Hmm... Gilles is even better :-) http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Miscellaneous.html
If I remember correctly, David takes about 30 seconds, and with that speed, Gilles says he averages 43 moves. And I think he wrote that page a while ago, maybe he has improved further in the meantime? Cheers! Stefan --- In [email protected], "Duncan Dicks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi David, > Those are pretty amazing move numbers for a speedcubing strategy! What > method do you use that is so much more efficient than Fridrich? I know with > fewest move methods one can get much lower but if this is a speedsolving > method then it seem to be lower than just about anything I've heard of. The > benefit of L2L is there are fewer algorithms to learn, and so also a less > onerous recognition phase, than Fridrich - is the number of algorithms a > problem with your method? i'd love to hear more. > > Best wishes > > Duncan > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "d_j_salvia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 1:37 AM > Subject: Re: [Speed cubing group] L2L2 solves > > > > Hi Duncan, > > > > In the old days I averaged somewhere between 36 and 54 moves, with > > occasional forays above and below that, but I rarely tried to improve > > solely on the basis of fewer moves. > > > > You got me wondering about how many moves it takes me now. So I did 16 > > solves: 46, 44, 41, 38, 46, 44, 47, 46, 48, 46, 45, 35, 48, 49, 46, 45. > > > > I know I can look ahead better and understand more than I'm do now. > > > > Cheers, > > > > David J > > > > --- In [email protected], "Duncan Dicks" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi All > >> Just a progress update. I am pretty much solving full time with my > > L2L2 > >> strategy now. Although my times are still slower until I get faster > > at the > >> recognition/selection process, my average number of moves per solve > > is a lot > >> less now. I did 10 solves recently at 52-53 moves which is probably > > close > >> to the right figure. Number of moves is mostly reliant on getting > > the cross > >> plus two corners in as few moves as possible - or if you were to > > choose a > >> different approach for the start - F2L less two middle edges. There > > may > >> still be room for improvement in this - I've been thinking of > > spending some > >> time on Chris' X-cross work to see if anything is applicable. Also > > Paul > >> Nixon has tried starting with the Petrus 3x2x2 but got bogged down. > > I don't > >> know this but it may offer another way to start L2L solves. Any > > comments or > >> suggestions more than welcome :) > >> > >> Duncan > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> AIDS in India: A "lurking bomb." Click and help stop AIDS now. http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpTY2A/lzNLAA/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/
