[Help Thread] 4x4 Discussion

[Sue Doenim]

I've recently been trying to improve on 4x4 and was wondering if there are any alg subsets specifically for 4x4. Obviously on 3x3 there's stuff like WV and ZBLL anything similar that is not on the 3x3 portion of 4x4? Thanks!

Look into Yau or Hoya, if you haven't already.

 

[Ulico]

I have, not exactly what I meant. I am looking more for algorithm subsets for 4x4. Thanks though!

Look into Yau or Hoya, if you haven't already.

I have, I meant something more like algorithm sets for 4x4. Thanks though!

 

[Ulico]

I've seen a lot that people say 3-2-3 edge pairing is by far the best method. Personally, I've never understood this. I use 6-2 pairing and find it both easy and efficient. I'd appreciate some insight and other opinions. Thanks!

 

[WombatWarrior17]

I used 6-2, but I switched to 3-2-3 recently and I like both, I'm having a hard time picking one; it really just depends on personal preference.

 

[xyzzy]

I prefer 2-4-3 over both 3-2-3 and 6-2, but I'm not that fast and you definitely should not blindly follow what I do.

6-2 runs into "weird" cases a lot more frequently than 3-2-3, since it requires the edge cycle you start with to have at least 7 edges, compared to at least 4 edges for 3-2-3. Also, I think 6-2 might require slightly more rotations on average, but don't quote me on this.

Is 3-2-3 "by far" the best? I don't think so; if it has an advantage over 6-2 and other edge pairing styles, I'd say it's a pretty small one. However, at the highest levels, even the tiniest of advantages have to be exploited.

 

[AMCuber]

So I haven't been on a while, but what can I do to get sub 2:30 on 4x4? (I know.) I tried Yau but I do slower with Yau, so I do reduction. How can I transfer into Yau and actually solve it decently quickly? I can solve a 3x3 in 14 sec, with an average of 20.

 

[One Wheel]

So I haven't been on a while, but what can I do to get sub 2:30 on 4x4? (I know.) I tried Yau but I do slower with Yau, so I do reduction. How can I transfer into Yau and actually solve it decently quickly? I can solve a 3x3 in 14 sec, with an average of 20.

2 things:
1. Practice (mostly)
2. Stick with Yau.

It's normal when you try a new method that it's slower. Yau is a better method than redux for 4x4. If you average 20 on 3x3, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get to 1:30 just by doing 1,000 solves with Yau.

 

[AMCuber]

I actually realized that with some practice just now, I am now like sub 2 on 4x4 with redux, but I can definitely tell you I have NOT done 1000 solves with Yau.

 

[AMCuber]

Should I start doing Yau?

 

[One Wheel]

Should I start doing Yau?

Yes. Some people will say Hoya is better, but I think most of the really fast people use Yau. It's not magic: it's just redux with slightly reordered steps. I really don't see any reason to wait. I started using Yau at about 3:40, I'm down to about 1:30. F3E is the real sticking point, but 3-2-3 edge pairing makes up for it. I often use one of 2 L2E algs that I've learned here.

 

[CLL Smooth]

@AMCuber

Yes. Some people will say Hoya is better, but I think most of the really fast people use Yau. It's not magic: it's just redux with slightly reordered steps. I really don't see any reason to wait. I started using Yau at about 3:40, I'm down to about 1:30. F3E is the real sticking point, but 3-2-3 edge pairing makes up for it. I often use one of 2 L2E algs that I've learned here.

Just to be clear, I don’t think Hoya is better than Yau. It does happen to be more comfortable for me and I think everyone, who uses CFOP, should give both variations a shot. And just like with Yau, you can use whatever method for L8E that you’re most comfortable with.

 

[Ruuuka]

I need help making my time better... I use reduction(6 edge pairing method) followed by fridrich F2l then 3look LL.

My average is about 3 mins and i think I've finished reduction at around 1:30-1:45.. the rest is all 3x3x3.. which i think i'll improve on one day..

In my reduction, my centers are very slow... about 30-40 seconds.. So i'd like some center solving tips please...

With edges i've been practicing looking forward so that's getting better imo..

So overall I'd like some reduction tips

Or if someone wants to suggest I learn a different method that's great...

I haven't seen any good 4x4 tutorials so far. I've looked all over the net and not one of them talk about my situation. Even places with algorithms I haven't found yet.

 

[xyzzy]

I haven't seen any good 4x4 tutorials so far. I've looked all over the net and not one of them talk about my situation. Even places with algorithms I haven't found yet.

(i) You quoted a post from 2008, by someone who hasn't posted since 2009.

(ii) What's your "situation"? We can't help you if we don't know what you're struggling with.

(iii) Have you tried CubeSkills?

 

[Mike Hughey]

I just want to say there's nothing magical about 1000 solves. The number of solves required to get better is variable based on the person. I've probably now done close to 1000 solves with Hoya, but I'm still substantially faster with reduction. I'd like to think that maybe another 1000 solves or so will make me faster with Hoya, though - my Hoya has gotten a lot better, and it continues to improve.

 

[xyzzy]

I've probably now done close to 1000 solves with Hoya, but I'm still substantially faster with reduction.

(This is a bit more of a general remark, not 444-specific.) If you've done a thousand solves with a method other than your main and still get significantly slower times, I suspect (at least) one of these apply: (i) the method just outright sucks; (ii) the method doesn't suck, but it's very hard for anyone to get fast with it (e.g. something like full ZB); (iii) you're not practising "optimally" (e.g. inconsistent practice, or doing only timed solves); (iv) the method is not for you.

I'd probably done at least a thousand 4×4×4 solves with sandwich by February last year, and then I did a bunch of solves with Yau and was seeing almost-immediate improvement in times. That's when I figured out that sandwich just wasn't for me. Don't buy into the sunk cost fallacy and think "I might as well continue trying since I've already put in so much effort".

(But also I'm not saying you should give up on Hoya yet!!! Given that you're still improving with Hoya, it's probably worth it to continue trying. In other words, (iii) might be applicable to you, rather than (iv). Another thing to take into account is how much you enjoy solving with one method over another; for competition purposes, you'd want to use the method that gives you the best times, but for casual practice / fooling around, you'd want to use a method that you "like". These usually coincide, but not always.)

 

[Mike Hughey]

iii) is certainly at least partially applicable to me. I'm very inconsistent with my practice, and while I do some untimed solves, I do more timed than untimed, even though I know that's not smart. This is why I probably don't improve enough at any of the events - I time myself too much. (Just look at how bad I still am at 3x3x3, after all these years!) But I enjoy the way I cube, so I keep doing it. Perhaps I should just admit that my experience isn't a good example for others to follow, since I don't practice efficiently at all. Sorry if I'm misleading people with that. And I will try to do more untimed solves in the future and really work on improving my technique to see if that will help some.

As for enjoying it, I really love Hoya, which is why I haven't stopped. I think it's a lot of fun; the strategies that go into inserting the cross pieces more efficiently are fun to work out. I didn't find Yau as much fun, which is why I went with Hoya.

Off-topic:

Spoiler

For bigger cubes I still mostly use AvG, even though it's clear that, at least for the bigger cubes like 7x7x7, freeslice is much better. The reason I haven't been able to convert to freeslice very successfully is because I don't find it as much fun as AvG.

Many years ago, I started with freeslice on 5x5x5 (before there was a 6x6x6 or 7x7x7), but Arnaud himself showed me AvG and I loved it - I got faster with it almost immediately. Since then I've tried to switch back to freeslice a number of times (I'm trying again now), but I'm always about 25% faster on edges with AvG than with freeslice. However, I have discovered that by practicing freeslice, my AvG times get better, so I keep trying to switch about once every couple of years, since at least it helps me improve at AvG.

 

[Ruuuka]

(i) You quoted a post from 2008, by someone who hasn't posted since 2009.

(ii) What's your "situation"? We can't help you if we don't know what you're struggling with.

(iii) Have you tried CubeSkills?

(iii) no.

(ii) ok, so try to imagine, you have all white and yellow edges solved and in the right layer. one equatorial edge piece is solved, i.e the red/blue pair. now put it diagonally at the back. from left to right and top down, my cases are: a blue/orange and a green/orange. only the oranges are visible. next, a green/red and an orange/red. the green on the top is to the left while the one on the bottom is to the right. now we have orange/blue and green/red. only green and orange are visible.

 

[One Wheel]

(ii) ok, so try to imagine, you have all white and yellow edges solved and in the right layer. one equatorial edge piece is solved, i.e the red/blue pair. now put it diagonally at the back. from left to right and top down, my cases are: a blue/orange and a green/orange. only the oranges are visible. next, a green/red and an orange/red. the green on the top is to the left while the one on the bottom is to the right. now we have orange/blue and green/red. only green and orange are visible.

You have 3 edges to pair: the last "3" in 3-2-3 edge pairing. The easiest way to do that that I know is this:
1. Put 1 of your unsolved edges in the top layer.
2. Slice to solve one of the two unsolved edges in the E layer (we'll say with a Uw')
3. Replace the newly solved edge with the unsolved one you put in the top layer, so that when you slice back and restore the centers the remaining two edges are solved. If you did a Uw' to pair the first edge, this means inserting the top-layer edge so that the piece that matches the top half that you pushed out of the way is on the bottom half of the third edge.
4. Slice back, to solve centers and last 2 edges.

 

[Ivan Vinogradov]

Hello guys can u tell me please how I can make the edge pairing faster

 

[Duncan Bannon]

Hello guys can u tell me please how I can make the edge pairing faster

Could you give some more information about what your struggling with? Do you use Yau Or Redux? Are you having trouble spotting next pair, or is it doing them more efficient?