Status
Not open for further replies.
Aren't you CN yourself? I need to memo all the color schemes for different crosses now.

Kennan Lejeune did a 4LLL average that was sub 12. CN doesn't really matter at all IMO so you can expect to be there. Though I suggest learning OLLs at sub 15.

Being color neutral does matter. I have no idea why you would think it doesn't. Keep being color neutral, PJK. :) And BTW, you don't have to try to memorize the color schemes as long as you know the opposites. White/yellow, green/blue, and orange/red. If you know that, you should be able to figure it out just by looking at the centers while planning your cross. You can memorize the color scheme, but you don't have to in order to plan a good cross in 15 seconds.
 
Being color neutral does matter. I have no idea why you would think it doesn't. Keep being color neutral, PJK. :) And BTW, you don't have to try to memorize the color schemes as long as you know the opposites. White/yellow, green/blue, and orange/red. If you know that, you should be able to figure it out just by looking at the centers while planning your cross. You can memorize the color scheme, but you don't have to in order to plan a good cross in 15 seconds.


I thought people had a general consensus that CN doesn't matter/helps minimally?
 
What's an ideal average time for someone who uses a Moyu cube and solves with full f2l, 2look oll, 2look pll, and who is color neutral?

That's pretty subjective. I would say to be considered world class, you have to be sub 10. To be considered "fast," you would have to be sub 15. The 15-25 second region would be sort of "intermediate." But that's by the standards of fast speedcubers. According to the general population, we're all prodigies.
 
I thought people had a general consensus that CN doesn't matter/helps minimally?

It helps more than minimally. On the example solve video by Feliks that was only for white cross, where he couldn't use his color neutrality, he said "this cross is pretty difficult" and I was thinking "what? No, that's a pretty easy cross." The reason for that is that he has 6 colors and I have 2. The general consensus is that it is significant. It makes it harder to learn, sure, but that's not the important thing. I think that it may be harder to get to sub 20 while being color neutral, but it's easier to become the best in the world. I'll try to explain that a bit more in the third paragraph.

Different methods have different merits/shortcomings when it comes to being color neutral. CFOP is one of the easiest methods to be color neutral with, and it is thought of as a good idea for that method. Nobody has gotten fast at Roux with full CN, and I think it's disadvantageous for that method because you have to know your color scheme insanely well. You don't have the centers to help you out because the M layer isn't fixed during F2B. Partial neutrality (x2/y2 or x2/y) is thought of as a good idea for Roux, but not full CN. For ZZ, being fully color neutral is a terrible idea in practice and I don't think anybody thinks that's a good idea. Most ZZ users have a completely fixed orientation. For Yau on 4x4, Feliks (as well as Jayden Mcneill, and others) only does white and yellow despite being fully CN on 3x3, just because it's slower. However, being color neutral on 2x2 is a must.

I guess what I'm getting to is that whether being CN is beneficial or not depends on the puzzle and the method. With many methods and puzzles, it is thought to not be beneficial, but I think almost everyone is in agreement that being CN for 3x3 CFOP provides a significant benefit. Once you get to the point of being one of the best in the world at 3x3, move count becomes really important. The only benefit to having a fixed color is having easier recognition, but the people who are the best in the world at 3x3 and are CN already don't pause no matter what color they're doing. They get to the point where they are completely comfortable with recognition and familiarity with the color scheme no matter what color they're doing. And once they are there, the improvements to their recognition that solving on a fixed color might or might not offer just cease to be worth it. They get to the point where a lower movecount (which is what CN offers) is more beneficial to them than any tiny improvement in recognition caused by solving a fixed color could be.
 
What are the french words for corner and edge? « arête » and « coin » sound like I'm in geometry class.
Maybe I am wrong, but IMHO you are right:)
You also can watch reviews in french:)
Here, in France, we say "arête(s)" for "edge(s)", "coin(s)" for "corner(s)" and "centre(s)" for "centers"... So you're right !
EDIT : When we write "rubik's cube" on Google (.fr), one of our first results is francocube.com and you can verify here !
 
Last edited:
I get where you're coming from.
I personally think that fix color solvers have better cross (or F2B or whatever) building skills, while CN people (GENERALLY) are not as great. Which is why I think that CN has no huge advantage.

...the cross isn't even what would be affected by being color neutral. I'm not color neutral, but I could do solves on blue, green, orange, and red and have my cross times barely suffer at all. F2L is where I would have trouble. That's why it doesn't make sense to me that CN people would be worse at building crosses.

EDIT: I'm about to do 12 solves with white/yellow cross and then 12 solves with the 4 colors I don't use.

2.29 cross AO12 with white/yellow. Now for comparison... 2.43 AO12. See? My cross barely suffers at all, despite the fact that I've never practiced blue, green, orange, or red. Doing cross on a fixed color is barely easier even for people who aren't CN.
2.45, 0.85, 2.88, 1.68, 2.90, 2.24, 1.93, 1.99, 2.13, 3.30, 2.63, 2.04 = 2.29 white/yellow
1.40, 1.76, 2.10, 4.26, 2.03, 3.00, 1.80, 2.99, 2.87, 1.88, 5.71, 1.63 = 2.43 other 4 colors
 
Last edited:
Just a quick question - Do you guys think that a stackmat timer is useful or not? I'm wondering if I'd want to get it or not...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top