Hey everyone, I've been doing lots of practicing switching between ZB and Fridrich today.
My Fridrich averages have definitely gotten much faster as of late, and my ZB averages definitely much slower. I think I've found the reason too. Because of WC2005 I've been thinking in Fridrich mode, which for F2L for me means go as fast as absolutely possible while still being able to catch glimpses of pieces I'll need later. I've found that instead of slow-fast going "not quite break neck fast" for F2L gives me better averages. Well I noticed that this is influencing my ZBF2L. My ZB solves are always really really bad immediately after switching from a really good Fridrich average, and then get better. I also tried going what felt like "too slow" after doing a good Fridrich average and then my ZB times got back down to my usual good range for ZB. So anyway I think that ZBF2L, even when mastered, should definitely be done slower than Fridrich F2L. I think ZBF2L should be strictly defined as "the 4 corners and 4 edges of the first layer, the 4 edges of the middle layer, and the opposite layer stickers of the last layer edges." I've noticed that by going slower and keeping an idea of how the LL edge orientations will end up, or even inserting pairs earlier in the F2L so as to keep my LL edges oriented, helps my times a lot. This has me thinking though, obviously since ZBF2L requires more moves than Fridrich F2L, and by all my experience should be done slower, that means that ZBLL has to make up the lost time from ZBF2L. Also recognition is clearly going to be an issue, so that time is added as well. That means that execution of the ZBLL cases has to overcome that lost time, and should be FAST. What I've been thinking lately, and again I am not trying to keep a negative attitude about ZB, I think the method is brilliant, but I lately I've had some persistent doubts about using it in a high pressure situation. I am starting to fall back on my idea of using ZB as a first and second round method. Meaning in the first and second rounds of a competition you use ZB, which is fast enough to get you to the next rounds. However, it also has the added benefit of, much more likely than Firdrich, getting a super incredibly easy LL and a super fast solve. So you can use ZB to still make it into the next rounds, and have the potential to set some incredibly fast solves. Then in the final switch back to Fridrich. Fridrich will seem easier at this point, and you will be under more stress as well. You will feel as if the easier method balances the more stress and hopefully get a burst of confidence to help with nerves. Maybe this is the best way to approach ZB before mastering it. Obviously if someone with the mind of Kasparov were an addicted speedcuber he/she would probably be able to speedcube ZB very easily. I imagine with practice most people could do that too. So maybe before mastering ZB we should approach it as a slightly slower than the main stream methods, that has a greater potential for spike superfast times and use it accordingly. Then once people start to master it we can rethink its future. What does everyone else think? Chris ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/u8TY5A/tzNLAA/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/
