# A method for 2x2 I made



## Tranman64 (Mar 7, 2020)

I was bored today so i made a 2x2 method.
First you solve one side
Then you solve another side that is not opposite of the existing side
You can do this mostly using j or t perm
Finally you make a side that is not opposite of either side (again using mostly t/j perm) and the cube will solve itself unless you have a corner twist


----------



## ProStar (Mar 7, 2020)

Tranman64 said:


> I was bored today so i made a 2x2 method.
> First you solve one side
> Then you solve another side that is not opposite of the existing side
> You can do this mostly using j or t perm
> Finally you make a side that is not opposite of either side (again using mostly t/j perm) and the cube will solve itself unless you have a corner twist



layers or sides?


----------



## Tranman64 (Mar 8, 2020)

Sides. They will eventually turn into layers themselves


----------



## Filipe Teixeira (Mar 8, 2020)

That method is not good

Also after first two sides is awful to make the third layer without messing up and hoping to solve the cube


----------



## CodingCuber (Mar 8, 2020)

isn't that just layer by layer with really long and inefficient oll?


----------



## Daxton Brumfield (Mar 8, 2020)

CodingCuber said:


> isn't that just layer by layer with really long and inefficient oll?


Give this man some credit... There is only so much you can do on 2x2


----------



## DerpBoiMoon (Mar 8, 2020)

making up a method is better than just you just searching. at least you learnt about the puzzle in doing so


----------



## Wish Lin (Mar 8, 2020)

Nothing personal here, but since the Rubik’s cube is a block-based structure, face solving based methods are just awful(Ortega as a special exception)

A good example of this is that everyone knows when a noob sees a Rubik‘a cube they want to solve it face by face and everyone know how that ends......


----------

