One answer BLD question thread blind

[AbstractAlg]

I like <R,U,L> moves and the table is designed to use only that moves except for few cases like cyclic shift. I liked <R,L,U> concept very much, but is that possible because of that rotations that need to be done on the cube?

When someone says "I solve with BH corner" (doesn't have to be always optimal, but in most cases others commutator based) it means that during the solve person recognizes the relations between stickers that are involved in current cycle, detects the BH case and executes it?

It just looks so confusing when looking at that blue table. o.O

Do guys like Marcell, Aron and Zane recognize the case and think of corresponding commutator/BH in sucha little time, or they somehow assigned one alg/comm with every pair and just execute it? That seams impossible with 378 cases and ~.4K for edges.

P. S. @A Leman, thanks, that might come in handy.

[Mike Hughey]

I know that for me, learning BH involved seeing in my head how the pieces moved to solve the commutator. So I didn't just learn the commutator, I understood it. I see how the 3 stickers involved move at each step of the commutator, so I can see how and why it works. After just a little practice, I got where I could see this almost instantly for most cases. Then additional practice led to where I am now, which is that usually I don't even have to see it - I just automatically know what the algorithm is. If I want to go maximum speed, I can do most cases essentially by reflex, but if I want to be really careful, I can spend the extra few seconds (which is really all it is, total, for a 3x3x3 BLD) to see each commutator in my head before I do it. Often this can be done in "thinkahead" mode, while you're still executing the previous algorithm.

If you're going for speed-optimized BH, all you need to do is selectively see cases where you can do better than an optimal commutator, and replace with that algorithm. That just takes practice; eventually just as I do with commutators, you get where you know them instantly when you hit those cases. For instance, I'm mostly BH on edges, but I use <R,U> U perms for a few edge cases, and you can see how that could just become automatic once you learn to see them.

Since there are only a small number of basic types of commutators, it really does work that you can learn to see these quickly once you work on it. You'll be surprised how easy it is to learn them. I know that some people (like Chris Hardwick) liked to learn the commutators by class of commutator and find where that particular class exists on the cube, but I found it easier to learn alphabetically.

What do I mean? Well, with my lettering scheme, my buffer for corners is A. So I first learned the cycle A->B->C, then A->B->D, then A->B->E, etc. all the way to A->B->X. Then I drilled those ("the B's") - I did time attacks on them. That really only took a day or two, after which they were pretty solid - I could see all of them almost instantly. Then I would do the C's next: A->C->B, A->C->D, A->C->E, etc., and drill those too. The nice thing is that, as you go, you get where many of them are just mirrors or inverses of the ones you already know, so they become easier to learn as you go.

I think I probably know BH almost as well as the good people; I think the difference between me and Marcell, Aron, and Zane are:
1. I'm much slower memorizing - I take 20-30 seconds instead of 6-10 seconds. This obviously hurts memorization time, but it also hurts execution time, because it takes longer to recall if it takes longer to memorize.
2. I'm not as good at "thinkahead" - I have too many pauses when executing. It's not really because of not knowing the algorithms; it's because I can't think as well while executing as they can, which holds me back in speedsolving as well as BLD.
3. My recall is often spotty; theirs isn't as much.
4. I'm just plain slower at turning.

I know this is a bunch of text and somewhat aimless, but I hope it might help someone, so I'm going ahead and posting it anyway.

[AbstractAlg]

Thank you, Mike, your post was useful.
Riffz's table (in the link of A Leman) is sorted by letters, and it also seams to me more natural to go through all the cases that way.
Think-ahead is a big part when talking about speed, that is one of the things that is slowing me down currently because I make too many setup moves even for the cases that are pure comms but are in somehow awkward angle and I try to setup to some "more visible" comm.

So it comes down to getting used to all the cases by practice. By ALOT of practice.

Thanks for the help and tips, but this is going to be pretty painful transition.

[DrKorbin]

Another tip on learning BH (most likely, an old idea most people know):
Suppose you have learned all algs A->B->*. Then you also know (or at least it is quick for you to learn) all algs A->*->B.
Now scramble the cube. If you have targets A->x1->x2->x3..., solve it using the following algs:
A->x1->B
A->B->x2
A->x3->B
A->B->x4
...
You will solve the cube twice slower then usual but you will train algs you've just learnt.
Do a lot of solves (1-2 days) and go to the next case A->C->*.

[Mike Hughey]

Yes, DrKorbin - that's how I trained them. That way you can make sure you're actually doing them correctly. Very helpful for having good accuracy.

[Riley]

Another tip on learning BH...

I know this is a bunch of text and somewhat aimless, but I hope it might help someone, so I'm going ahead and posting it anyway.

Thank you for these tips! I'll definitely use them, as I am learning BH right now too.

[Rubiksboy1]

Is it better to try and succeed at solving a 2x2 BLD before attempting 3BLD?
Or is there no advantage/it's not helpful?

[Mikel]

Is it better to try and succeed at solving a 2x2 BLD before attempting 3BLD?
Or is there no advantage/it's not helpful?

I did 2x2 BLD before I did 3x3 BLD because at the time I hadn't learned edges yet. 2x2 BLD helps with the corners of 3x3 BLD.

[Phlippieskezer]

So, I've been keeping myself busy learning full BH (thanks to all the help on these forums), and am also in the process of creating my own full list of cycles (about 1/4 way done. I find it very helpful to write one rather than just to look at one by someone else). I certainly know enough to at least solve with it, which is what I've been doing.

However, recognising certain commutators tend to take me a while, though, especially when blindfolded, and especially with corners (my execution time is still about 1.5x slower than my previous with M2/OP, entirely because of pauses, methinks. To be fair, though, it's only been ~5 days since I started learning seriously, two of which I was away and didn't have to time to do BLD).

I'm not exactly sure how to word my question, but I'll try anyway and risk embarrassing myself in front of semi-anonymous strangers:
How should I go about practising to cut down on these looong pauses? (I've been doing all of the following for the last few days, all of which were allotted about the same amount of time per day, with minor progress)
- Should I just keep on typing out my list (borrowing comms from other lists where necessary), which I think should bring me a bit more immediate understanding of the commutators I use (and, that way when I've completed with it, I have a comm for every case)?
- Should I practice without my blindfold, solving the cube with only commutators, forcing me to practice coming up with/recalling commutators on the spot, also putting more emphasis on the sticker locations rather than the letter pair involved?
- Should I practice with my blindfold, which means I'll also have to focus on memorising, but also means I have to, well, come up with/recall the comms blindfolded (duh), and I'd be associating the comms with letter pairs rather than only sticker locations.
- Should I stop being stupid by asking questions like this on the forum, and continue doing exactly what I've been doing: don't focus on just one of the above only, but instead all of the simultaneously? (this, of course, means I don't get to, say, finish my letter pair list as quickly, and it means I'm likely to improve at the same rate, which isn't very encouraging)
- Other?

Not sure how much help I can possibly get on such a problem, nor do I know how many others have experienced having ~1/2 of their solve times being blank pauses, but I'll post anyway. :S
Sorry about my incoherent writing.

[Ickathu]

Is it better to try and succeed at solving a 2x2 BLD before attempting 3BLD?
Or is there no advantage/it's not helpful?

It's helpful as long as you're not speed blinding the 2x2.