ok so should we start ? What about a method that solves Cross, then LL, then F2L... Weird...
another idea ? :D Gilles 2007/1/19, Brent Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
think out of the box?.... Nah. We need to think out of the cube. :D yeh i agree. -bm *Gilles van den Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: Yes I agree with you. Present results show that the pure CFOP method yields incredible results. Any change to this method will probably make it slower I think. Therefore we need to "think out of the box" and look for new ways of solving the cube. Gilles 2007/1/12, richy_jr_2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > The group has been relatively mute for a while. The reasons why are > many and varied, and I won't invest any time explaining as such. > The problem in the inactivity is that it screams failure not only > for the ZBmethod. It represents something far more important. This > group represents a group of people that are willing to explore > something new and innovative. > > I propose that we rename the group to relate the desire to explore > new methods. I'm fairly certain this will raise the activity in > this group, as well as giving cubers a good platform to discuss new > things. No offense to anyone but the normal speedcubing group is > quite possibly the worst medium available for discussing new > approaches. > > I have talked to several people with method ideas that could inspire > a major shift in traditional cubing -- Surely someone wants to play > a role in this. > > Best Regards, > > Richard > > > :) --Brent ------------------------------ Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail>and always stay connected<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail>to friends.
