Whenever I do an average of 500, I either learn
something new (small f2l trick or trigger), and I
almost always break some kind of record in a category
(average of 100, average of 10, single, the avg of
500, or something, etc.).  When I do these long
sessions (in a single sitting or 2), I learn which
last layer algs do not work for me, and which algs I
need to work on.  To simply put it out, I am still
"mastering" Fridrich f2l and last layer, and I think
there is yet much improvement to be made on the
current system.
However, I believe zb, with extensive practice and
training, can lead to similar results, in a sense that
with enough experience in mind, the system itself will
become a "no brainer," but I think it will take much
longer (atleast for me) to understand zb like I do
Fridrich.  I have done sub 14 times with full zb, and
these times in particular were much _easier_ to obtain
than a sub 14 fridrich time- and I think this will be
the general ideal, (on average of course).  A smoother
and slower zb solve can get a "super fast moving"
fridrich time, in other words.
As far as recoginition goes, I do believe it goes
beyond just "oh look at this and execute."  It does
need to be refined (to be a "science," if you will),
for it's much more advanced.  I think reaching new
levels, one can be comfortable with the recognition. 
Thousands of solves will be required to picture the
last laer cases as a whole (like I do with fridrich
last layer), but yes I do believe it is possible.  I'm
not just saying this; I decided to do a few 24 hour
marathons using ONLY ZB (on my own in my room, of
course- not for records) once I know full ZB, and the
purpose of this will be to conquer the recognition
hurdles with the known cases.  Sure, the cases would
be learned, but recognizing them is a different

When it comes to me, I learn all the necessary cases
for the system to be full, then I practice like crazy;
that's how I'm approaching zb, atleast.  That's me.
Though I don't think I will know zb by 2007, I do
believe I will know it in the course of a couple
years.  This is only my opinion, and I could be wrong,
but that's how I see it.  I've put a lot of thought
into this as well.
-Brent M

--- cmhardw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hey everyone,
> I recently have been having some doubts about ZB,
> which I would prefer
> not to be having, but I wanted to bring them up.
> I recently met with Dan Knights and asked him what
> he thought about
> ZB.  His response was, for the most part, that it
> seemed like a good
> method but that recognition seems that it would be a
> big problem.
> I also have noticed that I still delay quite a bit
> using the block
> method for my ZBLL cases.
> I'm at a dilemma.  I have been talking with lots of
> people about
> Fridrich after the 2005RWC and have found lots of
> really useful ways
> to drop my average.  I even think now that I could
> get sub-15 with
> Fridrich were I to just implement all the changes
> that I should implement.
> Also though, I really am curious about the potential
> for ZB.  I know
> that if I don't try it out myself, knowing all or at
> least almost all
> of it, my curiosity of whether or not it is a
> worthwhile method would
> eventually drive me insane.
> So I'm stuck.  I have two methods that both require
> quite a bit of
> work to learn/master and only 24 hours in a day.
> How can we balance these methods?  Should I extend
> my goal to learning
> ZB for another year or two and learn at a slower
> pace, and also
> practice Fridrich half the time?
> Also, after talking with Dan I think we really are
> underestimating the
> problem of recognition.  I think we need to develop
> several methods
> for recognizing each case.  Be able to recognize
> from any angle, etc.
> I really think just saying "oh and look at the case
> to reconize" will
> not work.  We need to turn ZBF2L and ZBLL
> recognition into a science.
>  I am going to post pictures of all my algs from all
> 4 angles for all
> my ZBLL algs.  I will make a page for recognition at
> every angle since
> I believe just recognizing at one will not work to
> master this method.
> The more I think about it, the harder this method
> will be to master,
> and the more I want to learn it :-)
> So anyway, I think we have grossly and terribly
> underestimated the
> problem of recognition.  I think at a bare minimum
> we all need to
> recognize ZBF2L and ZBLL from any angle, and ZBF2L
> done in any F2L slot.
> So I'm trying to find a balance, but there is so
> much to do and so
> little free time in a day :-(
> Any help whatsoever would be appreciated, I just
> want to stay motivated.
> Chris


Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
1.2 million kids a year are victims of human trafficking. Stop slavery.

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to