This turned out to be more of an adventure than I expected. I thought this would be a trivial solve that I would quickly move on from. Solve the middle layer with a twist or so, then solve the corners like a 2x2x2. Easy, right? But only if the corners solve with an even number of vertical twists. Hold on. Back up.
I'm not sure if I have ever documented how I solve a Square-1. When I said above that I solve the corners like a 2x2x2, that is only partially accurate. With a 2x2x3 I start the corners by separating the whites and yellows much like I do the Square-1. Then I can use the 2x2x2 algorithm for 2 pair. Can't use the other ones since they use an odd number of vertical turns and that messes up the middle layer.
What if there are zero pairs? With a 2x2x2 you just R2 B2 R2. With the 2x2x3 I did the 2-pair algorithm starting with R and F then did it again starting with F then L. Some turns in the middle cancel and combine and you end up with (R2 U R2) (U2 F2 U2 F2 U2) (L2 U L2). Will I memorize that? No. Will it come up often enough to remember it? No. But it was kind of fun figuring it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.