# Clock method idea: no-flip (tutorial and demo AO5)



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Feb 27, 2016)

Hey clock solvers,

First of all, you should really be doing a better event. At least it isn't as bad as feet.

I messed around with this ages ago, but didn't get much interest from the couple of people I talked to about it. Decided it was about time I made a video to try to see if someone would take the idea and develop it to its full potential. Thanks to Ryan Jones for giving me some feedback on it though.








Spoiler: Description



Now I can put my clock away, and not look at it for a very long time. The AO5 was bad, but I only practiced enough to learn the method, not enough to actully get fast. Because I refuse to practice clock enough to get fast.


```
Notes:
 U
LMR
 D

A=U-R
B=D-L

M1=A+B
M2=-B
M3=M-U
M4=M-L
M5=R-M4


pins = UL,UR,DL,DR

ddud M>U m5
dudd  >L
uddd  >D
udud  >R m1
uduu     m2
uuud     m3
uudu
duuu     m4
uuuu
```

Scramble (Jaap order apparently):
-5, -4/-3, -3/1, 1/3, -3/3/6/4/6/4/-5



I hope someone finds it interesting enough to play around with!

Matt

Edit: Probably silly variation I did in comp (because I needed to make clock less boring to make myself practise):


Spoiler





```
U
LMR
 D

A=R-(M-L)

M1=U-L
M2=A
M3=D-R
M4=M-D
M5=M-U

pins = UL,UR,DL,DR

dudu   D>L   m1
dudd   M>B   \
duud   U>UL  m2
ddud   B>U   /
udud   B>R   m3
uduu   B>UR  m4
uudu   B>DL  m5
uuud   B>DR
uuuu   B>12
```




I may practise it again if nice enough hardware happens.


----------



## Kudz (Feb 28, 2016)

Okey, so this is phenomenal. If I understood everything properly. I am going to try to learn it, to see what it is like. I'm not clocker tho. Method itself can get improved a bit, but not much. Thank you for sharing this. I'll attend to learn it and than I will say sth about it, but for sure it can be faster than normal method (at least imo)

brb in some time gotta learn it.


----------



## Cale S (Feb 28, 2016)

Would it be possible to take advantage of the fact that you can do moves in any order on clock and start with the move with the initial pin position of the scramble?


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Feb 28, 2016)

@Kudz: Thanks, I'm not going to push the limits of this myself and I don't know how top solvers handle certain cases (solving to 3/6/9 is something I've heard, but not fully thought about for example), so I'll be happy if someone else puts in the effort needed. Good luck!



Cale S said:


> Would it be possible to take advantage of the fact that you can do moves in any order on clock and start with the move with the initial pin position of the scramble?



I guess? Is this something that's done already or something you're just suggesting here? I presume you mean the following:

Usual start: ddud, dudd, ...
Example pins after scramble: dudd
Better pin order: dudd, ddud, ...

If so, cool idea! That's something else to work into the method I guess.


----------



## ryanj92 (Mar 15, 2016)

so i revisited this and have done about ~150 solves or so with it now, using BLD mode so I can keep track of how long the 'memo' step takes me...

at this point i can almost always do the memo in <15 seconds which is pretty nice, and during practise today i managed to get a couple of averages of 5, the best being 8.58, (7.64), DNF(9.42), 10.38, (8.41) = 9.12
(the 9.42 was actually a successful solve, it was 27s memo though because i choked so I counted it as a DNF...)

i think i can still improve a lot (particularly in execution), but i wanted to at least show that sub-10 (well, almost sub-9) is possible!

here's an addition:

- it is useful to be able to solve from an initial z/z'/z2 rotation, as this allows me to take advantage of more lucky cases and the initial pin order.

the way to do this is simple - the only bit of the memo that changes is when you calculate M5, you have to remember that the 'position' of M4 is also rotated in the same direction as the clock. 

for example, if your M4 is 3 and you've done a z rotation, you instead work out the distance to the R clock from where 6 o' clock would be if you were holding the clock 'correctly'.


----------



## CubeBag (Mar 17, 2016)

I'm getting my first clock in the mail (and I don't know how to solve one yet). Should I start with this or everyone else's method and build up to this ?


----------



## Sam N (Mar 17, 2016)

That's a really cool idea actually. I like it a lot. I never practice clock since I think the event is somewhat silly, but this is something that I'll try learning for fun when I have a chance. great stuff as usual.


----------



## Lazy Einstein (Mar 17, 2016)

Woah. I just bought a clock. I love this idea. I am going to have to sit down and actually watch this video soon. Intrigued to try it out.


----------



## Kit Clement (Mar 17, 2016)

I did an unscientific average of 12 x2s and y2s on clock, and got 0.20 for x2 and 0.34 for y2. I have thought about methods like these and used mathematica to do the linear algebra for me in finding the equations for the 3rd/4th edge clocks; however, I really feel that while this is a more "optimal" method that eliminates the rotation, the cognitive difficulty of this method outweighs the time saved on the flip.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Mar 17, 2016)

Thanks for the responses guys!



Kit Clement said:


> I did an unscientific average of 12 x2s and y2s on clock, and got 0.20 for x2 and 0.34 for y2. I have thought about methods like these and used mathematica to do the linear algebra for me in finding the equations for the 3rd/4th edge clocks; however, I really feel that while this is a more "optimal" method that eliminates the rotation, the cognitive difficulty of this method outweighs the time saved on the flip.



It's not just about saving a flip, it's about saving pin changes and potentially turning two cogs at once, and looking cool too. Plus, I'd say that clock is such a fast event that small time saves really make a difference, but I'll have to wait to find out whether anyone can actually do it faster (go Ryan!) otherwise it's just me speculating that it's better.


----------



## Lazy Einstein (Jun 16, 2017)

Are the equations in absolute?
Is it
2 - 5 = 3
or
2 - 5 = -3 therefore 9

Getting DNFs and your video is 20 minutes long. I can obvious figure it out but to save others time potentially I'd figure I'd ask.

EDIT: 



Here is the proof that 2 - 5 = -3.

I hope this saves someone learning in the future some time on the off chance they make this mistake.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Jun 16, 2017)

bobthegiraffemonkey said:


> Hey clock solvers,
> 
> First of all, you should really be doing a better event. At least it isn't as bad as feet.
> 
> ...


I average sub 8 and will give this a try but honestly it isn't work it IMO. Too high of a chance to DNF if you slip or something. The ~.4 seconds it takes to flip a clock isn't terrible and I has a waaaayy greater chance to not dnf


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Jun 16, 2017)

Lazy Einstein said:


> Are the equations in absolute?
> Is it
> 2 - 5 = 3
> or
> ...


Yes, 2 - 5 = -3 = 9, I'm not sure why you would think 2 - 5 = 3. I'm also not sure what your 'proof' is supposed to be, you just linked to my video.


Underwatercuber said:


> I average sub 8 and will give this a try but honestly it isn't work it IMO. Too high of a chance to DNF if you slip or something. The ~.4 seconds it takes to flip a clock isn't terrible and I has a waaaayy greater chance to not dnf





bobthegiraffemonkey said:


> It's not just about saving a flip, it's about saving pin changes and potentially turning two cogs at once, and looking cool too. Plus, I'd say that clock is such a fast event that small time saves really make a difference, but I'll have to wait to find out whether anyone can actually do it faster (go Ryan!) otherwise it's just me speculating that it's better.


Small time saves matter, and this isn't just about saving a flip. Also, this can be done consistently. I practiced this a little, not enough to get fast but enough to be able to use it, and got a successful average in comp (1 DNF, where timer turned off during inspection and distracted me a little, I was offered a resolve but didn't take it).

I'm still hoping a good clock will be released so that I'll want to practice and show that this can be fast, since I really don't enjoy solving on the hardware I have.


----------



## Underwatercuber (Jun 16, 2017)

bobthegiraffemonkey said:


> Yes, 2 - 5 = -3 = 9, I'm not sure why you would think 2 - 5 = 3. I'm also not sure what your 'proof' is supposed to be, you just linked to my video.
> 
> 
> Small time saves matter, and this isn't just about saving a flip. Also, this can be done consistently. I practiced this a little, not enough to get fast but enough to be able to use it, and got a successful average in comp (1 DNF, where timer turned off during inspection and distracted me a little, I was offered a resolve but didn't take it).
> ...


I think everyone and anyone who has ever solved a clock is waiting on good hardware. I asked moyu and qiyi if they would be willing to have me test for them so they can speed the process up and moyu said they only have 1 prototype... I think it was the same one from last year :/


----------



## Lux_cubing (Feb 28, 2020)

Hey, Sorry for resurrecting this old thread. Love this method, but not getting the numbers. Can someone simplify this method for me? Thanks


----------

