Blindsolving Accomplishment Thread

[martijn_cube]

yay, another sub 1:30 solve . this isn't a pb, but it was good enough to be posted here. it was a 1:28. im pretty sure that it was non-lucky, but maybe I'm wrong. Its an awesome scramble. L2 F' U' R' F' L U' L2 U' B2 D B D R' B2 F2 L2 U' L' B' D U' L' R U2

One corner and one edge in place. so not really a lucky solve i think. But it was a nice one cycle edges though.

 

[McWizzle94]

yay, another sub 1:30 solve . this isn't a pb, but it was good enough to be posted here. it was a 1:28. im pretty sure that it was non-lucky, but maybe I'm wrong. Its an awesome scramble. L2 F' U' R' F' L U' L2 U' B2 D B D R' B2 F2 L2 U' L' B' D U' L' R U2

1:01.61

That was lucky for 3OP corners which I used on this solve. It made it really easy because I only had to use 2 algs + setups for all of the corners.

 

[MatsBergsten]

what I want for Christmas

Now I've been bld-cubing for half a year. Done some 300 successful
solves of 3x3 and 25 4x4 and 2 5x5 (not in comp. though). My speed
alas is not much to brag about. But you cannot be disturbed to much
by that (bld cubing in the same room as Ville and Joey teaches you that
or maybe it is beacuse of having been there that I think I'm slow)

Even if I am the oldest blindsolver alive I cannot blame my slowness
on old age so I intend to improve. I've been using almost pure Pochmann,
at first the old one and then M2 (but not R2).
So corners by truncated Y-alg and edges by M2. For the bigger cubes
I found no good description for solving the centers, just a reference
to commutators. It was true though, commutators fixed that.

How to improve? I've found Erik A:s page that describes what he calls
Turbo Blind.

So now I have (almost) learnt 18 algs for cycling three corners in
the U layer. Waste of energy? Is anyone actually using this method?
Erik himself says no. Does it work? It seems so for most of the cases,
but in the parity case I'm still not sure. How to handle parity?
Simplest seems to use a T alg and memorizing the corners in swapped
order in that case. But how does that work on the bigger cubes?

When I tried to master 4x4 Joey gave me the last bit of info with nice
commutators for centers in opposite layers and the alg
r'U2r2U2rU2rU2l'r2U2r'U2rU2lU2 I saw mentioned somewhere else here.
It fits nicely if you solve the edges by r2 and have an odd number
of edges.

Now I need a similar alg which swaps two corners (preferably UBR and UBL)
and some (two or more) centers pieces (in an already solved center ).
Then corners and edges will not affect each other at all. I came up
with an improvement for M2 for the bad cases in the M slice (influenced
by all commutators) and then discovered that Stefan did the same two
and a half years ago. So I will not try to reinvent the wheel this time.

I wish me that 2-corner 2-centers-swapping alg for Christmas

 

[Zava]

A simple pll-parity, then y T-pll y', and voilá, 2 corners swapped
I don't know how it affect centers though... so it's best after finishing centers.

 

[tim]

So now I have (almost) learnt 18 algs for cycling three corners in
the U layer. Waste of energy? Is anyone actually using this method?
Erik himself says no. Does it work? It seems so for most of the cases,
but in the parity case I'm still not sure. How to handle parity?
Simplest seems to use a T alg and memorizing the corners in swapped
order in that case. But how does that work on the bigger cubes?

Kai's using turbo corners, but i don't know how fast he is with it now (at least under two minutes).

 

[Mike Hughey]

Now I've been bld-cubing for half a year.
...
Even if I am the oldest blindsolver alive I cannot blame my slowness
on old age so I intend to improve.

I PM'ed you about this to some extent, but it made sense to me to post this to everyone.

When I went to the Virginia Open in 2007, I had been BLD solving for 8 months. At that time I got:
3x3x3 BLD: 4:01.31
4x4x4 BLD: 22:01
5x5x5 BLD: 44:53

Mats, you say you have been BLD solving for just 6 months, and at your most recent competition you got:
3x3x3 BLD: 4:15.83
4x4x4 BLD: 26:50

Looks like very similar rates of progression to me! I don't see any reason why you can't have times like my current ones a year from now.

 

[fanwuq]

You can use TuRBo-classic Pochmann. I do that sometimes when I "recognize" that case. You can do TuRBo for the first few corners, solve 2nd to last corner using classic pochmann, then M2 edges, the U'F2UM2U'F2U parity fix, then finish last classic pochmann corners. That's basically my method nowdays, Except I don't know all of TuRBo (actually, I think I know all for sighted solves,but have no clue which stickers cycle.)

 

[fanwuq]

yay, another sub 1:30 solve . this isn't a pb, but it was good enough to be posted here. it was a 1:28. im pretty sure that it was non-lucky, but maybe I'm wrong. Its an awesome scramble. L2 F' U' R' F' L U' L2 U' B2 D B D R' B2 F2 L2 U' L' B' D U' L' R U2

2:44.51
First solve in days (I blame MGLS), not bad!
The corner memo was not easy for me. I had to use classic Pochmann...
Edges had funny words for memo. No parity.

 

[blah]

yay, another sub 1:30 solve . this isn't a pb, but it was good enough to be posted here. it was a 1:28. im pretty sure that it was non-lucky, but maybe I'm wrong. Its an awesome scramble. L2 F' U' R' F' L U' L2 U' B2 D B D R' B2 F2 L2 U' L' B' D U' L' R U2

Sick easy 3OP corners.

 

[Jacco]

1:32 Non lucky!
New personal best by 8 seconds. Memo was sub 40 which I'm getting more often lately. I'm also practising freestyle now but I'm very slow because I have to think way too long about how I could cycle pieces and what the best setupmoves/algs are (best solves are like 3-4 minutes).

 

[MatsBergsten]

Different methods

Anyone care to explain what "freestyle bld solving" is and how it differs from 3OP?
3OP = 3cycles Old Pochmann or 3cycles Orient Permutate or something else?

Is "freestyle" the same as inventing commutators "on the fly", an idea that appeals to me. But perhaps it is not fast enough. Using M2R2 or as I do, M2 + Pochmann old corners determines the whole solving process beforehand, but for where to start new cycles. Of course that is one of the factors that makes it fast.

 

[MatsBergsten]

Speed versus reliability

Maybe it is all said and thought before, but is it really fair to have the result depending on just the fastest solve of three. We can see numerous example of great blind solvers who just DNF:s (at least at 3bld), just like I beat both Ville and Joey at the last competition in the finals just because they tried to get another WR.. It is silly to me. It could also mean that you can be a great bld solver without even a knowledge about how to handle parity, as parity occurs only 50% of the time. So with a competition with three solves you have almost 90% chance to get at least one solve without parity.

In ordinary 3x3 or 4x4 it is always best mean of three or more. I cannot be alone in thinking this?

 

[Jacco]

Anyone care to explain what "freestyle bld solving" is and how it differs from 3OP?
3OP = 3cycles Old Pochmann or 3cycles Orient Permutate or something else?

Is "freestyle" the same as inventing commutators "on the fly", an idea that appeals to me. But perhaps it is not fast enough. Using M2R2 or as I do, M2 + Pochmann old corners determines the whole solving process beforehand, but for where to start new cycles. Of course that is one of the factors that makes it fast.

Hello Mats,
Freestyle is basicly using many different ways of cycling pieces (also using commutators) and choosing the easiest/fastest way of cycling the next two pieces (or perhaps 4 if you know 5-cycles )

Some useful threads:
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6114&highlight=freestyle
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2021

 

[Ville Seppänen]

Jacco is pretty right there. The big difference between 3OP(3-cycle, orient permute) and freestyle is that you don't orient first in freestyle, and you don't have any setup restrictions that you have with 3OP.

Yes, you somewhat come up with the next cycling alg on the fly, but after you have done some solves you get used to doing same cases the same way, and you can instantly start the alg once you know what pieces you need to cycle next. It's like intuitive Fridrich F2L, learned intuition. And it is fast.

About the competition solves, I didn't exactly go for sick fast times, I did normal solves, they just ended up as DNFs. Even my last solve where I memoed much slower and safer. I memoed wrong and had 2 flipped corners, it happens. I was just tired, didn't really like doing all 6 solves so close together.



Accomplishment: 15puzzle blindfolded: 5:49.16(1:25 memo) It's hard

 

[Mike Hughey]

It could also mean that you can be a great bld solver without even a knowledge about how to handle parity, as parity occurs only 50% of the time. So with a competition with three solves you have almost 90% chance to get at least one solve without parity.

Marcus Stuhr was once frighteningly good at 3x3x3 BLD (sub-1 back when no one else was sub-1), but he apparently made it a point to just "throw away" solves that had parity. I guess it might have even been worthwhile, considering he could spend the extra time getting good at non-parity solves. (But it wasn't like he didn't know how to solve parity - he just didn't bother to try most of the time.) It's a pity he never got to a competition.

Accomplishment: 15puzzle blindfolded: 5:49.16(1:25 memo) It's hard

Is there anything you can't do?

 

[d4m4s74]

I blindsolved my first 2x2
I used a visual memo and the normal 2x2 algs I always use (just because after the OLL the pll is always the same)

 

[Derrick Eide17]

Week Delayed Memo BLD! I got it Yeah!
memoed the cube last sunday and did it today at the same time. Execution was 1:00.54 and the memo from last sunday was 1:59.99.
Woo-hoo! Thats 168 hours Memo Delayed BLD

 

[fanwuq]

Yay!!!!!
Awesome job, Derrick!

 

[Thompson]

I can pretty consistantly solve the 2x2 blindfolded now, and I really only started trying yesterday. It takes about 7 minutes though...

 

[Ville Seppänen]

Nice session with 3x3 BLD:

1. 35,66 U L D2 U B F D' L2 B2 L R2 D U L2 U' B F' D L' D F' L' D2 U B
2. 44,44 D L B2 L' D2 F' L R2 D B2 D F2 L R' D U L U' B' F L R' B' F' D
3. 36,05 D L2 R2 F' D' B2 D2 U B2 F2 L2 R' D2 U F D2 U L' R F2 D' R U2 R' U
4. DNF
5. DNF
6. DNF
7. 36,30 B F' L F D' U2 B' L2 R B2 D L U2 L D2 F R2 B F D U L' R D2 U'
8. DNF
9. 36,20 B2 R2 B' F2 R' B F D' U2 F' L F D2 L' F' L R2 F' L R D' B2 F D2 U'
10. 39,92 L' U L B' F2 L' B2 U2 L' B F' L R B2 L R2 D L R2 D' R2 F' R2 D F2

After this it went worse. 38.10 avg of successful solves.