Older cubers discussions

[JohnnyReggae]

With all this talk of blind I would like to get back into blind solving. I started over a year ago and had limited success using OP because it's easy to learn. I didn't pursue it much because I'm terrible with making up word pairs or sentences and because of the number of possible word pairs there is just so much to try remember. I just felt overwhelmed.

So please excuse my ignorance as I haven't paid any attention to the blind discussions you guys have been having because it has been like a jumbo jet going straight over my head. Should I start again with OP or go straight into using M2 ? I did briefly look at M2 over a year ago but found it confusing. Are there any resources that you would recommend I look at first ?

 

[mark49152]

They were my first guess but then I thought that you might do S and I for the advanced r2 moves.

Which comps are the UK cubers going to if those announced so far. I'm booked for Manchester and should be good for High Wycombe. Wales is too far and not so keen on Guildford due to M25 and no 3BLD. Hoping to get to Peterborough if it doesn't clash with anything. It's close enough for a quick dash for favourite events.

I avoid S and I because if you start a cycle on one of those you need to solve it again at the end of the cycle, and might end up with a messier case.

I'm skipping Wales since there are a spate of UK comps coming up and I don't have enough brownie points to cover them all. Will try to make all others though.

Mark's option is good for adjacent pieces and I'd stick with U2 for Ufl. Personally I use simple comms for adjacent centres. eg Ubr - Ubl - Fur is F' l F r' F' l' F r You can set up to these in no more than 2 moves I believe and they work on the D face too with a double slice move. They are easy to get used to. Just remember to solve the non U face piece first.

I tend to use and suggest the U2/U/U pattern because it uses the usual U2 style inserts, so is arguably easiest, at the cost of a single U2 move.

IMHO a good stepping stone from U2 towards full comms is to stick with exchanging on the U layer but insert to a piece adjacent to your buffer. It would require a setup for the case you gave, but an example for Ubr-Ubl-Ruf would be [l u l', U']. That's good because it's then a simple step to graduate to exchanging on a slice - e.g. Ubr-Ful-Ruf would be [l' U' l, u] which offers better move savings for adjacent side targets.

As with r2 and M2, the journey seems to be a continuum from (at the easy end) sticking to a simple, logical and consistent system that sacrifices a little move efficiency in favour of easy thinkahead and good flow, towards (at the difficult end) a complete set of speed optimal comms chosen independently for each individual case with no regard to organising them into a system.

Generally centre comms are pretty easy though. It just depends where you like to be on the trade off between move efficiency and minimal thinking.

@JohnnyReggae: I recommend going straight for M2 and using Noah's tutorial, but make sure you can solve the cube with that method sighted before adding the complication of the blindfold.

 

[newtonbase]

IMHO a good stepping stone from U2 towards full comms is to stick with exchanging on the U layer but insert to a piece adjacent to your buffer. It would require a setup for the case you gave, but an example for Ubr-Ubl-Ruf would be [l u l', U']. That's good because it's then a simple step to graduate to exchanging on a slice - e.g. Ubr-Ful-Ruf would be [l' U' l, u] which offers better move savings for adjacent side targets.

I do quite a lot of centre comms in untimed solves (to the point where I forgot to just do U2 on a tricky one in 5BLD practice) and your example is a good one that I should do more of.

 

[Jason Green]

With all this talk of blind I would like to get back into blind solving. I started over a year ago and had limited success using OP because it's easy to learn. I didn't pursue it much because I'm terrible with making up word pairs or sentences and because of the number of possible word pairs there is just so much to try remember. I just felt overwhelmed.

So please excuse my ignorance as I haven't paid any attention to the blind discussions you guys have been having because it has been like a jumbo jet going straight over my head. Should I start again with OP or go straight into using M2 ? I did briefly look at M2 over a year ago but found it confusing. Are there any resources that you would recommend I look at first ?

At this point I would say go straight to M2 as well. JPerm also has a good M2 video on YouTube. I know what you mean about the jet flying overhead, that's still how I feel with all the big blind stuff right now.

 

[pglewis]

Should I start again with OP or go straight into using M2 ? I did briefly look at M2 over a year ago but found it confusing. Are there any resources that you would recommend I look at first ?

I went straight for M2 without learning OP edges and if I can learn basic M2 execution in a couple days then anyone in this thread probably can . The setups are mostly very intuitive, ignoring the M slice targets. I didn't even worry about memorizing the exceptions initially, I did my execution learning with a cheat sheet; there are only a couple and they were easy to commit to memory once the mechanics were understood.

I learned from Noah's vids; JPerm is always great and he has one on M2 now as well. I highly suggest tracing and solving 2 edges at a time for sighted M2 execution practice/learning due to the quirk of the M slice being flipped on even targets.

Ask about anything specific that's confusing.

 

[openseas]

That's nice. I hadn't considered a U move to float the buffer but it makes a lot of sense.
Do any of the top 3BLD guys who float buffers just set up to their normal buffer piece or do they all know multiple buffers now?

Gianfranco & Daniel, they float buffer. Jeff does only in a certain case when he used DF buffer (now he switched to UF, completely)

 

[mitja]

Should I start again with OP or go straight into using M2 ? I did briefly look at M2 over a year ago but found it confusing. Are there any resources that you would recommend I look at first ?

I started blind a little more then a year ago and went straight for M2. I also learned from Noah and from Zane's M2 guide here:

 

[h2f]

Do any of the top 3BLD guys who float buffers just set up to their normal buffer piece or do they all know multiple buffers now?

I was analyzing only some of their solves but it looks like few buffers.

 

[JohnnyReggae]

I went straight for M2 without learning OP edges and if I can learn basic M2 execution in a couple days then anyone in this thread probably can . The setups are mostly very intuitive, ignoring the M slice targets. I didn't even worry about memorizing the exceptions initially, I did my execution learning with a cheat sheet; there are only a couple and they were easy to commit to memory once the mechanics were understood.

I learned from Noah's vids; JPerm is always great and he has one on M2 now as well. I highly suggest tracing and solving 2 edges at a time for sighted M2 execution practice/learning due to the quirk of the M slice being flipped on even targets.

Ask about anything specific that's confusing.

I did have a look at J-Perm's M2 video yesterday and he does explain things quite nicely and it does make sense. I just need to get used to the Speffz notation because when I first learnt blind I followed SpeedCubeReview's method which used a different lettering scheme. I do want to follow Speffz because it is the standard. Pity I didn't know that back then.

I tried a few sighted solves using OP yesterday just to try get used to Speffz and to see if I could still do it. 1 out of 3 is not great. My problem was identifying the wrong position on a couple pieces in the 2 that failed.

Thanks for the pointers guys I really do appreciate it

 

[openseas]

I did have a look at J-Perm's M2 video yesterday and he does explain things quite nicely and it does make sense. I just need to get used to the Speffz notation because when I first learnt blind I followed SpeedCubeReview's method which used a different lettering scheme. I do want to follow Speffz because it is the standard. Pity I didn't know that back then.

I tried a few sighted solves using OP yesterday just to try get used to Speffz and to see if I could still do it. 1 out of 3 is not great. My problem was identifying the wrong position on a couple pieces in the 2 that failed.

Thanks for the pointers guys I really do appreciate it

I also started with M2/OP, J-perm's video was very helpful. Both Shawn (SpeedCubeReview) & Dylan (J-perm) are great but Dylan appears to have a better understanding of the cube, algorithm and grips, so better when you want to step up your game whereas Shawn is more suitable for beginners (some of his recommendations are not good for those who want to improve beyond intermediate phase).

 

[mitja]

I do want to follow Speffz because it is the standard. Pity I didn't know that back then.

For helper, just take some old cube and write letters on it, or take a cube box and put letters on it. I never regret to have my own scheme, it is of no importance. To me, it was important to use usable letter, that means, to throw the difficult ones into the buffer, because they won't be used. Also, I use my language and it has few different letters that are very useful to my memo. What I noticed is, that even if lots of people use speffz, they change some detail someware, switch two letters, go CCW or follow the faces differently. On the end, when I try to read other pople experiences, there is only few that strictly follow speffz. So, I need to think from scratch anyway.

 

[JohnnyReggae]

I also started with M2/OP, J-perm's video was very helpful. Both Shawn (SpeedCubeReview) & Dylan (J-perm) are great but Dylan appears to have a better understanding of the cube, algorithm and grips, so better when you want to step up your game whereas Shawn is more suitable for beginners (some of his recommendations are not good for those who want to improve beyond intermediate phase).

I do need to give Shawn some kudos for his blind solving video that I initially learnt from because he explained it so simply that I understood it. I did look at Noah's videos at the time and to be honest I found them extremely boring and long. So much so that I switched off watching them. At least with Shawn's I grasped the concept and could actually do a full blind solve after a short time.

J-Perm (Dylan) has a great way of explaining things and I do agree that he seems to have a better understanding of the cube and algorithms. I enjoy watching both their videos and have subscribed to both.

 

[newtonbase]

I tried a few sighted solves using OP yesterday just to try get used to Speffz and to see if I could still do it. 1 out of 3 is not great. My problem was identifying the wrong position on a couple pieces in the 2 that failed.

Nothing wrong with 1/3. We all identify pieces wrongly sometimes. I'm a fan of marking up a cube with your letter scheme when practicing and keeping it to the side for reference.

Floating buffers on 3BLD does look interesting. If you start a new cycle on a sticker that's one move from your buffer like DR or DL just set it up the buffer and save 12 moves. Downsides would be having another piece on that face affected by the setup to account for. Also, if the cycle ends on a different sticker (RD or LD) then you have a flipped edge to fix. Fortunately you know about these issues before you execute so you can just solve normally if you wish. I need to have a play with this.
EDIT: there are going to be issues if the break is after an odd number of targets so it's less useful than I'd thought.

 

[SpartanSailor]

Last night I was playing around with my skewb and 2x2... haven't done much of either in a bit. Then switched to 3x3 for a few quick goes. Shocked myself with a 17.77--both a PB and the 1st time I went sub-18! It was just a single, but I was pretty excited.

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled programs... LOL

 

[newtonbase]

Last night I was playing around with my skewb and 2x2... haven't done much of either in a bit. Then switched to 3x3 for a few quick goes. Shocked myself with a 17.77--both a PB and the 1st time I went sub-18! It was just a single, but I was pretty excited.

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled programs... LOL

Well done.

Finally didn't screw up MBLD practice. 4/4 in 17:51. 12:37 memo is reasonable but 5:14 is my execution PB and the overall time is PB for all attempts including failures. Did nothing fancy.

I'm now going to spend 20 mins trying to get a new 3BLD PB as feeling good.

 

[Jason Green]

Last night I was playing around with my skewb and 2x2... haven't done much of either in a bit. Then switched to 3x3 for a few quick goes. Shocked myself with a 17.77--both a PB and the 1st time I went sub-18! It was just a single, but I was pretty excited.

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled programs... LOL

I've found you have to share all PBs here or it's bad luck. . Nice job!

 

[One Wheel]

I've found you have to share all PBs here or it's bad luck. . Nice job!

Hmm, I've found the opposite. I've had some pretty nice runs on 4, 5, and 7 since posting my 6x6 single, but not a lot of progress on 6x6 .
Let's test it: I got a 2:09.xx 5x5 single yesterday, as part of a 2:29.xx Ao12.

 

[newtonbase]

1:20.08 3BLD PB. 6/12.

 

[SpartanSailor]

Hmm, I've found the opposite. I've had some pretty nice runs on 4, 5, and 7 since posting my 6x6 single, but not a lot of progress on 6x6 .
Let's test it: I got a 2:09.xx 5x5 single yesterday, as part of a 2:29.xx Ao12.

I certainly don't wish to jinx anything! I shared it with my wife and she said, "is that fast?"

 

[mark49152]

1:20.08 3BLD PB. 6/12.

Very nice, and nice MBLD too. You are breathing down my neck! Are you still using pure M2/OP? What comms or tricks?