Well we need to make the T-Orientation ones that need to be worked 
on, in fact it would be great if either we each posted our alg times 
on our sites, or we have this stuff recorded on a central site.

After finals, I'm sure I'll have a lot of time to devote to all this.

Chris, you could go through all of your T-Orintation algs and list a 
time for them. I know that I use a slightly different set of algs 
than you, perhaps some of mine are faster.

I have all of the no CP cases down. A few of my Pi1's need to be 
optimizd though.

I have two fast computers sitting around, If you ever need me to run
say... a couple hundred ACubes... I can do that. I also have access 
to computer labs.

My only problem with <R,U,L,M> algs is that my left hand isn't as 
dexterous as most of you. I couldn't trigger L'U2 for instance.

I'm not sure how to describe my style, but one thing is clear: I use 
my right thumb more than anybody other cubers I've watched.

I'm going to post my algs up sometime over break, if you don't mind 
Chris, I'm going to use your pages as a template to get these up 
quicker (and I love the php cube image thing).

I recommend working on the U3 and U4 cases since they are next on 
the list, so to speak. Or for some of you that don't follow that 
order of learning, try to work on the COLL cases with no EP (plus 
those with edges-H).

I like the idea of leraning 2 algs for each COLL case so that you 
never end up with an H-Perm finish. (H-Perm is my slowest) Also 
these tend to be the shortest/fastest within their COLL category.

>From now on, we need to post times along side our algs.

And just as a little update, I am working on finishing up the L1 
algs. These are all sub-3 for me I think.


-Doug






--- In zbmethod@yahoogroups.com, "cmhardw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey Gilles,
> 
> That would be awesome thank you!  I'm also going to start searching
> and including all the search lists for the algs for others to 
search
> for ones they like too.
> 
> Here is the biggest problem.  We all have different styles.  I 
vastly
> prefer RULM to anything else, and will often choose a sub-optimal 
RULM
> alg over an optimal length one.
> 
> Also, some people are better at using the optimal algs and getting
> them to full speed.
> 
> So here is the idea.  I am a self proclaimed RULM user.  I prefer 
RULM
> to anything else, although I do have lots of RUF and RULFD types 
algs
> that I like a lot.
> 
> So once someone finds a list of potential algs for a case I could
> search for the RULM alg, and someone who is better at making the
> optimal alg fast could search for that.
> 
> We can group ourselves accorind go out styles.  That way, on the
> central site where we post these algs, each case will have upwards 
of
> hopefully 10 different algs that are optimized for different 
styles. 
> If 10 isn't possible, at least a few to choose from.
> 
> I don't know the best way to set up this group interaction, 
perhaps we
> can all vote for our favorite and vastly preferred styles to start
> with.  I am very much a RULM solver though, and prefer it to all 
other
> types by far.
> 
> If too many of us are the same style then we can branch out.  I 
also
> like RUF a lot and could search for those.
> 
> Basically we need people to just search for algs in all types of
> metrics, and people to sift through algs once they are found.  Imay
> even be able to get Richard Patterson to help us for the sifting 
part.
>  I am willing to run my processor 24-7 to search for algs, as well 
as
> look for good ones among those found.
> 
> We should coordinate as a team and work on these together.  Let's
> serioulsly turn team [zb] into a group effort to improve the ZB
> method.  I do think with a truly optimized ZBLL, that this method 
can
> be one of the best, if not the best.  But it will take a flawless 
ZBLL.
> 
> Let me know what you guys think.  I want to start with my
> T-orientations case 1 algs first.  Most are sub-3 already, but I 
want
> to optimize those that aren't and also research and provide algs 
for
> different styles as well.
> 
> What do you guys think?  Should we make a database and divy up all 
the
> COLL cases?  What would work best, I want as much input from 
everyone
> as we can get so that everyone can enjoy what they are working on, 
and
> do what they want to work on.
> 
> Chris
> definitely still team [zb] as well
> 
> --- In zbmethod@yahoogroups.com, Gilles van den Peereboom
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Even though I stopped learning ZB a few weeks ago, I'm still
> > interested in that extension.
> > I'm kind of fed up with learning an huge amount of algorithms 
without
> > always understanding what I do.
> > But I'm really interested in finding new ones either by myself 
or with
> > the help of a computer.
> > 
> > If you want some help, I could help for exemple on one of the
> > orientation case (maybe split it with someone if anybody is
> > interested).
> > 
> > I'm rather fond of the Double-Sune orientation so if there is 
any case
> > you prefer to have first (since I'm probably not gonna use this 
in
> > competition), just tell me which one :-)
> > 
> > Gilles.
> > 
> > 2005/12/11, cmhardw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >  Hey everyone,
> > >
> > >  I've been talking to Richard a lot lately, and he really 
inspired me
> > >  about one thing.
> > >
> > >  I think ZBLL can be extremely fast, but we have to set a 
higher
> > >  standard for it.  We have to set the standard of sub-3 
average for
> > >  every alg (just straight execution) and that would make the 
LL have a
> > >  sub-4 solve time with recognition also (in theory).
> > >
> > >  Well I don't think even a few people could do this in a short 
amount
> > >  of time, so here is the suggestion.  ZB doesn't have much 
popularity
> > >  yet, since it isn't fast.  Sadly it will take that to get 
many to
> > >  notice.  Also, why learn ZBLL quickly now and redo 300 algs 
later
> when
> > >  it does gain some popularity after people have learned it, 
when
> we can
> > >  all work on generating algs (with the sub-3 requirement) and 
make it
> > >  fast now?
> > >
> > >  It would work like this, learn ZBLL in any way you want, and 
generate
> > >  and save all algs for that path.  If you are learning algs 
that have
> > >  already been generated, then learn the algs you want from a
> webpage or
> > >  from someone, but generate other cases only to make them 
fast, learn
> > >  them later.
> > >
> > >  We could each take a COLL case and generate algs and spend a 
few
> weeks
> > >  or maybe a month on optimizing each case to sub-3.
> > >
> > >  After that we can meet here and post the best ones on a 
central
> > >  website (perhaps Ron will lend us a space in the Algs 
section).
> > >
> > >  I think if we make ZBLL fast right from the start, then we 
can learn
> > >  the fastest ZBLL right from the start and have a chance for 
the
> method
> > >  to be fast.
> > >
> > >  I know a lot of you guys are very serious about the method, 
so I ask:
> > >  who is willing to help me make a sub-3 requirement for ZBLL a
> reality?
> > >  I can start with my slowest T algs (some are already easily 
sub-3)
> > >  and work from there.  Again you don't have to learn the algs 
you
> > >  generate, learn however you want, but spend time each day 
helping
> > >  optimize the ZBLL.
> > >
> > >  I think with all of us it will still not be much man power, 
but it
> > >  will be enough to make a start.
> > >
> > >  I will now require sub-3 for all algs, and try to spend a few
> weeks to
> > >  1 month on each COLL case to really get this right.  I will 
stop
> > >  learning until my T and U algs are fully sub-3 optimized.
> > >
> > >  Also if sub-3 is just not possible, let's find the true limit,
> and get
> > >  under that.
> > >
> > >  ZB can still have a change, but we have to have a higher 
standard
> than
> > >  sub-4.  I'm already convinced that a sub-4 ZBLL stands no 
change
> > >  whatsoever against Fridrich.
> > >
> > >  I'm going to start on my worst T cases and go from there.  Is 
anyone
> > >  else interested?  Let me know, I would really love for all of 
us to
> > >  really take this method seriously (we already do, but I think 
a new
> > >  level of dedication will be required for ZB to be fast) and 
move this
> > >  method into being a top level method?
> > >
> > >  Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > >
> > >  Visit your group "zbmethod" on the web.
> > >
> > >  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service.
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >
> >
>






------------------------ 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/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