The Fool wrote: > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/08/DD251010.DTL > > And I thought I was a nut over this kind of thing, but this guy is kinda > creepy. Besides he solves it backwards. The corners should be solved > first then the centers.
Haven't read the full article (just skimmed the beginning), but I'm with you on the cube-solving technique.
My father bought a 2 X 2 X 2 cube so we could all work on our corner-solving strategies. He was fairly strict about cube-solving -- we were NOT allowed to buy books on solving the cube (not even with our own money), but we were allowed to share techniques. He wanted us to figure things out, not memorize a cookbook approach. I ended up with the 2 X 2 X 2 cube, it's in this room. (Solved, of course -- I try not to pack puzzles unsolved, and I haven't touched it since the move, except to place it where it is now.)
Julia
A 2x2x2 cube? What in tarnation is that? (I forwarded the links to work, but I did read the Fool's story).
I got my cube for Christmas 1978 and solved it January 3rd. No idea what I did, but I was able to get it down to an hour by myself. Then I got a book. I got down to minutes but didn't even try for anything better, I couldn't see that far ahead. In fact the book was so old that it talked about a top down approach, do one side (the top), then the top rows around the top, then the next ring, then the bottom (corners or middles, I don't know which).
So I'm assuming there is some starting position that is the worst, takes the most moves to get it straight?
Kevin T. - VRWC I'll stick to horseshoes. Of course, I now officially suck at them also.
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
