Sub 20 With 3-look LL?

Hey guys, I've been meaning to ask about this for a while and just recently decided to do so. I'm somewhat new to the forum and just got into the hobby this past summer. So far, my favorite event is 3x3. I've gotten my time down significantly by learning F2L, and I average anywhere between 35-45 (I don't do timed averages often, so I can't even give a solid number), but I'm starting to get really into speed solving and getting faster. I currently use a somewhat inefficient method to do last layer, which RedKB taught on his tutorial for the 3x3. The steps are get the cross, solve one of the 7 cases (I memorized alg's for all of those), permute corners, then permute edges. I plan on soon shortening that by learning full PLL, which I've been told isn't very difficult. Here is my actual question: is it possible to get as fast as 20 seconds or even sub 20 using 3 look last layer (first get cross, then OLL, then PLL)? For all I know, that could be the standard for people who solve that fast, but I have no clue. It just seems to me, since using my weird 4 look (sometimes 5 if fixing the corners takes more than one execution of that alg) takes me so long, then cutting that down a step or two wouldn't cut my times in half, even with practice. Sorry if this is worded funny or sloppy, but that's the best way I could ask this. I'm welcome to all advice/constructive criticism. Thank in advance guys.

Yes, in fact, some people are sub 12 with 3look LL.

Change your wierd four look into first orient edges, then orient corners, then full pll. This will easily get you sub 20. Full oll is 57 cases, and is reccomended for sub 15.

I've seen someone average like 16 seconds using Keyhole for the first 2 layers (it's less efficient then corner edge pairing, but a bit better than placing the corners then placing edges) and using 4LLL with it. Although I wouldn't recommend 4 look last layer for sub 20. Go for 3 look, but although not completely necessary, 1 look OLL shaves off about 2 or 3 seconds from a solver averaging about 25-30 seconds.

Even I could probably Sub-20 with 4LLL

Yeah with cfop I average about 25 with messed up 3 look (eo/edge control, coll, ep) . I could be sub 20 but you know cross and f2l are hard.

I am around 15 seconds and I use 3LL

I'd be willing to bet that Feliks can sub-10 with 4LLL

guysensei1 said:

I'd be willing to bet that Feliks can sub-10 with 4LLL

Click to expand...

+1


Man, whoever is going against you is gonna lose $$$.

Seanliu said:

+1


Man, whoever is going against you is gonna lose $$$.

Click to expand...

Lol splits would be like 1-3-1-1-1-1

guysensei1 said:

I'd be willing to bet that Feliks can sub-10 with 4LLL

Click to expand...

I'm only 3 seconds slower with 4LLL, I don't see how he couldn't.

If by 3 look LL you mean first the edge orientation and then corners and then full pll (2 look oll + full pll), then I can tell you I was averaging 16 seconds with 3 look LL. It is doable and I would say that you should do it. Dont learn full OLL until you are sub 20.

CriticalCubing said:

Dont learn full OLL until you are sub 20.

Click to expand...

why?

CriticalCubing said:

If by 3 look LL you mean first the edge orientation and then corners and then full pll (2 look oll + full pll), then I can tell you I was averaging 16 seconds with 3 look LL. It is doable and I would say that you should do it. Dont learn full OLL until you are sub 20.

Click to expand...

I say he should start learning his OLLs like 1 per day after he learns his PLLs. Or whenever he wants to, really. Learning your OLLs before Sub-20 isn't going to hurt. I myself finished learning OLL when I was Sub-25. It then gave me more time afterwards to play with X-crosses and stuff, and now I can make a pretty good X-cross every now and then.

I've gotten plenty of sub 20 solves .using 3 look last layer. What I've really improved on, especially when it comes to PLL, is case recognition. This really just gets better the more times you see a specific pattern during solves

NewCuber000 said:

I say he should start learning his OLLs like 1 per day after he learns his PLLs. Or whenever he wants to, really. Learning your OLLs before Sub-20 isn't going to hurt. I myself finished learning OLL when I was Sub-25. It then gave me more time afterwards to play with X-crosses and stuff, and now I can make a pretty good X-cross every now and then.

Click to expand...

I just don't see why people recommend not to learn it, this is not the first time I've seen people advise against starting as soon as possible. If you don't want to, that's up to you, but there is absolutely no reason not too if you are willing.

Bindedsa said:

I just don't see why people recommend not to learn it, this is not the first time I've seen people advise against starting as soon as possible. If you don't want to, that's up to you, but there is absolutely no reason not too if you are willing.

Click to expand...

+1.

I learned it before I was sub-20 (around 23), and it helped me work them into my solves more easily (i.e., stop and recognize them, rather than giving up and 2 looking) than if I had started while I was faster, and makes it feel more natural as I get faster.

I'd recommend learning it as early as you feel like learning it, as long as it doesn't get in the way of practicing other things.

I use 4LLL and I am easily sub 20.

3LLL and average 20.

I use 3LLL and I average 12-13 seconds. It's definitely possible.

3LLL is definitely sub20, but I would also recommend learning a lot of the easy OLL cases. Some of them are really easy to pick up, and, if you have time, learn full OLL. I really helps.