Where do I go from here?

[invadercow]

I've learned the fridrich method, and I've been working with the Dyan Zhanchi for about a month now. My solves are pretty slow at 1 minute 20 seconds. What should I learn next to become faster? I'm about to start memorizing PLL, but is there anything a bit better that could shave off a few seconds? Maybe itd be bettre to learn OLL, or something?

 

[Goosly]

Do not learn full PLL or OLL. Stick with 2-look PLL and OLL until you are sub-40 at least. Then you can start with PLL
I average around 20 seconds, and I don't even know all PLL's yet
So work on your cross and F2L first

 

[wontolla]

I suggest to learn PLL, you will shave off a few seconds.

I also suggest some practice, you will shave off a lot of seconds.

At 1:20 all you need is a bit of practice and you will get around sub-30. But if you want to learn new things, try to execute F2L from different angles to avoid rotations and work on your look ahead.

And just to be clear: If you don't know OLL and PLL, you can't really claim that you've learned the Fridrich method.

 

[lordchriszhou]

How much of Fridrich have you learnt?

And yes, learning OLL and PLL will help, but you do not need to learn all of PLL to shave off seconds. But you might need to work on your cross also.
Dayan Zhanchis are very good cubes if lubed, you lubed it right?

Sounds to me that you may need to work on your turn efficiency. Do you flick or do you just to full hand turns?

Hope I can help,
Chris z

 

[invadercow]

Well maybe I have some terminology wrong. I learned how to solve a cube from the dan brown youtube videos, which im pretty sure is the fridrich method.
I solve it like: cross of green face, corner pieces of green face, second layer, then oll and pll.
Ive been reading about speeding up my f2l by pairing the corners with the edge pieces and inserting them at the same time.

Also, no, I havnt lubed the zhanchi yet, it feels pretty good to begin with. I can't see myself spinning it any faster if it was lubed

 

[Kirjava]

I learned how to solve a cube from the dan brown youtube videos, which im pretty sure is the fridrich method.

you are very very wrong.

 

[adragast]

Hi,

First, welcome to this forum.

I solve it like: cross of green face, corner pieces of green face, second layer, then oll and pll.

This is a layer-by-layer (LBL) method.

Ive been reading about speeding up my f2l by pairing the corners with the edge pieces and inserting them at the same time.

This would be the Fridrich method

Using a layer-by-layer method, 1:20 is not that bad. I would suggest you to look for another method (Fridrich, Roux, Petrus, ...). If you choose Fridrich, you should probably focus on cross and F2L first before learning a lot of OLL/PLL. I think you are right not to lube your zhanchi. Not needed and not what would help you now.

Adragast

 

[invadercow]

you are very very wrong.

Well, crap. I knew something was wrong. I guess today ill be looking through the actual fridrich method

 

[DRAGON_RYU]

Summary:
C: cross
F: first two layers AKA F2L
O: Oreientate last layer AKA OLL
P: Permutate last layer AKA PLL

 

[Cubenovice]

Summary:
C: cross
F: first two layers AKA F2L
O: Oreientate last layer AKA OLL
P: Permutate last layer AKA PLL

To the OP: "Fridrich" is also called CFOP.

If you want to speed up with CFOP I reccommend checking out Badmephisto's youtube channel and website.
Study intuitive F2L and the so called 4 look last layer.

Once you've got this down: keep looking around

 

[jskyler91]

also, you can check out my beginners tutorials:


http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../5/tT05f1jqG_w

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../6/wJzlBB8VAbE

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../4/bEuD9t4o9KM

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../4/bEuD9t4o9KM

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../2/mR0pdhsRBiI

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../3/UOnkTQlWnUI

http://www.youtube.com/user/jskyler9.../1/4PbzIjv11bA

I try to keep things simple, and I avoid using too many algs. This is still a beginners method, however it is probably much faster that the one you are doing and it will be a good intro into CFOP. The method described is pretty simplistic, however you can easily get sub 1 minute with it. If you are using Dan brown's tutorial, you are probably doing the cross on the bottom which is less optimal, so this will help you change this. DO you know 2 look oll and pll? if not, then my last layer tutorial is a basic intro into learning it and you shouldn't have to relearn any algs; just add more. Just thought I would throw this out there. BTW, I average 15/14 seconds will full CFOP and I teach a class at UC Berkeley on how to solve the cube.

 

[MovingOnUp]

Another thing is LBL is "promoted" the most. It is what the majority of cubers start by learning. The reason being that it is a very easy method to learn, but not very fast. The idea is to build upon it. Since you only know LBL 1:20 doesnt sound all that bad. Although, I'm sure you could probably get it to 40 s.

So basically your at a good point. To move on, I would suggest learning (in this order) F2L Fridrich method, 2 Look OLL, Full PLL, Full OLL

 

[MalusDB]

I use 2-look OLL and PLL, and also initially learnt from Dan Brown. Badmephisto is definitely a first point of call for you if you want to learn how to think about F2L intuitively and he has a brilliant guide to 2 look OLL and PLL on both Youtube and his own website. Check it out, and if you find some of the algorithms he mentions just don't seem to be comfortable to execute fast, try the wiki here for alternatives, theres a pretty expansive list of alternatives.

Hope this helps!

EDIT: My average is in and around 30, and I still have bucket loads of room for improvement without even learning more algs. F2L is really where the time is made up, and efficient crosses help too!

 

[yockee]

I've learned the fridrich method, and I've been working with the Dyan Zhanchi for about a month now. My solves are pretty slow at 1 minute 20 seconds. What should I learn next to become faster? I'm about to start memorizing PLL, but is there anything a bit better that could shave off a few seconds? Maybe itd be bettre to learn OLL, or something?

You average 1:20 and you're using a Zhan Chi? I'd recommend stepping back a little and use a storebought or type C until you average about 40 sec. THEN get a better cube. This will allow you to build skill as you won't be able to be lazy with your turning due to lack of corner cutting, and it will force you to turn slower which will help you start looking ahead. A Zhan Chi, at your level, is just unnecessary. You can't experience the full benefits of using it because you haven't gotten better with a normal cube first. When you get good with a normal cube and THEN switch to a better cube, you'll feel the difference and see your times go way up. You'll just hit a dead end if you keep using that cube.
I would also stick with beginner's method until you, at least, get your time down to about sub 1 min. There's no need to rush. Allow yourself to get better and learn from what you're doing already.

 

[Kirjava]

You average 1:20 and you're using a Zhan Chi? I'd recommend stepping back a little and use a storebought or type C until you average about 40 sec. THEN get a better cube. This will allow you to build skill as you won't be able to be lazy with your turning due to lack of corner cutting, and it will force you to turn slower which will help you start looking ahead. A Zhan Chi, at your level, is just unnecessary. You can't experience the full benefits of using it because you haven't gotten better with a normal cube first. When you get good with a normal cube and THEN switch to a better cube, you'll feel the difference and see your times go way up. You'll just hit a dead end if you keep using that cube..

I'm sorry, but this is really bad advice. I've seen you post it a few times and have had to tell people not to follow it before.

We had a thread about this issue. It's a misconception that I wish would stop coming up.

 

[yockee]

I'm sorry, but this is really bad advice. I've seen you post it a few times and have had to tell people not to follow it before.

We had a thread about this issue. It's a misconception that I wish would stop coming up.

What, you don't think it's good advice to stay away from fast / good cubes until you are faster? The idea (in my head) is that it's possible to get faster with cubes that give you a challenge (lack of corner cutting, etc.) so why not get better yourself, rather than allowing the cube make you better, so when you do get better and switch to a good cube, you'll be even better with that cube than you would be if you'd started with that cube? A lot of the fastest cubers of today, including yourself, were fast before Dayan cubes ever existed. Do you think if you had started with such a fast cube back then, you'd have gotten as fast, as quickly as you did?

 

[Kirjava]

Do you think if you had started with such a fast cube back then, you'd have gotten as fast, as quickly as you did?

No, I think I would've got faster quicker.

 

[fastcubesolver]

dominate F2L, then worry about PLLs and OLLs.

 

[yockee]

No, I think I would've got faster quicker.

I just feel like the faster cube would hinder your look ahead. When I was working my way to where I am now, I had no look ahead at all until I was sub 30. Once I hit sub 30, I couldn't get any faster, and had no idea why, until I learned about look ahead. If I hadn't learned about it, I would have just kept turning fast and staying stuck in the same time area. Even if you do get fast on a good cube, what happens when someone asks you to use a normal cube? Your times would just suck. At least, starting out with a normal cube and getting fast, you'd have an easier time getting fast times with any cube.

 

[Kirjava]

Your anecdotal evidence means nothing.