Dan Harris Beginner Method

[Anonymous]

How does everyone think Dan Harris's beginner method compares to others, like the ones you learned from? I know it's kind of similar to most other LBL-based beginner methods, but three things seem (to me) to be slightly flawed.

First of all, it's a LBL method, which really doesn't provide an easy transition to anything other than Fridrich.

Second of all, he provides an extremely algorithm-based approach, doing nothing to explain even basic things about the algorithms he provides. For instance, the way he teaches the cross is rather mechanical. Rather than explaining the few basic concepts needed, he provides four set sequences to perform. This limits a lot of alternate approaches that could otherwise be used, even by a beginner.

Lastly, I think the order in which his method solves the LL is a little awkward in terms of transition for any method, even Fridrich. The orientation of edges is acceptable, but after that he finishes the edges, then solves the corners. To me, this forces beginners who have mastered his method to learn all of either two-look OLL or PLL before they can begin to incorporate either into their solves.

That was a lot of text, so I hope I don't come off sounding superior- I think it's still a really good tutorial. Does anyone have any thoughts?

 

[Cyrus C.]

It's one of those methods that is just meant for you to learn how to solve the cube. It's not meant as a transition into Fridrich, this is one of the many reasons why people don't like Dan Brown's tutorial. I've never seen the video but that's what it seems like from your explanation.

 

[Anonymous]

Is your reference to Dan Brown an example, or did you think I was talking about his tutorial?

 

[Cyrus C.]

Is your reference to Dan Brown an example, or did you think I was talking about his tutorial?

I didn't think you were talking about Dan Brown.

 

[Anonymous]

For reference: http://www.cubestation.co.uk/cs2/index.php?page=3x3x3/beginner/beginner

I disagree that it's a tutorial just to solve the cube- IMO it's pretty clear that he wants his beginner tutorial to be the starting point of a potentially serious speedcuber.

 

[Chapuunka]

I learned from his book and almost got sub-40 with it, though I'm not incredibly happy with it. It's not the worst out there, but it's certainly not the best. The good thing is that it teaches cross on bottom.

 

[nck]

I learnt from his site in 2005. I guess I was too stupid to go onto youtube back then.
But yeah....his tutorials are alright. I started learning the fridrich method on his site before i was even sub 2min. I printed out all his algs for f2l and studied them until one day they all seem to 'click'. It is not a bad place to learn from if you like figuring things out for yourself i guess...

 

[rubiknewbie]

I didn't learn beginner's tutorial from Dan Harris's website cos by the time I got to his website I already know the beginner stuff.

There are 2 things I learn a lot from his website:

1. The OLLs and PLLs which I use quite a lot of and many of them replace Jessica Fridrich's OLLs/PLLs which I started from. Dan Harris has more standard algorithms. After I read his book, I relearn the algorithms again and replace yet more algorithms.

2. VHF2L which I used his algorithms as a starting point.

Another impact he has on me was his emphasis on solving cross on bottom which finally made me forced myself to change my habit of solving cross on top. I remembered he said something like if you have been solving with cross on top it is important you get out of this habit as soon as possible!!

 

[nck]

I didn't learn beginner's tutorial from Dan Harris's website cos by the time I got to his website I already know the beginner stuff.

There are 2 things I learn a lot from his website:

1. The OLLs and PLLs which I use quite a lot of and many of them replace Jessica Fridrich's OLLs/PLLs which I started from. Dan Harris has more standard algorithms. After I read his book, I relearn the algorithms again and replace yet more algorithms.

2. VHF2L which I used his algorithms as a starting point.

Another impact he has on me was his emphasis on solving cross on bottom which finally made me forced myself to change my habit of solving cross on top. I remembered he said something like if you have been solving with cross on top it is important you get out of this habit as soon as possible!!

I never learnt solving cross on top.
I figured out how to solve the first 2layers by myself and my friend taught me how to do the last layer when i just started cubing.
I didn't even know about the 'cross' until i discovered his site.

 

[joey]

First of all, it's a LBL method, which really doesn't provide an easy transition to anything other than Fridrich.

What other "beginner" methods don't usually provide bias towards fridrich?

 

[Anonymous]

Petrus could potentially be taught as a beginner's method, can't it? Personally I think that that would be the best system to teach, with maybe a 1-2 Sune OCLL, 2 algs for CPLL, and 2 algs for EPLL.

 

[joey]

Also, this isn't really about Dan Harris but beginners LBL methods in general.

 

[nck]

First of all, it's a LBL method, which really doesn't provide an easy transition to anything other than Fridrich.

What other "beginner" methods don't usually provide bias towards fridrich?

Corner first?