[Help Thread] Big Cubes Discussion

[ep2]

For larger cubes, like 11x11 and above, I've seen people remove the middle caps, to make it easier to count rows. Does this make it easier or harder to solve in terms of parity?

 

[Jupiter]

Ive really wanted to get into solving bigger cubes but I average like 45 on 3x3 which basically means i have like no chance of getting a solve under like 1 minute which honestly really discourages me. I have 4x4-6x6 but ive never attempted to speedsolve them for that reason.

 

[One Wheel]

Ive really wanted to get into solving bigger cubes but I average like 45 on 3x3 which basically means i have like no chance of getting a solve under like 1 minute which honestly really discourages me. I have 4x4-6x6 but ive never attempted to speedsolve them for that reason.

Slow solving of big cubes can be really relaxing. Go ahead and solve them, don't worry about time at first.

 

[Micah Morrison]

Ive really wanted to get into solving bigger cubes but I average like 45 on 3x3 which basically means i have like no chance of getting a solve under like 1 minute which honestly really discourages me. I have 4x4-6x6 but ive never attempted to speedsolve them for that reason.

Just keep practicing. You'll get there It does take a decent amount of practice to be sub 1 on 4x4. For 5x5, it takes a ton of practice, and if you're sub 1, you can win smaller comps. For 6x6, no one has proved it possible to be sub 1, as the world record average is 1:15

 

[Sub1Hour]

For larger cubes, like 11x11 and above, I've seen people remove the middle caps, to make it easier to count rows. Does this make it easier or harder to solve in terms of parity?

As long as the center piece itself is colored and not just the cap parity will remain the exact same

 

[Kaneki Uchiha]

is sub 3 7x7 hard ?
also sub 2 on 6x6
are these hard to acheive?

 

[cuber314159]

is sub 3 7x7 hard ?
also sub 2 on 6x6
are these hard to acheive?

Not really, spamming solves on them should suffice, about 2000 on each should get you down to those boundaries (assuming you have the mgc 6x6x6 and spark)

 

[Nmile7300]

is sub 3 7x7 hard ?
also sub 2 on 6x6
are these hard to acheive?

Yes, those are essentially the "world class" barriers. They will require a lot of dedicated practice and learning, it is not an easy task whatsoever. You will also need to get faster on 3x3 to achieve those goals. Spamming solves IS NOT the way to go.

 

[Prabal Baishya]

I am currently around 1:30 in 5x5, but want to get around 1:10. My edges are somewhat fast, but my L4C are somewhat slow, I do lots of rotations while doing them and I don't feel like I am doing those effectively all the times, also can learning the L2E algs help me?

 

[Micah Morrison]

Yes, those are essentially the "world class" barriers. They will require a lot of dedicated practice and learning, it is not an easy task whatsoever. You will also need to get faster on 3x3 to achieve those goals. Spamming solves IS NOT the way to go.

imo the world-class barrier is more like sub 1:50/2:40 (roughly top 100 in the world for both) I know @cuber314159 is sub 2:00/sub 3:00 on 6/7 and he probably got there mostly by spamming solves. To get beyond sub 2:00/3:00 you would have to learn more advanced techniques and spam solves

I am currently around 1:30 in 5x5, but want to get around 1:10. My edges are somewhat fast, but my L4C are somewhat slow, I do lots of rotations while doing them and I don't feel like I am doing those effectively all the times, also can learning the L2E algs help me?

Watch walkthroughs from world-class 5x5'ers and learn from them. Then, do untimed solves, almost like you're giving a walkthrough to someone, and work out what's most efficient in terms of moves and rotations. Then, try to incorporate those things you learned into your timed solves.

 

[fun at the joy]

ok sub-1:50 and sub-2:40/ ~top100 or even slower is definitely not world class.
I would say around sub-1:30 and sub-2:10 official Mo3 is world class in 6x6 and 7x7.

 

[Nmile7300]

ok sub-1:50 and sub-2:40/ ~top100 or even slower is definitely not world class.
I would say around sub-1:30 and sub-2:10 official Mo3 is world class in 6x6 and 7x7.

So 6 people are world class at 6x6 and 7 people are world class at 7x7? I don't know, I guess what world class is depends on your opinion, but that seems pretty harsh.

 

[Sinner123]

Hey, I’m learning to solve a 7x7 and I’m doing the method where you turn it into a 3x3 but need to swap two centres before I can complete it. I need an algorithm to fix this parity but I can’t find one. Please help. Thx

Spoiler

 

[Nmile7300]

Although there is an alg for that case, the easiest thing to do as a beginner is to do slice flip slices until it is the standard parity case on the inner edges.
If you don't know the standard parity, you put the flipped edge in the top on the front and do 3Rw U2 x 3Rw U2 3Rw U2 4Rw' U2 3Lw U2 3Rw' U2 3Rw U2 3Rw' U2 3Rw'.
This alg is the same as the 5x5 one but using different layers.

 

[BenChristman1]

This isn’t parity, you just haven’t finished edges yet.

 

[Nmile7300]

It's a parity case.

 

[BenChristman1]

It's a parity case.

It will be, but the edges aren’t done.

 

[Nmile7300]

They way you worded it, it sounded like you thought there wasn't parity at all. I would consider any last 2 edge case that requires at least one parity alg to solve a parity case.

 

[RCastle]

Ive looked all over youtube all the tutorials seems to skip some crucial steps/algorithms to solving the other 5 edge "pairs" and I havent had any luck figuring it out with what i already know. Can someone give me some links where this is shown in a step by step way cause i cant do any more edge "pairs" without breaking up the ones i already solved.

 

[Nmile7300]

Ive looked all over youtube all the tutorials seems to skip some crucial steps/algorithms to solving the other 5 edge "pairs" and I havent had any luck figuring it out with what i already know. Can someone give me some links where this is shown in a step by step way cause i cant do any more edge "pairs" without breaking up the ones i already solved.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but I'll take a guess. Maybe the tutorials only showed you one or two examples of the first 8 edges. This is becuase
you do all of the first 8 edges the exact same way. After pairing an edge, you use an insert to put it in the top layer. Do the same with 3 other edges, which will make the top layer fill up with edges. Flip the cube over and start putting you next edges on the "bottom", which is now on top. Once you fill up that layer, you are on to last 4 edges, which is completely different altogether, and you should just follow the tutorial.