• 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!

Is it time for me to ditch the beginner's method?

cookingfat

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
904
Location
Sheffield - UK
WCA
2009HARP01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Hi all, I'm just wondering if it's time for me to abandon the beginners method of solving the cube.

I can solve faster using the beginners method and 4LLL, my average is around 50 seconds, but using intuitive fridrich f2l my average is about 60-65 seconds.

Should I just concentrate on fridrich f2l all the time and just wait for my times to drop? and should I learn the rest of the PLLs now as well?

also, is it worth learning any of the algs for f2l? I currently just work with the standard 3 cases, bring them to the top, pair and insert.

thanks guys.
 

Cerberus

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
352
Location
Hamburg, Germany
WCA
2007CHRI03
YouTube
Visit Channel
I never learned f2l algs and I don't find them important though...
Go slow for f2l, plan your pairs so that you can look away during excecution and find the next pair so you look ahead.
You should also time a few solves with brakes, so you got your time for f2l and see how much times of the 60 seconds is it, I would estimate it's like 45-50 and the PLL step takes 4-10, so you could cut like 3-5 seconds there maybe, but got to earn recognition, algs and fingerspeed.
For f2l it would be easier to get down to like 30-35 seconds with looking, training, coming up with some own ideas for f2l pairs.
So you loose more seconds there ;)
Also you can watch your move count and should aim less than 40 for cross + f2l now later less than 35 and the less the better ofc.

P.S: learning algs is never wrong and if you like it, go for it, but it doesn't affect your time so great as look ahead and practise does.
 

Escher

Babby
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
3,374
WCA
2008KINN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
yeah, i had exactly the same thing when i made the switch - about 15 secs slower. Just do as many solves as you can, & think about exactly what you're doing with each case - is there a way that you can do it faster, or in fewer moves? look at a few sites with f2l algs - not to learn them, but to get a general idea of the different insertions you can use. also, keyhole method is a little strange to get used to, but once you know it its very useful.

As always, the various tutorial on youtube (and the ones posted around here) are excellent, but i still cannot recommend better than badmephistos videos :)

4 look last layer is fine :) if you really hammer it you can get sub12 or even sub 10 last layers. Wait til you're around 40-45 secs until you learn all the PLLs - however i'd suggest learning Y, the Js and T first.
by the way, T is just the two components of Y (FRU'R'U' - RUR'U' R'FRF') the other way round (with the F'/F cancelled)

sorry for such a long post, i just love giving people advice (it distracts me from my own lacklustre abilities at the moment)

EDIT - its not that long... also cerberus is very, very right (if thats possible?) - look ahead is the cornerstone of fast times - do what he says!
 

cookingfat

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
904
Location
Sheffield - UK
WCA
2009HARP01
YouTube
Visit Channel
thanks for all your advice guys, much appreciated. I think It'd also be wise for to learn how to insert pairs from different angles as I rotate the cube so much I almost drop it sometimes. It just seems frantic sometimes.

just done another average of 12 - 66 seconds. still the same. ah well, I'll keep at it I suppose. I've already learnt couple of the PLLs, T and one of the Js, but I'm gonna get the f2l down before I learn any more.

btw, Escher, I'm only 0.05 points away from a new cube. I can't believe that thing works.
 

DAE_JA_VOO

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
858
Location
Pretoria, South Africa
Your F2L will be slower once you move away from your usual beginner method. As far as i can remember, my times actually DOUBLED when i went to intuitive F2L. Intuitive F2L is seriously tough in the beginning, because it's intuitive and you're trying to do it fast.

But i guarantee you, in no time, you will be snoring as you pass your LBL speeds. I raced past my LBL speeds once i started getting the hang of intuitive F2L.

Now is a good time (50 seconds) to ditch LBL and start nailing a proper F2L method. I suggest you watch badmephisto's videos. Without even knowing it, that guy has single handedly taught me just about everything i know today regarding my process of solving. I don't use all his algs though (i've found quite a few better ones).
 

cookingfat

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
904
Location
Sheffield - UK
WCA
2009HARP01
YouTube
Visit Channel
thanks dae ja voo, I'm a fan of badmphisto too. His 'cubing journey' video inspires me, I can't believe he got that good in 6 months. And it's funny seeing him do a 3 minute solve with no finger tricks. The thing I'm struggling most with is bringing the two f2l pieces to the top in the 'right' way. I make it far too long for myself most of the time. and I can only seem to insert a pair into the front right slot, so I do a hell of a lot of cube rotations .

just done another average, 67 seconds. about the same, but I got a 45 out of it.
 

DAE_JA_VOO

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
858
Location
Pretoria, South Africa
Don't worry dude, all those little issues will work themselves out the more you practice. Once you've got F2L on lock, you won't even need to think of the moves to do. Once i spot the corner and edge pieces, it's like my brain takes over and before i know it, they're paired and in their slot.

It all comes with practise ;)
 

Jhong253

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
211
Location
Indiana, U.S.
WCA
2008HONG01
Yeah I agree with the other guys. F2L is really important. I still find myself using beginner's method for OLL and PLL, but I practice and practice on F2L and it got me from 50~60seconds to about 30ish average time. After you can do F2L in around 10~12 seconds, I'd say move on to PLL then eventually OLL
 

DAE_JA_VOO

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
858
Location
Pretoria, South Africa
After you can do F2L in around 10~12 seconds, I'd say move on to PLL then eventually OLL

No, i disagree.

There's no point in having a 10 seconds F2L if you're spending 20 seconds doing 4LLL.

I started learning the PLLs at the same time i started with intuitive F2L, and i still think that that was the best way to do it.
 

Escher

Babby
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
3,374
WCA
2008KINN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
yeah, i pretty much agree with daejavoo... once my lbl times were around 45-50 i began to do intuitive f2l and learnt some PLLs. i think (not including the 2 look PLLs) i learnt them like this - Y, T, Js, Rs, Ns (found 'conjugated Js'), V, F, the Gs, and finally H. ive probably forgotten to put down one or two, but i think that was a decent order. in retrospect, learning Gs first would probably have been more sensible...
 

Neutrals01

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
259
Location
Malaysia
WCA
2009JOON01
YouTube
Visit Channel
hmm..I think one way for intuitive f2l is that u can solve all 41 cases without any algorithm but the amount of moves needed is the same or max more by 1 or 2.. I learned my intuitive f2l such that the moves needed are the same with the algorithm(so I don't know whats the point learning algorithm)... I do this by going to dan harris site(because his site have setup moves for all 41 cases) and then do the setup moves for each case, then I try to solve the case with the least moves(sometimes take up to 10~20 mins to figure out the best solution), after done..it will become intuitive(because u know how to solve it)..do it for each single case till u can do intuitively for all 41 cases. Once u can do it, then go for look ahead and fingertrick for it. For pll part.. I think should be ok to learn it by now, I started learning pll and intuitive f2l at the same time..took me around 1 week to learn all the pll cases.. 1 day 3 algorithms should be enough..
 

hawkmp4

Member
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
1,395
All I want to add is try not to do too much at a time. Learning F2L and PLL at the same time starting from a beginners method is just going to frustrate you with your times. Once you feel you get a hang of F2L go for the PLLs.
 

DAE_JA_VOO

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
858
Location
Pretoria, South Africa
All I want to add is try not to do too much at a time. Learning F2L and PLL at the same time starting from a beginners method is just going to frustrate you with your times.

Not necessarily. Sure, your times will SUCK, but it won't frustrate you.

Look, i started intuitive F2L and the PLLs at the same time. My times took a hell of a knock. In fact, i actually STOPPED doing entire solves until i had learned the PLLs. I didn't get frustrated though because i knew what the outcome would be :)
 

Neutrals01

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
259
Location
Malaysia
WCA
2009JOON01
YouTube
Visit Channel
All I want to add is try not to do too much at a time. Learning F2L and PLL at the same time starting from a beginners method is just going to frustrate you with your times.

Not necessarily. Sure, your times will SUCK, but it won't frustrate you.

Look, i started intuitive F2L and the PLLs at the same time. My times took a hell of a knock. In fact, i actually STOPPED doing entire solves until i had learned the PLLs. I didn't get frustrated though because i knew what the outcome would be :)

yup..I agree with u...I stucked at 60 secs for 1 week+ because learning pll and intuitive f2l...then upon learning all the pll cases my time dropped from 60 secs till 35 secs in like 3 weeks+ of practice
 

DAE_JA_VOO

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
858
Location
Pretoria, South Africa
All I want to add is try not to do too much at a time. Learning F2L and PLL at the same time starting from a beginners method is just going to frustrate you with your times.

Not necessarily. Sure, your times will SUCK, but it won't frustrate you.

Look, i started intuitive F2L and the PLLs at the same time. My times took a hell of a knock. In fact, i actually STOPPED doing entire solves until i had learned the PLLs. I didn't get frustrated though because i knew what the outcome would be :)

yup..I agree with u...I stucked at 60 secs for 1 week+ because learning pll and intuitive f2l...then upon learning all the pll cases my time dropped from 60 secs till 35 secs in like 3 weeks+ of practice

That's almost EXACTLY what happened to me. Once i had intuitive F2L and those PLLs on lock, i nailed about 20-25 seconds off my times in a matter of DAYS.
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
627
Location
Saskatchewan, Canada
YouTube
Visit Channel
F2L isn't important with my method. But if you are going to use Fridrich, then F2L is by far the most important part. For the Fridrich method if you just learn all the PLL algorithms, and OLL algorithms before you have learned F2L, then you will have very slow times. Something else you could do is learn the Petrus method. Step 4 is a good way to teach F2L if you plan on using it for Fridrich.
 

Carson

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
1,285
Location
Somerset, Kentucky, United States
WCA
2008PENT01
I learned 2/3 of the F2L algorithms before I started working with intuitive. Now I use intuitive for the other 1/3. What I have discovered though, is that if I go slow and try to solve the f2l intuitively instead of using the algorithms I already know, then I am pretty much doing the same algorithms. Does that make sense? You can think of the algos as optimized versions of the intuitive f2l. I would recommend learning it intuitively, then going back and checking f2l algos at various sites to see how other people handle them...
 
Top