http://www.speedcubing.com/ton/buy1.htm

There is the link. He claims these are the best cubes for speed
cubing. Did you notice these being good cubes, anyone who bought
them?

What do you think are the best cubes in your experience?

Also the site mentions the newest cubes from rubiks.com having vinel
stickers, does that mean they hold up better like the 80's cubes
from Ideal do?

Thanks for answering all of my questions.

-Louie

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "yodamunkey2"
<yodamunkey1@a...> wrote:
> http://www.speedcubing.com/ton/buy1.htm
>
> There is the link. He claims these are the best cubes for speed
> cubing. Did you notice these being good cubes, anyone who bought
> them?
>
> What do you think are the best cubes in your experience?
>
> Also the site mentions the newest cubes from rubiks.com having
vinel
> stickers, does that mean they hold up better like the 80's cubes
> from Ideal do?
>
> Thanks for answering all of my questions.
>
> -Louie

the studio cubes are the best in my opinion.

the rubiks.com stickers aren't as good as the studio cubes.....

The studio cubes are definitely the best cubes you can buy. The
rubiks.com cubes work, but they have terrrrrible stickers and no
screws to adjust the tension.

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "yodamunkey2"
<yodamunkey1@a...> wrote:
> http://www.speedcubing.com/ton/buy1.htm
>
> There is the link. He claims these are the best cubes for speed
> cubing. Did you notice these being good cubes, anyone who bought
> them?
>
> What do you think are the best cubes in your experience?
>
> Also the site mentions the newest cubes from rubiks.com having
vinel
> stickers, does that mean they hold up better like the 80's cubes
> from Ideal do?
>
> Thanks for answering all of my questions.
>
> -Louie

I've been working on my own method the past couple days.  I have
dedicated a portion of my website to it:
http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html
Put your mouse over it to get a brief description of whats going on.
In my haste I haven't had a chance to make a quality description...so
please forgive me.  In the end you are left with 70 possible 1-look
situations.  There are 5 possible permutation you can get...and 14
different possible orientations...hence...70 1 look algs.
1. Cross (intuitive)
2. 3 c/e pairs, leaving an empty c/e slot (intuitive)
3. you'll make a 2x2x1 block opposite of your empty c/e slot.
(intuitive)
*This will leave you with 7 unpositioned pieces on your cube.
4. insert last corner/edge pair without ruining the 2x2x1 block you
made in step 3. (I'm thinking I'll need to make algs for this)
*This is the point in which you are left with your last layer to be
done. only 5 pieces left to deal with.
5. Orient&permute LL! (i'll be generating algs for this)
**! If i have made any mistake in my logic...or my calculations,
please feel free to let me know.  In my excitement I probably may
have overlooked something.

I ordered one about two weeks ago, the pre-lubed one but not the
broken in one.  When it gets here I'll let you know what I think.

Daniel
--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "yodamunkey2"
<yodamunkey1@a...> wrote:
> http://www.speedcubing.com/ton/buy1.htm
>
> There is the link. He claims these are the best cubes for speed
> cubing. Did you notice these being good cubes, anyone who bought
> them?
>
> What do you think are the best cubes in your experience?
>
> Also the site mentions the newest cubes from rubiks.com having
vinel
> stickers, does that mean they hold up better like the 80's cubes
> from Ideal do?
>
> Thanks for answering all of my questions.
>
> -Louie

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "richy_jr_2000"
<richy_jr_2000@y...> wrote:
> I've been working on my own method the past couple days.  I have
> dedicated a portion of my website to it:
> http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html
> Put your mouse over it to get a brief description of whats going
on.
> In my haste I haven't had a chance to make a quality
description...so
> please forgive me.  In the end you are left with 70 possible 1-
look
> situations.  There are 5 possible permutation you can get...and 14
> different possible orientations...hence...70 1 look algs.
> 1. Cross (intuitive)
> 2. 3 c/e pairs, leaving an empty c/e slot (intuitive)
> 3. you'll make a 2x2x1 block opposite of your empty c/e slot.
> (intuitive)
> *This will leave you with 7 unpositioned pieces on your cube.
> 4. insert last corner/edge pair without ruining the 2x2x1 block
you
> made in step 3. (I'm thinking I'll need to make algs for this)
> *This is the point in which you are left with your last layer to
be
> done. only 5 pieces left to deal with.
> 5. Orient&permute LL! (i'll be generating algs for this)
> **! If i have made any mistake in my logic...or my calculations,
> please feel free to let me know.  In my excitement I probably may
> have overlooked something.

It is definitely possible! Sounds like a good idea. I have trouble
with taht 2nd to last step (that you said you need algs for) but I
get it eventually...pretty much trial and error, I just need to
figure out how to get it on command! Very nice idea.

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "yodamunkey2"
<yodamunkey1@a...> wrote:
> --- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "richy_jr_2000"
> <richy_jr_2000@y...> wrote:
> > I've been working on my own method the past couple days.  I have
> > dedicated a portion of my website to it:
> > http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html
> > Put your mouse over it to get a brief description of whats going
> on.
> > In my haste I haven't had a chance to make a quality
> description...so
> > please forgive me.  In the end you are left with 70 possible 1-
> look
> > situations.  There are 5 possible permutation you can get...and
14
> > different possible orientations...hence...70 1 look algs.
> > 1. Cross (intuitive)
> > 2. 3 c/e pairs, leaving an empty c/e slot (intuitive)
> > 3. you'll make a 2x2x1 block opposite of your empty c/e slot.
> > (intuitive)
> > *This will leave you with 7 unpositioned pieces on your cube.
> > 4. insert last corner/edge pair without ruining the 2x2x1 block
> you
> > made in step 3. (I'm thinking I'll need to make algs for this)
> > *This is the point in which you are left with your last layer to
> be
> > done. only 5 pieces left to deal with.
> > 5. Orient&permute LL! (i'll be generating algs for this)
> > **! If i have made any mistake in my logic...or my calculations,
> > please feel free to let me know.  In my excitement I probably
may
> > have overlooked something.
>
> It is definitely possible! Sounds like a good idea. I have trouble
> with taht 2nd to last step (that you said you need algs for) but I
> get it eventually...pretty much trial and error, I just need to
> figure out how to get it on command! Very nice idea.

On second thought...there may be a problem. The 2nd to last step may
make it a 2 look at the end! Like you said you will need algorithms,
and I doubt they will be too small. So you will have well over 70
algs and still have 2 looks at the end. I'll try to figure out the
different combinations for that step anyway. ;)

At RWC2003 I met several spouses/relatives of cubers who had learnt
the cube themselves. For example, Yasmara (Michiel van der Blonk's
wife), Betty (Grant Tregay's wife), Elizabeth (Dan Knights' sister)
and Wiktoria (Zbigniew's daughter). I was just curious how these
cubing family members became interested in learning the cube. Is it
that they wanted to find out what all the fuss was with their puzzle-
obsessed relatives? :) Or maybe because they had such expert tutors
and so thought they'd give it a go? :)

I've certainly been offering to teach Peter (my fiance), but as he's
still in the US (and I'm back in Australia) it hasn't quite happened
yet. Although we did do a long distance solve once (he had the
scrambled cube in the US, I was on the phone in Australia describing
algs over the phone). That was fun. :)

Jasmine.

I looked it over again and now I realize that it will be 107 to have
a one-look with my method.  Sorry about that...

Richard

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "richy_jr_2000"
<richy_jr_2000@y...> wrote:
> I've been working on my own method the past couple days.  I have
> dedicated a portion of my website to it:
> http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html
> Put your mouse over it to get a brief description of whats going
on.
> In my haste I haven't had a chance to make a quality
description...so
> please forgive me.  In the end you are left with 70 possible 1-
look
> situations.  There are 5 possible permutation you can get...and 14
> different possible orientations...hence...70 1 look algs.
> 1. Cross (intuitive)
> 2. 3 c/e pairs, leaving an empty c/e slot (intuitive)
> 3. you'll make a 2x2x1 block opposite of your empty c/e slot.
> (intuitive)
> *This will leave you with 7 unpositioned pieces on your cube.
> 4. insert last corner/edge pair without ruining the 2x2x1 block
you
> made in step 3. (I'm thinking I'll need to make algs for this)
> *This is the point in which you are left with your last layer to
be
> done. only 5 pieces left to deal with.
> 5. Orient&permute LL! (i'll be generating algs for this)
> **! If i have made any mistake in my logic...or my calculations,
> please feel free to let me know.  In my excitement I probably may
> have overlooked something.

On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 12:52:14AM -0000, richy_jr_2000 wrote:
> I've been working on my own method the past couple days.  I have
> dedicated a portion of my website to it:
> http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html

Hi Richard, unfortunately this method is not new:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/message/2234

but feel free to explore it. You may find it is not as practical as it
is attractive.

Ryan

seems like everything is thought up :( lol.
after some thought i've decided on learning it anyway
as follows:

step 1.)typical fridrichs f2l
*except for last c/e slot
step 2.)2x2x1 block bottom layer
*as long as you don't break this up, doesn't matter
how you go about doing your business.
step 3.) insert last f2l pair
*can't break up the block!
step 4.)orient/permute all

I was thinking how long it will take for each step. i
figured:
step 1: 8.0-9.0 seconds
step 2: 2.5-3.0 seconds
step 3: 2.5-3.0 seconds
step 4: 3.0-3.5 seconds
total: 16.0-18.5 seconds
i think these are at least semi realistic estimates

So while the idea was brought up already, my approach
seems to be a bit different.  And another difference
is, I'll actually be following through with it...I had
some confusion about the math for it, but after all it
is 107 LL algs to learn.  The last c/e pair is also to
be a pain...most likely involving a slew of
algs...I'll be doing my best to organize this solution
for anyone who is interested.  Since I'm going to
'publish' this method on my site I think it deserves
an appropriate name...suggestions anyone?

i'll decide when i'm finished whether it was practical
or not. ;)

-Richard
--- Ryan Heise <rheise@...> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 12:52:14AM -0000,
> richy_jr_2000 wrote:
> > I've been working on my own method the past couple
> days.  I have
> > dedicated a portion of my website to it:
> >
>
http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/RPmethod.html
>
> Hi Richard, unfortunately this method is not new:
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/message/2234
>
> but feel free to explore it. You may find it is not
> as practical as it
> is attractive.
>
> Ryan
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/

Hey, i just wonder how u guys "make" algs. I know that it is easy to
use Cube Explorer to find short optimal algorithms once u specify
fully the initial state of the cube and the desired goal-state. But
what if u want to ignore parts of the cube. Like when ur algs are not
final step algs. Are there similar programs that will let u ignore
parts of the cube? Of course one can search for those algs manually
also, which is tedious and u will usually not find all the ones u are
looking for.

Similarly one can come up with algs that are faster to perform even
though they don't have the minimum number of moves. Are there
programs who can do this? It could for instance print out all the
move-sequences as it finds them and then u select the most convenient
urself. Or u can specify u want to limit urself to moving only a
certain number of layers etc etc. Any info on this is useful insight!!

Thank u guys (and girls)!!

--Per K.--

("Words are trains for moving past what really has no name" - Prefab
Sprout)

Ron's cube solver does exactly that (in the tools section of
speedcubing.com) It is a java applet that alllow you to ignore parts
of the cube and and ignore certain moves.
--barefoot Chris

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Per Kristen
Fredlund" <aspiring_to_love@y...> wrote:
> Hey, i just wonder how u guys "make" algs. I know that it is easy
to
> use Cube Explorer to find short optimal algorithms once u specify
> fully the initial state of the cube and the desired goal-state.
But
> what if u want to ignore parts of the cube. Like when ur algs are
not
> final step algs. Are there similar programs that will let u ignore
> parts of the cube? Of course one can search for those algs
manually
> also, which is tedious and u will usually not find all the ones u
are
> looking for.
>
> Similarly one can come up with algs that are faster to perform
even
> though they don't have the minimum number of moves. Are there
> programs who can do this? It could for instance print out all the
> move-sequences as it finds them and then u select the most
convenient
> urself. Or u can specify u want to limit urself to moving only a
> certain number of layers etc etc. Any info on this is useful
insight!!
>
> Thank u guys (and girls)!!
>
> --Per K.--
>
> ("Words are trains for moving past what really has no name" -
Prefab
> Sprout)

At 11:31 +0000 11/2/03, Per Kristen Fredlund wrote:
>Hey, i just wonder how u guys "make" algs. I know that it is easy to
>use Cube Explorer to find short optimal algorithms once u specify
>fully the initial state of the cube and the desired goal-state. But
>what if u want to ignore parts of the cube. Like when ur algs are not
>final step algs. Are there similar programs that will let u ignore
>parts of the cube? Of course one can search for those algs manually
>also, which is tedious and u will usually not find all the ones u are
>looking for.

Try Ron's Cube Solver(s) http://speedcubing.com/tools.html

They work great up to a certain number of moves. And can be
depressing in exposing your own stupidity...

>Similarly one can come up with algs that are faster to perform even
>though they don't have the minimum number of moves. Are there
>programs who can do this? It could for instance print out all the
>move-sequences as it finds them and then u select the most convenient
>urself. Or u can specify u want to limit urself to moving only a
>certain number of layers etc etc. Any info on this is useful insight!!

I don't think there is anything really powerful for this stuff.

>Thank u guys (and girls)!!
>
>--Per K.--
>
>("Words are trains for moving past what really has no name" - Prefab
>Sprout)


--
"The mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work unless it's open."
                                  --- Frank Zappa

Lars Petrus, San Francisco - lars@... http://lar5.com

Hello!

First, i'm a french student so excuse my bad English ; i just hope
you'll understand me ! :)

I've done several functions in CAML (it is a Fench programming
language: see http://caml.inria.fr/ for English support) about the
Rubik's Cube ; one of my aim was to know how positions where reached
in n moves exactly (not in less).
I call a move a single quarter turn of one of the 6 faces of the
cube. My computer has got 512 MO of RAM and has a P4-  1,4GHz
Pentium Processor.
I obtained these results in 50 hours of CPU time:
n     pos(n)
0     1
1     12
2     114
3     1,068
4     10,011
5     93,840
6     878,880
7     8,221,632
8     76,843,595
9     717,789,576

For n=10, with my method, it would take almost a month...

I used a soft data compression process and several tips, but
basically, my functions use the force of the computer (i don't use
IA algorithms like IDA*).

I made a program to generate isomorphic classes of a position (i
call isomorph of a position a position that is symmetrical, inverse
or the same but with an other orientation of the cube...).
To do this, i used the principe of conjugaison in a group.
I want to know how other people did to generate the positions
isomorphic to another? (according to my definition, a position has
got less or equal than 96 isomorphic positions, including itself!).
Also, a random position (randomly choosen not with random moves,
each position has the same probability to be chosen) has exactly 96
isomorphic positions (what is not surprising of course).

I hope someone would be interested in this work ; if someone already
did it, i would be really interested to contact him!

Least, considering the positions who are there one isomorph position
could help if we assume that there is only one antipode for the
3x3x3 Cube (there are only 8 of such positions, the identity, the
superflip, the Pont Asinum and others). Of course, if the antipode
is not single (what i believe), it won't help...

Regards.

Boris

How do you get the centre pieces off the cube? I'd like to fiddle
with the screws beneath them.

              Thanks,
                       Will

Just to show how stupid this whole virus thing is, this past week i
recieved a virus myself from someone i know... MYSELF!!!!  I have
two yahoo accounts and i sometimes send emails from one account to
another.  But this one was strange.  I never sent anything or
recieved anything like that under my other account.  I have also
been checking my computer for viruses quite frequently over the big
bout that exploaded a couple weeks ago.  Don't worry guys, i dealt
with the matter in a calm way, and i sent the person who "sent" me
the virus an email saying
"i got a virus and it was sent from you."
jake

I checked my other account and found the message and i replied,

"I am sorry, I would never send you a virus.  Theres a lot of weird
stuff floatting around but i am sorry and i will scan my computer to
see if there are any viruses present."

jake

So i had my computer screened or whatever, its clean... no dirty
sickies lingering anywhere.
So I checked my other email and after reading the reply i responded:

"Don't worry Jake, It didn't do any harm to my computer because i
scanned the email before i opened it.  I always do that regardless
who sent it to me, because sometimes an unintentional virus is sent
somehow.  Either way, good luck with cubing!"
Jake

I went and checked my other account and after reading the message i
replied:

"thanks for being a good sport about this mess, i am truly sorry,
and i am glad that no harm came to you computer. "
Jake

See, maybe i am just insane sending messages back and forth to
myself, but i dealt with the situation in the best way i could.
Thats the only way to work out a problem.  Blowing up at someone
would not have settled anything, especially in this case...

But anyway, there were no bugs in my computer anywhere.  SO this
means that someone is hacking in my "oh so dear" yahoo acount, or
something else.  I am not a techy poopy genius but i think its just
dumb to blame someone 100% over something they cant control.

Jake and Jake

Does anyone know how they allowed for inspection time at the world
championships?
Was it 15 seconds?  And how was it timed?  Did they just use a stop watch or was
the
15 second delay built in to the stack mat pad?

-Tyson

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "gosd123"
<dgosbee@s...> wrote:

> [...]
> www.cornersfirst.com will be open upon my return from break after
> the event.
>


Is this site going to open its doors soon?

Hi, I was a judge at the championships. Cubers were allowed 15
seconds of inspection time. The inspection was just timed on a
stopwatch.


--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Tyson Mao"
<tmao@i...> wrote:
> Does anyone know how they allowed for inspection time at the world
championships?
> Was it 15 seconds?  And how was it timed?  Did they just use a
stop watch or was the
> 15 second delay built in to the stack mat pad?
>
> -Tyson

I'm just curious, how many of the judges knew how to solve the cube?
I guess they all had to learn the notation for it so a lot of people
could mix them up.

--- In
speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "william_rodwell_albert"
<will_pearson88@h...> wrote:
> Hi, I was a judge at the championships. Cubers were allowed 15
> seconds of inspection time. The inspection was just timed on a
> stopwatch.
>
>
> --- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Tyson Mao"
> <tmao@i...> wrote:
> > Does anyone know how they allowed for inspection time at the
world
> championships?
> > Was it 15 seconds?  And how was it timed?  Did they just use a
> stop watch or was the
> > 15 second delay built in to the stack mat pad?
> >
> > -Tyson

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Atkinson"
<unipsycho6@y...> wrote:
> I'm just curious, how many of the judges knew how to solve the
cube?
> I guess they all had to learn the notation for it so a lot of
people
> could mix them up.
>
>

I know how to solve it, and I'm sure at least one other did. There
were 3 or 4 employees from Kroger who didn't know how. We all were
taught the notation. Dan had to scramble all the 4x4s and 5x5s
himself because none of the judges knew how.

Also, after the 15 seconds, they covered the cube with their hands.
That makes a lot of sense, but if you weren't prepared for it, it can
be really disorienting.

In the Budapest WC, they didn't cover the cubes, so you could keep
scheming while it lay on the table. Not that I really need(ed) more
than 5-10 seconds to plan as far ahead as I could use.

/Lars

At 22:46 +0000 11/2/03, william_rodwell_albert wrote:
>Hi, I was a judge at the championships. Cubers were allowed 15
>seconds of inspection time. The inspection was just timed on a
>stopwatch.
>
>
>--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Tyson Mao"
><tmao@i...> wrote:
>>  Does anyone know how they allowed for inspection time at the world
>championships?
>>  Was it 15 seconds?  And how was it timed?  Did they just use a
>stop watch or was the
>>  15 second delay built in to the stack mat pad?
>>
>  > -Tyson

--
"They say the grass is greener on the other side, but have you ever
   flipped it over?"

Lars Petrus, San Francisco - lars@... http://lar5.com

So are you learning how to speed cube, or just know how to solve it?
Also, what's your method? Just curious.

--- In
speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "william_rodwell_albert"
<will_pearson88@h...> wrote:
> --- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Atkinson"
> <unipsycho6@y...> wrote:
> > I'm just curious, how many of the judges knew how to solve the
> cube?
> > I guess they all had to learn the notation for it so a lot of
> people
> > could mix them up.
> >
> >
>
> I know how to solve it, and I'm sure at least one other did. There
> were 3 or 4 employees from Kroger who didn't know how. We all were
> taught the notation. Dan had to scramble all the 4x4s and 5x5s
> himself because none of the judges knew how.

This might extend to corners first and other methods too, but I
guess it mainly applies to people who use an F2L approach.  Tonight
I had an amazing night on the cube and I just wanted to share some
insight in case it would help others.  I'm sure all of you
consistent sub-20ers do this even when you're sleep deprived with
both hands behind your back and underwater, but I just recently
discovered the value of this and wanted to try to let others know.
Anyway, tonight I took 3 averages on the cube.  Two of which were
sub-20, which I haven't pulled off in a while, and the other was
only a couple hundredths of a second away.  I did this by
concentrating really hard on doing moves that only used RUL turns.
I mean I REALLY concentrated hard on only trying to do RUL (or d or
d') turns ONLY during the F2L.  When I "got into the zone" of
thinking this way, I found myself solving what felt to me to be
extremely slowly, and I was concentrating so hard on only turning
those three faces that I almost forgot that I was trying to speed
solve and the usual nervousness from trying to "go fast yet slow yet
not rotate the cube yet find good c/e pairs" etc. went away.  I
found myself getting lots of times that I normally only get two or
three times a day.  So anyway for those like me who are slow to pick
up on the tricks of getting fast, I can't stress enough how
important it is to try to really, really only do RUL (or d or d')
turns when solving the F2L.  Also try to only rotate the cube
whenever you have to do lots of B or F turns, and rotate the cube so
the B face becomes the L or R face, then continue doing the alg.
Rotate only to place the B or F face on R or L when you have several
B or F turns coming up.  I know you fast people already do this, but
I just discovered the value of it and I want to try to emphasize to
everyone that it really works.

My two cents.  Sorry for the preaching but I hope it helps,
Chris

Two looks and a 3 cycle:

I'm formalising my strategy for the last layer (assuming an F2L that
does not direct the structure of the LL in any way).

I think of it as a two-and-a-half looks method but that's a damn lie
really – its 3 looks but the last is always a simple 3-cycle of
edges.  I'd be interested if anyone else uses a similar approach
although I know that there are not many people who solve the LL
doing corners then edges.

Before I summarise it below you might well ask "why?".  After all
its 3 looks not 2 and it averages between 25 and 30 moves (I
understand others do more like 22).  The main advantages are:
1. There aren't many algorithms to learn (pessimistically up to
30 although I think its more like 20 or less)
2. Many of the algorithms are what I would call "intuitive" – 3-
cycles and 2-pair swaps using conjugation.  At least they seem
intuitive to me but then they are all "hand-made" – that is invented
by me using common sense principles.  Of course this means that
there may be more efficient algorithms to do it using the same
strategy.
3. I don't think the "looks" are very hard to "see"!  Of course
the last look is pretty trivial.
4. Its an interesting hybrid – I suspect that it might be an
easier stepping stone to the 2-look for some people.

General 2 and 3 LL Strategy:
1. Orient corners ensuring that at least one edge is unflipped.
(Up to 12 algorithms here probably a lot less).
2. Position corners and position one unflipped edge.  (Maybe 4
or 5 algorithms).
3. Finish with a 3-cycle of edges. (3 algorithms).

The eagle-eyed will spot some possibilities that don't fit.
Q1. What if corners are already oriented and all edges are flipped?
A1.  Position corners; finish with 2 3-cycles of edges. (still 2
looks and a 3-cycle).
Q2. If the corners are properly positioned then you can't arrange to
finish Q1 with 2 3-cycles if the edges are flipped but properly
positioned can you?
A2.  One extra algorithm for flipping all 4 edges in their proper
positions (my best algorithm for this is 22 moves!).

I haven't done a proper mathematical count of the number of
algorithms required and I haven't systematically worked out the
average or range of numbers of moves required to solve but I think
30 algorithms and 30 moves are both very, very pessimistic.  I do
intend to work it all out properly for my own peace of mind
eventually but if I've reinvented the wheel and anyone else already
knows all this do let me know!

Duncan

Many thanks for this tip Chris.  I am certainly going to make the
effort to follow you URL tip.

--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, cmhardw
<no_reply@y...> wrote:
> This might extend to corners first and other methods too, but I
> guess it mainly applies to people who use an F2L approach.
Tonight
> I had an amazing night on the cube and I just wanted to share some
> insight in case it would help others.  I'm sure all of you
> consistent sub-20ers do this even when you're sleep deprived with
> both hands behind your back and underwater, but I just recently
> discovered the value of this and wanted to try to let others
know.
> Anyway, tonight I took 3 averages on the cube.  Two of which were
> sub-20, which I haven't pulled off in a while, and the other was
> only a couple hundredths of a second away.  I did this by
> concentrating really hard on doing moves that only used RUL
turns.
> I mean I REALLY concentrated hard on only trying to do RUL (or d
or
> d') turns ONLY during the F2L.  When I "got into the zone" of
> thinking this way, I found myself solving what felt to me to be
> extremely slowly, and I was concentrating so hard on only turning
> those three faces that I almost forgot that I was trying to speed
> solve and the usual nervousness from trying to "go fast yet slow
yet
> not rotate the cube yet find good c/e pairs" etc. went away.  I
> found myself getting lots of times that I normally only get two or
> three times a day.  So anyway for those like me who are slow to
pick
> up on the tricks of getting fast, I can't stress enough how
> important it is to try to really, really only do RUL (or d or d')
> turns when solving the F2L.  Also try to only rotate the cube
> whenever you have to do lots of B or F turns, and rotate the cube
so
> the B face becomes the L or R face, then continue doing the alg.
> Rotate only to place the B or F face on R or L when you have
several
> B or F turns coming up.  I know you fast people already do this,
but
> I just discovered the value of it and I want to try to emphasize
to
> everyone that it really works.
>
> My two cents.  Sorry for the preaching but I hope it helps,
> Chris

Hi

After a year of almost constant cubing and after giving up trying to
get her interested in the cube, she suddenly said: 'OK, teach me now'.

An important aspect of this was that I told her that anyone could do
it, and that she needed to learn just a couple of alg's and it would
probably take 3 to 4 days and a little practice to be able to do it
without the alg's on hand.

Of course real speedcubing takes a lot more dedication, and up to now
that is a far fetched dream. She stopped practicing after reaching
the 1.30 barrier, and she might take it up when there is a new
championship.

I myself am at a best average of about 23 seconds, and I have to say
it gets harder and harder to beat seconds. Ans Jasmine, how about
both getting a webcam? That would make things a lot easier! Ans you
get to see each other once in a while.

bye
Michiel


--- In speedsolvingrubikscube@yahoogroups.com, jasmine_ellen
<no_reply@y...> wrote:
> At RWC2003 I met several spouses/relatives of cubers who had learnt
> the cube themselves. For example, Yasmara (Michiel van der Blonk's
> wife), Betty (Grant Tregay's wife), Elizabeth (Dan Knights' sister)
> and Wiktoria (Zbigniew's daughter). I was just curious how these
> cubing family members became interested in learning the cube. Is it
> that they wanted to find out what all the fuss was with their
puzzle-
> obsessed relatives? :) Or maybe because they had such expert tutors
> and so thought they'd give it a go? :)
>
> I've certainly been offering to teach Peter (my fiance), but as
he's
> still in the US (and I'm back in Australia) it hasn't quite
happened
> yet. Although we did do a long distance solve once (he had the
> scrambled cube in the US, I was on the phone in Australia
describing
> algs over the phone). That was fun. :)
>
> Jasmine.

Hi folks!

As the unofficial world record holder (yeah, real hard without
opponents ;-) I'd like to get more people to solve the clock. So I
just made up a page describing how I do it:
http://www.stefan-pochmann.de/spocc/speedsolving/clock/

Cheers!
Stefan

First, a bit of background about myself.

I've been a casual cuber since the early 80's.  My method of solving the cube
was learned from a book, and is quite basic:

- Solve the top layer (~25 moves)

- Use a simple algorithm to get all middle layer cubes in place (~25 moves)

For the last layer, I flip the cube.  Then I

- Permute the edges

- Permute the corners

- Orient the corners

- Orient the edges.

I use 5 algorithms (not including inverses which I sometimes use).  It takes me
about 50 moves to solve the last layer, and the total solve time is around 110
secs.

I would like to learn a new method to slash my solve times at least in half.  I
have had a look at a few web sites mentioned in this group (speedcubing.com for
example), and find the methods, terminology, and number of algorithms
intimidating.  Most posts on this group are way above my head.

I don't believe I could handily retain huge numbers of algorithms.  I guess I
would like a method which gives the best "bang for the buck" and minimizes the
number of algorithms.

Can someone recommend a web site with more of a tutorial approach which will
suit my needs?

Thanks for reading.

Scott