One of the drawbacks of using making a 'cage' on the 3x3 (so doing 
centres last), is that you can get parity if you start with a wrong 
cross... :)

--- In [email protected], cmhardw 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey Gilles,
> 
> Interesting idea.  I had never really thought to try that to be 
honest.
> 
> Sometimes I do start with centers moves right after I pick up the 
cube
> though.  Say I have two c/e pairs that connect correctly to the 
same
> corner, so sort of like a 2x2x1 block but the center is not the 
right
> one.  If the center is in a bad spot, and I can't really use face
> turns effciently then I sometimes permute the center into the 2x2x1
> block and finish from there.
> 
> I do remember once, maybe twice, I actually have had a solved 
cross bu
> on the wrong face, and I permuted the center into that face and a
> super fast cross.  That was very lucky to get that though.
> 
> I think your idea will allow for always solving an easier cross 
(since
> you can choose to solve it almost anywhere.  I say almost since 
half
> of the positions you could solve a cross into will give you a 
parity
> error.
> 
> If you turn any middle layer on a cube where centers are indistinct
> then you perform an odd cycle on the edges but leave corners 
alone. 
> Choosing to solve the cross on other faces will make this edge 
parity
> possible, so you would have to watch out for that.
> 
> The F2L is a bit confusing, but you could get used to looking at 
the
> side color of the cross edge rather than the center to know where
> stuff goes, so that is not a big deal.
> 
> I think the only real hump in such an approach is learning your 
color
> scheme well enough to always solve your cross sch as to avoid the
> parity error, but I think that would not take much work.
> 
> I actually want to look into this, since for a solve where a cross 
is
> mostly or completely built on the wrong face, this could be fast.
> 
> I'll definitely try it and see what I think ;-)
> 
> Chris
> 
> --- In [email protected], Gilles van den
> Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Yesterday when I was watching the drawing for the Football World 
Cup
> > in Germany, I was turning my cube and something came up in my 
mind :
> > What about using a cage method for the 3x3 ?
> > 
> > Some times when you solve the cross, you really have a bad time
> > (though it's usually not so hard :p) but what if the cross was 
already
> > solved, but not with the good center ? (or something close to 
that)
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better to do F2L and then LL without the right 
centers
> > and then fix the centers afterwards ?
> > 
> > The thing is I don't see many advantages with that, but maybe 
you'll
> > see more than I do :-)
> > 
> > What do you think ?
> > Gilles.
> >
>







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/MXMplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to