# OrtegaZB



## Kirjava (Feb 25, 2010)

Ok so, me and Joey were messing about with 2x2x2 today and came up with an ortega varient where you can skip the PBL step *every single time*. 

The method is basically the same as ortega, except with two main differences.

1) Instead of making a face like you do in ortega, you make a layer instead.

2) Instead of doing OLL, you learn all the algorithms to orientate and permute the last four corners *at the same time*. It's believed that this number is less than 100 - I can't think of a good name for it right now but because it's a lot of algs we named the method "OrtegaZB".

That's all you need to do and this will force a skip of the PBL.


----------



## ianini (Feb 25, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> 1) Instead of making a face like you do in ortega, you make a layer instead.
> 
> That's all you need to do and this will force a skip of the PBL.



If you make a layer, then why would you need to do PBL?


----------



## DavidWoner (Feb 25, 2010)

Sounds pretty cool, I might learn it. Have you generated any algs yet?


----------



## vrumanuk (Feb 25, 2010)

TICT is better.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 25, 2010)

I think CLL has a nice ring to it, like, Corners of Last Layer? Nah, OrtegaZB sounds good for now.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 25, 2010)

Not yet, but I'm going to generate some examples with acube and see if they're short or good to execute.

Also, I might make a table for what I now call "OrtegaZBFF". This is the special subset of the first face I decribe in the method that reduces the number of algs you have to learn.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 25, 2010)

Cool method bro.


----------



## guitardude7241 (Feb 25, 2010)

this is just cll.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 25, 2010)

whoosh


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 25, 2010)

ZOMG nice method. sub-3-able too.


----------



## Daniel Wu (Feb 25, 2010)

Check out my signature!


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 25, 2010)

guitardude7241 said:


> this is just cll.



WTF? It's totally different. Maybe you should learn both sets of algs, to see how different it is.


----------



## kinch2002 (Feb 25, 2010)

rickcube said:


> Check out my signature!


Impressive that you've learnt most of it when he hasn't even published the algs yet


----------



## Sa967St (Feb 25, 2010)

A PBL skip every single time? I'm liking this idea


----------



## 4Chan (Feb 25, 2010)

I love it because of the letters "ZB".


----------



## gamemeister27 (Feb 25, 2010)

Pfft, the recognition would be too difficult to achieve times as fast as those as Oretga.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 25, 2010)

gamemeister27 said:


> Pfft, the recognition would be too difficult to achieve times as fast as those as Oretga.



notrly. it's sooo much faster


----------



## Edward_Lin (Feb 25, 2010)

im pretty sure this is the same as cll


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 25, 2010)

pfft, the idea is PBL skip every solve. it's not like cll at all


----------



## cincyaviation (Feb 25, 2010)

Edward_Lin said:


> im pretty sure this is the same as cll


read it again, just once more


----------



## qqwref (Feb 25, 2010)

A while ago I heard the current world record holder uses this method. I thought it was hard to believe at the time, but I'm beginning to see the possibility... This sounds like a really cool method, quite fast


----------



## Anthony (Feb 25, 2010)

zomg, it would be even better if you could just make a side instead of a whole layer!


----------



## Edward_Lin (Feb 25, 2010)

cincyaviation said:


> Edward_Lin said:
> 
> 
> > im pretty sure this is the same as cll
> ...


its cll


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 25, 2010)

pfft again PBL skip is the key here not LL skip.


----------



## dannyz0r (Feb 25, 2010)

Edward_Lin said:


> cincyaviation said:
> 
> 
> > Edward_Lin said:
> ...



It's OrtegaZB


----------



## Edward_Lin (Feb 25, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> pfft again PBL skip is the key here not LL skip.


then that would be EG


----------



## 4Chan (Feb 25, 2010)




----------



## cincyaviation (Feb 25, 2010)

Edward_Lin said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > pfft again PBL skip is the key here not LL skip.
> ...


read closely, i want you to grab the nearest spoon, hit yourself 8 times on the nose with it, each time saying "i have no sense of humour" in a russian accent


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

I dont see how this is any different to CLL, because its just making a layer and solving the last layer in 1 alg, which is just CLL.


----------



## MichaelP. (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> I dont see how this is any different to CLL, because its just making a layer and solving the last layer in 1 alg, which is just CLL.



:fp


----------



## Daniel Wu (Feb 25, 2010)

No. Cuz you get a PBL skip. What could compare to that???


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Feb 25, 2010)

Edward_Lin said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > pfft again PBL skip is the key here not LL skip.
> ...



No, because you make a layer, not a face.


----------



## Truncator (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> I dont see how this is any different to CLL, because its just making a layer and solving the last layer in 1 alg, which is just CLL.


lern2read

I'm glad I didn't waste my time learning CLL


----------



## RyanO (Feb 25, 2010)

Great thread, made my day. It makes me sad how many of you don't get this. Very funny.


----------



## Edward_Lin (Feb 25, 2010)

:fp


cincyaviation said:


> Edward_Lin said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...


:fp its either cll or eg and he said that you make a layer which means its cll


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

Truncator said:


> ben1996123 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont see how this is any different to CLL, because its just making a layer and solving the last layer in 1 alg, which is just CLL.
> ...



I have read it, I've read it at least 10 times really carefully, and I just dont see any difference at all.


----------



## Truncator (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> Truncator said:
> 
> 
> > ben1996123 said:
> ...


I think it's time you invested in a new sarcasm detector.


----------



## gamemeister27 (Feb 25, 2010)

Edward_Lin said:


> :fp
> 
> 
> cincyaviation said:
> ...





ben1996123 said:


> Truncator said:
> 
> 
> > ben1996123 said:
> ...


:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp:fp 


ARE YOU WITHOUT EMOTIONS!? LEARN WHAT FUNNY IS!


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> Truncator said:
> 
> 
> > ben1996123 said:
> ...



:fp:fp:fp

YOU GET A PBL SKIP EVERY TIME. HOW HARD IS THIS TO UNDERSTAND.


----------



## Edward_Lin (Feb 25, 2010)

this isn't funny at all


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 25, 2010)

gamemeister27=banned soon. Let's see if I'm psychic.

Anyway, I saw the title & then had to leave. It left me wondering the whole time what the method was. What is this thread a parody of? I haven't seen a recent one like this.


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

Ethan Rosen said:


> ben1996123 said:
> 
> 
> > Truncator said:
> ...



PBL skip = First layer (No permutation required), Last layer (permuted during orientation)

First layer (Just like in CLL), then LL is just orienting and permuting 4 pieces at once, which is just solving the corners of the last layer, which is just CLL!


----------



## Escher (Feb 25, 2010)

IM LEARNING THIS 

I MUST FAST

FOR THE WIN


----------



## Edmund (Feb 25, 2010)

I *used* to know all of this


----------



## Daniel Wu (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > ben1996123 said:
> ...


Are you serious right now? I really hope you're just playing along.


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

rickcube said:


> ben1996123 said:
> 
> 
> > Ethan Rosen said:
> ...



Um... no, I just dont have any idea as to what this method is supposed to be, idk is this thread just a joke or something?


----------



## nlCuber22 (Feb 25, 2010)

Dude that's genius.
OrtegaZB is very fitting.



ben1996123 said:


> Um... no, I just dont have any idea as to what this method is supposed to be, idk is this thread just a joke or something?


You get a PBL skip. What is so hard to understand? It's not a joke.



Spoiler



TEE HEE


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

nlCuber22 said:


> Dude that's genius.
> OrtegaZB is very fitting.
> 
> 
> ...



So its just OLL and PBL at the same time?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Feb 25, 2010)

ok you guys officially fail hard.
But kirjava, i think this is the single greatest thing since... since....
sliced bread


----------



## Forte (Feb 25, 2010)

WOT THIS MIGHT EVEN BE BETTAR THAN THE METHOD THAT ROWE HESSLER USE TO BREAK WR?!!!

OMG BUT THAT'S LIKE 500+ ALGS I HEARD THAT ZB ON 3X3 HAS THOUSANDS SO FOR 2X2 IT WUD BE LIKE 500!!!!!


----------



## JeffDelucia (Feb 25, 2010)

Ok so in this you make a layer and finsh the cube. In Cll you make a layer and finish the cube. No difference.


----------



## Forte (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> Ok so in this you make a layer and finsh the cube. In Cll you make a layer and finish the cube. No difference.



YA THERE IS BECAUSE YOU CAN GET PBL SKIP EVERY TIME AND EVEN THOSE PEOPLE THAT USE EG HAVE TO FIX THE LAYERS BUT NOT WITH ORTEGAZB OMG KIRJAVA SO SMRAAAT


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Feb 25, 2010)

ben1996123 said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > ben1996123 said:
> ...



No, because you aren't doing OLL and PLL at the same time, you're skipping PBL. I honestly don't get what's so hard about this...

Also, has anyone generated any algs for the sune cases yet?


----------



## JeffDelucia (Feb 25, 2010)

its not a pbl skip if you solve the first layer to begin..


----------



## MichaelP. (Feb 25, 2010)

Ethan Rosen said:


> ben1996123 said:
> 
> 
> > Ethan Rosen said:
> ...



Yes, you can find them here   




JeffDelucia said:


> its not a pbl skip if you solve the first layer to begin..



Nou.


----------



## Forte (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> its not a pbl skip if you solve the first layer to begin..



IS IT AN OLL SKIP WHEN YOU USE WINTER VARIATION?!

YA IT IS


----------



## JeffDelucia (Feb 25, 2010)

this is a joke...


----------



## ben1996123 (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> its not a pbl skip if you solve the first layer to begin..



This.


----------



## happyface352 (Feb 25, 2010)

This is clearly not CLL.
I wish I didn't learn CLL, but learned this :/


----------



## DavidWoner (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> its not a pbl skip if you solve the first layer to begin..



Depends on the method.


----------



## Anthony (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> this is a joke...



orly?


----------



## MichaelP. (Feb 25, 2010)

Anthony said:


> JeffDelucia said:
> 
> 
> > this is a joke...
> ...



Haha, Anthony's just upset because he learned CLL and not OrtegaZB.


----------



## Dene (Feb 25, 2010)

Wowza this thread is full of stoopid.


----------



## guitardude7241 (Feb 25, 2010)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> guitardude7241 said:
> 
> 
> > this is just cll.
> ...



no, it's not.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Feb 25, 2010)

Does it matter? The method is more than fine. Even if one side wins this stupid argument, what's to gain?


----------



## Ashmnafa (Feb 25, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> Anthony said:
> 
> 
> > JeffDelucia said:
> ...



No, he's upset because he likes EG more.


----------



## rowehessler (Feb 25, 2010)

woah this method sounds amazing! CLL is too slow, i must learn OrtegaZB!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 25, 2010)

I think I will try this...


----------



## Aksel B (Feb 25, 2010)

EDIT: Wauv. Just found the other 6 pages 

Too late for jokes, I guess!


----------



## Owen (Feb 25, 2010)

Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Feb 25, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.



LMAO really? fail


----------



## Shortey (Feb 25, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> this is a joke...


----------



## Escher (Feb 25, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.



You can get sub 30 with TICT.
Trust me.


----------



## Litz (Feb 25, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> Owen said:
> 
> 
> > Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.
> ...



Woosh, I hope.


----------



## Toad (Feb 25, 2010)

Wow this is immense.

Finally someone's created a method that's even less moves than optimum 2x2...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 25, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.



Hint: TICT is not a joke.


----------



## puzzlemaster (Feb 25, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.



I'm still trying to figure out if that was a joke or not...:fp


----------



## Toad (Feb 25, 2010)

puzzlemaster said:


> Owen said:
> 
> 
> > Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good. I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.
> ...



Errr what...?

Faz used it on his 3rd solve of his 9.21 average... How can it be a joke? :confused:


----------



## Owen (Feb 25, 2010)

randomtoad said:


> puzzlemaster said:
> 
> 
> > Owen said:
> ...



See, I can't tell if that is a joke or not. You are not being serious enought. But I looked a faz's 3rd solve, and I'm pretty sure it was fridrich. He locked up after OLL, and you could see that It was all done exept for PLL.


----------



## puzzlemaster (Feb 25, 2010)

randomtoad said:


> puzzlemaster said:
> 
> 
> > Owen said:
> ...



I was talking about Owen's post..


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 26, 2010)

Edward said:


> > Ok so, me and Joey were messing about with 2x2x2 today and came up with an ortega varient where you can skip the PBL step *every single time*.
> >
> > The method is basically the same as ortega, except with two main differences.
> >
> ...



norly?


----------



## iasimp1997 (Feb 26, 2010)

This is basically CLL. No, it IS CLL!!!!


----------



## Edward (Feb 26, 2010)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > > Ok so, me and Joey were messing about with 2x2x2 today and came up with an ortega varient where you can skip the PBL step *every single time*.
> ...


Yeah.
I just realized I was late to the partay :fp.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 26, 2010)

iasimp1997 said:


> This is basically CLL. No, it's ALL CLL.



LOLOL

I think it's about time this thread got closed. Sorry, but... oh man.....:fp


----------



## vrumanuk (Feb 26, 2010)

iasimp1997 said:


> This is basically CLL. No, it IS CLL!!!!



NO! In CLL you solve the LL in one look. In this you get a PBL skip every time! Why can't you people see the importance of this simple, but groundbreaking method?


----------



## Sa967St (Feb 26, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good.


That's why this website is so awesome.



Owen said:


> I still can't figure out if TICT is a joke or not.


dzkvdvfjo';xdtgkvjlnsyfbglimdhvo;


----------



## Johan444 (Feb 26, 2010)

Owen said:


> Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good.



It might be the ones that are "not getting" the joke that are tricking the ones that play along.

Or is it the ones facepalming at the ones who's not getting it that actually do the real tricking by making others think that they think that the ones "not getting it" are actually not getting it?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 26, 2010)

Johan444 said:


> Owen said:
> 
> 
> > Thats the problem with this website. You can never tell if it's a joke or not, because people play along so good.
> ...



I would facepalm you, but you still wouldn't get it...


----------



## iasimp1997 (Feb 26, 2010)

vrumanuk said:


> iasimp1997 said:
> 
> 
> > This is basically CLL. No, it IS CLL!!!!
> ...



Grrrrr..... I can't tell if you're joking or not.
In Ortega you solve a FACE! NOT A LAYER!
I don't see the difference. CLL is the same thing as ZBortega.


----------



## qqwref (Feb 26, 2010)

I think the difference is pretty huge. OrtegaZB is just an improvement on Ortega. You solve a face (with the correct permutation) and then orient the last layer with the correct permutation, forcing a skip. But CLL makes a layer and then solves the last layer corners in one look - no skip anywhere. The methods are pretty much completely different.


----------



## mr. giggums (Feb 26, 2010)

Isn't solving the face with the correct permutation the same as solving a layer.


----------



## Weston (Feb 26, 2010)

mr. giggums said:


> Isn't solving the face with the correct permutation the same as solving a layer.



whuttanoob.
No it isnt.


----------



## Caedus (Feb 26, 2010)

OrtegaZB =/= CLL
Is it really that difficult to understand?
OrtegaZB (Based off Ortega) = Solve a face with correct permutation, orient the last layer with the correct permutation, forcing a skip.
CLL (Based off LBL) = Solve a layer, and solve the last layer in one algorithm


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Feb 26, 2010)

I come back about a day later and you guys are STILL arguing. Really?
Come on....OrtegaZX is like Ortega Squared.


----------



## Innocence (Feb 26, 2010)

OrtegaZX? Lulwut.

You guys should've stopped talking right after Qqwref's post, as he pretty much cleared the matter up as much as can humanly be done.

Srsly.

I'm such an idiot for starting to learn COLL, OrtegaZB is obviously more optimalized for the 2x2x2.


----------



## HaraldS (Feb 26, 2010)

@ben1996123
Instead of making a face make a layer start of cll then you orient and oermute the corners at the same time wooooow neeeww methodd OH YEAAAH its the same thing isn't it FACEPALM FACEPALM.


----------



## HaraldS (Feb 26, 2010)

@ben1996123 i agree with you its the same thing.


----------



## H (Feb 26, 2010)

AHHAHAHA cll now im gonna ask another popular guy in the forums to make a new 3x3x3 method lets call it "mcftt2flatstanollalpll" (Make Cross First Then The 2 First Layers At The Same Time And Then Orient Last Layer At Last Permute The Last Layer) Hmm im maybe gonna ask Stefan Pochmann to do it with me because then everyone would belive us cuse they are dumb -.-


----------



## Toad (Feb 26, 2010)

H said:


> AHHAHAHA cll now im gonna ask another popular guy in the forums to make a new 3x3x3 method lets call it "mcftt2flatstanollalpll" (Make Cross First Then The 2 First Layers At The Same Time And Then Orient Last Layer At Last Permute The Last Layer) Hmm im maybe gonna ask Stefan Pochmann to do it with me because then everyone would belive us cuse they are dumb -.-



No because that's just Fridrich. Silly.


----------



## Aksel B (Feb 26, 2010)

H said:


> AHHAHAHA cll now im gonna ask another popular guy in the forums to make a new 3x3x3 method lets call it "mcftt2flatstanollalpll" (Make Cross First Then The 2 First Layers At The Same Time And Then Orient Last Layer At Last Permute The Last Layer) Hmm im maybe gonna ask Stefan Pochmann to do it with me because then everyone would belive us cuse they are dumb -.-



mcftt2flatstatollalpll

I guess that N was supposed to be a T


----------



## riffz (Feb 26, 2010)

And here I was wasting my time learning CLL when I could have just extended my Ortega method... This should save me loads of time.


----------



## Erik (Feb 26, 2010)

Oh god, not another fake 'look I found a method which is not new or fantastic and want to confuse people with it' thread (after having a lot of those by for instance Faz already). 
People are already so stupid to find themselves what method people use for which puzzle, this only causes confusion. I would be surprised if I get facebook messages tomorrow with questions like: 'what do you think is better for 2x2, CLL or OrtegaZB?'

thanks...


----------



## ManasijV (Feb 26, 2010)

Erik said:


> Oh god, not another fake 'look I found a method which is not new or fantastic and want to confuse people with it' thread (after having a lot of those by for instance Faz already).
> People are already so stupid to find themselves what method people use for which puzzle, this only causes confusion. I would be surprised if I get facebook messages tomorrow with questions like: 'what do you think is better for 2x2, CLL or OrtegaZB?'
> 
> thanks...



Exact same thought. It was funny only the first time.


----------



## Meisen (Feb 26, 2010)

It was never funny. People come to this forum to learn. Atleast i do. So when fast people post something they say is new and exiting, i'm all over it. The fact that it doesn't make sense might not be so obvious for me as a relatively new cuber, as it is for you experienced (and therefore obviously smarter AND allowed to make fun of others) cubers.

Why do you make fun of people that don't know as much as you do? We ALL started out knowing nothing about the cube...

One thing is for sure: I've lost respect for a great deal of cubers that never really earned my respect in any way other than the fact that they are faster than me.
I'll make sure to be more careful before judgeing people (in a positive way) here on this forum again.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Feb 26, 2010)

Meisen said:


> It was never funny. People come to this forum to learn. Atleast i do. So when fast people post something they say is new and exiting, i'm all over it. The fact that it doesn't make sense might not be so obvious for me as a relatively new cuber, as it is for you experienced (and therefore obviously smarter AND allowed to make fun of others) cubers.
> 
> Why do you make fun of people that don't know as much as you do? We ALL started out knowing nothing about the cube...
> 
> ...



Its not really that big of a deal, If you read it you realize that:
TICT is basically a roux/CF/BLD-like method.
XG = lbl 
OrtegaZB = CLL

regardless of what they say. Its just funny when ppl get flustered over it. Its all done in good fun, not as an attempt to patronize people.


----------



## Meisen (Feb 26, 2010)

Thanks for that mature answer to my somewhat annoyed post 
You just made my christmas card list


----------



## TMOY (Feb 26, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> I would facepalm you, but you still wouldn't get it...


Have you tried layerpalming him ?


----------



## Zava (Feb 26, 2010)

TMOY said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > I would facepalm you, but you still wouldn't get it...
> ...



this.


----------



## Cride5 (Feb 26, 2010)

TMOY said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > I would facepalm you, but you still wouldn't get it...
> ...









.. sorry it just had to be done


----------



## gamemeister27 (Feb 26, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> TMOY said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



And this is my avatar now.


----------



## rahulkadukar (Feb 26, 2010)

Why do people like to waste time


----------



## qqwref (Feb 26, 2010)

Meisen said:


> It was never funny. People come to this forum to learn. Atleast i do. So when fast people post something they say is new and exiting, i'm all over it. The fact that it doesn't make sense might not be so obvious for me as a relatively new cuber, as it is for you experienced (and therefore obviously smarter AND allowed to make fun of others) cubers.
> 
> Why do you make fun of people that don't know as much as you do? We ALL started out knowing nothing about the cube...



For me, threads like this are not really about being mean, but about having fun and at the same time encouraging people to follow the right path and think for themselves. If someone is faster at cubing or more popular, it does not mean you should listen to everything they say! Even if you're new to something, you should always think for yourself when you hear advice, because even well-meaning advice may not even apply to you. I think this is one of the things that separates people who don't get anywhere in cubing from people who do, and I wish more people would do it

Basically, if you're wondering what method/cube/lube/algs to use, you're not going to get anywhere by just asking someone and blindly following their instructions. At the very least, ask a few people and see what the general consensus seems to be. Because of personal preferences, no two people have the same style and algs and cube, so if you want to really find out what's good for you the best idea is to simply try it out yourself. Use a method because it gives YOU better times, not because someone said you should use it... use a cube because YOU like the feel... and so on. And it's the same thing on the forum, many people will give answers that are obviously false (to them) to mess with the people who memorize their advice and to give a joke to the people who treat it as an opinion. But I assure you, we're not trying to be malevolent.


----------



## Dene (Feb 26, 2010)

Meisen said:


> It was never funny. People come to this forum to learn. Atleast i do. So when fast people post something they say is new and exiting, i'm all over it. The fact that it doesn't make sense might not be so obvious for me as a relatively new cuber, as it is for you experienced (and therefore obviously smarter AND allowed to make fun of others) cubers.



I have a question: Why are you so desperate to see the latest and greatest new method? Anyone that has spent some time reading around the threads here should know that new stuff pops up all the time, and 99% of the time it disappears and is forgotten about. I suggest you stop worrying so much about the best new things, and focus on what is currently working for you.


----------



## Lt-UnReaL (Feb 26, 2010)

hi all


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 26, 2010)

Shouldn't OrtegaZB be EG instead


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 26, 2010)

Lt-UnReaL said:


> hi all



sup.


----------



## Meisen (Feb 26, 2010)

Dene said:


> Meisen said:
> 
> 
> > It was never funny. People come to this forum to learn. Atleast i do. So when fast people post something they say is new and exiting, i'm all over it. The fact that it doesn't make sense might not be so obvious for me as a relatively new cuber, as it is for you experienced (and therefore obviously smarter AND allowed to make fun of others) cubers.
> ...



Did i sound desperate to you? You must lead a very tranquil life.

I'm aware that noobs posts new ideas quite frequently, and i rarely pay much attention. The difference in some recent threads is that fast cubers are promoting false info. That is mean to the people with less knowledge and understanding.

I do agree that to some extent one should think for oneself, but there is absolutely no reason for me to try to reinvent the wheel when it comes to cubing! So, if fast people says: this works for me, i tend to listen.

In my opinion the purpose of this forum is not to have fun with people that know less than yourself, but to exchange experiences and help other peoples knowledge to grow.

This purpose is not promoted by threads like this, and while your intention might not be to be malevolent, it still leaves people confused, and maybe disheartened. That in itself is not nice...


----------



## joey (Feb 26, 2010)

This thread really was just for fun!
Me and thom were just cubing (in a pub), and came up with the idea!


----------



## iasimp1997 (Feb 26, 2010)

qqwref said:


> I think the difference is pretty huge. OrtegaZB is just an improvement on Ortega. You solve a face (with the correct permutation) and then orient the last layer with the correct permutation, forcing a skip. But CLL makes a layer and then solves the last layer corners in one look - no skip anywhere. The methods are pretty much completely different.



A face with correct permutation is a layer. Can someone make an explanation vid and send it to me? I might learn this.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Feb 26, 2010)

Innocence said:


> OrtegaZX? Lulwut.
> 
> You guys should've stopped talking right after Qqwref's post, as he pretty much cleared the matter up as much as can humanly be done.
> 
> ...



Godamnit, again? I keep pressing X instead of B because the Z automatically reminds me of ZX from Megaman. Lol


----------



## Dene (Feb 27, 2010)

Meisen: Ok sure, fair enough. However, upon quick inspection you should quickly be able to see the truth of this "new" method. In which case, you go "I don't get the joke so I will ignore it". When I first saw this thread I went straight to Kirjava himself and asked him what it was about.
It isn't our fault then that a bunch of morons come in and can't see through this, so others go along with it just for a cheap joke. It isn't their (my) problem that they are too stupid to see through it.


----------



## richardzhang (Feb 27, 2010)

Isnt this just CLL?


----------



## adimare (Feb 27, 2010)

So if I get a PBL skip using this method (which I will!!!), is it considered a lucky solve or not? I'm gonna have to rethink this quite a bit...


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Feb 27, 2010)

Lucky is something that happens rarely. if it happens a lot, it isn't rare. For YOU. remember. Getting lucky is not a crime.


----------



## Meisen (Feb 27, 2010)

Dene said:


> Meisen: Ok sure, fair enough. However, upon quick inspection you should quickly be able to see the truth of this "new" method. In which case, you go "I don't get the joke so I will ignore it". When I first saw this thread I went straight to Kirjava himself and asked him what it was about.
> It isn't our fault then that a bunch of morons come in and can't see through this, so others go along with it just for a cheap joke. It isn't their (my) problem that they are too stupid to see through it.



Thats just it. I recent being called stupid because i don't have the same understanding as you lot do.

But ok. Even though i disagree with your demeanor, i believe you aren't mean on purpose, so we'll just have to agree to disagree whether theese threads have any positive effect at all.

Let's leave it at that


----------



## kurtaz (Feb 27, 2010)

this. topic. is. fail.


----------



## Hyprul 9-ty2 (Feb 27, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> Lucky is something that happens rarely. if it happens a lot, it isn't rare. For YOU. remember. Getting lucky is not a crime.


:confused:


----------



## Innocence (Feb 27, 2010)

Meisen said:


> De*mean*or



Pretty much sums it up.

Intentional or not, it's unfair for the newbies to have to wade through threads of jokes to get to something useful.

Come to think of it, it's unfair for everyone.


----------



## Muesli (Feb 27, 2010)

Innocence said:


> Meisen said:
> 
> 
> > De*mean*or
> ...


NO MORE JOEK THREDS CUZ CUBING IS SRS BSNS


----------



## Meisen (Feb 27, 2010)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Innocence said:
> 
> 
> > Meisen said:
> ...



Sadly, for me it actually is :/

I was mad at myself for days after my first, and so far only competition. I feel i let myself down, taking things far to seriously. Oh well, i think i have recovered from that event by now.


----------



## dillonbladez (Feb 27, 2010)

beware the noob?

what pbl?


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Feb 27, 2010)

PBL=Permute Both Layers
If that is what you are asking.
Oh I get it.
You solve ONE layer.
Then you use: http://www.erikku.110mb.com/CLL.html
Those algs to solve the cube.


----------



## Dene (Feb 27, 2010)

Meisen said:


> ...i believe you aren't mean on purpose...



Well actually, a lot of the time I am mean on purpose. However most other people aren't. I'm just a big old douchemonkey is all.


----------



## Stefan (Feb 27, 2010)

Innocence said:


> unfair for the newbies to have to *wade through threads of jokes to get to something useful*.



Wiki?


----------



## DavidWoner (Feb 27, 2010)

This thread was never meant to confuse anyone. It was just an observation that a ZB-type method for Ortega would just be CLL. Some people can't take a joke and took this way too far.



Innocence said:


> Intentional or not, it's unfair for the newbies to have to wade through threads of jokes to get to something useful.



It's even more unfair for the experienced members to have to sort through the steaming mound of pointless, nooby, repeat threads to find something useful.


----------



## Escher (Feb 28, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> It's even more unfair for the experienced members to have to sort through the steaming mound of pointless, nooby, repeat threads to find something useful.



This ^ 100%, all the way.

I read about 2% of threads on this forum now, seeing as they are almost all repeats or completely useless.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 28, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> This thread was never meant to confuse anyone. It was just an observation that a ZB-type method for Ortega would just be CLL. Some people can't take a joke and took this way too far.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And not just the experienced members, I'm hardly a good cuber/experienced, yet I am so sick of speedsolving.com. When I joined, I loved it. I found out so much stuff, took a lot of *important or useful* threads in. Now I have to search to find decent threads, and most of the time, they are old threads. I think mods maybe could be stricter, and hand out temp bans to people who make, threads that are repeats, and threads that belong in other threads.


----------



## Stefan (Feb 28, 2010)

ZB_FTW!!! said:


> When I joined, I loved it.



Yeah, six months ago all was still perfect.


----------



## dannyz0r (Feb 28, 2010)

How the hell did you like it during the time you joined? All the annoying people started popping up at that time. I hated it and now I love it because of stuff like this.


----------



## Escher (Feb 28, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> ZB_FTW!!! said:
> 
> 
> > When I joined, I loved it.
> ...



It started to suck before I began reading it, almost 2 years ago...


----------



## cincyaviation (Feb 28, 2010)

Innocence said:


> Meisen said:
> 
> 
> > De*mean*or
> ...


newbies learn, its how they grow, we don't have to coddle them, i learned, let them do the same


----------



## Dene (Feb 28, 2010)

dannyz0r said:


> How the hell did you like it during the time you joined? All the annoying people started popping up at that time. I hated it and now I love it because of stuff like this.



I'm gonna say that was about the time that _I_ joined.


----------



## dannyz0r (Feb 28, 2010)

Dene said:


> dannyz0r said:
> 
> 
> > How the hell did you like it during the time you joined? All the annoying people started popping up at that time. I hated it and now I love it because of stuff like this.
> ...



The new generation.


----------



## Dene (Feb 28, 2010)

Hmm. Does that make me an old generation cuber? I don't feel like an old cuber. I haven't been around for half as long as some people.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 28, 2010)

Basically it started getting bad when youtube cubing got popular?


----------



## Dene (Feb 28, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> Basically it started getting bad when youtube cubing got popular?



I guess that depends on how you define "bad", and whether you are prepared to include yourself in that or not.


----------



## dannyz0r (Feb 28, 2010)

Older than the 2009 at least


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 28, 2010)

Dene said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > Basically it started getting bad when youtube cubing got popular?
> ...



I was including myself, not as a noob, but as entering during the time when all the noobs came.


----------



## Edward (Feb 28, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...



Meh, I would say most of us are still considered noobs (myself included).

It got bad when the experienced started lurking moar (which seems to be around the time me and you got here).


----------



## Stefan (Feb 28, 2010)

Edward said:


> It got bad [...] around the time me and you got here



People need to stop thinking there was nothing before them.


----------



## Deleted member 2864 (Feb 28, 2010)

dannyz0r said:


> Older than the 2009 at least



I can haz old generation status?

I think the nublets kinda started a little after I joined. I think I remember tons of "wutz teh bezt cub!!1!!!1!" threads.

After that, I'd say there was a steady stream...

but since I wasn't here before I was here (lolstatement), I wouldn't know if there was always a steady stream of nublets entering this site.


----------



## AndyRoo789 (Feb 28, 2010)

I reckon there were always noobs, but the bigger the forum gets, the more noobs there will be.

i iz a nubblet!!11


----------



## Stefan (Feb 28, 2010)

aznmortalx said:


> I can haz old generation status?



Not if you started with this forum, that much is for sure. I believe this is where/when I joined:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/message/6741



aznmortalx said:


> I think the nublets kinda started *a little after I joined*.



What a surprise!


----------



## Deleted member 2864 (Feb 28, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> aznmortalx said:
> 
> 
> > I can haz old generation status?
> ...





StefanPochmann said:


> aznmortalx said:
> 
> 
> > I think the nublets kinda started *a little after I joined*.
> ...



indeed


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 28, 2010)

Edward said:


> (which seems to be around the time me and you got here).


I joined back in June, but under a different name, it had already started by then.

I think why people think there are more noobs now is because, 1 when they started they were a noob & less people seemed noob to them, 2 noobs post more. 

x=noobs y = experienced, noob posts:experienced posts, xa:yb, a>b.


----------



## Dene (Feb 28, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> I believe this is where/when I joined:
> http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/message/6741



I have to say it... LMAO. When I read that post, instead of the usual macho manly voice I have in my head for you, I imagined the voice of a little child XD


----------



## Innocence (Feb 28, 2010)

Dene said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > I believe this is where/when I joined:
> ...



Au contraire, Dene. (Lol, I hope I spelled that right.)

Even then, Stefan was very mature, apologetic, and polite.

Can you not tell the difference between a nice noob like that, and a common, dirty noob?


----------



## deadalnix (Mar 4, 2010)

Innocence said:


> Au contraire, Dene. (Lol, I hope I spelled that right.)



Parfaitement.

(And now, I hope you spell it right too, otherwise I will look very dumb).


----------



## dillonbladez (Mar 4, 2010)

nice french, guys 

and yes, im pretty sure you spelt it right.


----------



## deadalnix (Mar 4, 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF3a-wtq65Q

You speak québécoué not french  Tempête d'hosties xD


----------

