• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

next step for F2L

David Pritts

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
71
Location
Ohio, USA
Hey guys,

I started using intuitive fridrich F2L about 2.5 months ago, and I am now finally at the point where I can look at most of the 41 cases and know an optimized way to solve it.

The only ones for which I can not quickly see an optimized (or close) solution are the ones where the corner and edege are incorrectly placed, but in the correct slot... for these cases, I just remove them from that slot and solve them normally, wasting a few moves.

My best F2L times are ~25 seconds, but average is closer to 40 seconds, and sometimes even slower than that. My overall average is now under a minute (yesterday i was averaging around 56-57 seconds)..

Although I know I will get better with more practice, I want to keep learning new things. I know how advanced and complicated this F2L solving can get, and I was wondering what tricks I should start learning next. What is the best way to handle cases (for example) where both of my pieces aren't in the LL ? When I have a corner in the LL, and an edge which isn't, I usually rotate the LL and then bring the edge up so that I can get one of the R U R' moves, or F' U' F. I bet this isn't the best way to handle these.

General tips for anything are welcome as well!

Thanks,
David
 

Harris Chan

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
783
WCA
2007CHAN07
YouTube
Visit Channel
About that part on moving the edge so that you get R U R' moves etc., that's actually the way that I do it. Katsu's page on F2L has the algos for all the cases that are like that...well you could just treat the incorrect slot as a correct slot, and then do a pair up part of the algo, and then do AUF to insert. This is the same way Macky describes it on his page (sort of).

Rubik's Galaxia used to have the advance algos for these cases, I don't think they're there anymore...

See...the algos on the traditional F2L is useful and easy to spot once 3 of the slots are solved, so it's sometimes easier to solve the first pair because it doesn't matter if you mess up the other slots. Macky has some empty slot algos.

Finally, you just need to be able to track down the next pair. Many people started off by looking at the cube (and see the pair to solve), then close their eyes...and solve the pair...and they do that again and again. The main idea is to be able to solve the pair without needing to pay attention (at least visually) to that pair, so that while you're doing the 1st pair you can look for the 2nd pair, etc. Sometimes if there's one edge solved already, I'll just look for the missing corner (which takes 1 sec or so) and then..BOOM! I did it right away. So pairs with solved piece might be good...

anyway I got to sleep. Hope that helps. :)


Harris
 

dougreed

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
287
Location
Austin, TX
I do an intuitive F2L (and am decently good at it :)) so I can offer some advice. If I run into a pair where both pieces are incorrectly placed in the correct spots, I normally try to solve a different C/E pair and simultaneously kick out the incorrectly placed pair.

If it is your last pair, then you should try experimenting with set-ups like R U' R' and F' U F with the pair in the FR position.

-Doug
 

Joël

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
633
Location
3rd rock from the sun
WCA
2004NOOR01
Hey David,

Don't worry about wasting a few moves for that F2L case. I know an alg for it, but don't use it... I basically do it the same way you do it, usually by a quick RUR'U'.

- Jo?l.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
22
Originally posted by Harris Chan@Apr 6 2006, 03:07 AM
Sometimes if there's one edge solved already, I'll just look for the missing corner (which takes 1 sec or so) and then..BOOM!
this brings up a subject that i haven't thought about. do you guys look for corners first and then their corresponding edges? or the reverse?

i realize now that i ALWAYS see the corner and then search for the corresponding edge. i don't know if it makes a difference at all...its just what i do, and i'm curious of what you guys do.

-rst
 

pjk

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
6,686
WCA
2007KELL02
SS Competition Results
David: Do you have any of the PLL or OLL algs. down? I have been working on Fridrich F2L for 3 weeks or so (Solved my first cube in mid February), and I have the majority of them down, I average around 27 seconds for F2L. My weakness right now is on the PLL, since I sometimes have to perform an alg. 3 times to finish the last layer, which kills my times by 5-10 seconds. i only have a few OLL algs down, but when I have to do an alg 3x for OLL, I can usually do that pretty fast, compared to my PLL. But I can average around 47 seconds consistantly for a few solves. I did an average of 12 solves yesterday and I was under 45 seconds. I guess it really depends on how "warmed-up" I am, because when I am on a role I can recognize pairs faster.

Raoul St. Texas: I am not the best to answer this question, but I really just pair up whichever piece I see first, whether it is a corner or edge. Doug/Joel/Frank/Chris or anyone else, how do you guy find you first pair? Do you just use the first one you see? Thanks.

Patrick
 

David Pritts

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
71
Location
Ohio, USA
Hey Patrick,

I know all of the PLL algorithms and use a full 3LLL. However, I am no good at these algs yet, even though I have them memorized... whenever I get one of the 6-cycle cases, I go slooow.

AND BTW, I am not even kidding. It seems that the entire time I was learning PLL (and now, with the hard algs), I ALWAYS get the cases that I don't know!!! When I knew 17 of the 21 algs, except for the 6-cycle ones, I seemed to get one of those cases like half the time! I swear I'm not making this up. Lol.


I don't know OLL. I have an alg for all 3 possible edge orientations and like 9 I think for all the possible corner orientations... I dont plan on learning OLL.


Pat you must be a faster learner than me, beacuse I definetely couldn't average 27 seconds for F2L after only 3 weeks.. although I wasn't doing a good job of learning it, and I never really sat down for a long period of time to tr to practice just that, but whatever.

anyway, as I get better at F2L, and get faster with my PLL algs, I shall start getting much faster B)

David
 

David Pritts

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
71
Location
Ohio, USA
Pat, you should learn a 4LLL.

Maybe you are already learning the right algorithms, but it sounds like your current system is really ineffective (you mentioned having to repeat algs 3 times?).

Craig selected specific versions of each case which he thinks are best, especially for beginners like us. These are good algs:

----------------------

Orient Edges(the cross):
http://www.cubewhiz.com/oll.html
Cases 1 and 2
http://www.geocities.com/rubiks_galaxia/OLL5.html
the first case on there...

Orient Corners:
http://www.cubewhiz.com/oll.html
Only use 4, 6, 7 and 9 from this page...
http://www.cosine-systems.com/cubestation/...ntablepage.html
Case 52, 50(the one that is (R U R' U R U' R' U R)(U2 R'))
http://www.speedcubing.com/chris/3-orientations.html
Case 36B) B)

Permute Corners:
http://www.cosine-systems.com/cubestation/...tationslist.php
Cases 3 and 4
http://www.cubewhiz.com/pll.html
Case 3


Permute Edges:
http://cubefreak.hp.infoseek.co.jp/PLL.html
Case 1 and 2 and 6
(Dan's Cubestation)
http://www.cosine-systems.com/cubestation/...tationslist.php
Case 5 the first algorithm that begins with the x...

Hope you like...

Craig

--------------

anyway, I apologize if i'm saying something you already know, or if i'm not being helpful... I just figured i'd share that list with you b/c it's a powerful and relatively easy way to solve the LL.

David
 
Top