Cool Frog schrieb:The idea of this method Is to combine efficency and speed together in one method.

The first step of this method is to reduce the cube into a 2x2x2 "state" where you would then solve the cube as a 2x2. The advantages of doing this over reducing it into a 3x3 state is that
1. The 2x2 is significantly easier to solve than a 3x3
2. There is no edge pairing
3. you don't have to solve the centers until closer to the end of the solve where you can just use wide turns.
4. You cannot get parity once you have reduced to 2x2.

As to go about reducing into 2x2 state there are multiple methods that all work well (I shall order them from best to least in my opinion.)

1. Blockbuild sections and manupulate bad cases with wide turns (since you DO have lots of freedom)
2. Creation with NO manipulation of 2x2 sections. (Allows for lookahead directly into 2x2 state)
3. Direct solving into a solved 2x2
4. Direct solving 2x2 state.

History/ extra information

This method was created by Chris Hardwick and Justin Harder, and formerally called HH method (Hardwick-Harder) and pronounced HHHHHH(Like a gasping sound)

The idea came as silly challenge at a cube mettup and after a solve Chris had a 8:xx solve while I failed at some blockbuilding and got a 12:xx. after some quick calcualtions we determined that rate of improvement would deacrease exponentially until the 2x2 state starts to hinder you. At wich point you would begin to learn more 2x2 algorithms... (guimond, CLL, EG)

This method is easily a sub 20 method.

(21.08.2011, 08:20)cuber-linus schrieb: Wow klingt auf jeden Fall sehr interessant.. Hätte ich algos oder n Video dazu würde ich mir das auf jeden Fall genauer anschauen

EDIT: hab's jetzt mal probiert und komm nach dem vierten/fünften gepairten Edge nicht mehr weiter.. Hat jemand ne Idee?