OLL or PLL

[Sub1Hour]

As someone who is sorta bad at memorizing--that is to say, rote memorization takes me a long time--that is encouraging. So what would you recommend a 60-90s solver focus on after learning 4LLL? (Sorry, I posted this before Nmile's post showed up.)

Effieceny during Cross and F2L, combined with slow solves, and I would also work on your TPS. What is your average TPS during a solve?

 

[zslane]

do slow solves...

Since my fingertrick game is pretty weak at this stage, slow solves is pretty much all I do.

What does "F2L efficiency" mean? What slows me down the most in F2L is finding the pairs and deciding the best way to pair them. The time it takes to decide between one sequence of moves over another (which might only differ by one turn) is more than I am saving, and since I have zero lookahead ability, I'm not really sure what "efficiency" is supposed to mean in my situation.

 

[zslane]

What is your average TPS during a solve?

How would I go about measuring that?

If I had to guess I'd say around 2 TPS. Probably lower given how much time I spend looking for F2L pairs and not making turns.

 

[ArbishAli]

If you average 1:45, then don't learn either if them until around sub 30. Then learn PLL.

Actually I get confused when I time my solves. And I want to improve my cross. And I also wanna work on F2L.

 

[Nmile7300]

Just practice right now and work on cross and F2L. And I'm not sure what you mean by "confused" or why it has anything to do with this.

 

[ProStar]

Since my fingertrick game is pretty weak at this stage, slow solves is pretty much all I do.

What does "F2L efficiency" mean? What slows me down the most in F2L is finding the pairs and deciding the best way to pair them. The time it takes to decide between one sequence of moves over another (which might only differ by one turn) is more than I am saving, and since I have zero lookahead ability, I'm not really sure what "efficiency" is supposed to mean in my situation.

Efficiency is how many moves it takes to solve F2L. Try to be able to solve almost any F2L case in 8 moves or less. You don't really need lookahead right now. Also, try to know your intuitive solutions so well that you can execute them just as fast as you could an alg. You probably can't reach all of these goals until around 20 seconds, but improve at them little by little

How would I go about measuring that?

If I had to guess I'd say around 2 TPS. Probably lower given how much time I spend looking for F2L pairs and not making turns.

Turns/Seconds is the formula for TPS. So if I had a 50 move solve and did it in 10 seconds, then 50/10 = 5 TPS. This is your average turns a second, although it is slightly skewed because your LL TPS is way higher than F2L TPS

 

[zslane]

Yeah, but I don't count my moves during a solve. That would completely distract me from the task at hand.

 

[ProStar]

Yeah, but I don't count my moves during a solve. That would completely distract me from the task at hand.

Of course you cannot do it in a speed solve, but do a solve dedicated to counting moves. Go to alg.cubing.net and type in your solution as you're solving the cube, move by move(untimed of course). It will show you the total number of moves

 

[Nmile7300]

Also slow solves doesn't refer to how fast you are. Slow solves is kind of a bad way to describe it, the better term is untimed solves. In an untimed solve you don't try to go fast and instead work on efficiency.

 

[zslane]

Try to be able to solve almost any F2L case in 8 moves or less.

What is your stance on cube rotations? They effectively count as moves, but are theoretically unnecessary, right?

And do you have any suggestions for speeding up/improving pair search?

 

[zslane]

Of course you cannot do it in a speed solve, but do a solve dedicated to counting moves. Go to alg.cubing.net and type in your solution as you're solving the cube, move by move(untimed of course). It will show you the total number of moves

Okay, but how is that useful in obtaining an accurate TPS measurement?

 

[Nmile7300]

Okay, but how is that useful in obtaining an accurate TPS measurement?

Like we said, moves divided by time is your TPS, so you need moves to measure it.

 

[zslane]

Like we said, moves divided by time is your TPS, so you need moves to measure it.

Yes, but if one can't measure the number of moves during a normal solve, then one can't get an accurate TPS value (which is only meaningful in the context of a normal solve).

 

[ProStar]

Yes, but if one can't measure the number of moves during a normal solve, then one can't get an accurate TPS value (which is only meaningful in the context of a normal solve).

You could try recording your solves then reconstructing them

 

[zslane]

Is that how people typically obtain their TPS?

 

[Nmile7300]

Honestly you are overthinking this. At your stage, just doing solves will help the most. How much do you practice?

 

[zslane]

I have a cube in my hand throughout most of the day. I probably do several dozen solves a day. I know that's not that much, but given all the other demands on my time, that's what I'm able to manage.

 

[Nmile7300]

That's fine at your stage. How long have you been stuck at 60-90 seconds?

 

[zslane]

I'd say about a week or two at this point. I only just finished memorizing all the 2-look OLL algs this week.

I can always find an 8-move cross solution, but I can't yet fingertrick it. Most of my F2L pairs are slotted in 8 moves or less, but finding each pair and deciding what series of moves to use is the really time-consuming part (relatively speaking).

 

[Nmile7300]

Then just keep solving. If you've only been stuck there for a week then that hardly calls for learning anything new. If your F2L and cross are efficient then just solve and your recognition of F2L pairs will improve drastically over time.