Is the f2l really that faster?

[Beatlecube]

I know how to solve the beginners method and my time is about 45 seconds. Now I want to know the f2l and I have checked badmeisto. It just does not seem that faster its just more confusing. should I skip to oll and so on?

 

[Beatlecube]

And do I actually have to memorize all those algorithms?

 

[~Adam~]

No. F2L can be done in 5 seconds on average by some people. You just have to get on and pratice it.

Don't memorise all the algs. Just learn intuitive. Only learn the algs for the complicated cases once you've got intuitive down pat.

I've been doing F2L for about 10 months and average about 11 seconds and I don't turn very fast.

 

[Erzz]

Just practice practice practice. It's a huge difference

 

[Cool Frog]

F2L has a lower move count that LBL on average, recognition at first can be hard, but the P word helps a lot.

 

[Einfrein]

I have never averaged my F2L, but I think it's around 7-8 seconds or so. It's MUCH faster than Corners and then Second Layer algorithms. When I learned F2Ls in the beginning I was memorizing algorithms - DON'T DO THAT! If you really have no clue on how to do F2L, then check some algorithms. Look at what moves you make to make the pair and then inserting it, you won't have to waste a lot of time to learn algorithms if you learn by thinking. And if you can't figure out on how to do some particular F2L cases, check them up too, and memorize them. I think most people can figure out most F2Ls, but still can't figure out some cases.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

F2L+Cross often takes the longest (after all, it's solving 2/3s of the cube), so it's a very good idea to master what is hardest.

 

[stinkocheeze]

STOP MAKING THREADS. PLEASE. JUST. STOP.
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...ne-answer-question-thread&p=504360#post504360
or use search function
ot:
yes, its fast.. No. You can use intuitive f2l which requires no algorithms, but there are a few hard cases where intuitive is pretty slow.

 

[irontwig]

If you don't want to learn F2L you can learn to build a layer efficiently instead and learn Waterman. : )

 

[ColdFactor]

I've never looked at any F2L algorithms and I can tell you intuitive F2L is better to learn.
When I first learned F2L it slowed me down for over a week but I soon improved so it may seem slow at first but it is definitely faster.

 

[Ranzha]

What I do is I build an easy 2x2x2 block and extend to cross, then insert F2L pairs.
Inefficient, I know, but still getting be sub-20.

 

[qqwref]

If it wasn't faster, why would every fast person (except those who use totally different methods) be using it?

 

[Cubenovice]

If it wasn't faster, why would every fast person (except those who use totally different methods) be using it?

Devils advocate mode on
Perhaps they don't practice LBL enough?

 

[Olji]

Devils advocate mode on
Perhaps they don't practice LBL enough?

lol missed that text for a while, but seriously, does'nt it make sense to you that its faster doing 2 steps (corners and middle layer) at the same time instead of individually?

 

[rock1313]

I't may seem really hard at first and your times may be slower but with practise it will be way faster

 

[cookieyo145]

is a scooter faster or is a car faster?????
the car
go with f2l

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

If there's a case on F2L you don't how to solve, find an algorithm and do it slowly. You will understand how it works.

 

[Hiero]

I can't believe how many people responded to this. With beginner's method you put in the corners then take out the corner you just put in, pair it up with the edge and then insert it. With f2l you skip the first two steps, you just pair it up and insert it. It usually takes a whole lot less moves than the 8-count algorithm to put in an edge piece and the moves it takes to insert a corner by itself.

At my school everyone uses beginner method and some of the faster students I race in slow motion. They are sure they are going to win because I'm going so slow. They don't understand that my solve takes half as many moves as theirs'.

 

[uberCuber]

I have never seen a single sub-15 average with LBL (in fact can't even recall seeing a sub-15 single), but hundreds of sub-10 averages with F2L.
Hmmmm..

 

[waffle=ijm]

still LBL. but not beginner's method.