The One-Answer Question Thread [closed]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, there is one.
On 5.01 version, menu "Options", below "Huge Optimal Solver"
webserver.png
 
Cubing Methods Help

I know how to solve my 3x3 with beginner's method, and I totally want to get more into actual speed cubing. I found the Friedrich's method and I'm in the process of learning that, are there any video tutorials or print out ones that would help me to learn this faster? Well, I'm guessing there are, but does anyone know any really good ones???
 
Last edited by a moderator:
guysensei1 said:
I can say that this is sometimes false. I was constantly averaging 16 until I decided to do 50 solves everyday, and now I've dropped to nearly sub-15.
Click to expand...

You know what they say... Practice makes permanent. If you look ahead well, you will look ahead better. If you don't look ahead, your turn speed will get faster and you'll get faster for a while but you'll develop a habit of not looking ahead, which is hard to break later on.

PJKCuber said:
I tried out a SS 6x6 and Mini 7x7 but they are too big and uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

Develop hand flexibility
 
Last edited:
guysensei1 said:
I can say that this is sometimes false. I was constantly averaging 16 until I decided to do 50 solves everyday, and now I've dropped to nearly sub-15.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I wouldn't call 50 solves doing a lot in a row. I think repeated daily exposure is going to improve your times whatever you do. But I still think you'd have improved faster from that invested hour(ish)-a-day with something that taught you new abilities, rather than just honing old abilities which, for most of us here, are relatively poor and based on fast recognition rather than lookahead. I know that's something I identify in my own solves.

mark49152 said:
Well , I can only speak from personal experience. I spent a lot of time on metronome training and ultimately found it ineffective for initially learning lookahead. (Maybe for those who can already look ahead and want to improve, it might help.)


This is what I disagree with. A ticking metronome can't force you to do things you can't do. It doesn't help you concentrate on the next pair. It just ticks. If you cannot take your eyes or mind off the current pair, you just miss beats. That is why I recommend starting out with blind pairs practice.


Absolutely agree, but that's not what I recommended.
Click to expand...

Sure, everybody learns differently, and I think blind pairs are good when you're not familiar with the method. But if you are familiar with F2L, something which I would say people around the 20 second mark are, I think their utility ends there. The idea of metronome training is to slow right down and practice turning without pauses. Forcing yourself to do that will make you look at the next pair, because when you don't, you fail the solve. Doing blind pairs when you know your inserts already is actually training the wrong abilities: fast turning, and fast recognition. These are useful, but not as useful as lookahead, and when we reach plateaus at faster times we're going to wish we'd learned lookahead instead.
 
5BLD said:
You know what they say... Practice makes permanent. If you look ahead well, you will look ahead better. If you don't look ahead, your turn speed will get faster and you'll get faster for a while but you'll develop a habit of not looking ahead, which is hard to break later on.
Click to expand...


I think that describes me quite well.
 
Hypocrism said:
Honestly, I wouldn't call 50 solves doing a lot in a row. I think repeated daily exposure is going to improve your times whatever you do. But I still think you'd have improved faster from that invested hour(ish)-a-day with something that taught you new abilities, rather than just honing old abilities which, for most of us here, are relatively poor and based on fast recognition rather than lookahead. I know that's something I identify in my own solves.



Sure, everybody learns differently, and I think blind pairs are good when you're not familiar with the method. But if you are familiar with F2L, something which I would say people around the 20 second mark are, I think their utility ends there. The idea of metronome training is to slow right down and practice turning without pauses. Forcing yourself to do that will make you look at the next pair, because when you don't, you fail the solve. Doing blind pairs when you know your inserts already is actually training the wrong abilities: fast turning, and fast recognition. These are useful, but not as useful as lookahead, and when we reach plateaus at faster times we're going to wish we'd learned lookahead instead.
Click to expand...

The thing is I can do blind pairs. I only have problems searching for the next pair at a high turning speed.And I did an ao100 yesterday and reduced my global average to 22 seconds.
 
Last edited:
PJKCuber said:
The thing is I can do blind pairs. I only have problems searching for the next pair at a high turning speed.And I did an ao100 yesterday and reduced my global average to 22 seconds.
Click to expand...

You average 22 seconds. That is like 3 tps.

Anyway, try this: Look for a corner while inserting a pair. Whenever you insert a pair, you should know the next corner. When you are comfortable with this, try tracking both corner and edge.
 
Hypocrism said:
Sure, everybody learns differently, and I think blind pairs are good when you're not familiar with the method. But if you are familiar with F2L, something which I would say people around the 20 second mark are, I think their utility ends there. The idea of metronome training is to slow right down and practice turning without pauses. Forcing yourself to do that will make you look at the next pair, because when you don't, you fail the solve. Doing blind pairs when you know your inserts already is actually training the wrong abilities: fast turning, and fast recognition. These are useful, but not as useful as lookahead, and when we reach plateaus at faster times we're going to wish we'd learned lookahead instead.
Click to expand...
I found blind pairs hard at first despite knowing all my inserts well, because I was still relying on watching the pieces. Practising them was definitely helpful. Without being able to insert blind, looking ahead at something else was impossible.

Once blind inserts are easy I would recommend tracking another corner or edge (and later both) while doing the blind insert. That is even harder because it requires breaking the habit of mentally (rather than visually) tracking the current pair.

These are what I would call the fundamentals of lookahead because if you don't have these basics down, lookahead is much more difficult, with or without a metronome.

I'm at around the 20 second mark and lookahead is what I have been working on the last few months. I can only say what works for me at my level (which is similar to the questioner's), and as you say, everyone's different. Metronome training was unhelpful and frustrating. I don't yet have good enough ability to do one thing while looking at another, and slowing down and following the beat just made it even more difficult to insert the current pair without watching because it interfered with muscle memory. Some day I will give it another go, but as of today it's too advanced for me and I'll continue to train the basics.

Thanks for the comments though. I'm more likely to try metronome again some day because of your encouragement.
 
PJKCuber said:
The thing is I can do blind pairs. I only have problems searching for the next pair at a high turning speed.And I did an ao100 yesterday and reduced my global average to 22 seconds.
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't recommend blind pairs as the main source of practice for you, I recommend metronome training until sub10 at the very least. I'm still doing it and improving quite well. Doing solves will help you to improve, but it will also stamp in bad habits.
 
Hypocrism said:
Yes, I don't recommend blind pairs as the main source of practice for you, I recommend metronome training until sub10 at the very least. I'm still doing it and improving quite well. Doing solves will help you to improve, but it will also stamp in bad habits.
Click to expand...

Doing both is a good idea. They train slightly different skills. For example today I did metronome training and although my lookahead is good, my burst turn speed isnt very fast (because I'm trying to look ahead).
 
Oh My God! I am so tired and bored of CFOP because its been 2 months and I still haven't improved at all. I'd like to switch or at least practice another method so that I don't get bored. Roux or ZZ? I looked at a lot of videos. I like both the methods, M slices aren't a problem however I suck at blockbuilding and EOLine. I am interested in becoming fast at OH also. I kind of enjoy the idea of an RUL F2L however I feel that Roux is faster than ZZ.
 
PJKCuber said:
Oh My God! I am so tired and bored of CFOP because its been 2 months and I still haven't improved at all. I'd like to switch or at least practice another method so that I don't get bored. Roux or ZZ? I looked at a lot of videos. I like both the methods, M slices aren't a problem however I suck at blockbuilding and EOLine. I am interested in becoming fast at OH also. I kind of enjoy the idea of an RUL F2L however I feel that Roux is faster than ZZ.
Click to expand...

While I would recommend you doing some other puzzle, you give choices so...
roux, because you only need to blockbuild, no EOLine
but then, blockbuilding in ZZ is much simpler, and EOLine should be easy after a few hundred solves
definitely a hard decision for me if I may only choose one :/
 
yoinneroid said:
EOLine should be easy after a few hundred solves
Click to expand...

The real tricky part, IMO, is that sometimes, for example in a six edges bad case, you might want to orient three edges (yes, making one edge bad), so that you can get a good case where all four bad edges are on F or B. EO+Line is fine when starting out, but it will help to integrate them ASAP.
 
brian724080 said:
The real tricky part, IMO, is that sometimes, for example in a six edges bad case, you might want to orient three edges (yes, making one edge bad), so that you can get a good case where all four bad edges are on F or B. EO+Line is fine when starting out, but it will help to integrate them ASAP.
Click to expand...
In ZZ, you can also do EOCross also? right? So he can choose ZZ over Roux as he can make crosses. It will be better than blockbuilding.
But both the methods are fast and choose whichever you want or are comfortable with!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
One answer random question thread
Replies
8
Views
1,772
tnk351
T
AlexvanVugt
One-Answer Square-1 Question Thread
5 6 7
Replies
138
Views
25,080
Renslay
Renslay
shadowslice e
One-Answer Puzzle Theory Question Thread
8 9 10
Replies
193
Views
33,024
eeeeeeeee
eeeeeeeee
B
  • Locked
One-Answer 3x3 Roux Question Thread
7 8 9
Replies
164
Views
32,655
PiKeeper
PiKeeper
Note
One-Answer 2x2x2 Question Thread
14 15 16
Replies
317
Views
46,296
Renslay
Renslay
Back
Top