Older cubers discussions

[sqAree]

mafergut, my 2x2 progress is roughly the same as yours (and I also never thought I'd enjoy but now I do ), and the day before yesterday I got a 4.90 ao100 with Ortega, seems possible to be sub5!
I think one cannot start learnign EG too soon. I'll be on it in the next weeks.

And mark, I agree, PBLs > PLLs.

 

[mafergut]

Maybe they are skips? Usually I find layers are the slowest solves as the PLLs are longer than other PBLs. In fact if I have choice of easy faces and can see one of them would make a layer, I'll choose the other.

Correct! Like this one that's now my PB single, they are almost always PLL skips and maybe some OLL skips + T-perm (I still haven't learned a shorter variant for adjacent swap on top / layer on bottom). The ones that are not LBL are either diag swap / diag swap PBL or OLL skip + PBL. I'm not sure but my best "full step" Ortega solve must be a low 4.

 

[Jason Green]

Private video, I cannot watch it. Can you make it public?

Thanks, it's fixed now!

 

[mafergut]

mafergut, my 2x2 progress is roughly the same as yours (and I also never thought I'd enjoy but now I do ), and the day before yesterday I got a 4.90 ao100 with Ortega, seems possible to be sub5!
I think one cannot start learnign EG too soon. I'll be on it in the next weeks.

And mark, I agree, PBLs > PLLs.

Wow! Sub-5 Ao100 with Ortega is really, really nice! Congrats!

In order to learn less algs I assume that CLL algs for 2x2 are not supposed to work as CMLL algs for 3x3 Roux, as they will not necessarily preserve the middle layer edges of F2B, right? I assume the other way around would be true so, are CMLL algs so much worse so that it's worth it to learn new ones for 2x2? I don't know CMLL yet as my main 3x3 method is CFOP but I also like Roux so I was thinking maybe I can just learn one set of algs instead of two.

 

[muchacho]

I'm not sure but I think Alex Lau uses CMLL algs for 2x2 (and he averages 3-4 seconds). I might try that, I'm too lazy to learn CLL for 2x2 (although I like 2x2 very much).

 

[muchacho]

Here's an average of 12 for me that is decent. Although I was going to try and film a nice clean session and it turned out very messy, tons of DNFs and stuff. I restarted the camera for this.

Check out at about 5:10, I had back to back 23.59s. Then another 23 later.

It's funny my last video was a month ago and was 38 average. Just two more months and I should be to 8 second average.

https://youtu.be/9cGpag_Wocg

Viewing that video a non cuber might think it must be easy to average 28 seconds... if viewing some of my solves instead (and the smoke coming out of my ears) that person would think 28 seconds must be close to the WR

 

[LL Cool Skip]

Wow! Sub-5 Ao100 with Ortega is really, really nice! Congrats!

In order to learn less algs I assume that CLL algs for 2x2 are not supposed to work as CMLL algs for 3x3 Roux, as they will not necessarily preserve the middle layer edges of F2B, right? I assume the other way around would be true so, are CMLL algs so much worse so that it's worth it to learn new ones for 2x2? I don't know CMLL yet as my main 3x3 method is CFOP but I also like Roux so I was thinking maybe I can just learn one set of algs instead of two.

CLL algs are really easy. Many of them are OLL algs you already know. Many of them also translate into COLL very well, or some sort of OLLCP. I think it's really helpful to at least know how the recognition works for these cases. It can help a lot in predicting PLL on 3x3.

 

[Chree]

CLL algs are really easy. Many of them are OLL algs you already know. Many of them also translate into COLL very well, or some sort of OLLCP. I think it's really helpful to at least know how the recognition works for these cases. It can help a lot in predicting PLL on 3x3.

Seconded. I use CP recognition for Ortega to predict PBL, as well. So it has lots of uses.

 

[JanW]

Here's an average of 12 for me that is decent. Although I was going to try and film a nice clean session and it turned out very messy, tons of DNFs and stuff. I restarted the camera for this.

Check out at about 5:10, I had back to back 23.59s. Then another 23 later.

It's funny my last video was a month ago and was 38 average. Just two more months and I should be to 8 second average.

https://youtu.be/9cGpag_Wocg

Very nice, can't believe how calm it looks. Seems so easy...

Finally finished the Ao100 I started yesterday. The last 33.61 PB single was shattered only three solves later: 28.83. First (and so far only) sub 30! Sune and EP skip. Also had my first sub 40 Ao12 (39.96) and by far best Ao100 so far: 43.07.

I switched to my stickerless for the last 30 or so solves and average times went down with 1-2 seconds. I feel my regular Zhanchi might be a bit too fast and wobbly for me, get some lockups when I can't control it properly. The stickerless is tighter and slower. Can't wait to get the 7 different cubes that are in the mail, hopefully I will find something there that suits my current solving skills better. The order included some slower and intermediate cubes, as well as also a TangLong.

 

[muchacho]

I'm not sure but I think Alex Lau uses CMLL algs for 2x2 (and he averages 3-4 seconds). I might try that, I'm too lazy to learn CLL for 2x2 (although I like 2x2 very much).

Ouch, I've tried (for the first time) with the CMLLs I know and recognition/execution on a 2x2 (hopefully just for now) is a pain in the arse.

 

[mafergut]

Thanks, it's fixed now!

Nice improvement this last month Jason! Nice to see you insert F2L pairs in the back with such confidence in the first 23.59 (for sure in other solves as well, I just spotted you doing it during that solve). You don't even look like your trying really hard as muchacho points out. Not sure about 8 seconds but I'm sure you will be close to 20 in no time at this pace.

CLL algs are really easy. Many of them are OLL algs you already know. Many of them also translate into COLL very well, or some sort of OLLCP. I think it's really helpful to at least know how the recognition works for these cases. It can help a lot in predicting PLL on 3x3.

I'm not sure but I think Alex Lau uses CMLL algs for 2x2 (and he averages 3-4 seconds). I might try that, I'm too lazy to learn CLL for 2x2 (although I like 2x2 very much).

Seconded. I use CP recognition for Ortega to predict PBL, as well. So it has lots of uses.

Thank you all for your feedback. I will try to take a look at CLL if it has so many benefits. Also, how many can also be used as COLL? Because learning those was also on my todo list (for OH 3x3 so that I can avoid all those ugly non-2gen PLLs and just stick to EPLL). To be honest, I have too many things on my todo list, I will have to prioritize. Would you recommend to learn them in order of more things preserved to less things preserved? Or the other way around? Because I'm afraid if I start learning COLL then I will be too lazy to learn specific CLL and CMLL and will just use COLL algs for Roux and 2x2 instead

A different thing would be to do that on purpose, like, e.g., you finish F2B and happen to have already EO done, then you could use COLL instead of CMLL to preserve EO. Not sure if any Roux solver does that.

 

[EvilGnome6]

2x2 is a pain in the arse.

Yes. Yes it is.

 

[LL Cool Skip]

I occasionally do Roux practice because it's a very fun method. My CMLL algs are all just my favorite OLLCP algs I know for those cases. Many of the CLL algs for 2x2 don't work as COLL but with minor modifications they do. For instance, this is my CLL alg: R' U R U2' R2' F R F' R, and my COLL for the same case: R' U R U2 R' L' U R U' L. I recommend learning COLL.

 

[Jason Green]

Tip for embedding videos... change curly brackets to square brackets:

Thanks for the tip, I usually post from the Tapatalk app and it shows them as videos anyway. I'm having a little trouble getting it to work, I even tried using the video icon from the desktop website...

Edit - got it working. I overlooked your ";" in the video string and copy/pasted my own. Strange the little video icon on the website figured out how to pull it in once I pasted in the long URL version. Is there a simple way to do that from Tapatalk or do you have to manually edit the video link?

Viewing that video a non cuber might think it must be easy to average 28 seconds...

Very nice, can't believe how calm it looks. Seems so easy...

Finally finished the Ao100 I started yesterday. The last 33.61 PB single was shattered only three solves later: 28.83. First (and so far only) sub 30!

Well I guess I look calm while cubing, I'll take it as a compliment. Although I'm probably one to look like that even if I'm not.

Good job Jan, you're not far behind me!

Nice improvement this last month Jason! Nice to see you insert F2L pairs in the back with such confidence in the first 23.59 (for sure in other solves as well, I just spotted you doing it during that solve). You don't even look like your trying really hard as muchacho points out. Not sure about 8 seconds but I'm sure you will be close to 20 in no time at this pace.

Thanks, I need to study my own videos a little more and watch for those things. All I notice is lots of pauses still! Yeah the progress definitely slows down, it was fun getting new PBs every day or two when I was slower, but it's also fun to be improved. Seemed like once I got under 40 it was like will I ever get under 35 (probably took a couple more weeks), and then same for 30. I did feel like I took a little "jump" from about 31 - 28/29. It reminds me of what Lars Petrus says about improving in "quantum leaps". http://lar5.com/cube/menthol.html

 

[h2f]

By the way, not counting the 1.56 3-mover 2x2 solve I got the other day (because it needs to be a 4-mover to be a legit WCA scramble) today I got a nice 10-move 2.43 single and a 6.00 Ao50 and 6.21 Ao100 with Ortega... with my Zhanchi 2x2. Maybe after all, when lubed and tensioned, it will not be a bad cube. Slowly improving but I don't see how I can get past the 5 second mark with Ortega. Maybe when I reach low 5 average it will be time to learn CLL/EG. Didn't think I'd say this but, I'm starting to enjoy 2x2 a lot.

Nice. My ao100 with Ortega is sub-8 and your times are very impressive too me.

Have you tried putting time limit on memo? How rigidly structured is your memo? I'm wondering whether to force myself to do less reviewing...

Well, I've thought it's time to try this again. Earlier I did it to get 1 minute memo. My memo is not rigid. When I'm relaxed I can do it sub30. But when I'm not and I get hard scramble it can be 1:30. Usually it takes around 40 seconds. When I practice and I do dnf I redo solve on half solved cube to practice shorter memo. And after all it is quite funny. Today I got 50 seconds solve with 8 edges and 5 corners (2x3-cycle). I thought it's time to review less. Usually I do 2 reviews of edges or just repeat it loudly to myself but often I do more. I think it's up of your solving time - when you solve corners (I solve corners first) in around 30 seconds or you must remeber edges longer if execution of corners takes 15 seconds. So you need to repeat it and review. But when it's shorter it's time to review less or not review...

 

[Chree]

I did feel like I took a little "jump" from about 31 - 28/29. It reminds me of what Lars Petrus says about improving in "quantum leaps". http://lar5.com/cube/menthol.html

My favorite line from this page was always the opener, and it was a personal motto for years: "Being able to solve Rubik's cube very fast is a near useless skill, that takes a lot of time to acquire, and does not typically impress the opposite sex. If you think you have better things to do, I can only agree. You probably have." - Lars Petrus

 

[Jason Green]

My favorite line from this page was always the opener, and it was a personal motto for years: "Being able to solve Rubik's cube very fast is a near useless skill, that takes a lot of time to acquire, and does not typically impress the opposite sex. If you think you have better things to do, I can only agree. You probably have." - Lars Petrus

Yes, Lars was cubing when cubing wasn't cool. That just came to mind, is it cool yet? I think it's cool...

 

[Logiqx]

Yes, Lars was cubing when cubing wasn't cool. That just came to mind, is it cool yet? I think it's cool...

There is a fine line between cool and uncool. I think we're just about on the right side of it.

 

[Berd]

Nice improvement this last month Jason! Nice to see you insert F2L pairs in the back with such confidence in the first 23.59 (for sure in other solves as well, I just spotted you doing it during that solve). You don't even look like your trying really hard as muchacho points out. Not sure about 8 seconds but I'm sure you will be close to 20 in no time at this pace.







Thank you all for your feedback. I will try to take a look at CLL if it has so many benefits. Also, how many can also be used as COLL? Because learning those was also on my todo list (for OH 3x3 so that I can avoid all those ugly non-2gen PLLs and just stick to EPLL). To be honest, I have too many things on my todo list, I will have to prioritize. Would you recommend to learn them in order of more things preserved to less things preserved? Or the other way around? Because I'm afraid if I start learning COLL then I will be too lazy to learn specific CLL and CMLL and will just use COLL algs for Roux and 2x2 instead

A different thing would be to do that on purpose, like, e.g., you finish F2B and happen to have already EO done, then you could use COLL instead of CMLL to preserve EO. Not sure if any Roux solver does that.

Bumping and old topic here but it's quite important to stress, most COLLs are awful compared to there CLL equivalent. For instance the double sune case (double headlights) can be solved 2 gen in 5 moves on 2x2. However saying that, F (R U R' U')*3 F' is still aguably the best alg for its case.

I'm learning CLL at the moment but I already know COLL, the learning process is taking longer but it's so worth it. If you want to get even sub 5 at 2x2 then (aside from the John method) learning CLLs will be a good idea.

Hope this helps!

 

[MarcelP]

Yes, Lars was cubing when cubing wasn't cool. That just came to mind, is it cool yet? I think it's cool...

It still does not get you into any pants