Kinda sucking atm

J

Jorghi

Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
448
I average 70 MOVES per solve? I use the fridrich method, 2 look oll, and full PLL.
My average of 100 is 20 seconds flat. I am color neutral and can do cross/f2l pairs blindfolded.

Would learning full OLL help me? I really dont get why I'm not faster...
 
ben1996123 said:
no full oll is stupid

look ahead
Click to expand...

scottishcuber said:
Full OLL would definitely help in the long run. Right now its seems you aren't solving F2L efficiently (70 move solves wtf), look up some algs to make sure you solve cases in minimal moves.

Lookahead is like overrated
Click to expand...

Lookahead and full oll are overrated. 10 tps is what you need. 70 moves/10 tps=7 second average. But efficiency is legit. Cross should be 8 or under. F2L less than 32 for sure. 8 for a pair gives you lots of elbow room. And your ll is about 30 which is pretty common for 3 look. Mine is around that. Maybe more like 28.
 
I started learning lookahead and now I get a bunch of random 15 second solves but my average is still high.
 
Efficiency seems to be an issue. You say you can solve cross bld, but is the solution 8 moves max? If not, compare your cross solutions to the cross solver on prisma or Jarcs and see what you are missing, there are many ways to affect multiple pieces at once which yield a much lower movecount than an average beginners 10 or 12, especially pay attention to putting pieces in the correct order but wrong position and fixing with a final D/D2/D', and concepts like oriented and misoriented edges.

Are your F2L cases all around the 8 move mark max (unless special case thats fast, e.g. 3 x sexy move)? Are you effectively using empty slots and are you fully fluent in solving in all slots (including rear), not just the front right? If not, get a big list of F2L cases (theres one in the thread linked in my sig) and go through them, deciding what you do for each case, and if it sucks, change it. Macky's site has rotationless, move efficient, fingertrickable solutions for almost every possible basic f2l case in all four slots. Also check Jeff2L tricks and similar for situations with stuck pieces if this is a problem. DO lots of slow solves, consciously trying to find efficient solutions to each case as it arises.

Is your 2-look OLL consisting of good algs? Perhaps your source for these algs is outdated and has been superseded by a shorter or more fingertrickable alg set. Same for PLL, there are some terrible recommendations out there from websites that predate the Rowe E perm and similar. My basic starting recommendations are here, but read the post for some alternatives, PM me if theres an issue. Also read the "Whats you N-perm" thread which some good ideas for these notoriously slow cases (but they dont have to be slow! Practice is a powerful thing.)

http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?2373-The-OLL-and-PLL-help-thread&p=808791&viewfull=1#post808791

For more practice tips and advice, check the "how to be sub 20", "how to practice" and my "systematic CFOP (linked in sig)" threads, which pretty much cover all the bases.

And here is a list of useful solutions to awkward f2l cases that I have assembled for just such an eventuality.

http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?6085-How-to-Get-Faster-using-the-Fridrich-CFOP-Method&p=824176&viewfull=1#post824176

The key to not sucking is identifying why you suck and then practicing what you suck at until you no longer suck. Repeat until sub 7.

Oh yeah, and if you really can't figure out what sucks, 99% of the time its lookahead, however good you think you are, you can always get better at it. I will maintain this position until someone solves a cube BLD with CFOP following no more than 15 seconds inspection.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I am kinda pissed. I got to 20 average after only 2 months of cubing then I quit because I was stuck at 20 for another whole month not knowing wtf to do.

Yeah my turn speed SUCKS. My last layer takes a long time. Sometimes I see I finish F2L in 11-12 seconds but stop the timer at 21+seconds...

Should you use the d (R' U' R) or y'/y rotation to insert pairs??

Edit: I think the "d (R' U' R)" is better... Is it possible to look ahead far enough to know which one would be more useful???
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a general rule d (R' U' R) is better as it leaves the solved pair at the back. If the back pairs are solved, all the remaining pieces are easily visible, so this benefits lookahead. I wasnt saying avoid rotations at all cost mind you, I hope that wasnt inferred, no more than 1-2 a solve though, and y2/y2' is a nono.
Awesome lookahead involves seeing two or more pairs in one look and basically knowing in advance where they are going to be via a combination of tracking and experience (similar to solving a cross bld, how you know where the third and fourth pieces are and how to solve them whilst you are solving the first two). It is possible to get good enough at this to be able to select an insert for the first pair that leaves an easy second insert, whilst keeping an eye on the third and so on. To practice this, solve cross, spot two pairs and close your eyes and solve them both. Practice of this sort naturally leads to you automatically selecting the insert that helps the next pair, or doing a y rotation rather than a d to ensure a 2-gen second case and things like that. Thats why when you go through the reconstructions of awesome solvers that the f2l seems so effortless and flowy, they arent just inserting the first thing they see, they are making rapid choices in advance as to the best way to insert everything they see, and thus the stage becomes a zen like "solve f2l" rather than a coarser, "do the first pair, then the second, now the third.....". Tough to achieve, but definitely possible, and all made automatic by mindful slow solving and conscious development of lookahead to supreme standards.

If your last layer is a big time problem, some serious alg drilling and fingertricking would help massively, time each alg and work on the slowest, then repeat the process with the new slowest alg, this will bring your worst case scenario last layer time down systematically, avoiding those 10 second last layer disasters. This will also naturally increase your tps. If you can sub-1 a Y perm then your TPS in general will be much much faster than if you cant. However, as I keep telling my students: with regard to F2L, only go as fast as your eyes can, not as fast as your fingers can. Lookahead needs to be developed to the point where your turning is behind your lookahead, TPS without lookahead is like a fast car without steering. Practice going as fast as you can whilst maintaining perfect consistent lookahead, any faster than this and you just arent improving. As lookahead improves, you will go faster, if you ever get to the point where your lookahead is faster than your fingers then you will find single digit times arent far off, assuming of course you have kept up your last layer development and are sub 1.5 on every OLL/PLL, and your recognition is good enough to take real advantage of this. You should end up with a 3-4 second last layer, 1-1.5 ish cross and a 6-7 second cross + f2l for a solid sub 10 avg of 100.

Cross improves massively with general tps increase if you have totally mastered BLD cross, and you should be trying to plan x-cross or at least know where your first pair is by the time the cross is finished. Try spotting a corner edge pair during inspection and watching it during your cross execution (because you dont need to watch the pieces since you planned it all in inspection and can do it BLD right?) so you can immediately insert upon completing the cross. If you add a move or two to the cross solution to ensure a 3 move 2-gen insert of your first pair or insert it before solving the final cross piece, or plan a true x-cross 2x2 then add the extra cross pieces, all the time knowing where your first pair is going to be after the stage is complete, whilst looking ahead to the next pair or two and being mindful of making insertion choices that render future pairs easier then this is world class solving. Do it at 9+ TPS and you are Faz.

If recognition is a problem, look into 2-look PLL recognition, Sarah Strong has a good document on her site that may help, Andy Klise has another. To practice, use the PLL scrambler on Prisma and then try and identify the case on the cube in the corner of the main display. You will only be able to see two sides, and can check your answer by rotating it. This avoids the time taken setting up a bunch of cases on a real cube and forces you not to sneak a peek at a third side.
 
Last edited:
70 moves is not great, but it's fine. It's possible to get sub-10 with 70 moves. What you really need is to increase your TPS, which means:
- drilling algs and fingertricks over and over (and maybe getting a better cube) until you can do most stuff at, say, 6-7 tps or more
- finding better algs if one of yours seems consistently slow
- decreasing pauses between steps, both by working on lookahead and by planning out the cross better to quickly transition into F2L
 
70 is a bit much but not that bad if you're doing 2-look OLL. If you can finish F2L including cross by 11-12 that's pretty good. Then I'd say your LL needs work. LL usually takes about 1/3 of the full solve (half the time of F2L). Maybe you need to drill your algs. Full OLL helps, but maybe not as much as you think. You still need to move faster for those algs.
 
00:18.78 x
00:19.79 x
00:17.32 x
00:17.16 x
00:18.74 x
00:17.03 x

Weird.. I'm getting faster.

Edit:All my solves are like from 16-18...! When my F2L has no pause and my last layer is fast I usually get 15-16.
 
Last edited:
Jorghi said:
Yeah I am kinda pissed. I got to 20 average after only 2 months of cubing then I quit because I was stuck at 20 for another whole month not knowing wtf to do.
Click to expand...

Maybe you need to work on patients and persistence.

I was stuck at 17 sec for over 2 years and now I'm starting to improve again.

Other than that try reading the repeating information in every single topic like this. It's repeated because it works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
LONG POST - A one-algorithm method that actually (kinda) works - this time, for 2x2.
Replies
4
Views
2,188
NCCuberDad
N
J
Heise... Kinda
Replies
3
Views
546
Renslay
Renslay
HCross
MoYu is kinda weird
Replies
17
Views
2,684
Fred
Fred
TheSpeedSkewber
I made a cubing timer on Scratch... it's kinda good now (v2 update)
Replies
15
Views
1,973
TheSpeedSkewber
TheSpeedSkewber
HaHaHaHeeHeeHee
[Member Intro] Kinda late but yea
Replies
7
Views
1,406
ArbishAli
ArbishAli
Back
Top