Feasibility of Using ZZ as a Beginner's Method

[brian724080]

I can recall that when I was a beginner to cubing (less than a year ago), I wasn't exposed to much information about speedsolving methods other than LBL (typical beginner's method) and CFOP. Lately, I switched to the ZZ method, and I found that I liked it way more than CFOP, and I'm now at sub-20 in less than a month. Obviously, there are lots of other great, but not as popular methods like Roux and Petrus, and I've been wondering how efficient it will to teach a beginner that instead of LBL.

In the few people I've taught, or tried to teach to solve a 3x3, I found that every one of them found it very difficult to predict where a sticker will be, even after only one move. Needless to say, it was a disaster when they asked me how the 2nd layer edge algorithms (U R U R' U' F' U' F) worked. Still, I'm thinking of teaching people ZZ instead of LBL when they ask me for the solution, and I wanted opinions on how feasible it may be. Several obvious obstacles will be the understanding of edge orientation, and blockbuilding F2L (oh god...), last layer wouldn't be a problem because there is only a few cases. What are your opinions?

 

[KongShou]

lets teach the hardest, most non intuitive, longest to inspect speed cube method to complete beginners

 

[Tim Major]

I taught my Dad Cross+Corner Edge Pairs+last layer with 3 algs. He learnt CFOP easily enough. ZZ is a bit more complicated, but depending on the person, you could teach it. There are some people I could teach Roux/Petrus as a first method to, and others who I would struggle to teach LBL.

 

[brian724080]

lets teach the hardest, most non intuitive, longest to inspect speed cube method to complete beginners

Unfortunately, I don't know of such method

 

[kunparekh18]

EO and Line and blocks would be tough for beginners to understand imo. For a beginners method these things should be obeyed:

1. No movecount restrictions - let beginners use how much ever moves they want to. They just need to solve it

2. A mostly algorithmic approach, but not too many algs to learn - since it would be hard for beginners to grasp the intuitive-ness of solving the Rubik's cube, an algorithmic approach would be a bit better. But learning too many algs would also be difficult, so a less number of algs is good.

This is just what I think, people may obviously disagree.

 

[brian724080]

An algorithmic approach does seem to be a better choice, but when I first started as a beginner, I had no problem understanding the break-down of the algorithms, and intuitive F2L wasn't hard for me at all. So I guess it might be completely dependent on the person, as a lot of people say, there is no best method. Still, I believe it is better to show a beginner many methods so they can get the most out of their advantages, whatever it may be.

 

[PianoCube]

I taught some people to solve it using 8355 with keyhole f2l. It's mainly intuitive and is more of a simplification of Heise rather than CFOP/LBL.

 

[TDM]

I'd teach Corners First. I've taught several people at school how to do a 2x2 already, so I was going to teach them CF. That's mostly intuitive after the corners, but I wasn't sure how to teach them LSE. Should I do Roux LSE? Or place one UL/UR edge, then solve the other with an alg, flip edges with (M' U)3 (U M)3 U2, then use M' U2 M?

 

[Frubix]

When I teach people I teach them LBL, but i don't count the 2nd layer edges as an algorithm, so I say that they need to learn 4 algs, for 4LLL

 

[TheNextFeliks]

I can recall that when I was a beginner to cubing (less than a year ago), I wasn't exposed to much information about speedsolving methods other than LBL (typical beginner's method) and CFOP. Lately, I switched to the ZZ method, and I found that I liked it way more than CFOP, and I'm now at sub-20 in less than a month. Obviously, there are lots of other great,1. but not as popular methods like Roux and Petrus,and I've been wondering how efficient it will to teach a beginner that instead of LBL.

In the few people I've taught, or tried to teach to solve a 3x3,2. I found that every one of them found it very difficult to predict where a sticker will be, even after only one move.3. Needless to say, it was a disaster when they asked me how the 2nd layer edge algorithms (U R U R' U' F' U' F) worked. Still, I'm thinking of teaching people ZZ instead of LBL when they ask me for the solution, and I wanted opinions on how feasible it may be. 4.Several obvious obstacles will be the understanding of edge orientation, and blockbuilding F2L (oh god...), last layer wouldn't be a problem because there is only a few cases. What are your opinions?

lets teach the hardest, most non intuitive, longest to inspect speed cube method to complete beginners

My rants. I agree with KongShou. Most experienced cubers have trouble picking up zz. So we're going to teach complete beginners.

1. Roux is more popular than ZZ so yeah.
2. A. Why is that necessary? B. Good luck with ZZ then.
3. Teach U R U' R' U' F' U F. A. It's better and B. The effect is more obvious.
4. So basically most of the solve is a challenge.

IMO, zzf2l would be horrific to teach them. I actually want to see if I can teach someone zz now. Ugh eo rules are a pain.

 

[Joël]

I've recently been playing around with something else for beginners. I'd start with placing 1 corner, and then add the three surrounding edges to form a 2x2x2 block. The edges can be placed in three moves (after aligning them with a center).

1. Hide corner
2. Insert edge
3. Unhide corner

The rule for the hiding move will be that the hiding move should not move the edge that you are solving, or the edge that is going to be 'replaced'. This can also easily be extended to a 2x2x3 block. I think it's quite easy to build blocks in this way, and something that can be suitable for beginners. I am not sure if EO would be suitable for beginners, even after the 2x2x3 block. If a beginner is willing to invest some time in it, then yes, it will enhance their understanding of how it works. But they should certainly NOT start with EO-lines.

For edge insertions btw, I sometimes show beginners the move R' E R U2 R' E' R [U2]. Very easy commutator, and some people who have problems doing the 'regular' edge insertion, will find this one easier (provided that you explain it properly).

 

[brian724080]

Ugh eo rules are a pain.

TBH, EO rules aren't that difficult once you get used to the color scheme.
And yea, you are right when you say that many experienced cubers have trouble picking up, but if there was more documentary, maybe someone can make ZZ more beginners friendly?

 

[TDM]

TBH, EO rules aren't that difficult once you get used to the color scheme.

Maybe for us, but they'd be too difficult for a beginner.

And yea, you are right when you say that many experienced cubers have trouble picking up, but if there was more documentary, maybe someone can make ZZ more beginners friendly?

I could possibly make a tutorial or something. But this is me though, and I often get half way through and give up. As I've done with CN CFOP. And Roux. And CN Roux. And 2H ZZ. And CN ZZ. And 2GLL. And ZZLL. And megaminx. And pyra. And making an alg list for P2GLL. And probably more that I can't remember.

 

[Joël]

TBH, EO rules aren't that difficult once you get used to the color scheme.
And yea, you are right when you say that many experienced cubers have trouble picking up, but if there was more documentary, maybe someone can make ZZ more beginners friendly?

No.

For cubers who use ZZ, it's easy, because EO is a simplication. It reduces the number of pattern you can run into. Starting with EO is just not for beginners. Keeping track of the 12 edge orientations is just not something that beginners can do. Many beginners have trouble making a cross, which involves only 4 pieces. They have trouble placing the last cross piece, if it's unoriented. How are they supposed to keep track of 12 edge orientations?

Maybe, if they first learn something like petrus 2x2x3, then EO and practice that for a while, they can later transition to ZZ.

 

[Escher]

I used to teach LBL but now I tend to teach Roux with fixing D layer to finish f2l, then beginners LL. Tends to lead into better progression to other methods if they feel like advancing, but intuitive enough that they feel like they're discovering things on their own. Really depends on who you teach though, whether they just want to learn algorithms or actually want to learn how to solve.

 

[brian724080]

Right, plus, it'll be sufficient if a beginner can fully grasp the concept of orientation and permutation.

Maybe for us, but they'd be too difficult for a beginner.

I could possibly make a tutorial or something. But this is me though, and I often get half way through and give up. As I've done with CN CFOP. And Roux. And CN Roux. And 2H ZZ. And CN ZZ. And 2GLL. And ZZLL. And megaminx. And pyra. And making an alg list for P2GLL. And probably more that I can't remember.

I'm making a printable text-based LBL beginners guide because I found that I preferred text over videos. I might think of making one for ZZ, but it'll probably be overly complicated and will not be suitable for printing.

 

[CubezUBR]

EO would be hard to explain to a begginer
it is easier to understand how lbl/cfop works for begginers so it helps them understand and feel comfortable with the method.
its better to slowly introduce beginers to blockbuilding etc so cfop would help generate the skills needed.
its a bad idea

 

[ThomasJE]

My rants. I agree with KongShou. Most experienced cubers have trouble picking up zz. So we're going to teach complete beginners.

1. Roux is more popular than ZZ so yeah.
2. A. Why is that necessary? B. Good luck with ZZ then.
3. Teach U R U' R' U' F' U F. A. It's better and B. The effect is more obvious.
4. So basically most of the solve is a challenge.

IMO, zzf2l would be horrific to teach them. I actually want to see if I can teach someone zz now. Ugh eo rules are a pain.

I disagree with all but your first point. I picked up ZZ easily and it has improved my average by about 5 seconds. And there are also many ZZ cubers that are quite fast out there; it's just happens to be that one Roux solver is really fast. And think about it; many Rouxers use it because of Alex. If suddenly, a ZZer broke the world record, many people would switch to ZZ.

There's a reason why it's called the 'beginner's method'. Because over the 30 years we've been playing with this toy, that method has stood the test of time that it is the easiest for beginners to learn and gives them the best understanding of the cube.

 

[waffle=ijm]

Roux isn't actually hard to teach. Especially if you dumb it down. When I teach, I end up teaching like escher. Blocks->Insert D Pieces-> LL(which changes depending on if they can pick up the idea of EO or not). IF they pick up EO fast enough, and get it I usually just teach them Roux. Usually when it comes to Roux, if you dumb down without explaining how it works, EO is actually pretty easy to teach, at least from my experience.

 

[immortalchaos29]

I learned originally with Petrus, and I often teach Petrus to beginners who want to understand the moves they're doing and why they work. I find it isn't usually too hard for them, provided you explain it in a way that makes sense. Step 3 (EO) is the hardest for them pretty much exclusively at first. It's just not a simple concept for someone who has no experience.