James Esh generally, it doesn’t make much sense to write a machine learning code to play something that clearly have a correct and algorithmic way to play.
12:17 OOOOOH Cary didn't solve it optimally!! He moved it 3 to the right instead of 2 to the left. He wasted 1 move!!! Cary is such a noob at this game. smh
Sometimes it’s more speed optimal to choose the linnet route. I mainly do 4x4 and when the piece I need is on the bottom row I would slide up 3 instead of sliding 1 down because it sets me up better
Are you implying I made a bad statement? Because let me say that Cary, previously in the video, said that its much more efficient to move right 2 spaces instead of left 3 spaces ( 6:08 ). But then at 12:17 like j_the_guy_is_taken mentioned, he wasted a move, when he previously said that you could be more efficient. I'm 13.
4:40 i love how in the span of a few years ai music went from a kind of nerdy thing thats a fun curiosity to now being a morally ambiguous thing that made me make sure it was in the nerdy part of ita kife
1:10 is perfect, so much information made so readable in such a concise way. Time is displayed overlaid so its readable, tells us where to buy the cube as the song does the "where'd ya find this?" gives us the song name as well. 10/10
Cary: Isn't this just a slider puzzle? Me: *looking at cary's attempt at solving 15 slider puzzle* Cary: I'm done! Me: *looks over to the loopover* WAIT WHAT
What it is interesting is for the top row you can normally just drag in and then systematically put in place the others (like slide down A to F in the next row over then have A one above F and then slide F into the same column.
3 thousand word essay on speedcubing methods, beware: In the world of professional speed cubing, CFOP rains supreme. However, in a trinity of efficiency, ZZ and Petrus have the ability to alter the landscape of cubing permenantly. CFOP is used by Felix Zemdegs, one of the world's greatest. CFOP is so commonly used, because it is a learnt as a gradual increase from the "official" beginner's method, by gradually improving already known methods. This contrasts the other 2, which to most, appear to be unconventional and challenging. When a beginner quickly finishes a layer with CFOP, they can easily see the acheivement then and there. CFOP, or cross f2l, oll and pll, is by far the most researched method. This allows more efficient methods to be discovered. Furthermore, It translates easily to 4 x 4 and 5 x 5. This is likely due to the fact is does not require knowledge of the internal way the cube functions, no block building of Roux, or edge orientation with ZZ. Thus, although it is extremely algorithm dependent, it is easily manajed. First, a cuber solves the cross. This is almost the exact same as the beginner method, thus easy to learn. A common issue, amongst many cubers, is a focus on one colour, instead of pure efficiency. Furthermore, CFOP relies heavily on the inspection stage, with a cuber expected to think forward atleast 10 moves, during 15 seconds, an incredibly arduous task. After the cross, A cuber will insert edge-corner pairs into there areas in F2L. This is initially learnt intuatively, however, as one progresses, one must think of the necessary next akgorithm, whilst completing the initial one. After this one transfers to OLL, or orienting the top pieces. There are over 50 algorithms, with increasing learning often initially slowing, before enough practice has occured. Also, there are hundreds of further algorithms, if one wants to transition to a smoother pll, however, the recognition of which algorithm to use is of the upmost importance, as the incorrect one will end the solve. This overrealiance on algorithms found in CFOP contributes to the fact, in top cubers, most solve times are up to luck, although this is obviously an issue in other methods, simply a smaller one due to the flexibility. CFOP has a higher move count then the other strategies, which is why many believe that ZZ can change the game. ZZ uses an alien intuitive technique known as eolining. First, a cuber must orient every edge in the cube, whilst this is initially time consuming and move inefficient, it eventually gains extreme efficiency. At the same time, a cuber builds up a central line from the edge DB and DF. From here, the rest of the cube can essentially be completed with only U, L and R moves, rotationless. This is of course advantage for a multitude of reasons. Most cubers are quicker with these slices, as opposed to internal M moves, this also translates to OH extremely well. With F2L, a cuber must complete 10 different peices as opposed to 8, due to the LD and RD peices being incompleted. There is also significant switching between L and R moves, difficult for the beginner, although, often easy with enough practice. Finally, the users reaches the top layer. Given all edges are oriented, it gives many possibilies for efficiency, which CFOP somewhat lacks in easiness. These include COLL and EPLL which when combines (and with fewer cases if one wants total efficiency) makes ZZ A, essentially a 1LLL, wiith 493 cases, which is extremely doable. For this reason, I personally believe someone using ZZ with ZZa could transform the cubing landscape permenantly. However, ZZ does come with numerous disadvanteges. These include an extreme reliance for introspection, which is offputing for many cubers. The unintuitive EOLine which offputs the majority of beginners, albeit becoming natural and easy after a long time, and the L R switching, which is again unnatural. Despite these flaws, I am completely on board with the possibilty of ZZ user with ZZa being able to beat Felix Zemdegs or anyone with CFOP, it is simply currently unpopular. Likely equally unpopular, Petrus. First, a cuber builds a 2x2x2 block in the cube. Then this is expanded to 2x2x3 block, this can be done with many different strats, but is somewhat intuitive. After this, a cuber orients the remaining edges, in a similar fashion to ZZ. After this F2L can be completed by only turning 2 sides, which is obviously extremely efficient and quick. In Pure Petrus, A cuber will create a 1x2x2 block which is expanded to 1x2x3 to finish F2L, when done with the efficient 2 side movement, the top 4 edges will orient automatically, this is due to the bulding of the 1x2x3 block necesitating full edge orientation, thus when it is completed, this necessity will be met. After this, unconventionally, the user will Permutating the Corners of the last layer, then orient them. Finally, the cuber will permutate the edges, which will require swift algorithms. It has the same advantage for the last layer as ZZ, given the orientation, to make 1LLL extremely viable. For the begginner, it is far more intuitive to block build, and requires less algorithms. The Petrus method also uses far fewer moves than CFOP, thus increasing efficiency. However, the high intuition levels comes with a huge disadvantage. Thinking is practically non concious at Proffesional Speedcubing for 3x3. Thus, unless it becomes more popular, and strategies are created, as like what happeneed in 2003, it will likely stay unused. Furthermore, in the Edge orientation stage, recognition of cases is a drawback to beginners, as is block building, thus will again stay unused. While not as favourable in my eyes as ZZ, I do see the benifits of Petrus, especially for a non algorithm heavy method for beginners, which in my oppion is where it should stay. COLL will become more common, and cubers will make it ubiquitious. COLL will be more advantagous in ZZ and Petrus, and that is the only chance for their rebirth. If they dont beat CFOP then, they never will. Due to this, the most likely path is that elements of ZZ and Petrus will be incorporated into CFOP in certain cases, in which knowledge of those elements will be examples. For example, X cube, is born of Petrus, utilizing the block building, but during the cross element of freidrichs. Knowledge of this case, and far more importantly, the experience of how to quickly incorporate this edge pair in to a 2x2x2 block without affecting the cross, is the opening stage of Petrus. Furthermore, Petrus’ use of blocks is extremely prevelant in methods for larger cubes, like 4 x 4 and 5x5. One method of solving is to create blocks, akin to Petrus, and solve it almost identically. Whilst ZZ’s Edge orientation appears useless, in 4x4, the entire initial stage involves centre fixing, and then orienting the edges, akin to ZZ, knowledge of how to do this, and experience of it is helpful. ZZ also utilizes mainly U L and R moves, making it the ideal strategy for OH. Both methods have significantly lower move counts, and are often used for lowest move, in which CFOP is scarcely used. Furthermore, ZBLL, originating from ZZ and Petrus, is being learnt by people across the board, and is likely going to lead to the next stage of world records, once it is universely learned. Although CFOP reigns supreme, numerous smaller methods can be utilized, as mentioned above. Many methods involve orienting a permutating the top layer, whilst solving F2L. This includes the Winter and Summer variations.These were invented by Mats Valk, besides the winter, and are a subset of VLS. There are 432 algorithms to learn, including mirrors, which is a significant amount, however any method of improving world records is a superhuman method or luck. Given this, extreme methods are needed, and we are reaching a stage in which one must balance recognition and algorithms. Methods to improve recognition, such as some sort of quick flash card challenge which has hundreds of buttons and 0.1 seconds is necessary. This of course is almost impossible. However, is the speed gaming world, such methods are necessary, and given the prevalence of actions 1/30 of a second, it is possible, and to beat the battle of algs vs recognition, is the next step. CMLL, a method in Roux, is used by Feliks Zemdegs. CMLL has only 42 algorithms, and will always eb faster than COLL. However, in honesty, there are 2 strategies that will improve almost all cubers. Colour neutrality, and improving your look ahead. Most people start with a certain colour, and plan with that, as opposed to essentially colour blindness, looking for the most efficient solution. If one has colour neutrality, it will often reduce the moves by up to 3. This is more important than a simple 3 moves, due to the fact it will let you lookahead and plan 3 more moves during the F2L stage. Furthermore, If one practices blindfold cubing, the lookahead needed is immense, thus it would be useful for almost all, due to the fact ones planning happpens so quickly. Furthermore, 3x3 cubing is reaching a stage where in improvement is almost completely up to luck and chance. I would recommend that anyone looking to inovate a cubing feild dont start 2x2, the extremely luck based solution, or 3x3 which is so popular, it is practically impossible to control improvement. Rather I recommend improvent of other feilds, like OH, least moves, 4x4 and 5x5, which arent up to the miniscule improvement stage. However, in the feild of 3x3, there are so many conflicting strategies, its hard to remember the most basic and importants one. Practice transitioning from different moves. Practice look ahead, and finally practice algorithm recognition. And of coruse Zeroing. The most important algorithm. Remember to practice your zeroing daily. Zeroing is the most important moves. DO zerioing. Zeroing zeroing zeroing.
Gonna resume it for you: when you use an even amount of layers loop over, each time you do any move it changes the "parity state" of the cube, given that it is normal parity when solved, and scramble moves count to change parity. Also when you do two move like right right it count individually each one to the parity state
Me: *barely knows the alphabet and has to count letters constantly and quickly loses my place when counting if I don't focus enough* Also me: "Ah yes, this game is perfect for me!"
im rewatching this video after 4 years. When i first watched it i didnt know how to solve a rubiks cube. I was so surprised to see you using the roux method, then i remembered i learned it because of you and completely forgot that was the reason lmao
I understand the purpose of using letters, to distance this from that game ‘15’ however numbers would be far more intuitive. Perhaps add numbers as a settings option with letters as the default
I tried the puzzle out before watching the whole video. It was a really fun puzzle, but not nearly as difficult as a Rubik’s Cube. I figured it out in under 15 minutes with no hints or pre-known strategies or anything.
Well, that is to be expected if you take away a dimension. If you add a fourth dimension (like colours changing over time, for example), it will get much more difficult.
@@Holobrine itd be hard to make a physical one because the pieces seem like they'd have to shrink and grow, but it might be possible with clever engineering
I tried it before watching you try and had a totally different approach. I use CFOP (boring I know and I'm still slower than you, 14ish average) and had a layer by layer approach and used a simple commutator for the last step. I find it interesting how you, a Roux solver took a block building approach and I, a CFOP user, took a layered approach. Makes sense but super cool! Great video and game!
I managed to get a pretty nice 1:37 attempt on playing loopover for the first time, on a full scramble. I have never solved any kind of rubik's cube before, and i messed up the alphabet several times, but I'm happy with the result. thanks for the challenge mate
6:21 i started paying so much attention to the number puzzle that i didn't even notice he solving it, and when he finished, i was like: *wut dafuk happened*
I watched this video like half a year ago and I didn’t know bfdi existed, now it’s my favorite show and WE ARE GOING TO THE SAME COMPETITION TEMECULA VALLEY FALL OMG
Well just like how people define cubes to be 3d squares and hypercubes to be 4d cubes you can do the reverse. It also makes it more understandable as people might not immediately get the correlation between a rubiks square and rubiks cube. Yes some people are that dumb.
Here's a brief and incomplete explanation of what he means by "parity", particularly in reference to the puzzle he made, if anyone is interested. Parity in a broad sense means whether a number is even or odd, but it has a more specific usage in combinatorics and in cubing, namely permutation parity. So basically, the puzzle contains a set of unique items, and you can do operations that rearrange the items. The basic move in this is to just move a row or a column over by one space, and every other operation is just a combination of moving a row or column. Now imagine that you had the same puzzle but with just a single row of five tiles. You can imagine moving the row to the right by one as each tile swapping with the one immediately to the left. So if the puzzle starts as: ABCDE and becomes: EADBC Then it is the same result as if you swapped the first tile (A) with the last tile, and then the second-to-last, then the third-to-last, etc. Since there are 5 elements, you make 4 separate exchanges of two pieces. The parity of 4 is even. This is important because if you keep adding an even number to an even number, you will always end up with an even number. Remember when I said each operation is just a combination of moving a row or column? Well here that's important because since the basic move has an even permutation parity, then every possible combination of moves will leave the puzzle in a state with even permutation parity. Now let's imagine a slightly different puzzle where you still have a row of five elements, but the operations you can do are different. In one move, you are only allowed to make exactly two swaps of pieces. If you start the puzzle in the state ABCDE then no matter how many moves you do and no matter how much you scramble it up, because you always have an even permutation parity, you will always be able to return to that state. If you instead started the puzzle in the state BACDE Where the first two tiles are swapped, then if you stick to the rule of even permutation parity, you will never be able to put it in alphabetical order. The reason that even order's of Loopover (4x4, 6x6, 7x7, etc.) have problems with parity is that the basic move gives it an odd permutation parity. If you go from ABCD to DABC then you've made an odd number of tile swaps. When you add an odd number over and over again, rather than being even every time, it keeps flipping between even and odd every time you add one. The reason that they are difficult to deal with in this puzzle is that the keyhole method discussed in the video only works with even permutation parity, so you have to hope that the scramble was done in such a way that once you get to the keyholing phase, you are left with even permutation parity. However, if you start keyholing and find a problem with the parity, then just keyhole everything over to either side by one position, and it should work out fine. If you want a more detailed explanation from an actual mathematician rather than some rando who likes puzzles, then watch this video: ruclips.net/video/w0mxdo5ur_A/видео.html
@@littlebubby1 you move everything over by one position. So if you have ABCDFE Then E and F need to swap, but because of parity, that isn't possible with the keyhole method so what you do instead is you can use the keyhole to move A one position to the right (or left if you like) and then continue to use the keyhole method to solve the rest of the row.
I like how when he cubes blindfolded he's thinking about bfdi memes then as soon as the timer starts he's like "alright we need to focus on Cube, only Cube, and nothing but Cube"
Reminds me of "Puzzle Poker" on Steam. It has the same grid with the same movement, but instead of arranging the tiles (cards in this case) in a fixed order, you need to make ten poker hands (five horizontally and five vertically) with values as high as possible, of course.
On most mobile brothers you can demand the desktop version in the menu so it shows the whole square to you. To find the scramble button the, is for another story though.
I like speed cubing. I first solved it at 37, I'm not nearly as fast as you. I use a corners first method that was first devised by Erno Rubik in 1974. It's relatively fast but hasn't been heavily represented in competition since CFOP hit the scene. I think the reason why is because you get hung up on the last two of the eight corners. Basically there's three patterns you'll see when you're at this point and I feel like I'm very close to finding the appropriate algorithms for each which will cut the total time to solve to under a minute.
You should make a hexagonal one with triangular pieces. Then you can make the slice through the RGB cube be the plain where R+B+G=0, which I'm pretty sure is a hexagon.
6:54
That went from
Cheering
To yelling
To screaming
To broken windows
To an elementary school shooting
How in the heck did that go from cheering to elementary school shooting in 5 steps?
Lmao when the teacher leaves
he should remove that from the video
TheNormalMinecrafter why it’s funny
@@thenormalminecrafter2720
*N O F U N A L L O W E D*
*gets 4 of the same color on one side*
You know, I'm something of a cuber myself.
So you use 8x8s
Gaby Gacha what?
@@gabygacha6609 one side of a 3 by 3 has 9 cubies
Well if you use a 2×2...
I'm just here for the satisfying clicks of an ordinary cube
I aint no expert in dimensions or nothin, but I aint too sure thats a cube. Maybe you should play Bookworm Adventures Deluxe to gain some intelijents.
GODAMMIT BEEF STEW
Well hello there
BeefStew, how are you literally fuckin' eveywhere?!
Exactly! I thought he was getting smarter from his cat, but it turns out it is the opposite!
Oh hey Ken
6:54 I love how cary just dosent care and just keeps talking calmly
and also 4:50 LMFAOOOO
4:50 The words moving places to become “Poo Lover” absolutely killed me
That is kindergarten humor
Meows of Luckiness *I KNOW RIGHT*
yes
Ok stop that
I named it loop over because- (okay stop that) -I named it loop over because...
Lol
CodeBullet should write an AI that uses Machine Learning to solve this!
...
Well he didnt use machine learning instead he used an algorythm which isnt what his channel does!
That's too easy though, you just tell the computer what values to look for and how to put them in the right spot, using Cary's technique.
LOL i just watched his channel
James Esh generally, it doesn’t make much sense to write a machine learning code to play something that clearly have a correct and algorithmic way to play.
12:17 OOOOOH Cary didn't solve it optimally!! He moved it 3 to the right instead of 2 to the left. He wasted 1 move!!! Cary is such a noob at this game. smh
Sometimes it’s more speed optimal to choose the linnet route. I mainly do 4x4 and when the piece I need is on the bottom row I would slide up 3 instead of sliding 1 down because it sets me up better
I came here to say exactly this
Well they were just pointing out that
cary was being a hypocrite
Zak how old are you?
Are you implying I made a bad statement?
Because let me say that Cary, previously in the video, said that its much more efficient to move right 2 spaces instead of left 3 spaces ( 6:08 ). But then at 12:17 like j_the_guy_is_taken mentioned, he wasted a move, when he previously said that you could be more efficient.
I'm 13.
4:40 i love how in the span of a few years ai music went from a kind of nerdy thing thats a fun curiosity to now being a morally ambiguous thing that made me make sure it was in the nerdy part of ita kife
I applaud your epic skills.
How does this not have over one thousand likes? It’s the legendary Cubeorithms.
hi cubveorithmjdshdjikfbdhsdjas
oh hi cuborithms i didnt you know you watch cary
The man himself
Darth Vader
hi
1:10 is perfect, so much information made so readable in such a concise way. Time is displayed overlaid so its readable, tells us where to buy the cube as the song does the "where'd ya find this?" gives us the song name as well. 10/10
The Song is called: "WVFFLE FVLLING OVER" by Shawn Wasabi
Your Welcome!
*You’re 😈
Yeah, with better look-ahead, Cary could drop sub-5 solves out of nowhere
@@preztheartist aww! Baby learnt his first ratio!
@@ThinkingCrimson what is gang on about
Cary: Isn't this just a slider puzzle?
Me: *looking at cary's attempt at solving 15 slider puzzle*
Cary: I'm done!
Me: *looks over to the loopover* WAIT WHAT
It's not even him solving it...
@@leoleo4469 What is your evidence behind this?
It literally says "How To Solve a 15 Slide Puzzle by Zealot740"
@@lukeaj6774 Fuck it does I'm retarded.
Oh I found another (random word) (random number)
What it is interesting is for the top row you can normally just drag in and then systematically put in place the others (like slide down A to F in the next row over then have A one above F and then slide F into the same column.
are we just going to ignore the 6:57 audio clip?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Fucking Weeb no
Yes
6:54 children laugh then start being shot at and for some reason glass is breaking. Thanks, cary.
Me: *chuckles*
Teacher: whats so funny?
Me: nothing
My brain: *Cary kidnaps human*
wrr
@@zes3813 yyyyyyyy
poo lover
Cary Kills Humanity
**doom music starts playing**
Cary: I’m so old
Also Cary: I am 24
3:25 He is not joking that is actually how you memorize Blind folded!
Man, this video takes me back. I saw this when it was new, and it got me into speed cubing. Also, I learned CFOP so get rekt Cary
r/madlads
Time flies
Me too
Same
"Takes me back"
It's a year old
Another reason ROUX is better:
ROUX’s steps go from 1, 3, 2, 4! It’s so much more edgy than CFOP!
1
3
2
4
No it's not
Yay fellow roux solver
I know cfop and roux
But I'm not very good at cfop
I personally use CFOP, but I am willing to give ROUX a try!
Me in 2nd grade
6:59. War , war never changes
Okay
I bet you're still in 6th grade
@@Leaked_Footage_79probably already in highschool
@@_redniel_ yeah
4:50 I don’t know if this is a good thing or not but that is unironically one of your best jokes
So we're all just gonna gloss over "Cary Kidnaps Humans" huh
Yees
Nah AFAP is better
Human. Just one.
Cary
Knows
Hell
In one of the first carykh videos I watched he said “hey guys, Cary Kill Hitler here!” and I was really concerned
3 thousand word essay on speedcubing methods, beware:
In the world of professional speed cubing, CFOP rains supreme. However, in a trinity of efficiency, ZZ and Petrus have the ability to alter the landscape of cubing permenantly. CFOP is used by Felix Zemdegs, one of the world's greatest. CFOP is so commonly used, because it is a learnt as a gradual increase from the "official" beginner's method, by gradually improving already known methods. This contrasts the other 2, which to most, appear to be unconventional and challenging. When a beginner quickly finishes a layer with CFOP, they can easily see the acheivement then and there. CFOP, or cross f2l, oll and pll, is by far the most researched method. This allows more efficient methods to be discovered. Furthermore, It translates easily to 4 x 4 and 5 x 5. This is likely due to the fact is does not require knowledge of the internal way the cube functions, no block building of Roux, or edge orientation with ZZ. Thus, although it is extremely algorithm dependent, it is easily manajed. First, a cuber solves the cross. This is almost the exact same as the beginner method, thus easy to learn. A common issue, amongst many cubers, is a focus on one colour, instead of pure efficiency. Furthermore, CFOP relies heavily on the inspection stage, with a cuber expected to think forward atleast 10 moves, during 15 seconds, an incredibly arduous task. After the cross, A cuber will insert edge-corner pairs into there areas in F2L. This is initially learnt intuatively, however, as one progresses, one must think of the necessary next akgorithm, whilst completing the initial one. After this one transfers to OLL, or orienting the top pieces. There are over 50 algorithms, with increasing learning often initially slowing, before enough practice has occured. Also, there are hundreds of further algorithms, if one wants to transition to a smoother pll, however, the recognition of which algorithm to use is of the upmost importance, as the incorrect one will end the solve. This overrealiance on algorithms found in CFOP contributes to the fact, in top cubers, most solve times are up to luck, although this is obviously an issue in other methods, simply a smaller one due to the flexibility. CFOP has a higher move count then the other strategies, which is why many believe that ZZ can change the game. ZZ uses an alien intuitive technique known as eolining. First, a cuber must orient every edge in the cube, whilst this is initially time consuming and move inefficient, it eventually gains extreme efficiency. At the same time, a cuber builds up a central line from the edge DB and DF. From here, the rest of the cube can essentially be completed with only U, L and R moves, rotationless. This is of course advantage for a multitude of reasons. Most cubers are quicker with these slices, as opposed to internal M moves, this also translates to OH extremely well. With F2L, a cuber must complete 10 different peices as opposed to 8, due to the LD and RD peices being incompleted. There is also significant switching between L and R moves, difficult for the beginner, although, often easy with enough practice. Finally, the users reaches the top layer. Given all edges are oriented, it gives many possibilies for efficiency, which CFOP somewhat lacks in easiness. These include COLL and EPLL which when combines (and with fewer cases if one wants total efficiency) makes ZZ A, essentially a 1LLL, wiith 493 cases, which is extremely doable. For this reason, I personally believe someone using ZZ with ZZa could transform the cubing landscape permenantly. However, ZZ does come with numerous disadvanteges. These include an extreme reliance for introspection, which is offputing for many cubers. The unintuitive EOLine which offputs the majority of beginners, albeit becoming natural and easy after a long time, and the L R switching, which is again unnatural.
Despite these flaws, I am completely on board with the possibilty of ZZ user with ZZa being able to beat Felix Zemdegs or anyone with CFOP, it is simply currently unpopular. Likely equally unpopular, Petrus. First, a cuber builds a 2x2x2 block in the cube. Then this is expanded to 2x2x3 block, this can be done with many different strats, but is somewhat intuitive. After this, a cuber orients the remaining edges, in a similar fashion to ZZ. After this F2L can be completed by only turning 2 sides, which is obviously extremely efficient and quick. In Pure Petrus, A cuber will create a 1x2x2 block which is expanded to 1x2x3 to finish F2L, when done with the efficient 2 side movement, the top 4 edges will orient automatically, this is due to the bulding of the 1x2x3 block necesitating full edge orientation, thus when it is completed, this necessity will be met. After this, unconventionally, the user will Permutating the Corners of the last layer, then orient them. Finally, the cuber will permutate the edges, which will require swift algorithms. It has the same advantage for the last layer as ZZ, given the orientation, to make 1LLL extremely viable. For the begginner, it is far more intuitive to block build, and requires less algorithms. The Petrus method also uses far fewer moves than CFOP, thus increasing efficiency. However, the high intuition levels comes with a huge disadvantage. Thinking is practically non concious at Proffesional Speedcubing for 3x3. Thus, unless it becomes more popular, and strategies are created, as like what happeneed in 2003, it will likely stay unused. Furthermore, in the Edge orientation stage, recognition of cases is a drawback to beginners, as is block building, thus will again stay unused. While not as favourable in my eyes as ZZ, I do see the benifits of Petrus, especially for a non algorithm heavy method for beginners, which in my oppion is where it should stay. COLL will become more common, and cubers will make it ubiquitious. COLL will be more advantagous in ZZ and Petrus, and that is the only chance for their rebirth. If they dont beat CFOP then, they never will.
Due to this, the most likely path is that elements of ZZ and Petrus will be incorporated into CFOP in certain cases, in which knowledge of those elements will be examples. For example, X cube, is born of Petrus, utilizing the block building, but during the cross element of freidrichs. Knowledge of this case, and far more importantly, the experience of how to quickly incorporate this edge pair in to a 2x2x2 block without affecting the cross, is the opening stage of Petrus. Furthermore, Petrus’ use of blocks is extremely prevelant in methods for larger cubes, like 4 x 4 and 5x5. One method of solving is to create blocks, akin to Petrus, and solve it almost identically. Whilst ZZ’s Edge orientation appears useless, in 4x4, the entire initial stage involves centre fixing, and then orienting the edges, akin to ZZ, knowledge of how to do this, and experience of it is helpful. ZZ also utilizes mainly U L and R moves, making it the ideal strategy for OH. Both methods have significantly lower move counts, and are often used for lowest move, in which CFOP is scarcely used.
Furthermore, ZBLL, originating from ZZ and Petrus, is being learnt by people across the board, and is likely going to lead to the next stage of world records, once it is universely learned.
Although CFOP reigns supreme, numerous smaller methods can be utilized, as mentioned above. Many methods involve orienting a permutating the top layer, whilst solving F2L. This includes the Winter and Summer variations.These were invented by Mats Valk, besides the winter, and are a subset of VLS. There are 432 algorithms to learn, including mirrors, which is a significant amount, however any method of improving world records is a superhuman method or luck. Given this, extreme methods are needed, and we are reaching a stage in which one must balance recognition and algorithms. Methods to improve recognition, such as some sort of quick flash card challenge which has hundreds of buttons and 0.1 seconds is necessary. This of course is almost impossible. However, is the speed gaming world, such methods are necessary, and given the prevalence of actions 1/30 of a second, it is possible, and to beat the battle of algs vs recognition, is the next step. CMLL, a method in Roux, is used by Feliks Zemdegs. CMLL has only 42 algorithms, and will always eb faster than COLL. However, in honesty, there are 2 strategies that will improve almost all cubers. Colour neutrality, and improving your look ahead. Most people start with a certain colour, and plan with that, as opposed to essentially colour blindness, looking for the most efficient solution. If one has colour neutrality, it will often reduce the moves by up to 3. This is more important than a simple 3 moves, due to the fact it will let you lookahead and plan 3 more moves during the F2L stage. Furthermore, If one practices blindfold cubing, the lookahead needed is immense, thus it would be useful for almost all, due to the fact ones planning happpens so quickly. Furthermore, 3x3 cubing is reaching a stage where in improvement is almost completely up to luck and chance. I would recommend that anyone looking to inovate a cubing feild dont start 2x2, the extremely luck based solution, or 3x3 which is so popular, it is practically impossible to control improvement. Rather I recommend improvent of other feilds, like OH, least moves, 4x4 and 5x5, which arent up to the miniscule improvement stage. However, in the feild of 3x3, there are so many conflicting strategies, its hard to remember the most basic and importants one. Practice transitioning from different moves. Practice look ahead, and finally practice algorithm recognition. And of coruse Zeroing. The most important algorithm. Remember to practice your zeroing daily. Zeroing is the most important moves. DO zerioing. Zeroing zeroing zeroing.
nice
Contents: A
Spelling: D
Same
You should make a video on this
My god dude you wrote a damn essay in the RUclips comment section
9:38 4th line is "yes no"
9:28 says
"YES
NUT"
Yes no maybe I don't know can you repeat the question
Loopover:Well yes but actually no
@@halfnwhole751 why u has double comment
I only noticed yes
Gonna resume it for you: when you use an even amount of layers loop over, each time you do any move it changes the "parity state" of the cube, given that it is normal parity when solved, and scramble moves count to change parity. Also when you do two move like right right it count individually each one to the parity state
4:49 top ten anime betrayals
poo lover 💀💀
poo lover 🤤🤤
🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨@@ManioqV
@@ManioqV why did you put that emoji
🤤🤤🤤🤤🤤🤤@Arty-natthachai-inchan
Me: *barely knows the alphabet and has to count letters constantly and quickly loses my place when counting if I don't focus enough*
Also me: "Ah yes, this game is perfect for me!"
"barley knows the alphabet", sir what?
@@ZaphireDespacio me to
unless English isn’t your main language, what the fuck
@@ZaphireDespacio does barley know the alphabet?
@@ZaphireDespacio too
c - cary
k - knows
h - hthat twow is being delayed longer and longer
Oh ok
Crockett noooo
Ccya
K khe
H hdoes
@Crockett no twow 24 came out
im rewatching this video after 4 years. When i first watched it i didnt know how to solve a rubiks cube. I was so surprised to see you using the roux method, then i remembered i learned it because of you and completely forgot that was the reason lmao
1:55 " join the rouxvolution" is the funnier thing i heard in my life ( im french, roux means readhead in french)
Join the redheadvolution
No ruox is *R O B U X*
@@liamFon im kinda glad you only commented once because you know literally nothing about rubiks cubes
CARY IS A REDHEAD!
.
@@thoseonetrains its a joke u dumb fuck
6:57 is this a sign?
EpicN what
The background sounds
Nonononononononononononnonononnonnon too far leave before the fbi get here...
Haroldioactive I’m pretty sure he’s talking about foreshadowing a school shooting, it ain’t good
Arctic_FoxyAnimating oh jeez,now I get the connection
6:54
Ya a say!!!
Screaming
Broken glass
Screaming intensifies
Shotgun shots in background
i am confused
@@jaguarr314 you play geometry dash if u do I will rage
@@Vibri_but_Paranoid yes
That video got me into speedcubing, thank you, Cary!
Can't even do 4072x4072 to utilize (almost) all 16 million colors.
4096x4096 for all 16 million colors
Furry > PhD in math
Cary: It's called loop over because the rows loop over!
Alternate Universe Erno Rubik: It's called turn over because the sides turn over!
here is an ő so you can write his name properly
alternate carykh: it's called huang's square because it's my square
Poo lover
yes
@@Mate_Antal_Zoltan óh okay
I understand the purpose of using letters, to distance this from that game ‘15’ however numbers would be far more intuitive. Perhaps add numbers as a settings option with letters as the default
I understand why, it's kinda frustrating not having Z lol
4:47 bro the way he executed that joke is amazing
Hmm... Rubik's cube videos, coincidentally as code bullet makes Rubik's cube videos... HMMMM?
Unrelated, but it's Rubik's, not Rubix.
@@alexbazzelle377 ah yeah... Sorry 😅
@@alexbazzelle377 Ruubickx's
Double hmmmm
*HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM*
9:29 *Y E S, N U T*
Lisa McIntosh is u
Lisa McIntosh Y E S, NUT
@Lisa McIntosh You’re welcome :)
_Ŷ Ę ẞ,Ń Ů Þ_
Y E S, N U T
I tried the puzzle out before watching the whole video. It was a really fun puzzle, but not nearly as difficult as a Rubik’s Cube. I figured it out in under 15 minutes with no hints or pre-known strategies or anything.
Well, that is to be expected if you take away a dimension. If you add a fourth dimension (like colours changing over time, for example), it will get much more difficult.
I tried 20x20..
2 hours wasted. Why did i do that?
Yeah it's pretty easy to just figure out the puzzle.
That's what makes it fun for me hahaha.
Bro i never knew your name was "CARY KIDNAPS HUMANS" Its so beautiful
Technically, loopover is a Rubik’s torus (doughnut shape).
This video explains it pretty well: ruclips.net/video/-gLNlC_hQ3M/видео.html
If you're being technical technical you'd probably call it a projection of a torus wouldn't you?
Ryder Christie because it be on 2d surface. Do you know what grammar is?
Yay math!
Oh I watched that video
6:54 that went from 0 to 100 very quickly
Cary:Ok stop that sound effect
I need more of that so I d effect in my life lol
Clickbait title, this is clearly a 2D Rubik's Torus.
Rhyme Bito Fascinating. I want to play this game on a torus now.
You kids and your topology.
@@Holobrine itd be hard to make a physical one because the pieces seem like they'd have to shrink and grow, but it might be possible with clever engineering
*3D
@@Lime-ne3fd I think that joke fell flat.
Honestly the most impressive thing is that not only is Cary a speedcuber, and is also a Roux cuber
Would be cool if you added a feature where you could have a pixel art for the solved state!
"I'm looking for 69 and it's really hard" - this just made my day :D
When i heard it i imidieatly checked is there a comment and there actually is...
Also 9:29 : ＯＹＥＳ Cary, ＮＵＴ inside of my keyhole 😩
@@pswitch9553 lmao
69 likes 😂😂
@@pswitch9553 O YES I NUT
0:06 “Cary, please let go of pence-pence” -Matchstick
0:05
Only match says the pencil nickname!
I tried it before watching you try and had a totally different approach. I use CFOP (boring I know and I'm still slower than you, 14ish average) and had a layer by layer approach and used a simple commutator for the last step. I find it interesting how you, a Roux solver took a block building approach and I, a CFOP user, took a layered approach. Makes sense but super cool! Great video and game!
4:50 Me laughing a lot at this goes to show how mature I am
Yeah lmao
*”okay stop that”*
Loop
Over
*Poo*
*Lover*
Cary >:v
Loop
Over
I laughed at the "OKAY STOP THAT-"
I thought it was gonna say
Pool
Over XD
Cary kicks hills
(Carykh)
Cary hides horses
Cary krokodil hunter
Cary don't asK about bfb pleaHse
Cary kid hunter
Cary know hell
18:43
“I’m looking for 69 and it’s really hard.”
*nice*
nice
nice
nice
Nice
nice'nt
I managed to get a pretty nice 1:37 attempt on playing loopover for the first time, on a full scramble. I have never solved any kind of rubik's cube before, and i messed up the alphabet several times, but I'm happy with the result. thanks for the challenge mate
Im dedicated enough to spend 1 hour on a 20x20 loopover puzzle. 8000 moves, and the end result was worth it
Hi there neo guy
I did 21x21 in 3h
@@silverrta4908 hey silver 😄
cooool
i did it too but in 1 hour 28 minutes
6:21 i started paying so much attention to the number puzzle that i didn't even notice he solving it, and when he finished, i was like: *wut dafuk happened*
Yeah me too
NO SWEARING YOU LITTLE SH-
Me too lol
Also in the 3x3 mode i got a lucky solve and got 13.38 seconds
I also got a 1.016 second time in 2x3 in this game
6:54 sound effect please?
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA sound effect no copyright
IMOVIE
I watched this video like half a year ago and I didn’t know bfdi existed, now it’s my favorite show and WE ARE GOING TO THE SAME COMPETITION TEMECULA VALLEY FALL OMG
I did ~1 minute and 26 seconds in Loop Over. My strategy is do it row by row.
I got 1:04 with rows
28.99 Row By Row
I got it in 3 seconds, my strategy is to press the 2 by 2 button.
My best is 34 seconds
POO LOVER
14:40 congrats on helping the armless contestants, Cary!
3:10 the things in cary's brain are um, interesting
It contains fanart... even cursed ones...
jeff shuns killing
Poor Cary has to suffer from us
The pencils lmaoo
Huh
1:11 amazing editing
I wanna hear about parity
which one
@@c9x493 >:(
@@c9x493 the one where the pieces are swapped. We need to know how to fix it!
Me too. I think it comes from the fact that there are even squares on a side. Like how there's parity in a 4x4x4 cube but not in a 3x3x3 or 5x5x5.
@@e11eohe11e actually there is a parity on 5x5
You know something is reaally wrong when someone says...
*_Is that a 10 by 10_*
my soul hurts
@Ashington06 WHYYYY
If they look at a 3x3 and ask if it's a 9x9 they should get tf out of your life
IS THAT 10000 BY 10000
*W0w i5 t4TH a Suupprr Rubix Kube*
Cary: USE ROUX
Also Cary: For those who are curious, I got an OLL skip and a good j perm for my PB
fr lmao
Man is a BFDI character💀
Who’s gonna tell him..
If he knew…
Hold my hand while I tell you this..
@@ARMIE_SABZfr
9:30 *"NUT"*
*NUT*
YES
8:32 DINO
"YES
NUT"
*YES*
2D rubiks CUBE
2D Cube
2D..
Cube..
how in the freaking frick can u have a 2d cube
rubix square
@@dr.blockcraft6633
"A cube is a solid object with 6 square surfaces which are all the same size"
:)))))
Well just like how people define cubes to be 3d squares and hypercubes to be 4d cubes you can do the reverse. It also makes it more understandable as people might not immediately get the correlation between a rubiks square and rubiks cube. Yes some people are that dumb.
Yooo
Square
Am I the only one who thinks that cute human needs to be saved?
2:07
“If you can learn how to type, you can learn how to cube.”
That can’t be right.
*years later*
thanks for helping me learn how to cube :)
Cary Kidnaps Human, _did you mean: Cary Kidnaps Humany_
Cary Kidnapsy Humany?
Computery kidnaped Cary at some point, right? Has Cary been assimilated? :o :o
No
Cary Kills Humanely
Cary kills H U M A N I T Y
"Most of my audience is middle and high school"
literally graduated college
@•sunshine • me too
you know what "most" means?
DamageMaximo its a JOOOOOOOOOOOOOKE
@@DamageMaximo it's a JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKE
Im in highschool but I live in the UK sooo...middle school?
omg i laughed so hard when he turned loop over to poo lover
6:54 cary kidnapped those humans, and used his pew pew because they wouldn't stop cheering
Here's a brief and incomplete explanation of what he means by "parity", particularly in reference to the puzzle he made, if anyone is interested. Parity in a broad sense means whether a number is even or odd, but it has a more specific usage in combinatorics and in cubing, namely permutation parity.
So basically, the puzzle contains a set of unique items, and you can do operations that rearrange the items. The basic move in this is to just move a row or a column over by one space, and every other operation is just a combination of moving a row or column. Now imagine that you had the same puzzle but with just a single row of five tiles. You can imagine moving the row to the right by one as each tile swapping with the one immediately to the left. So if the puzzle starts as:
ABCDE
and becomes:
EADBC
Then it is the same result as if you swapped the first tile (A) with the last tile, and then the second-to-last, then the third-to-last, etc. Since there are 5 elements, you make 4 separate exchanges of two pieces. The parity of 4 is even. This is important because if you keep adding an even number to an even number, you will always end up with an even number. Remember when I said each operation is just a combination of moving a row or column? Well here that's important because since the basic move has an even permutation parity, then every possible combination of moves will leave the puzzle in a state with even permutation parity.
Now let's imagine a slightly different puzzle where you still have a row of five elements, but the operations you can do are different. In one move, you are only allowed to make exactly two swaps of pieces. If you start the puzzle in the state
ABCDE
then no matter how many moves you do and no matter how much you scramble it up, because you always have an even permutation parity, you will always be able to return to that state.
If you instead started the puzzle in the state
BACDE
Where the first two tiles are swapped, then if you stick to the rule of even permutation parity, you will never be able to put it in alphabetical order.
The reason that even order's of Loopover (4x4, 6x6, 7x7, etc.) have problems with parity is that the basic move gives it an odd permutation parity. If you go from
ABCD
to
DABC
then you've made an odd number of tile swaps. When you add an odd number over and over again, rather than being even every time, it keeps flipping between even and odd every time you add one. The reason that they are difficult to deal with in this puzzle is that the keyhole method discussed in the video only works with even permutation parity, so you have to hope that the scramble was done in such a way that once you get to the keyholing phase, you are left with even permutation parity. However, if you start keyholing and find a problem with the parity, then just keyhole everything over to either side by one position, and it should work out fine.
If you want a more detailed explanation from an actual mathematician rather than some rando who likes puzzles, then watch this video: ruclips.net/video/w0mxdo5ur_A/видео.html
Can you give me a more detailed explanation to "keyhole everything over to either side," please?
@@littlebubby1 you move everything over by one position. So if you have
ABCDFE
Then E and F need to swap, but because of parity, that isn't possible with the keyhole method so what you do instead is you can use the keyhole to move A one position to the right (or left if you like) and then continue to use the keyhole method to solve the rest of the row.
I paused exacly when it writhes "POO LOVER" 😂 😂
4:50 POO LOVER
When I saw this I blew up in laughter 💩 ❤️
(Edit 1) OMG 😱 this is the most likes I ever got on a comment! 🤯
lol
hows the song called playing at that timw
oh wait is on description sorry
CONGRATUGLAUTIONS YOU ARE 5 YEARS OLD
poo eyes
4:20 lol I understood that joke I love it
4:49 I named it loop over **letters re-arrange** Okay stop that, I named it loop over- LOL!
9:36 you spelled "YES"
And then for a second he spelled no next to it xd.
@ O YES 9:29
"Yes" yes, but "No" no.
Cary: So this is loop over..
Loop over: *im gonna end this whole mans career.*
Also loop over: 4:50
I like how when he cubes blindfolded he's thinking about bfdi memes then as soon as the timer starts he's like "alright we need to focus on Cube, only Cube, and nothing but Cube"
4:49 I laughed way too hard.
My dogs in a nutshell
4:55 This reminds me of the game "Chuzzle"!
Oh ye remembered that too
Same! I said that too!!
Reminds me of "Puzzle Poker" on Steam. It has the same grid with the same movement, but instead of arranging the tiles (cards in this case) in a fixed order, you need to make ten poker hands (five horizontally and five vertically) with values as high as possible, of course.
ｆ ｌ ｏ ｗ ｅ ｙ
All these games mentioned here I looked for in the iOS App Store and can't see any that have the same mechanism as this.
I feel bad for z it was left out it's all alone. I
Using your explanation, i was able to solve it in 4:01.244 for my first time.
9:43 have anyone else noticed “YES”?
Yes I nut**
and no
I saw it
Y E S
I love how the kidnapped human just stays in place the entire video.
the entire video?
@@notzaky4 Yes, because in the backround, and if even he wasn't showing, then he's still there the entire video.
It seems to be broken on mobile. Either I can't see the bottom half, or all the controls are missing. Is there a way to fix this?
On most mobile brothers you can demand the desktop version in the menu so it shows the whole square to you. To find the scramble button the, is for another story though.
@@vinlebo88 Yeah that's what I meant. Oh well, at least it works on PC
This is the first carykh video I ever found out about! It’s because I was super interested in Rubik’s cubes at the time.
“He’s a kid so he has more free time”
Covid-19: I’m about to do what’s called a pro gamer move
9:28 “yes nut”
*cary is looking for 69*
Lmao
Lmao
Lmao
Lmao
Lmao
Hey at least you dont peel off the stickers!
i did
Potato Stickers aren’t a thing on good quality cube
@@kingnoob4505 good quality cubes (the most expensive being almost $80) come in stickerless and stickered
That's some pretty cool rubiks square
I like speed cubing. I first solved it at 37, I'm not nearly as fast as you. I use a corners first method that was first devised by Erno Rubik in 1974. It's relatively fast but hasn't been heavily represented in competition since CFOP hit the scene. I think the reason why is because you get hung up on the last two of the eight corners. Basically there's three patterns you'll see when you're at this point and I feel like I'm very close to finding the appropriate algorithms for each which will cut the total time to solve to under a minute.
Cary kills haters
New cube that allows you to play online...
GoCube.
- KirbyTheGamer - you mean giiker cube
@@mcathewildhippo6512 You mean GAN 356 i
0:19
The Primary school ppl like myself:
allow us to introduce ourselves
0:51 omg.... hes... uhh... beautiful!
You should make a hexagonal one with triangular pieces. Then you can make the slice through the RGB cube be the plain where R+B+G=0, which I'm pretty sure is a hexagon.
normal people : roux is a normal word
true gamers : F L A M I N G O
The roblox flamingo?
BIG NOOB
Oops I forgot my chill face
Sorry
Flamingo is one of the worst youtubers ever
Random youtube comment on a video about Rubix cubes
best part is the human trying to escape on the side of the screen