Blindsolving Discussion and Help

[y235]

Going backwards works if it was just some letters back (I'll use letters, but it works the same with everything), but not if you have to undo 20 pieces.

Assuming your correct memo is ABCDEFGH, but you thought it was ABEFGH, and after that, you realize your mistake, the important question is "Which is the first piece I remembered AFTER the 'gap'?" because that is the first incorrectly solved piece, in our case it's E.

So, you have to get E back into play, by shooting/doing E, than the gap, and finish with E again. In our case, it's ECDE. The total solve would be ABEFGHECDE, instead of going backwards ABEFGHHGFECDEFGH. WARNING, if you're using M2, the CD will be solved EC DE, so the M-slice will be NOT like if you'd solve it normal.

Thanks ths is really helpful.
BTW i'm using TURBO

 

[lucarubik]

same as y235

 

[5BLD]

I don't know if this is necessarily the fastest way, but I do this:

Say the double transposition you're left with is:
(AB)(CD)

I would do two three cycles to solve this. You can either do:
1) (ABCDC) which is (ABC) followed by (ADC)
or
2) (ACDCB) which is (ACD) followed by (ACB)

Basically you're not doing anything other than just breaking the A buffer piece from the first cycle into the second cycle, solving that cycle, then closing the cycle after.

Or for 3x3x3 you can do a setup into a Z perm or H perm (edges) or E perm or X perm (corners).

Aha! Makes sense! Thank you very much



Got yet another question... When would you recommend trying MBLD? Is it a good idea to try it even if you're a beginner...?

 

[riffz]

If you feel comfortable with it and have a decent success rate when going at a medium pace then I'd say go for it if you want.

 

[JyH]

Do any of you guys who use things like Roman Rooms or similar memorization methods use them to help you study for things like tests and quizzes? I would be highly interested in putting work into Roman Rooms if any of you guys have had any success with it. I don't really see letter pairs being useful for this.

 

[Jakube]

Do any of you guys who use things like Roman Rooms or similar memorization methods use them to help you study for things like tests and quizzes? I would be highly interested in putting work into Roman Rooms if any of you guys have had any success with it. I don't really see letter pairs being useful for this.

You can use Roman Rooms f.i. to memorize historical dates (every number is a letter). Doubtless there are also other possibilities.

 

[RyanReese09]

I mean I suppose you could somehow do it. However, I never study for any tests. 16 years of education and I believe I've studied a total of 5 times.

 

[Julian]

Do any of you guys who use things like Roman Rooms or similar memorization methods use them to help you study for things like tests and quizzes? I would be highly interested in putting work into Roman Rooms if any of you guys have had any success with it. I don't really see letter pairs being useful for this.

Moonwalking with Einstein by Joshua Foer

 

[Zane_C]

Do any of you guys who use things like Roman Rooms or similar memorization methods use them to help you study for things like tests and quizzes? I would be highly interested in putting work into Roman Rooms if any of you guys have had any success with it. I don't really see letter pairs being useful for this.

I use a journey method by placing letter-pairs in locations (mostly outdoor) along a set route which I visualise.

I've found letter-pairs really helpful (asides from cubing), for example memorising numbers and the periodic table of elements (which I've forgot most of).
As for images which aren't letter-pairs, I've used them to memorise an essay and many short facts prior to a test.

Don't become too dependent on this form of learning. It's good for memorising things easily and fast, you haven't learnt anything if you need to associate information with images.

 

[minime12358]

Do any of you guys who use things like Roman Rooms or similar memorization methods use them to help you study for things like tests and quizzes? I would be highly interested in putting work into Roman Rooms if any of you guys have had any success with it. I don't really see letter pairs being useful for this.

Ok, I had to answer this one...

We had a geography quiz about seas, rivers, mountains, everything that people like barely know except for in the US (lawl)

So 5 minutes before the quiz, I just memoed the first two letters of each, going in rows. 5 min memo, perfect execution lol.

Ok, so my question, I will describe in the next post as it is long

 

[minime12358]

Ok, so here is my idea:

Take the scramble, R' L2 F2 L2 B U' L' D' U R' F' U B' U F R' D U' L' U2 L' B D' U' F2
If I take it from the angle that it is, my memo is:
Q N W J R K U |New cycle| A X C F A |End of edges| L C X U K B |New Cycle| D E

Ok, so it is 12 for edges and 8 for corners, interestingly enough. It is also notable that there was a flipped corner, the D E in the memo.

My idea (Probably been suggested many times by other people, but still) is more applicable for multi blind, but it would work for speed. It prevents any missed memo or miss memo.

Basically, simply memo what the piece is, not where it is going. The advantages:
This means that every single cube will have Exactly 20 letters of memorization.
It also means that you can not accidentally miss a twisted corner as the entire cube is in your memorization.
Potentially faster memorization (You memorize in a straight line basically if you know your color scheme well...) .
The disadvantages:
Possibly longer execution recall (Could be just as fast with practice)


I Would go around the U Face starting at the top and going clockwise. Then the middle of the front and back, then D face so it is : UB UR UF UL FL FR BR BL DF DR DB DL for edges and simply UBL UBR UFR UFL DFL DFR DBR DBL for corners.
So, the previous scramble would be:
X Q F T V A H W B G J C for edges.

I would then have each room (I dont use rooms right now, but I could always witch) have 20 spots that I could easily recall between.

What do you think? I think that it would really help with multi in my opinion, but I was curious your thoughts.

Oh, and I realize that this has probably been suggested by a noob, but I was wondering what you think of it coming from a logical stand point

And yay! Last post was 200.

 

[Julian]

Ok, so here is my idea:

Take the scramble, R' L2 F2 L2 B U' L' D' U R' F' U B' U F R' D U' L' U2 L' B D' U' F2
If I take it from the angle that it is, my memo is:
Q N W J R K U |New cycle| A X C F A |End of edges| L C X U K B |New Cycle| D E

Ok, so it is 12 for edges and 8 for corners, interestingly enough. It is also notable that there was a flipped corner, the D E in the memo.

My idea (Probably been suggested many times by other people, but still) is more applicable for multi blind, but it would work for speed. It prevents any missed memo or miss memo.

Basically, simply memo what the piece is, not where it is going. The advantages:
This means that every single cube will have Exactly 20 letters of memorization.
It also means that you can not accidentally miss a twisted corner as the entire cube is in your memorization.
Potentially faster memorization (You memorize in a straight line basically if you know your color scheme well...) .
The disadvantages:
Possibly longer execution recall (Could be just as fast with practice)


I Would go around the U Face starting at the top and going clockwise. Then the middle of the front and back, then D face so it is : UB UR UF UL FL FR BR BL DF DR DB DL for edges and simply UBL UBR UFR UFL DFL DFR DBR DBL for corners.
So, the previous scramble would be:
X Q F T V A H W B G J C for edges.

I would then have each room (I dont use rooms right now, but I could always witch) have 20 spots that I could easily recall between.

What do you think? I think that it would really help with multi in my opinion, but I was curious your thoughts.

Oh, and I realize that this has probably been suggested by a noob, but I was wondering what you think of it coming from a logical stand point

And yay! Last post was 200.

Kind of a huge waste if you get a lucky scramble.

 

[minime12358]

Kind of a huge waste if you get a lucky scramble.

But kinda good if you get a bad scramble.. you could just skip that location in the room if it is solved...

 

[TMOY]

I go backwards . Or if I don't care about the success I'll just DNF it (it depends on how far in the solve I am in)

You can also determine the new cycles, it's not that hard and t may be faster than undoing all you have done since the error occurred.
For example, let's say your original cycle is (ABCDEFGHIJ), but you forgot B and executed (ACDEFGH) before realizing somethig was wrong. Then the B slot still contains the C edge, and the B edge has been sent to the C slot instead, so you're left with (AIJ)(BC) to execute.

 

[nickvu2]

Basically, simply memo what the piece is, not where it is going. The advantages:
This means that every single cube will have Exactly 20 letters of memorization.
It also means that you can not accidentally miss a twisted corner as the entire cube is in your memorization.
Potentially faster memorization (You memorize in a straight line basically if you know your color scheme well...) .

That would be great for memorization, but I'm having a hard time translating that into an effective execution strategy. Any ideas?

Initial observations using M2:
*Quick, strait forward memo. (letter pair images)
*It takes an extra step for me to decode my memo sequence: reducing the images back to letters per the usual, then visualizing the cube and recalling what piece occupies the destination position.
*Shooting from DF to LF, I'm going to the opposite sticker than what I memorized, which also complicates recall.

Basically it seems like I'm working out the sequence during recall rather than during memo. It requires a lot more thinking (less brain dead), and I believe that would still be the case even if I was well acquainted with the method. The biggest question is, can it be as fast and as reliable?

 

[porkynator]

Ok, so here is my idea:

Take the scramble, R' L2 F2 L2 B U' L' D' U R' F' U B' U F R' D U' L' U2 L' B D' U' F2
If I take it from the angle that it is, my memo is:
Q N W J R K U |New cycle| A X C F A |End of edges| L C X U K B |New Cycle| D E

Ok, so it is 12 for edges and 8 for corners, interestingly enough. It is also notable that there was a flipped corner, the D E in the memo.

My idea (Probably been suggested many times by other people, but still) is more applicable for multi blind, but it would work for speed. It prevents any missed memo or miss memo.

Basically, simply memo what the piece is, not where it is going. The advantages:
This means that every single cube will have Exactly 20 letters of memorization.
It also means that you can not accidentally miss a twisted corner as the entire cube is in your memorization.
Potentially faster memorization (You memorize in a straight line basically if you know your color scheme well...) .
The disadvantages:
Possibly longer execution recall (Could be just as fast with practice)


I Would go around the U Face starting at the top and going clockwise. Then the middle of the front and back, then D face so it is : UB UR UF UL FL FR BR BL DF DR DB DL for edges and simply UBL UBR UFR UFL DFL DFR DBR DBL for corners.
So, the previous scramble would be:
X Q F T V A H W B G J C for edges.

I would then have each room (I dont use rooms right now, but I could always witch) have 20 spots that I could easily recall between.

What do you think? I think that it would really help with multi in my opinion, but I was curious your thoughts.

Oh, and I realize that this has probably been suggested by a noob, but I was wondering what you think of it coming from a logical stand point

And yay! Last post was 200.

That's interesting, I'll try a multi with this method soon, and I'll let you know.

 

[Mike Hughey]

Direct memorization is a nice idea, but the thing that's hard about it is that most memorization tends not to be truly random access. It's hard to go to a specific piece and find its "value". I have to do something like this when solving square-1; for each piece in a given puzzle shape, I have memorized where that piece will be once it has been made cubic. One of the things that slows me down is getting to the particular piece I need as I go - I have to walk through my little "stories" and find the piece I need, and that takes more time than I'd like.

I am curious if Mats Bergsten might have something interesting to add on this, though; I know that he is the reigning expert at the Everest test for pi. This requires a random access capability; I wonder if he does something special for this?

I would think that if you want this to work, the way to go might be to have something like a Roman Room type of method, where you put each single piece into one location. If you did this, it might be fairly random access, and you might get what you want. The only problem with this is that it would require a lot of locations; it would be fine for a single 3x3x3, but I'd hate to think what it would be like for a big multi or a 7x7x7!

 

[riffz]

Translating direct memorization of the cube state into what you need to execute is very difficult.

It's been discussed before, and to be completely honest, I think it's a terrible idea. I'd love to be proven wrong, but it doesn't condense memo enough to be worth it.

 

[minime12358]

Direct memorization is a nice idea, but the thing that's hard about it is that most memorization tends not to be truly random access. It's hard to go to a specific piece and find its "value". I have to do something like this when solving square-1; for each piece in a given puzzle shape, I have memorized where that piece will be once it has been made cubic. One of the things that slows me down is getting to the particular piece I need as I go - I have to walk through my little "stories" and find the piece I need, and that takes more time than I'd like.

I am curious if Mats Bergsten might have something interesting to add on this, though; I know that he is the reigning expert at the Everest test for pi. This requires a random access capability; I wonder if he does something special for this?

I would think that if you want this to work, the way to go might be to have something like a Roman Room type of method, where you put each single piece into one location. If you did this, it might be fairly random access, and you might get what you want. The only problem with this is that it would require a lot of locations; it would be fine for a single 3x3x3, but I'd hate to think what it would be like for a big multi or a 7x7x7!

First,

I would then have each room (I dont use rooms right now, but I could always witch) have 20 spots that I could easily recall between.

But I agree in a few things- One, 7x7 would be insanely worthless to do with this method unless you used a 36 letter alphabet (centers would be so inefficient otherwise...)
Also, why does pi need to be recalled in random places..? I have thought of memoing pi for a long time (or tau... it is cooler) using my letter pairs A for 0, etc and since I dont have a formal one for double letters, I would use L to mean double letter. But also, it would be exactly the same number of locations as a single cube if there are no pieces solved (could always leave the location blank) and there are 2 cycles for corners and edges. Perhaps you might think I mean to do a single letter per, but I meant to use it for pairs
Also, it is strange because it remotely reminded me of square-1 blind despite not doing any yet Still making those stories (That is the first phase I have, the second phase is engraining those stories which I have done for a few of them)

That would be great for memorization, but I'm having a hard time translating that into an effective execution strategy. Any ideas?

Initial observations using M2:
*Quick, strait forward memo. (letter pair images)
*It takes an extra step for me to decode my memo sequence: reducing the images back to letters per the usual, then visualizing the cube and recalling what piece occupies the destination position.
*Shooting from DF to LF, I'm going to the opposite sticker than what I memorized, which also complicates recall.

Basically it seems like I'm working out the sequence during recall rather than during memo. It requires a lot more thinking (less brain dead), and I believe that would still be the case even if I was well acquainted with the method. The biggest question is, can it be as fast and as reliable?

Well, I was thinking the way that it would work is basically you see the letter that the buffer piece is going to go to, go to that location in the room, keeping track of whether it is flipped or not I guess. I might make my memo start with my buffer piece, but I am not really sure, I have it at the second half of my first pair right now

I was also just figuring that it would take less time to check to make sure you did not miss any cycles ( if you have unvisited locations in your room...)
Perhaps it is just me, but I tend to miss little things when doing multi or single.

 

[Mike Hughey]

I would then have each room (I dont use rooms right now, but I could always witch) have 20 spots that I could easily recall between.

Sorry - I missed that you had already covered that. :fp

Also, why does pi need to be recalled in random places..?

For the same reason pi needs to be memorized to thousands of digits. (In other words, it makes no sense at all.) But that's what the Everest test is about.