Ok,  thanks.  I'm having enough trouble recognizing corner 
permutation on COLL as it is,  adding in edges right now would 
probably be a bit too ambitious.  Thanks for the advice.

Matt

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "cmhardw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey Matt,
> 
> I guess I should have clarified a little more ;-)
> 
> COLL/EPLL is extremely fast, and I think when you factor in the 
1/12
> chance to skip EPLL that it might be faster than most people's 
OLL/PLL
> combos.  I think a really good OLL/PLL set of algs though would
> probably win out.
> 
> What I don't like is getting a slow COLL case, and ending with a Z
> permutation.  As weird as that sounds, and as much as I like the Z
> perm in my solving, it is my slowest and longest EPLL alg.  That
> double combination can mean a slow LL time compared to the average
> COLL/PLL gives you.
> 
> On this page: http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/zbstats.html
> 
> I have twice done a 100 cube average that shows the number of moves
> used in COLL/PLL finish.
> 
> I get that, including the EPLL skips, COLL/PLL averages 21.12 
moves on
> average.  I think Fridrich averages around 19-20 as well so they 
are
> fairly close.  The problem though, for me, is that keeping the 
edges
> oriented for some CLL cases means a slow alg.
> 
> Having said that though I have managed sub-17 averages using 
COLL/PLL
> on ZBLL cases that I don't know.  I am certain I have had a full 12
> cube sub-17 average that only had EPLL skips for the ZBLL stuff,
> meaning that sub-17 is definitely possible.
> 
> I don't think a transformation+ZBLL combo used exclusively would be
> faster, but rather a combination of COLL/PLL finish (only on fast 
COLL
> cases) and transformation+ZBLL on slow COLL cases would be best.
> 
> I think all of COLL should be required before learning any ZBLL
> though, since the recognition of ZBLL for me is so heavily based on
> COLL.  I use the block recognition technique for ZBLL, and often 
the
> only thing different between three different ZBLL cases is the COLL
> case.  They can have the same block structure, but be different 
COLL
> cases.
> 
> So I would definitely say to learn COLL, and use COLL/EPLL until 
you
> finish your first orientation case for ZBLL.  After that point,
> replace your slowest COLL cases with transformations into your ZBLL
> orientation.  At least that is the experiment I am trying, but I 
have
> a feeling it has potential to e very fast.
> 
> So when I say slower, I only mean sometimes.  COLL/EPLL is still 
fast,
> but I don't think it is the best option.  It is, however, still a 
good
> one.
> 
> Chris






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
1.2 million kids a year are victims of human trafficking. Stop slavery.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WpTY2A/izNLAA/yQLSAA/MXMplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> 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