# M2 flipped edges and breaking into new cycles



## Mike Hughey (Apr 17, 2008)

I've been working on M2 for the past week. At first I had tried Stefan's original method, with leaving edges in the M slice flipped and just remembering to go back and flip them when I was done. This never really worked for me. I always had trouble figuring out and remembering which pieces to flip. Then I tried doing the extra moves to place them in the correct orientation right away, and that helped a lot and worked better. Then I realized it was becoming the same method I use for 4x4x4 BLD, so I went all the way - I started solving anything with a flipped edge in the M slice using commutators, and the rest with M2. That method seems to really work for me - almost.

It seems so promising - memorization times under a minute, fast execution when my memory doesn't fail me - but I'm having problems with accuracy. I've never been this bad with 3-cycle, not even when I first started. I'm way less than 50%; probably more like 30% or so. I can almost always figure out where I went wrong. Much of it is me making mistakes with my lettering system, since it's different from what I used before - that should certainly straighten out over time. Perhaps some of this is just due to the fact that M2 is a more advanced method, and will take a while to get good at. But the majority of my mistakes are:
1. I forget to include the starting piece of a cycle I broke into at the end of the cycle. This is just like in 4x4x4, but I don't do it nearly as often for 4x4x4 - I figure I'm just making this mistake more in 3x3x3 because the time pressure is so much greater - I'm trying to go faster.
2. I miss a cycle - usually a couple of pieces in a two-cycle. This is happening less the more I practice it, so maybe this will go away over time.
3. I miss a flipped edge (an edge that was in place, but flipped, from the beginning). If it's just one flipped edge, I should be able to tell I'm missing one by the time I get to the end, but I seem to forget to check that most times. Sometimes I miss 2 flipped edges too.

For those of you who use M2, what do you do about these problems? I really want to use M2 for multiBLD, but with the accuracy it's currently giving me, I just don't see it happening. I have to figure out how to get better.


----------



## Pedro (Apr 17, 2008)

I forget to check edges sometimes too (also on 4x4)

I do it like Stefan, flipping the edges at the end...but I don't do M2 a lot...I've got some good times with it, using my rooms and images to memorise (which I usually don't do)

but sometimes I forget to flip the edges or flip the wrong ones...

I guess it's about practicing...or learning those ugly "special" cases

and...do you think 30% is that bad? I'm having low 20% accuracy this week :/ don't know what's going on


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Apr 17, 2008)

Find the flipped edges is easy!

I just remember if the sticker has to go(and we are talking about the M layer here, you should be able to accurately place edges out of the M layer) onto the D or U layer, if it doesn't have to go to the U or D layer, then just remember to flip it!


----------



## alexc (Apr 17, 2008)

Lotsofsloths said:


> Find the flipped edges is easy!



But why make extra work for your memo and execution when it is easier to just use a slightly longer alg to solve the orientation?


----------



## Lotsofsloths (Apr 17, 2008)

alexc said:


> Lotsofsloths said:
> 
> 
> > Find the flipped edges is easy!
> ...



Slightly longer?
You mean a LOT longer!!

Plus, the longer and less intuitive the alg, the more the chance to mess up!


----------



## alexc (Apr 17, 2008)

Lotsofsloths said:


> alexc said:
> 
> 
> > Lotsofsloths said:
> ...



No, not that much longer. These are the algs I use for UF and DB (buffer=FD) and I think they are very fast:

Note: These are Lucas Garron's algs and they work for r2 on 4x4 bld too. These are commutators w/ set ups.
UF: D [M', U R2 U'] D' M2 So in full: D M' U R2 U' M U R2 U' D' M2

DB: M2 D [U R2 U', M'] D' In full: M2 D U R2 U' M' U R2 U' M D' 

They are inverses in case you didn't notice.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Apr 17, 2008)

I memorize pieces in pairs. What I do is that if I have a piece that needs to go to FU or BD (I use DF as my buffer), I do a commutator which solves that piece plus the other piece in the pair that I memorized together. That's almost always just 8 moves to solve 2 pieces! And the commutators for those cases are really easy to figure out - they're all very much alike. BU is a little harder - it's 10 moves including the setup move (which is always U, unless UF is the other piece).

So, I no longer have to worry about flipping those pieces. The only flipped pieces I need to worry about (and that I'm complaining about here) are the ones that are flipped to begin with. I just sometimes flat out don't see them. I especially miss it often when DB is flipped - I just don't notice it.

And Pedro, I'm used to about 75% accuracy with Macky's 3-cycle. I've been that accurate for ages. So 30% seems simply hideous to me. (And I'm 20% today.) I almost never get 3 DNFs in a row with 3-cycle, but with M2 today I got 7 DNFs in a row!


----------



## tim (Apr 17, 2008)

Mike Hughey said:


> So, I no longer have to worry about flipping those pieces. The only flipped pieces I need to worry about (and that I'm complaining about here) are the ones that are flipped to begin with. I just sometimes flat out don't see them. I especially miss it often when DB is flipped - I just don't notice it.



If you use the journey method to memorize the pieces, you should try to memorize the location where one long 12-cycle (11 pieces to memo) would end. If you haven't reached this part in your journey, you know, that there must be some pieces left. If you have two cycles, you know, that you should end at X + 1 and so on. After a while you'll get a good feeling for missing pieces and if you're not sure, you can still take a look at your cube and check all pieces (which doesn't take more than 2s)


----------



## Mike Hughey (Apr 17, 2008)

tim said:


> Mike Hughey said:
> 
> 
> > So, I no longer have to worry about flipping those pieces. The only flipped pieces I need to worry about (and that I'm complaining about here) are the ones that are flipped to begin with. I just sometimes flat out don't see them. I especially miss it often when DB is flipped - I just don't notice it.
> ...



Thanks, Tim. I actually sort of do that. I guess for 4x4x4 and 5x5x5 I've gotten a good feel for where that endpoint is, but for 3x3x3 I still don't yet, and I'm not real careful about it either. I guess this is saying it's just practice. After all, I've probably still done less than 100 M2 solves so far.

I assume that means I should also use that to check for flipped edges - if I have pieces unaccounted for, I should ALWAYS notice that and make sure I find the missing ones, either as flipped or as unflipped edges. I do that routinely for 4x4x4; it just feels like there's not enough time for 3x3x3 (even though I'm more than twice as slow as you at 3x3x3). I'll work on that, I guess.

By the way, Tim, it feels like I'm slowly migrating towards using your method to solve. How do you do the corners? Also, how do you solve the difficult edges (FU, BU, BD)? Do you solve them in place, like Alex, leave them for later, like Stefan, or perhaps solve with commutators, like me?


----------



## Pedro (Apr 17, 2008)

Mike Hughey said:


> And Pedro, I'm used to about 75% accuracy with Macky's 3-cycle. I've been that accurate for ages. So 30% seems simply hideous to me. (And I'm 20% today.) I almost never get 3 DNFs in a row with 3-cycle, but with M2 today I got 7 DNFs in a row!



Yeah, my accuracy used to me more like 60%...but this particular week I'm doing pretty crap...

this is my log from tuesday, april 15th:
DNF (1:23 / 27)
DNF (1:32 / 36)
DNF (1:38 / 33)
DNF (1:57 / 38)
DNF (1:18 / 27)
DNF (1:57 / 38)
DNF (1:42 / 43)
1:31.06 (39)
2:01.55 (40)
DNF (1:26 / 35)
1:31
1:23.02
DNF (2:21 / 34)
DNF (2:05 / 41)
DNF (1:16 / 28)
DNF (1:35 / 28)

(after the / is the memo time...I start jnetcube and stackmat, then hit the bar when starting to solve)

that one was 4/16, so 25% 

I had 5/27(18%) on monday, 5/21(less than 24%) on wednesday and today it's 5/15 (3 solves with room/images and M2 - 2 successful, one DNF - all 3 "slow", btw)

I don't know what's going on


----------



## Mike Hughey (Apr 17, 2008)

Let's hope this is just growing pains before big improvements for both of us, huh?

I'm so jealous of your times. I'd just like to get sub-2 so I can have a chance to stay in the top 100 this year. I figure by the end of the year, you'll need to be sub-2 to be in the top 100 at 3x3x3 BLD. (I figure I'm going to drop out of the top 100 this weekend, with all the competitions and everyone's amazing times these days. I'm 87th now.)


----------



## joey (Apr 17, 2008)

I hate DNFing BLDs cos I forgot to memo misoriented pieces. I had a 57.xx DNF months and months and months ago because of that, it sucked 

I need to change my BLD habits, to make sure I don't miss those pieces/and or parity.


----------



## tim (Apr 17, 2008)

Haha guys, my success rate is usually > 90%


----------



## Dene (Apr 18, 2008)

I don't get how people can complin that set up moves are longer, when afterwards they have to go an flip a whole lot of edges!! I'm not sure which algorithm you guys use, but M' U M' U M' U M' U2 M' U M' U M' U M' Isn't the shortest algorithm around...


----------



## alexc (Apr 18, 2008)

tim said:


> Haha guys, my success rate is usually > 90%



Nice, my accuracy usually isn't THAT good, but still probably about 60-80%.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Apr 18, 2008)

tim said:


> Haha guys, my success rate is usually > 90%



That's what I want. That's why I'm complaining. I won't be happy until I'm there.

By the way, my success rate went up on M2 a bit today as the day went on - I'm up close to 50% now. Still not good enough, but better.


----------



## Stefan (Apr 18, 2008)

Dene said:


> I don't get how people can complin that set up moves are longer, when afterwards they have to go an flip a whole lot of edges!! I'm not sure which algorithm you guys use, but M' U M' U M' U M' U2 M' U M' U M' U M' Isn't the shortest algorithm around...



But (M' U)*4 is short and fast. So it's much better to have three M-edges flipped than only one.


----------



## malcolm (Apr 24, 2008)

You could just learn every single 3 cycle from DF to a flipped edge and to somewhere else, there would be 3 flipped edges, and 20 places to go after that, so it is 3*20*2 = 120 algs. Not too many, and most are simple commutators


----------



## KConny (Apr 28, 2008)

I just do F' D R' F D' and then the inverse after: D F' R D' F. Wich I can do just about as fast as the edgeflipper.


----------



## RobinBloehm (Apr 28, 2008)

The way to memorize edges that are flipped from the beginning I do is to simpliy memorize it as a one-cycle of the first and the second sticker, so cause you memo in pairs you have one more word to memorize for each flipped edge, that's what I do.


----------



## KConny (Apr 28, 2008)

Thank you, I've been looking for a way to do this. But the fire/ice thing didn't work for me. And a was thinking of making like a quarantine in every journey where I'd put flipped edges and corners. But this will work fine for both corners and edges. I can even combine it, and have one person from edges and an action from corners.


----------



## malcolm (Apr 29, 2008)

What I've been doing now is just switching to freestyle edges whenever there is a flipped M edge, mostly it takes <12 moves and you solve two edges.


----------



## hdskull (Apr 30, 2008)

Okay, so let's say I finish this 5 cycle, and the DF piece gets solved. How would I go on from there ?


----------



## masterofthebass (Apr 30, 2008)

Just pick a new edge that's part of a new cycle and start with that. Let's say another cycle on the cube is UR->DR->DB.... you would just shoot the DF piece to UR and continue on the cycle.


----------



## malcolm (Apr 30, 2008)

What I do is do the cycle from DF using M2, and the rest using freestyle, much faster for me because you have to use two extra algs every time you break into a new cycle with M2


----------



## martijn_cube (May 1, 2008)

i'm trying to learn M2(edges)+pouchmann(corners)
and i'm just trying to solve the corners and edges wile looking. just one piece at the time. solving the pieces works good, and breaking into a new cycle isn't very hard. but i'm doing something wrong. and i think it has to do with the parity fixing part. but i've finisched the cube now, but the centers of the M slice need a M2 to be in the right position. is there an algorithm for or do i need to use a parity fix somewhere sooner in the solve?


----------



## hdskull (May 3, 2008)

masterofthebass said:


> Just pick a new edge that's part of a new cycle and start with that. Let's say another cycle on the cube is UR->DR->DB.... you would just shoot the DF piece to UR and continue on the cycle.



Oh!!!! I get it, THANKS! lol.


----------



## blah (Jun 11, 2008)

Sorry for bumping into an old thread but this is the closest thread I found to what I wanted to ask.

I've read the entire thread, but I don't think I saw anyone conclude whether flipping the bad M edges with longer algorithms, or flipping them at the end is better. So which is better?

This is how I see it: If you flip them on the spot, it reduces confusion and you can just forget about that piece forever, so you can focus your mind on thinking ahead. If you don't, you save moves because you flip everything (including non-M slice bad edges) in the end with one MU algorithm. Are these all the pros and cons there are?

And are there any other 'long' algorithms to flip these M edges on the spot other than Erik's and Lucas'? (so far these are the only two I found, I don't think Stefan Pochmann provided any on his page.) And is there a common consensus as to which of them are best? Or can I have any recommendations by anyone? Thanks.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jun 11, 2008)

I don't like either option (flipping at the end or using a longer algorithm to solve on the spot), so I took the third option: solving on the spot with a SHORTER algorithm. Whenever I have any of the 3 bad stickers in a pair of pieces (I memorize in pairs), I use commutators, like Chris Hardwick or Daniel Beyer would. The optimal commutators for doing pairs with just these 3 edges in them is much smaller than the set for solving the entire cube, so they're more manageable than solving the whole thing with commutators, and most of them are very similar and therefore easy to see once you know a few of them. And they're generally fewer moves than solving them with M2 leaving them flipped! (There are a few exceptions, but those are rare.) It takes a while to get good at those commutators, but I found that to be less of a chore than dealing with the problems of the other two methods.

But I guess I'm not very fast, so maybe you shouldn't listen to me.


----------



## Stefan (Jun 23, 2008)

Which is better depends. I'm actually switching to solving them immediately with longer algs. Because right now I need/want simple. Later I might use "improvements" again.

My alg for BU: (U R' U' l U' R U) M2 (U' R' U l' U R U')
My alg for FU: (F' R U') x (U' l L' U2' r' R U') x' (U R' F)

I made up the FU one just now and don't have a good one for BD yet.


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jun 23, 2008)

Er, FU: D [M',U R2 U'] D' M2
(BD is just the inverse)


----------



## Stefan (Jun 23, 2008)

Yeah, I might end up using those. Or this one:
L2 l' U l' U L U' r R' U L' U' r' l R U' l'
I get about 2.5 seconds for all of these.


----------



## Stefan (Jun 24, 2008)

Ok I'll use yours for FU. I can do my first one slightly faster but the execution is not as relaxed. My second one ... well, I timed six consecutive execuutions of these algs because that returns the cube to solved state, and with my second alg I had huge trouble getting it right six times in a row.

For BD I'll use M2 B' [U' R' U, M'] B. I think it's slightly slower than the inverse of your alg, but it's different. I fear using both your alg and its inverse could confuse my hands/unconscious.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jun 24, 2008)

Swordsman Kirby said:


> Er, FU: D [M',U R2 U'] D' M2
> (BD is just the inverse)


Who came up with that alg? 

Stefan: Feel free to do it your way, it's interesting. But the reason I made this (and inverse) instead of using Erik's is because they both feel like you're shooting DR, so it's half-familiar.


----------

