# Square-1 BLD



## byu (May 10, 2009)

I've been really interested in making a Square-1 blindfolded method, and I've been thinking about it a lot recently. So, I've got this idea for steps.

*Memo*
1. Memo Cubeshape and track pieces through Cubeshape
2. Memo Cycles of edges starting with UB, each edge being lettered A-H, creating images in pairs.
3. Memo Cycles of corners starting with UBL, each corner being lettered A-H, creating images in pairs.

Of course, since there aren't many pieces, visual memorization is also a good idea.

*Execution*
1. Cubeshape
2. Bring edges up to UF and keep in cubeshape, use alg /(3,3)/(1,0)/(-2,-2)/(2,0)/(2,2)/(-1,0)/(-3,-3)/(-2,0)/(3,3)/(3,0)/(-1,-1)/(-3,0)/(1,1)/(-4,-3) to swap UB with UF.
3. Bring corners up to UBR, and use an alg to swap UBR with UBL, use alg /(-3,0)/(0,-1)/(2,0)/(0,4)/(2,-2)/(0,4)/(4,0)/(0,-4)/(0,2)/(0,-5)/(3,0)/ (Thanks Maarten for the alg)

4. Feel the Square-1. If it's not square yet, apply this alg. /(6,0)/(6,0)/(6,0)

Remember, this is just a general idea, I don't know how well this would work. Tracking shouldn't be _too_ hard, because there are only 16 pieces to keep track of, although this would decrease success rate. However, anyone who's had experience with 3x3 Speed-BLD, even if they're not very good, should find this much easier than tracking 3x3 pieces, since there is no orientation to worry about, only permutation.

If anyone interested in helping me work on this method, I'd appreciate it. If you have any suggestions or comments that might make this better, please tell me. I really want to someday get a successful Square-1 BLD solve, and I think this method might work for me.

Again, this might be a terrible idea and I just have no idea about it, but I thought I'd announce it in case anyone was interested. If nobody posts, I'll assume nobody is interested and I'll work on devising the method myself.


----------



## happa95 (May 10, 2009)

#1= the whole reason people haven't been able to do Sq-1 BLD
EDIT: there was a thread on this, but I can't find it with the new search.


----------



## Pedro (May 10, 2009)

correct me if I'm wrong, but A-F is only 6 letters, no? and you have 8 edges and 8 corners


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

Oh yeah, should be A-G, 7, since buffer doesn't count


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (May 10, 2009)

Your corner swapping alg: /(-3,0)/(0,-1)/(2,0)/(0,4)/(2,-2)/(0,4)/(4,0)/(0,-4)/(0,2)/(0,-5)/(3,0)/

Of course the first step is the hardest. A nice possibility though is to learn what the alg for the cubeshape does to the permutation of the pieces. This requires a lot of work to do though...


----------



## DavidWoner (May 10, 2009)

I still think speedBLD is easier. The algs are a lot simpler, and once you're through CO can move only a few pieces at a time.


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

Speed BLD would have faster execution, but memo would probably take quite a while. 

Oh and Maarten, thanks for the alg. Once I'm comfortable with it blindfolded, I'm going to try a Square-1 Square BLD (e.g. Start from cubeshape) on the bus that will leave in 4 hours


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

Sorry for the double post, but here's a sample lettering system, and I decided to go A-H just so every piece has a name, even the buffer.

Edges
A - UF
B - UL
C - UB
D - UR
E - BD
F - BL
G - BF
H - BR

Corners
A - UFL
B - ULB
C - UBR
D - URF
E - UBL
F - ULF
G - UFR
H - URB


----------



## Stefan (May 11, 2009)

Cube shape is the only problem, the rest is trivial and can be done many easy ways. I don't understand why you discuss the rest in detail but more or less ignore the cube shape issue. I suggest to first talk about and make up a reasonable method for safely and effortlessly tracking pieces to cube shape. Then again, I'm a Square-1 beginner and don't know shortest paths to cube shape from all shapes.. Maybe it's not hard anymore if you do?



byu said:


> anyone who's had experience with 3x3 Speed-BLD, even if they're not very good, should find this *much easier than tracking 3x3 pieces, since there is no orientation* to worry about, only permutation.



Well... for the 3x3x3, there are 24 possible positions for each edge (12*2) and for each corner (8*3). For the Square-1, there are *also* 24 possible positions for each piece (24*1).


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (May 11, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> Cube shape is the only problem, the rest is trivial and can be done many easy ways. I don't understand why you discuss the rest in detail but more or less ignore the cube shape issue. I suggest to first talk about and make up a reasonable method for safely and effortlessly tracking pieces to cube shape. Then again, I'm a Square-1 beginner and don't know shortest paths to cube shape from all shapes.. Maybe it's not hard anymore if you do?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Huh?

8 for each edge, 8 for each corner?

What's wrong?


----------



## Stefan (May 11, 2009)

trying-to-speedcube... said:


> 8 for each edge, 8 for each corner?


Nope. Every edge and every corner can start at one of 24 positions.


----------



## DavidWoner (May 11, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> trying-to-speedcube... said:
> 
> 
> > 8 for each edge, 8 for each corner?
> ...



Thats only if its not in cubeshape though, for the method byu is describing you don't memo positions until after you've traced pieces through cubeshape. If you are talking about 24 positions while both layers are square then I have no idea what you are talking about.



byu said:


> Sorry for the double post, but here's a sample lettering system, and I decided to go A-H just so every piece has a name, even the buffer.
> 
> Edges
> A - UF
> ...



I don't know about you, but on my square-1 there is no BF edge, and I only have 4 corners in the U layer.


----------



## Stefan (May 11, 2009)

Vault312 said:


> Thats *only if its not in cubeshape* though


Yeah. Which is what byu and I were talking about. Step 1, getting to cube shape.


----------



## DavidWoner (May 11, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> Vault312 said:
> 
> 
> > Thats *only if its not in cubeshape* though
> ...



Ah yes, I see that now. I was still stuck on the earlier discussion of post-cubeshape memo.


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .


----------



## rahulkadukar (May 11, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .



I completely agree


----------



## Mike Hughey (May 11, 2009)

rahulkadukar said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .
> ...



Yeah, like that really helps.

For anyone who happens upon this thread and is reading it later, I wanted to add that I finished a way to do it (and I didn't want to spam the forum with a new post). So here is my method for solving it:
http://skarrie.se/square1blind/

And as it turns out, feeling it to see what shape it is is actually part of the method.  But I don't consider it cheating.


----------



## Daniel Wu (May 11, 2009)

Mike Hughey said:


> rahulkadukar said:
> 
> 
> > spdcbr said:
> ...



Darn. I just tried that and got it into cube shape... But then i realized that i had no idea where the pieces were... Wow. I'm dumb. That obviously doesn't work.


----------



## Ellis (May 11, 2009)

rahulkadukar said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .
> ...



Oh wow guys... cmon


----------



## Kian (May 11, 2009)

rahulkadukar said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .
> ...


----------



## Lord Voldemort (May 12, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .



Most cubers solve SQ1 by bringing to to cube shape first.
You wouldn't have any advantage after that.
Oh, and just bringing it to cube shape does NOT mean it's solved.


----------



## Stefan (May 12, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> How is Suare-1 ever going to be a blindfolding event if you can can feel if it's a cube shape or not? It's cheating .



In addition to your stupidity pointed out by the others already:

Is solving a Rubik's Blind Man's Cube blindfolded cheating? No, it's solving a Rubik's Blind Man's Cube blindfolded. Just because puzzles like Rubik's Blind Man's Cube or Square-1 inherently give you physical cues, doesn't make solving them cheating. Only makes it different from what noobs like you have seen, and possibly but not necessarily easier. What would be cheating (for example) would be to enter a regular Rubik's Cube blindsolving competition with a Rubik's Blind Man's Cube.


----------



## byu (May 25, 2009)

I just made a video explaining my idea. I have a video of me attempting a post-square Square-1 BLD solve DNF in 4:53.85 that's processing right now.


----------



## ThatGuy (May 25, 2009)

This site: http://www.jaapsch.net/puzzles/square1d.htm
diagrams the cube shapes. 
These cube shape methods could make speed bld easier
There's also this table but I can't understand it.
Some theory.


----------



## Stefan (May 26, 2009)

What are those two swap algs, and what pieces do they swap?


----------



## joey (May 26, 2009)

Also, byu well done in reinventing classic/old pochmann.. but making it worse.

I did sq-1 BLD from cube shape, a long while back.


----------



## Dene (May 26, 2009)

Do you even know the first thing about Square-1? If you want to swap adjacent edges, use adj parity! Also, why is your opposite edges swap algorithm so unnecessarily long? Use opp parity! Deary deary me this is so very sad and miserable to watch. I strongly suggest you give up your pursuit to Square-1 bld efficiently until you know how to speedsolve the Square-1. 

On a side note: your two corner swap algorithm is rather painful for speed and can be avoided by using J perm then adj parity (for those of us who are beast at parity).


----------



## DavidWoner (May 27, 2009)

you don't even need to use pure 2 swaps for a Pochmann-esque method. 

Corners:
with UBL buffer, UBR target
(-5,0)/(3,-3)/(3,0)/(-3,0)/(0,3)/(-3,0)/(-4,0)

to target UFL simply preface the above alg with (-3,0) instead of (-5,0) and end it with (6,0) instead of (-4,0).

UFR is just Y perm: (6,0) double J (-5,0) double J (2,0)

Edges: 
UL buffer, UF target
(-2,0)/(3,-3)/(3,0)/(-3,0)/(0,3)/(-3,0)/(5,0)

for UB:
(-3,0)/(3,-3)/(3,0)/(-3,0)/(0,3)/(-3,0)/(6,0)

for UR

T perm: (-5,0) double J (-4,0) double J (-3,0)

adj parity and J perm to solve parity, and you are done.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 8, 2010)

I think it's easy to remember each piece if we start from 'square' shape.
Just use simple orientaion and permutation algorithm.

The problem is how to memorize and keep tracking when we want to make a cube ?


----------



## shelley (Feb 8, 2010)

Daryl said:


> I think it's easy to remember each piece if we start from 'square' shape.
> Just use simple orientaion and permutation algorithm.
> 
> The problem is how to memorize and keep tracking when we want to make a cube ?



What do you mean? Just go through your moves for each piece and track where they end up. It's just like speed BLD.


----------

