R2 F' U2 R' F R2 U F2 L' R2 D' 
56. 11.976 F' U2 L B2 L2 D' F2 D B2 D' F2 D' B2 U2 B' D' U L2 F' U2 L' 
57. 11.095 U D' R' U2 R B' R2 L D F U2 B' R2 F' L2 D2 F2 D2 F D2 F 
58. 13.457 L2 U2 F2 L' D2 R' F2 R' U2 L' F2 U2 D' L2 R U F L B U R2 
59. 12.378 U2 R' B' D2 R2 U2 F' D2 F' R2 U2 B2 R2 B' U R D L' D' B R' 
60. (18.252) U2 F2 U2 L2 D2 R2 U2 B' D2 B2 R2 L D' F2 D2 R D U L' R' 
61. 12.158 R' B' R2 B L2 F2 R2 D2 F2 D2 B D2 R U B2 D B' F D' R' B 
62. 10.790 R2 D' L2 F2 D' B2 U' L2 B2 R2 F2 R2 F' R' D2 B L' U B' D 
63. 15.722 B R' B L' B U2 R F U F D2 R2 D2 F2 B' D2 F' U2 B 
64. 14.585 L' B D2 L2 R2 F2 U2 B L2 R2 D2 B' U' L' F' D2 R2 D R' U' 
65. 14.290 B2 R2 D' R2 B2 L2 U2 B2 D' L2 U' L' R' F' D' U R' U' B' L' 
66. 12.798 L2 D' U' L2 B2 F2 U B2 F2 R2 D' B2 F D' B' F' U' R U2 B2 R 
67. 13.066 R' F2 L D' L D L B' R2 B2 D F2 U2 B2 L2 B2 D F2 L 
68. 15.052 R B2 R2 F2 D' L2 F2 D B2 D2 F2 U' B L R' B' D L2 U' R' 
69. 12.883 D2 F L2 U2 B L2 F' U2 L2 B D2 R' F' U' R' D' R B D' F2 R 
70. 13.336 B2 F2 R2 F2 R' F2 R' U F' R B F' R U L' F' D2 
71. 13.333 R B D2 F D L2 U' R' B2 L2 U2 R2 U F2 D L2 D2 R2 D' B2 
72. 13.044 U2 R2 D2 R2 F R2 U2 B' F' R2 B2 U' L' U' L B2 U2 F' D F' 
73. 12.229 U B' L U2 B' D' F' R D2 F L2 B L2 U2 F B U2 L2 F' L' 
74. (10.120) D2 F' D' U2 R D2 L' F2 L U2 B2 U2 L2 F2 U R U' L2 B D2 R' 
75. 14.210 F2 U2 L' F2 R U2 F2 D2 L' B2 F2 R' B' L' B' F' L' D' B L 
76. 15.688 F R F2 D2 L2 D2 R' B2 R2 D2 B2 L' D2 B' D R' U' F' R2 U' B2 
77. 11.318 F' D' R' L2 U' F2 U L U2 R2 F2 D2 R2 D2 R2 B2 D B' 
78. 12.756 B2 D L2 B' F2 D2 F' R2 F2 L2 B' D2 L U F2 L2 U F R2 U 
79. 14.208 L2 U' R2 U' R2 F2 U2 R2 F2 D F2 R B U' R' U' L D B' U' F 
80. (9.108) B2 U2 B' U2 L2 F D2 F R2 B D2 U R' U2 B L2 R' B2 L' D2 
81. 11.086 F R D2 F' L2 U2 L2 D2 B F2 D2 L2 F' U2 D B L' D' R F U 
82. (9.673) B2 D2 B2 F2 L2 R B2 D2 R' D2 R U' R F2 D2 R' D B' L' R 
83. 10.666 R2 D F' U' B' R' F U' B U2 L2 F2 B2 U2 R' U2 R' F2 R' B2 
84. 11.950 U2 F2 L2 B2 F2 U2 L2 D' F2 U' F' R2 F' L F U2 B2 L' B2 
85. 13.199 B L2 U2 R2 B D2 F D2 B R2 D2 L' U' R' F' R2 D L2 R' F2 
86. 12.593 R' B' L2 B' F2 R2 B' D2 F' D2 L2 D2 R' U' F' D' L2 F L B2 
87. 11.039 R2 F L2 U2 L2 D2 U' B2 F2 R2 U' R2 L' B' R2 B' D B R2 
88. 11.930 L2 B' F2 R2 B2 D R2 U F2 L2 B2 U' L B2 F' D' L' B F 
89. (16.760) U2 R U2 L' U' B' D' B' R D2 L B2 U2 L F2 R' B2 L' 
90. 13.658 F2 U2 D' L2 B' U' F2 L F D2 B2 L' F2 R' U2 L F2 L D2 R 
91. 15.228 B' D L2 F L' D2 R' F R2 D2 R2 U L2 B2 U B2 U B2 U2 F2 L' 
92. 13.356 B D' L2 U' B R' F2 R D' R' F2 D2 B2 R F2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 
93. 12.796 U F' L' U' B2 D' B' R' B' L2 U' D' L2 D L2 B2 U2 B2 
94. 10.589 R U' L2 F2 D2 L2 U2 L2 B D2 B2 D2 L2 F' L' B' L2 D B' L' U 
95. 11.391 L' D2 L U2 F2 D2 U2 F2 L2 D2 R D' U' L U2 B' U' F2 D R' 
96. 13.995 B L' D L2 F U2 B D2 F U2 F L2 F' R2 U B2 R B' U B' U' 
97. (9.396) R U D2 F' D L' F B' U B2 U' F2 U L2 U D2 B2 U' B2 L2 
98. 13.523 D2 L F2 U2 B2 L2 D2 L R2 D2 R2 B' U F' U2 F U2 L' D2 
99. (17.785) R' L U2 D B' R2 U L' U' L2 F2 D F2 U B2 R2 L2 D2 R2 B D2 
100. 12.019 B U F2 U D F L' D B' R' U2 R B2 R' F2 L' F2 L B2 L' 
101. 11.268 R' D' L F2 D2 F D2 F' R' D L2 F2 D' B2 D F2 U2 F2 R2 
102. 13.367 L2 F2 U B2 F2 L2 D F2 U2 R2 B2 F U L' D2 R B2 F U' B 
103. 13.383 R2 D2 F' R D B D2 L U L2 B2 D' B2 D' B2 R2 B2 D' R 
104. 12.681 F L F' B' L' F2 D' R F U2 L2 U2 L2 B' L2 F2 U2 R2 B2 D' 
105. 11.811 F' L2 D2 R2 U2 B2 R2 B2 U' L2 U L2 B2 L' F' U2 R B U' R F 
106. 12.520 F2 B2 L B' U B' R U' D2 F' D2 R2 F' R2 F' D2 L2 B2 D 
107. 14.957 F D2 U2 R2 F' D2 L2 F' R2 B2 F' D' F2 L F2 D' U F2 U2 L2 
108. 12.417 L2 B' L' U2 L2 D2 F2 D B' R2 U' R2 U D L2 D' L2 F2 B2 
109. 11.416 B R F2 B2 D' F' U' R D L2 U B2 D' F2 U2 F2 D' B2 
110. 14.086 L2 B2 U' B2 U2 F2 L2 D' B2 F2 D R' D' R2 D B' R F D F2 U 
111. 12.182 L' F' U' B2 D2 B2 L2 U' R2 D' B2 D' R2 B' L D' U' B R' D 
112. 12.623 B2 D' L2 R2 F2 D L2 B2 U F2 L2 U R' F L D' F' U L R B2 
113. 14.213 L B U2 R2 F' R2 B' U2 F' R2 U2 B2 U R' B F U' R' D2 L2 
114. 12.485 D2 R B2 L2 F2 L' D2 L' B2 U2 R U B L' B2 L2 R U2 B R2 
115. (21.380) B L' F2 R F' B' D R U B U2 R2 D R2 U' R2 U' L2 D' B2 
116. 12.366 D2 F2 U' R2 F2 R2 B2 R2 U L2 U2 L' D F R' B U B2 L' U 
117. 12.122 U R2 D' F2 D' L2 U2 F2 U' B2 F2 U' R' B F2 R' D L2 B' R2 D 
118. 13.697 F2 U R U B2 D L2 D R2 D' U L2 R2 F2 L B F' L' F2 R2 U2 
119. 11.682 R B' U R2 U B2 R2 U2 L2 F2 U R2 B2 F' D2 U2 R B U' L2 D' 
120. 14.854 U' R2 U B U' F2 U' L F2 D' R2 U' F2 L2 F2 B2 U R2 B2 
121. 16.492 U B2 F2 L2 D' U2 F2 R2 D' F2 B L D' F R B' U' R2 B L' 
122. 13.424 F D' U2 R2 U2 B2 D2 R B2 F2 U2 L2 R' F2 D F2 U' R2 F R D' 
123. 15.634 R2 U' B2 L2 R2 U' L2 D F2 D F' L2 R2 B L' F2 D' B F 
124. (9.872) B L2 F' U2 F U2 B R2 D2 F U2 D' L F' D' L D' F' R U2 
125. 13.960 F' R2 D B2 L2 D' B2 D L2 U' L2 F2 U L' B F2 U2 R D' B L 
126. 14.372 D2 L' D2 R2 D2 F2 R2 B2 U2 L B2 D' B R' D2 U R' D B' R 
127. 13.120 U R U F2 B U B U' L F2 D2 B R2 F' L2 D2 R2 F2 U2 D2 
128. 13.452 B2 D F B' D2 R2 F R' U2 B2 L2 B2 D2 L2 U D2 L2 D' R2 F2 R 
129. 13.450 L U2 B2 L' F2 R2 U2 R' F2 R2 D2 F U B2 D' U2 L' R B' D 
130. 14.243 D2 F' L2 B2 F2 L' U2 R2 B2 L B2 L' U2 F' D L D' F' L D 
131. 12.437 R B' L' F2 L U2 L' F2 U2 L2 U2 R' U2 R' D R D2 B' D F' U 
132. 14.096 D2 B2 D2 B' U2 F D2 R2 F R2 F' L2 R' B L B D2 B D2 U R' 
133. 12.003 R U' B' D B' R' F' B2 U2 R D2 L F2 B2 L2 B2 L' D2 B2 D F2 
134. 13.826 B R2 B D F U2 B R2 D' F2 L F2 B2 U2 F2 R L2 F2 R' U2 L2 
135. 12.148 F' B2 R2 B2 L F2 L' U2 F2 U2 F2 U2 L U F2 U2 L2 F' U R' D2 
136. 12.636 U' R2 F2 D B2 U' L2 U F2 R2 U' B2 L' F D' B' R F' R2 D' R2 
137. 16.301 B2 R2 D2 F2 D U R2 F2 R2 D' B' L2 U' L' R2 D B2 F' U' R' 
138. 14.183 L2 U' B' D F B2 U' B2 U2 F2 D2 L D2 L' D2 L U2 R2 D' 
139. 16.718 D2 U2 L2 F2 R F2 R U2 L2 F2 D2 F L' D B2 L2 U2 R' F2 U 
140. 14.112 F D2 L' D2 U2 L2 F2 L B2 R' B2 F2 R' F' D2 U' L' D' B' L2 B 
141. 15.014 U R2 U B2 D' L2 F2 U' F2 D' B2 U' B U' B2 F R B U' B' 
142. 12.774 L' B2 R2 B2 L2 U' F2 L2 D' R2 B2 D2 B2 R' F' D2 R2 D R' B' D' 
143. 12.552 B U' L F' B D2 B' R F' U2 R2 B2 U L2 F2 U L2 U L2 B2 
144. 14.120 F2 R2 U D' B L' D2 F L' U2 F' R2 B' U2 B L2 F2 R2 F2 
145. 11.784 U' F2 R' B2 U' L' F' B2 U' F2 L2 F2 U R2 U' F2 R2 D2 L2 R' U 
146. 12.108 U L F2 D2 F2 D' B2 U' R2 B2 R2 U' F L' D R2 U' B' D2 
147. 15.718 L2 B U2 R' U2 R2 B2 F2 R B2 R' D2 U2 F' U' L' D F R' D L2 
148. 16.211 L2 U2 L2 F' D2 F L2 F2 U2 R2 L D2 F L' R' D F' L2 U R2 
149. 12.111 F B D2 R' U2 F' R D' F2 U2 B D2 B' D2 B2 U2 B' R2 F2 
150. 12.127 D R' D F R U D' F2 R' L2 B R2 B' U2 L2 F' D2 L2 
151. 13.340 L U2 R2 D B2 U' R2 U2 R2 B2 U' R2 D' L' B' F2 D L' F D U2 
152. 11.040 D2 L F2 R2 U F2 B R' L2 B2 R2 D L2 U L2 F2 B2 U' F2 L2 R 
153. 13.691 R B R2 D L2 D2 U' B2 D R2 F2 R2 D B L' U L F L R' F' 
154. 13.352 B R2 U2 R' D2 F2 R U2 F2 U2 R2 U2 F' R B' D L2 R' B' U2 
155. 13.153 U B' R' U L2 U' F' U' F2 R' U2 L B2 U2 D2 L D2 R' U2 B 
156. 12.938 U2 L2 F2 D2 F2 D F2 D' F2 L2 R' B2 U' F D2 U R2 D R U 
157. 13.204 U' R2 F B2 U' L2 U F2 L2 U L2 D2 F2 L' D L B' R2 B' R2 
158. 12.590 R2 F' L2 F L2 F' L2 F D2 B U2 R U2 F U L2 R D' F D2 U2 
159. 14.091 D R L2 U' R2 D2 L2 U' R2 U' L2 U F L' R B D' U2 L2 D 
160. 14.402 F2 U L2 U' B2 U R2 B2 R2 D2 R2 F' U' L' B' U2 F R2 F2 L' 
161. 10.926 B2 R2 D2 R2 U F2 R2 U' F2 U R D' L' U' R U L2 R' F 
162. 11.619 R2 B2 R' D2 F2 U2 B2 L R2 D2 R F R B2 F2 D' B2 U' F2 U' 
163. 13.354 L' U2 F' D2 L2 D F2 R2 B2 R2 F2 U F2 L2 R' D2 F2 L' F L' R 
164. 12.178 L2 D2 B2 D' L2 U F2 L2 D L2 B2 U' B' L U2 L R D' L U L' 
165. 12.288 D L' D' R F' R2 D' B D F R2 B2 U2 F' L2 F U2 R2 B2 D2 L2 
166. 14.709 U2 F2 L2 F2 R2 F2 D' F2 D R2 U' L B' R2 D U B F D L' 
167. (10.061) L F B2 U F' L' F' U2 L2 F2 L2 D2 B2 D2 F2 U B2 F R 
168. 11.679 F2 R2 B2 U L2 U F2 D2 L2 F2 L2 F' L' R B R U F2 D L' U2 
169. 12.480 D F2 D' B2 U B2 L2 B2 L2 U L2 U L B' L R F' L2 F D2 R2 
170. 16.159 D2 B L2 D' B2 L2 B L' U' R2 F' D2 B U2 R2 U2 L2 B2 D2 F' L2 
171. 12.793 F2 B2 D R U F' R B L2 B2 D2 B2 L' B2 D2 L F2 B2 U2 R2 F 
172. 12.678 D2 B2 L2 D2 F D2 R2 U2 F2 L2 B F2 U' L B D2 F2 L D' B2 R2 
173. 12.151 D R2 F2 L' F2 L F2 R D2 R2 B D2 B2 U' F R' D F' 
174. 15.111 D' B2 U' F2 R2 B2 D2 U' R2 D' R2 L F' D L' R F D' B R2 
175. 13.101 R' U R2 U L' B U D F' U2 B D2 R2 U2 F' L2 U2 B' D2 B R 
176. 15.381 R2 D2 L2 F L2 U2 R2 B2 D2 B' D L' D2 F L R' U2 F L2 
177. (10.419) R D' B U' L' D2 B2 U' R F B2 D2 R2 U2 L2 B D2 F R2 D2 
178. 11.838 D' B R2 F' U2 F' R2 U2 F D2 R2 B U2 R' F D2 F2 U' B R U2 
179. 13.423 L U' L' D2 B L' F R2 F2 D2 R2 U' F2 U2 B2 U' B2 D B2 F 
180. 11.873 D' F D2 B R2 F' L2 B F2 U2 L2 R' F L2 F2 U B D R' F 
181. 14.289 R2 D2 L2 F2 D' U2 B2 L2 D F L B' U' B R D2 R2 D2 F 
182. 15.221 R2 L2 F2 L U2 D F' U' L D2 F2 L2 B' U2 F' U2 L2 F' L2 U2 
183. 16.304 L2 U2 D2 L' U' B' L U' B' U2 D F2 U F2 R2 B2 U2 B2 U D 
184. 13.935 F D' R2 F' L2 U2 B2 D2 B L2 B2 D2 U' L D2 B2 R2 F D 
185. 12.190 D2 L U2 B R2 D' R' U R F2 L' U2 R L2 F2 U2 R' D2 R2 B' 
186. 11.349 F R2 D R2 B2 D' B2 L2 U' F2 L2 U R2 F' U' F' U' R U' L B2 
187. 14.622 R2 D2 B D2 R2 B' R2 D2 F2 L2 U2 D L F R' D2 B R2 U' F' 
188. (9.922) R' L U B' D L' B2 D2 R' U B2 U B2 L2 U' B2 R2 F2 U B2 
189. 12.476 B2 D2 U2 F' D2 U2 F R2 B L2 U2 D' F' R' B' U L F U2 F2 
190. 12.840 B2 D2 F2 D' R2 U' L2 B2 U B2 U' B' F U' L2 F D R' D2 B2 D' 
191. 12.232 R' F' L' D2 F2 B2 L' D2 R2 B2 U' F2 U2 D L2 F2 U' L' D 
192. (9.323) R' F2 U2 L F2 U2 L R B2 R U2 R' F' D' L D U F' D2 R2 U 
193. 11.752 L' F D2 F U2 F R2 F' D2 F D2 F2 U2 R' U' R B2 L U' F2 
194. 13.073 U2 L2 B2 D2 R' D2 R' B2 R D2 F2 L2 F D L' U2 R B2 F' L2 
195. 12.892 U' F D2 F' U2 B L2 B L2 B2 U2 L' R U2 F' L2 U' F2 U' F' 
196. 12.451 R U2 L2 F R2 U2 B2 R2 D2 F' U2 R' F L' U' L U' L2 U' 
197. 14.780 B' U F D' R' U' L' U L' B' U' B2 U' B2 R2 F2 D2 R2 U' B2 U2 
198. 13.347 D2 L2 R' U2 F2 L2 F2 L D2 B2 U2 F2 D' B' R' F U B F' L B' 
199. 12.224 B2 L F' L' U R' U L D' F D2 F2 U2 F2 L2 B R2 F2 D2 L2 
200. 12.874 R D B2 L2 D' F2 U2 B2 L2 U2 L2 F' L' B2 F D2 F L' D F'



I guess I'm sub-13.5 now. Dropped my average by an entire second in just two days.


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Apr 12, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Spoiler: Ao50 12.69
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1 second in 2 days is insane! Keep it up


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 14, 2022)

Learned 4LLL for megaminx this week. Going to be grinding that, maybe sub-90? I also got my first sub-4 6x6 single with a time of 3:47 (lol) so maybe I'll grind for sub-4 average on 6.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Apr 16, 2022)

Modded my Qiyi MS 3x3 last night. I have the factory springs replaced with the extra set of springs that come with the Dayan megaminx v2 m and l added center-edge magnets (Like on the Valk Elite m) and set it up with Adheron heavy on the core, Lubest XMT-10 on the pieces and after breaking in, DNM-37. I no longer main the MoreTry Tianma Snap.

This MS mod makes it so good, almost like a flagship. Now all it needs is PVC coating (Yeah right, $25 for a coating, I don't have that money!)

Edit: Oh yeah, and the Platypus logo, don't worry @TheEpicCuber he's still there.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jun 30, 2022)

I have updated my 3x3 PLL's, my current algs can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1emHKuSWKcAq7hV22sI-pu_mPi4NUy9ipB2rg1VTRqXQ/edit#gid=0


As for updates, as of yesterday I main the Valk Elite m with Red/Red, I get more consistent results on it and love the stability, I've heard that the Guhong v4 is similar so I might pick one up the next order I place. Speaking of orders I'm expecting an Ambition and a Volt V2 UD in a couple days along with a couple other things. And it actually turns out my Aosu GTS2M was a GTSm which explains a lot of things. Hopefully I can improve at 4x4 once I have the Ambition.

Right now my main events are Hungarian Supernova (megaminx for you uncultured ones), 3x3, Sqaure-1, and 4x4. I just got back into Hungarian Supernova two weeks ago so my improvement isn't extraordinary. For the event I average; ~1:26 on Hungarian Supernova, low-12 on 3x3 on pace to sub-12 once I get more consistent, around 20-22 on Square-1 and I expect to reach sub-20 easily as soon as I make myself learn Intermediate CS, and for 4x4 I really don't know, I might be sub-1, I'm very inconsistent, as I said hopefully that changes soon.

Quack!


----------



## Timona (Jun 30, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> I have updated my 3x3 PLL's, my current algs can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1emHKuSWKcAq7hV22sI-pu_mPi4NUy9ipB2rg1VTRqXQ/edit#gid=0
> 
> 
> As for updates, as of yesterday I main the Valk Elite m with Red/Red, I get more consistent results on it and love the stability, I've heard that the Guhong v4 is similar so I might pick one up the next order I place. Speaking of orders I'm expecting an Ambition and a Volt V2 UD in a couple days along with a couple other things. And it actually turns out my Aosu GTS2M was a GTSm which explains a lot of things. Hopefully I can improve at 4x4 once I have the Ambition.
> ...


Just call it a Megaminx


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 1, 2022)

Timona said:


> Just call it a Megaminx


On behalf of me, myself, and I I hereby declare that it is incorrect to say such a thing. Megaminx is a meaningless name. The suffix "minx" denotes that it is a work by puzzle designer Ewe Meffert, which it is not but was in fact renamed after Ewe bought the patent for the puzzle. The word "Mega" is absolute nonsense and has no meaning.

The original name given to the puzzle by Dr. Cristoph Bandelow in the '80's was Hungarian Supernova, this name not only sounds cool, but it also describes its characteristics. The Rubik's cube (or Magic Cube) was created in Budapest, Hungary so it is possible that we can associate the word Hungarian with a twisty puzzle. A supernova is basically when a star explodes, when this happens it is surrounded by a bright, _*colourful*_, cloud of gas. So, supernova tells us that it is colourful and has something to do with stars.

Hungarian Supernova, it's not too late to change the name back, do your part by calling it what it was meant to be.

Quack!


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 8, 2022)

Sub-12 barrier has been broken on 3x3. Thanks in part to my new Orange Side logo for me VE.

I will now focus on improving at Square-1. I currently average around 21 but I could easily get sub-20 if I learned Intermediate CS. So I'll be focusing on that as well as EP since my method for doing it is awful. I basically usually reduce it to adj/adj or EPLL on top. As you can tell this is super inefficient, so I'll work on learning new algs. Speaking of which, what is the best EP document?

I also got some new puzzles, an Ambition and a Volt V2 UD, along with some logos and a Jelly 3x3 for my baby sister. The Ambition was an instant main and it's my favourite cube in terms of feel, I don't think I'll ever need another 4x4. The Volt v2 on the other hand was awful out of the box. It's gotten better after some setup but I need to work on it some more. I also applied a custom colour scheme on the Volt v2. It's @OreKehStrah's colour scheme but Black is replaced with Purple (because purple best colour) and White replaced with Reflective White (because why not?). I haven't gotten used to is yet but it looks very poggers.

I applied the extra sticker set that comes with the Volt V2 UD and put it on my MGC which fixes every problem I had with its grip and size.

Quack!


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 26, 2022)

Today I decided to quit speedcubing. I am now just a cuber. The speed aspect has lost its appeal on me. I'll still get faster just by solving puzzles but it's no longer my goal to get faster.

Besides that announcement I'm going to try to get into 3BLD and I was grinding Snake today (who doesn't?) and I'm sub-15 with a 10.84 single. I'll still buy a couple cubes but I'll probably just get a new 5-7 and the upcoming Yuxin Gigaminx and maybe some interesting new releases (The new Monster GO EDU looks cool).


----------



## Eli Apperson (Jul 26, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Shengshou Yuxin Gigaminx


----------



## ruffleduck (Jul 26, 2022)

TheCubingCuber347 said:


> Today I decided to quit speedcubing. I am now just a cuber. The speed aspect has lost its appeal on me. I'll still get faster just by solving puzzles but it's no longer my goal to get faster.


i see my fellow duck is following my footsteps. quack


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 3, 2022)

@DuckubingCuber347 

My new name is pronounced practically the same exact way but when you read it you will clearly see the Duck in my name. I am very pleased with this.


----------



## IsThatA4x4 (Aug 3, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> @DuckubingCuber347
> 
> My new name is pronounced practically the same exact way but when you read it you will clearly see the Duck in my name. I am very pleased with this.


Everything's the same except now we can call you DCC
Wait even that sounds the same...


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 10, 2022)

I've managed to bring my PB down to 5.22 (got it on camera too) and I average around 7-8. I should be working on my consistency and my worst step is the first 2 seconds of the solve as I usually make some wrong turns and mess up. Going to grind for sub-5 and hopefully average sub-7 by the end of the month.

Edit: 5.90, 5.96, 5.80 = 5.88 new PB mo3

Edit Edit: 5.13 PB single and 5.88 Ao5.


----------



## gsingh (Aug 10, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I've managed to bring my PB down to 5.22 (got it on camera too) and I average around 7-8. I should be working on my consistency and my worst step is the first 2 seconds of the solve as I usually make some wrong turns and mess up. Going to grind for sub-5 and hopefully average sub-7 by the end of the month.


2x2? 3x3? Pyra?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 10, 2022)

gsingh said:


> 2x2? 3x3? Pyra?


Snake.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Aug 15, 2022)

I figured out how to solve an FTO. The only cheats I used was glancing at Bens document so I knew the order of the steps and (ashamedly and only after 4 times of losing all my progress on the puzzle) learning the CP commutator. I need to look into L3T (or whatever the last step is called) pair creation some more because it's mostly just trial and error lol. I actually solve the Red face first which is pretty nice. White is so generic.

I also switched to ZZ-Tripod for OH today so I want to work on my EO step and at the very least know where my line edges will end up. In addition I will need to learn NLS and start rememorizing my Tripod ZBLL's, again...

Finally I want to give Nautilus-L5E another shot on 3x3 2H because it's really fun. I need to work on planning my FB in inspection which was always the thing holding me back from truly switching to an FB first method.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Aug 26, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> On behalf of me, myself, and I I hereby declare that it is incorrect to say such a thing. Megaminx is a meaningless name. The suffix "minx" denotes that it is a work by puzzle designer Ewe Meffert, which it is not but was in fact renamed after Ewe bought the patent for the puzzle. The word "Mega" is absolute nonsense and has no meaning.
> 
> The original name given to the puzzle by Dr. Cristoph Bandelow in the '80's was Hungarian Supernova, this name not only sounds cool, but it also describes its characteristics. The Rubik's cube (or Magic Cube) was created in Budapest, Hungary so it is possible that we can associate the word Hungarian with a twisty puzzle. A supernova is basically when a star explodes, when this happens it is surrounded by a bright, _*colourful*_, cloud of gas. So, supernova tells us that it is colourful and has something to do with stars.
> 
> Hungarian Supernova, it's not too late to change the name back, do your part by calling it what it was meant to be.


If Ewe Meffert bought the patent for the puzzle, he has a right to call it what he wants, and that is its name. However, I am absolutely _not _saying that you have to call it a megaminx. Nobody has the right to control your mouth. If you want, call it a megaminx, and if you want, call it a Hungarian Supernova.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 17, 2022)

Sub-11 global average on classic third order Magic cube has been achieved. Currently maining the Moretry Tianma Snap but I will probably order/preorder a Qiyi X-man Designs Flagship Tornado Version 3 magnetic 3x3x3 stickerless speedcube. (From TheCubicle.com, the largest twisty puzzle retailer in the US.)


----------



## Silky (Sep 18, 2022)

Are you still working on L5E?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 18, 2022)

Silky said:


> Are you still working on L5E?


I did learn it. However, when I learn new alg sets I always get distracted by something else and end up forgetting everything due to lack of usage. It's very hard for me to focus on one thing. I love learning algorithms but it's frustrating when I forget everything.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 18, 2022)

I'm still on the waiting list for Think In Fink Fall 2022 but just in case I do get off I guess I better relearn CLL and become decent at 2x2 or something.


----------



## baseballjello67 (Sep 18, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I guess I better relearn CLL and become decent at 2x2 or something.


You have finally left the dark side.


----------



## Silky (Sep 19, 2022)

Or you could just use Guimond


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 19, 2022)

Silky said:


> Or you could just use Guimond


The thing is, I'd rather not be an embarrassment to the community by using a redundant, largely unergonomic, rather silly method. If I were to do that, I'd pick whatever Swagrid uses!


----------



## Silky (Sep 19, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> The thing is, I'd rather not be an embarrassment to the community by using a redundant, largely unergonomic, rather silly method. If I were to do that, I'd pick whatever Swagrid uses!


Redundant?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 19, 2022)

pog.


----------



## Eli Apperson (Sep 19, 2022)

Mains and goals when?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 19, 2022)

2x2:
Main: XMD Flare
Method: CLL
Goal: sub-3.67 average. sub-2.91 single.

3x3:
Main: MoreTry Tianma X3 Snap or possibly my Le canard MS (I guess that's what I'll call my modded Qiyi MS).
Method: CFOP
Goal: sub-11 average. sub-9.47 single.

4x4:
Main: XMD Ambition
Method: Hoya
Goal: I really don't care. Sub-53 and 46 average and single?

5x5:
Main: Force my friend to let me borrow his Valk 5m.
Method: Hoya
Goal: Sub-1:33 average. Sub-1:28 single.

3x3 OH:
Main: The Valk Valk Elite m
Method: CFOP/FreeFOP and maybe a ZZ solve.
Goal: Sub-20 average. sub-17 single.

Edit: If I get the XMD Tornado V3 Flagship before the comp I might use it depending on how well it breaks in and how much I enjoy it.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Sep 29, 2022)

Updates on what to expect on Saturday.

I barely touched 2x2 but I'll probably grind tomorrow.

For 3x3, I have become super inconsistent, I'll probably take a break and get a fresh start on Saturday morning. I can get sub-11 but it seems like I also get way too many 12's.

For 4x4... Honestly why did I even register for it? I'm incapable of improving. I'll try to grind Yau just because I find it more fun than Hoya but I'm not expecting much.

For 5x5, I get into this weird zone where I average like 1:36 for 5-6 solves and then when I come back I get trash solves. I did get my first sub 90, a 1:26.87 so that's nice. Hopefully I can improve because I would like to actually get a decent result.

OH, I forgot how to do it. I was on pace to average sub-20 then I stopped and now I average 22-23 and struggle to get sub-20.

So, what can you expect? Well, I think I'll get 2x2 WR single, podium for 3x3, get an LL skip on OH and get in the top 50 for single, and get 0/10 parity during 4x4.


----------



## gsingh (Oct 1, 2022)

Bro what happened with 2x2


----------



## baseballjello67 (Oct 1, 2022)

He got 2 7's, an 8, a 13, and a 1. What absolute consistency. Congrats.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 2, 2022)

I forgot to practice 2x2 and I messed up every single solve. On one I forgot to inspect, on another I messed up a Y-perm, on another I did the wrong CLL, on the 1.50 I took a long time to recognize a skip, and the other one had a 2-3 second lockup. Also, bad judge, first event of the day, cold, and pressure from all of my fans to break WR single (I didn't.) Too bad because I actually had a good chance of getting finals if I had gotten what I average.

3x3 was a mess. I did get better results in the second round but the last two solves were trash, probably nerves.

For 4x4 I wasn't expecting much but I did get a somewhat decent average. I almost got a good average, but I messed up PP which probably cost me at least five seconds. Also, I used Yau. pretty nice considered I switch a day or two ago.

5x5 went nice, I got an overall PB single by two seconds. The average was decent but could have been better. I did too many solves during warm up and somehow, I missed my group and didn't realize until right before the next group. On top of that when I (and another competitor who was sitting at my table that also missed it) went up to clear up confusion I had to solve his 5x5 which was scrambled (because I was faster than him). Luckily, we were still allowed to compete but by the fourth solve I was burnt out.

I can't really complain about OH. I could have done better on the last solve but I'm still pleased considering it was the only event I thought I would fail to meet my goal at, but somehow exceeded it. (5x5 doesn't count because I had no idea what to expect.)


Overall, I had a great time and gave some cubes away as well as mentally forcing Hassan to get a PLL skip in finals.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 7, 2022)

DCC OLL


Intro Orignal soure of OLL pictures: <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Cubers/comments/fasyjp/a_customizable_and_printable_oll_cheat_sheet/">https://www.reddit.com/r/Cubers/comments/fasyjp/a_customizable_and_printable_oll_cheat_sheet/</a> My OLL's <a href="https://www.speedsolving.com/members/th...




docs.google.com





OLL sheet with my OLL's that I use for OLL. Happy with most of them except Anti-cannon . I optimized a lot during the creation of this so I'm not comfortable using all of them.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Oct 9, 2022)

I made a similar sheet except mine was an OLL sheet with my F2Ls that I use for ZBLL.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Oct 12, 2022)

L'il update. My personal best 3x3x3 Rubik's cube single is now 5.63, great F2L and easy OLL into predicted PLL skip. F2L wasn't lucky but I was able to be super efficient in my pair selection and executions. I've been doing a lot more pseudo-slotting and keyhole recently as well as working on fluency efficiency. I now only rotate 1-2 on the majority of my solves. Very poggers indeed. I'll probably work on slower turning so that I can better look ahead and not pause. I've had a few very successful attempts at doing it and it's quite satisfying. I also want to start doing more pseudo crosses and F RU F' tricks. Will probably watch some Jay videos to learn some great techniques.

I switched to K4 on 4x4 (duh) for a couple of days but I decided to switch priorities and go back to Hoya. I am learning PPLL and already have EPLL and diag done. I will work on adj tomorrow if my schedule allows for that. The reason I switched priorities is that I'd rather be fast with Hoya (currently not) and be sub-1 global in a bunch of more obscure methods. As soon as I'm done with K4 I'll start doing either LBL, OBLBL, Meyer, or 4PB. If you have any other interesting ones I'll definitely consider them, as long as it isn't something dumb like 2x2 redux.

Quack!


----------



## scrubizilla (Oct 12, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> L'il update. My personal best 3x3x3 Rubik's cube single is now 5.63, great F2L and easy OLL into predicted PLL skip. F2L wasn't lucky but I was able to be super efficient in my pair selection and executions. I've been doing a lot more pseudo-slotting and keyhole recently as well as working on fluency efficiency. I now only rotate 1-2 on the majority of my solves. Very poggers indeed. I'll probably work on slower turning so that I can better look ahead and not pause. I've had a few very successful attempts at doing it and it's quite satisfying. I also want to start doing more pseudo crosses and F RU F' tricks. Will probably watch some Jay videos to learn some great techniques.
> 
> I switched to K4 on 4x4 (duh) for a couple of days but I decided to switch priorities and go back to Hoya. I am learning PPLL and already have EPLL and diag done. I will work on adj tomorrow if my schedule allows for that. The reason I switched priorities is that I'd rather be fast with Hoya (currently not) and be sub-1 global in a bunch of more obscure methods. As soon as I'm done with K4 I'll start doing either LBL, OBLBL, Meyer, or 4PB. If you have any other interesting ones I'll definitely consider them, as long as it isn't something dumb like 2x2 redux.
> 
> Quack!


Wow you're really fast, how long have you been cubing for?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 12, 2022)

I average around sub-20 with Roux now. I need to get better at S/AS recognition/recall and work on my SP solutions. I'll probably stick with Roux as my main method as I find it fun.


----------



## cuberswoop (Dec 13, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I'll probably stick with Roux as my main method as I find it fun.





DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I'm seriously considering switching to APB instead just because I think it has *way* more potential the Nautilus.





DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I've decided to switch to APB instead of Nautilus.


And my mom thinks _I'm_ bipolar.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 13, 2022)

First Roux solve of the day was a 9.82. Very nice. I got a sub-10 with Roux before but I wasn't very happy with it because it was basically a FreeFOP solve. Accidental F2L and FRURUF into U perm.

This 9.82, however, was undoubtfully Roux.

Sub-10 global next.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Dec 13, 2022)

Why are you using Roux?


----------



## Garf (Dec 13, 2022)

Noob's Cubes said:


> Why are you using Roux?


He likes Roux. It isn't that bad of a 3x3 speedsolving method. I would use it if I didn't like CFOP so much.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Dec 13, 2022)

I thought he was better with CFOP.


----------



## Garf (Dec 13, 2022)

Noob's Cubes said:


> I thought he was better with CFOP.


He is. He is just trying to get faster at Roux so that it is faster than CFOP.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Dec 13, 2022)

Good luck with that. Also, why?


----------



## Garf (Dec 13, 2022)

Noob's Cubes said:


> Good luck with that. Also, why?





DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I average around sub-20 with Roux now. I need to get better at S/AS recognition/recall and work on my SP solutions. I'll probably stick with Roux as my main method as I find it fun.


Does this make sense?


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 13, 2022)

I'm better with CFOP because I've been using it since I started cubing.  

I think CFOP is boring. 

Roux, on the other hand, is fun, offers a lower movecount, allows for cooler block building, has no rotations, has cool ergonomics, has an awesome finish, has a low base alg count, has potential for very interesting alg set (ACMLL), gives a fresh new challenge to a stale cubing life, and is all around a more interesting method.

Just because one is better at one thing doesn't mean they can't and shouldn't try something else. That's a noob mindset.


----------



## Garf (Dec 13, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I'm better with CFOP because I've been using it since I started cubing.
> 
> I think CFOP is boring.
> 
> ...


I sometimes solve with Roux. I'm not fast at it (because of the lack of practice), but it is fun to solve with. I'm going to keep prioritizing CFOP, but I admire Roux a lot.


----------



## Noob's Cubes (Dec 13, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> I'm better with CFOP because I've been using it since I started cubing.
> 
> I think CFOP is boring.
> 
> ...


Well, the whole point of cubing is to have fun, so if you don't enjoy solving with CFOP, in my opinion, you shouldn't use CFOP, unless you prioritize speed.


Garf said:


> Does this make sense?


Lol I didn't see that.


----------



## Garf (Dec 13, 2022)

Noob's Cubes said:


> Well, the whole point of cubing is to have fun, so if you don't enjoy solving with CFOP, in my opinion, you shouldn't use CFOP, unless you prioritize speed.
> 
> Lol I didn't see that.


I could go into how society is so screwed up these days where you have to be the best in what you do and you could be judged for doing things in a slow/bad fashion. But this is a progression thread, so no in-depth concepts about that.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Dec 13, 2022)

Noob's Cubes said:


> you shouldn't use CFOP, unless you prioritize speed.


Roux is objectively better for OH and equal, if not better than CFOP for 2H.



Garf said:


> But this is a progression thread, so no in-depth concepts about that.


This is also my progression thread, not cuber.hello.com's. Feel free to write a short novel in my thread if you want.


----------



## Garf (Dec 14, 2022)

DuckubingCuber347 said:


> This is also my progression thread, not cuber.hello.com's. Feel free to write a short novel in my thread if you want.





Spoiler: Bet.



In my advisory class today, my teacher talked about what I said, but in more in-depth. Basically, it started off with a quote about how an archaeologist was enrolled in a school and was taking classes they weren't good at. Their instructor said that they shouldn't worry about not being good at things, they should just have fun instead. Following this mindset, that student/archaeologist became the best in their classes and went on to be successful in life.
After that, my teacher started talking about how we should be grateful for what we do. For example, I'm grateful for cubing and running.


----------

