Look ahead can only be done when one can effortlessly spot pairs and insert them without thinking too much. This is why I believe one needs to be decent at F2L before attempting to look ahead, otherwise it's simply not feasible. So basically, with 35 seconds for F2L, you can't really look ahead much, you would need to think about what you are doing.Originally Posted by skeletonboy
I am just trying to tell him or inform him of lookahead. I am not pressuring him to do lookahead, just explaining why he should work on lookahead. This way, when he practices F2L, he can remember that there is such thing in this world called lookahead and may try to attempt at his own risk to lookahead without asking again on this forum, what should I do next.
Reducing F2L Move count.
Working on 'intuitive' F2L for a little while. Went to the F2L 'Database' to check out algs for fingertricking (helps me to have an alg when working on 'Lookahead'. Checked the 'Reconstructions' page and saw some of Feliks reconstructions and the one that killed me is his former WR 6:18 F2L1=U R U R' L U L', F2L2=R L' U L R', F2L3=R l U' R' U l', F2L4=y U' R U R'(this one in SS Database). Are you kidding me? This is a ridiculously low F2L move count and I wondered is this 'Feliks being Feliks' and he's that good at intuitive, Cube Explorer or is there some kind of alg study going on. Seems like his F2L move count is getting smaller except when he screws up then he corrects as fast as most solve. What would you recommend to reduce F2L move count and can ACube or CX help lowering F2L movecount? Feliks does say he works on algs but he's not specific.
Last edited by Arkwell; 03-16-2012 at 12:54 PM.
I would say just practice. One thing I would suggest - go through the F2L cases, and compare your intuitive move count to the algorithic move count (probably on the Speedsolving.com wiki - F2L link). If your count is 2-3 moves more than the algorithms, then consider learning the alg for that case if it is not an intuitive case (R U R' U' R U R' U' R U R' is a good example).
In his 3x3 examples video he talks about choosing which pair to do next based on how it will influence the remaining pairs. To be honest, I haven't worked through it yet to understand exactly, specifically what each case he mentions looks like.
IMO you shouldn't learn the alg, you should learn what the alg does, I find that if I just reel of an f2l alg from memory I don know where or what the pieces are doing I just know that the two pieces will end up in the slot. This messes up my look ahead, I prefer to look at the Algs and take note of how, and more Importantly why they are done that way.
I don't know about one particular solve, but multi-slotting is the answer. Not so much the wacky multi-slotting that "God" comes up with sometimes, but just good pair selection and making an informed choice about how to insert a pair such that it minimizes the complexity of the next. So how to reach these decisions quickly?
The brain is a powerful thing...after tens of thousands of repetitions it can subconsciously pick up on the patterns of success and failure and steer you toward the right decisions if you stop being logical and let it run on pure intuition+experience. More info
Has anyone done a study on the average f2l move count of various cubers?
Untimed solves of discovery! The most beautiful thing cubing can give you.
As i was reading this i was like "wtf when did i write this???" cuz i have the exact same problem. I average like 38-40 and my f2l is like a good 20 seconds. Ive nearly given up on fridrich f2l and have been going back to beginners lbl f2l. I know all the cases and intuitively can do the fridrich f2l, but i simply cant do it fast.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks