for the last step (the 4th one where you permute both layers) you could just permute the corners (8 cases), and then solve the edges with M2 U2 M2, S' M' U M U2 S, M2 U* M2 U*' M U2 M2 U2 M, and edge only pll algs (and with some U and D moves to adjust the layers)
this method would be very difficult to make viable at a high level because doing EO and the face-1 takes probably ~20 moves which is like move count for 2 or 3 pairs in cfop then the belt seems awkward because you have to do a lot of D moves and the IPFL algs don't have very good finger tricks
Ermmm actually 🤓 I am going to reply to this year old comment cuz I am bored. Anyways, eoface-1c only takes 9 moves on average not 20. And I have regennes IPFL to be RUD gen with good ergo. And tricks like R2 E’ R2 E and R2 E2 R2 commutators can reduce belt movecount
why would you solve belt after almost finishing the 1st side, if you can use dseudosloting. something like eo+incorrect cross and then pseudosloting would work great. the other option would be to do eo line with any edges, and then blockbuild the rest. theoretically you can also give up on eo, and just make an incorrect cross, and then solve pseudopairs while orienting edges, and then you can insert the last edge and last corner at the same time while doing WV. that would be a totally different method but based on similar idea
I find that as a CFOP solver, using F2L to do the first face and the belt at the same time speeds up the solve. I was able to get a sub-30 by doing so (I average 17 seconds with CFOP)
I haven’t tested this out myself, but I wonder if it’s only faster because of F2L familiarity. The freedom of face building might make the “normal” way faster. Plus you can just move the open corner around to insert edges since bottom layer orientation is irrelevant.
I remember finding this on the speedcubing wiki and trying to solve with it, its very slow even with cls and ipfl, It's better to just solve 3 pseudo f2l pairs after eo, insert last corner using cls. So the time go like so Eo 2s White face 7s (hard to plan due to inspection used for eo) Inserting belt edges 4s (Takes lots of u and d moves) Cls 3s Pll 1 2s Rotation .5 Pll 2 2s Total 22.5s for very fast execution Ipfl not worth it its not very fast
I'm sorry if there are any typing issues; I quickly typed this on my phone. 1. EO doesn't take 2 seconds. Also, you should not consider EO and the white face as 2 different steps. With some exercise, you can plan almost them in the inspection. 2. I agree that inserting the belt edges takes some time because of the U and D moves, but this is one thing that can be fixed by doing the first two steps (EoFace-1C and the Belt) in some kind of ZZ style. EoPseudoCross + PseudoF2L is already an improvement/suggestion that I added to the Iacob Method webpage. 3. You can predict the CLS algorithm before inserting the last belt edge so that it wouldn't take that much time to recognize the case. 4. I know that IPFL it's not very fast, but doing a z2 rotation and then doing PLL is 100% slower.
I forgot to mention that before doing PLL you can also see the IPFL case, having almost no pauses between permuting the last layer and permuting the first layer.
@@im_razvan saying that IPFL is 100% faster than a z2+PLL is only true as long as there are fast a low regrip algs for IPFL, which is not true at the moment. I'd rather do a big rotation at the start and then a 0 regrip alg than pretending that not doing a z2 but doing a trash alg with 3-4 regrips is any better
1. Have you ever tried the belt method? Try it and see how much of a "better" method it is. 2. I main the Roux method and yes, I can say that it is better. The Iacob Method is good only if you know PBL.
I don't think this method is worth learning it because it's too inefficient and has too many algs for a beginner 1) You solve the (almost entire) first face but incorrectly so you have to re solve it later with unintuitive algs and more move count. I think it's better to use the freedom you have at the beginning of the solve to correctly solve the first layer 2) You solve one piece at a time, which can be good for beginners but when you want to get faster you'll have to learn an entire new method like roux or cfop cause learning all the algs to solve both the first and last layer seems pretty hard. So instead I think it's better to directly learn cfop or roux when you're beginner, cause it offers less algs, less move count and is more intuitive.
On the Iacob Method website it's says that it is recommended to kinda make PseudoF2L pairs instead of doing that. Also making just a pseudo layer can help with lookahead
![F2L - All 42 Cases [Intuitive Explanation]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BtDLfh0XZkE/mqdefault.jpg)
Make sure to view the official page for more information
@Itstwisted101 Yeah, the algorithms are not optimized
This actually seems like a decently fast method, which is surprising, because most of these methods aren't very good
@@Nace112 it seems ok compared to other ones, it just has lots of algs
@@Nace112 tf bro
@@Nace112 I mean if you use that method and like it, ok. Enjoy your 1-minute average lol
Still, not as good as CFOP
I usually use cfop but sometimes I do the Roux method
for the last step (the 4th one where you permute both layers) you could just permute the corners (8 cases), and then solve the edges with M2 U2 M2, S' M' U M U2 S, M2 U* M2 U*' M U2 M2 U2 M, and edge only pll algs (and with some U and D moves to adjust the layers)
thanks
That's what we call a 2 look Pll
this method would be very difficult to make viable at a high level because doing EO and the face-1 takes probably ~20 moves which is like move count for 2 or 3 pairs in cfop then the belt seems awkward because you have to do a lot of D moves and the IPFL algs don't have very good finger tricks
Ermmm actually 🤓 I am going to reply to this year old comment cuz I am bored. Anyways, eoface-1c only takes 9 moves on average not 20. And I have regennes IPFL to be RUD gen with good ergo. And tricks like R2 E’ R2 E and R2 E2 R2 commutators can reduce belt movecount
This method seems pretty nice
why would you solve belt after almost finishing the 1st side, if you can use dseudosloting.
something like eo+incorrect cross and then pseudosloting would work great.
the other option would be to do eo line with any edges, and then blockbuild the rest.
theoretically you can also give up on eo, and just make an incorrect cross, and then solve pseudopairs while orienting edges, and then you can insert the last edge and last corner at the same time while doing WV.
that would be a totally different method but based on similar idea
I find that as a CFOP solver, using F2L to do the first face and the belt at the same time speeds up the solve. I was able to get a sub-30 by doing so (I average 17 seconds with CFOP)
I haven’t tested this out myself, but I wonder if it’s only faster because of F2L familiarity. The freedom of face building might make the “normal” way faster. Plus you can just move the open corner around to insert edges since bottom layer orientation is irrelevant.
But you would likely want to do standard F2L for the last edge to get the corner in with it.
@@AlexBrogan96 haha I have no clue what you're talking about because I quit cubing a long time ago for chess 😅 I forgot some of the stuff I learned
@@prawnydagratecubing for chess, haha relatable, i only practice square-1 now
@@2_art i've completely stopped. i just occasionally solve a 3x3 for people at school. i used to average 15 seconds but now it's like 20+
This just looks like the belt method with extra steps
But takes less timw
As a belt method enthusiast, I notice the method I use is very similar to this one
This is basically like square-1
wait you are actually right lol
@@im_razvan haha
So its essentially belt method but better. Nice
At face value, it seems pretty bad for look ahead… still, new methods are always welcomed🎉
Sir idont understand theese words DFR. CLS. IpFL. Please clary fy me.iam new student.pplease reply me
This method seems very inefficient because of the double pll so I don't think it's very viable
Fun method
So just the belt method but a bit better?
Is it the same razvan that made the css only clock.
no
@@im_razvan i just noticed your name is razvan. Are you possibly the inventor of this method.
What’s IPFL
iacob is basically outdated everywhere EXCEPT where it was revived in squan
Feels a lot like the "belt method", maybe I'm way off base on that but that is just my opinion.
keep it up man, I'll see you at a speedcubing copetition in the future
sKWITLE
hello skittle.
can't belive your so good at cubing, you made all of this yourself, #iacobBetterThenRoux
Atleast Roux is faster and more popular than this "IaCoB" method.
for cls, just do sledge thrice to insert the corner😂
i just learnt 3 method in one night roux apb and this
I remember finding this on the speedcubing wiki and trying to solve with it, its very slow even with cls and ipfl, It's better to just solve 3 pseudo f2l pairs after eo, insert last corner using cls.
So the time go like so
Eo 2s
White face 7s (hard to plan due to inspection used for eo)
Inserting belt edges 4s (Takes lots of u and d moves)
Cls 3s
Pll 1 2s
Rotation .5
Pll 2 2s
Total 22.5s for very fast execution
Ipfl not worth it its not very fast
I'm sorry if there are any typing issues; I quickly typed this on my phone.
1. EO doesn't take 2 seconds. Also, you should not consider EO and the white face as 2 different steps. With some exercise, you can plan almost them in the inspection.
2. I agree that inserting the belt edges takes some time because of the U and D moves, but this is one thing that can be fixed by doing the first two steps (EoFace-1C and the Belt) in some kind of ZZ style. EoPseudoCross + PseudoF2L is already an improvement/suggestion that I added to the Iacob Method webpage.
3. You can predict the CLS algorithm before inserting the last belt edge so that it wouldn't take that much time to recognize the case.
4. I know that IPFL it's not very fast, but doing a z2 rotation and then doing PLL is 100% slower.
I forgot to mention that before doing PLL you can also see the IPFL case, having almost no pauses between permuting the last layer and permuting the first layer.
@@im_razvan saying that IPFL is 100% faster than a z2+PLL is only true as long as there are fast a low regrip algs for IPFL, which is not true at the moment. I'd rather do a big rotation at the start and then a 0 regrip alg than pretending that not doing a z2 but doing a trash alg with 3-4 regrips is any better
#ThisMethodIsJustALongerVersionOfBelt
#RouxIsBetterThanIacob
1. Have you ever tried the belt method? Try it and see how much of a "better" method it is.
2. I main the Roux method and yes, I can say that it is better. The Iacob Method is good only if you know PBL.
@@im_razvan Ortega PBL?
@@RandomZZUser Something like that, but for 3x3 (PLL and IPFL at the same time)
@@im_razvan What is IPFL??
That is 3BL@@im_razvan
This is a worse ZZ pretty much, I don't see it as a contender guys, I'm sorry.
I don't think this method is worth learning it because it's too inefficient and has too many algs for a beginner
1) You solve the (almost entire) first face but incorrectly so you have to re solve it later with unintuitive algs and more move count. I think it's better to use the freedom you have at the beginning of the solve to correctly solve the first layer
2) You solve one piece at a time, which can be good for beginners but when you want to get faster you'll have to learn an entire new method like roux or cfop cause learning all the algs to solve both the first and last layer seems pretty hard. So instead I think it's better to directly learn cfop or roux when you're beginner, cause it offers less algs, less move count and is more intuitive.
On the Iacob Method website it's says that it is recommended to kinda make PseudoF2L pairs instead of doing that. Also making just a pseudo layer can help with lookahead
i understood nothing good video tho
thank you. it's a pretty funny method but not really good for speedcubing
I’d rather learn CFOP then this
OMG!!! I WILL TRY THIS SOON! THANK YOU GEYBOX FOR MAKING RUBIX CUB LOT OF EEAZY! TY DATY!
lol
for cls, just do sledge thrice to insert the corner😂
for cls, just do sledge thrice to insert the corner😂