Too old to be fast?

[Rudinie]

Allthough i don't FEEL old i AM an old fart compared to most here i think (35 years of age) and it is a known fact that speed decreases with age.
I've been cubing for a little less then a year now i think, and my current pb non lucky is 23.68 but i still can't get my average under 30. (avg is between 30.5 and 34 now) I use friedrich's method, full PLL, 2look OLL and use intuitive F2L.
My cross+F2L is in general between 18 and 24 seconds and i have a couple of questions about my F2L approach because i think that's the area where i can improve most. (correct me if i'm wrong)

When searching for F2L pairs, what's the mental process you go through? What i'm doing so far is this: while i'm turning and i try to go as slow as needed to be able to look ahead i scan for f2l-pairs, when i recognize either an edge or a corner i start searching for the corresponding part.
Would it be faster to always first search an edge and then find the corresponding corner (because the white makes them stand out more)

Metronome practice. When i'm solving to the speed of a metronome i very often feel like i could go much faster but setting the metronome speed higher doesn't work because there is allways one moment where i DO need the time. So while practicing i keep with the beat. But while solving to a clock, i'm quite sure i'm rushing to the next pair only slowing down in time to not screw my lookahead. Would it end up being faster to keep going slow, even though you allready see the next pair, or even the next 2 pairs?

Algorithms
I know this has been discussed in depth over and over again and there is no real consensus about it but i am wondering if learning some algorithms for the harder f2l cases would help. I currently do everything intuitivelly and the argument about less moves when using an algorithm does seem valid.
Which F2L algorithms did you learn?

Well, a lot off questions, i hope to hear from some oldies saying "I'm 50 years old and have a sub 20 average" :-)

[cmhardw]

When searching for F2L pairs, what's the mental process you go through? What i'm doing so far is this: while i'm turning and i try to go as slow as needed to be able to look ahead i scan for f2l-pairs, when i recognize either an edge or a corner i start searching for the corresponding part.
Would it be faster to always first search an edge and then find the corresponding corner (because the white makes them stand out more)

I use what's called "Corner Bias", meaning I search for the corner first usually, and then try to find the corresponding edge. Here is a link to an analysis of this.

Chris

[Mike Hughey]

Well, a lot off questions, i hope to hear from some oldies saying "I'm 50 years old and have a sub 20 average" :-)

Ton is almost 50 years old and has a substantially sub-20 average.

I'm getting closer (I'm around 25 seconds), but I still have a way to go. My obsession with blindsolving has a little to do with that, though.

It sounds like you're making great progress, you young whippersnapper.

[joey]

Mike Hughey.. he is OLD. 3 kids. Crazy.

[mdmrubik07]

Well, I am 41, and I thought I would never reach sub-30, I now average 23's and am almost finished learning full OLL, I hope to be sub 20 by next summer. For me it is practice, practice, practice. And like Chris, I build F2L using corner recognition. One day you will look back, like I do. I didn't think I would breack 20 seconds...EVER! Now I break 20 at least 5 times a day...Good luck

[Rudinie]

I use what's called "Corner Bias", meaning I search for the corner first usually, and then try to find the corresponding edge. Chris

That's an interesting statistical analysis. If i understand well, from a "pieces" standpoint, corners are easier to identify. That would in my opinion speak in favor of: finding an edge first and then localize the corresponding corner. Because when you start to search, ANY edge is ok, so during the solve of the first F2L pair that's 3 edges that qualify. After spotting A edge, you'd have to find THE corresponding corner. (only 1 piece qualifies)
So making the hardest part (finding the corresponding piece) should be made the easiest(i.e corner)
Or am i making a mistake here?

Nice to see there are more old cubing farts :-)

[Stefan]

35 years "old" you gotta be kidding me.

http://stefan-pochmann.info/misc/wca_fun.html

And that isn't even up to date (looks like a year old), times probably improved by now.

I'd say if at your age you average above 12 seconds, you can't blame your age.

[Zarxrax]

Too often people use their age as an excuse as to why they aren't good at something. You don't suddenly start going downhill when you hit 20. Unless you are training to be a fighter or a world class athlete or something, you can still do what the younger kids do (although often, people just let themselves get out of shape when they get older). I think a 35 or 50 year old definitely has the potential to beat anyone younger when it comes to cubing. It's just that after we become adults, we don't have 10 hours a day to dedicate to practice anymore, like those young whippersnappers do

[Ton]

Allthough i don't FEEL old i AM an old fart compared to most here i think (35 years of age) and it is a known fact that speed decreases with age.
I've been cubing for a little less then a year now i think, and my current pb non lucky is 23.68 but i still can't get my average under 30. (avg is between 30.5 and 34 now) I use friedrich's method, full PLL, 2look OLL and use intuitive F2L.
My cross+F2L is in general between 18 and 24 seconds and i have a couple of questions about my F2L approach because i think that's the area where i can improve most. (correct me if i'm wrong)

When searching for F2L pairs, what's the mental process you go through? What i'm doing so far is this: while i'm turning and i try to go as slow as needed to be able to look ahead i scan for f2l-pairs, when i recognize either an edge or a corner i start searching for the corresponding part.
Would it be faster to always first search an edge and then find the corresponding corner (because the white makes them stand out more)

Metronome practice. When i'm solving to the speed of a metronome i very often feel like i could go much faster but setting the metronome speed higher doesn't work because there is allways one moment where i DO need the time. So while practicing i keep with the beat. But while solving to a clock, i'm quite sure i'm rushing to the next pair only slowing down in time to not screw my lookahead. Would it end up being faster to keep going slow, even though you allready see the next pair, or even the next 2 pairs?

Algorithms
I know this has been discussed in depth over and over again and there is no real consensus about it but i am wondering if learning some algorithms for the harder f2l cases would help. I currently do everything intuitivelly and the argument about less moves when using an algorithm does seem valid.
Which F2L algorithms did you learn?

Well, a lot off questions, i hope to hear from some oldies saying "I'm 50 years old and have a sub 20 average" :-)

Age has nothing to do with speedcubing -I am almost 49 now-, the fact that I am only 17 to 18 sec average has to do that I do not have real talent for speedcubing and .....I am a bit lazy to lear more algs. I can improve a lot learning more algs , I ony use 1 alg for each PLL and 1 alg for each OLL, where if you learn more you save the U turn and recognition time

I think I can still do a sub 20 if I am 60 , 70 years , and I believe every body can do a sub 20 average. If you do not have the real talent , it will take dedication

For a sub 20 average , you only have to turn 3 turns a second, which is very slow

My only tip is to practice not for speed but train to see the next F2L, PLL , OLL. So practice for efficiency rather than speed.

It help me a lot to practice the 4x4, this puzzle is ideal to train look ahead, I am now sub 1:20 for the 4x4 where I was last year between 1:30 and 1:40. The 4x4 helped me to improve my lookahead for the 3x3.

[Ton]

35 years "old" you gotta be kidding me.

http://stefan-pochmann.info/misc/wca_fun.html

And that isn't even up to date (looks like a year old), times probably improved by now.

I'd say if at your age you average above 12 seconds, you can't blame your age.

I love to see the update list ....