Can't get below 1:25

so many advices, so few questions about you...

so what is your goal? 60s in next year? 15 sec. in next month? somewhere in between? how realistict and obsessive/perseverant are you? how old are you (the young have it a bit easier).

do you have a speed cube at all? lubed? Just get rid of the obvious brakes if any.

do you hope to do finger tricks like a master pianist? Not everyone can articulate extremely fast, it takes a long time to get the tiny muscles to do what you want like a reflex.

are you doing F2L with algos? your head is likely way too full and you could be pausing too much, or worse, making errors.




all right, my turn to dump my personal experiences:

you can learn most of the 21 PLL (I skipped the 4 G perm) at a pace of 1-3 per week. It crucial that you experiment with many if not all the variant algos of all the PLL, and find the algo you prefer. Take the time to recognize/identify the permutations too (don't skim of that!). Those little weekly goals are satisfying and kept me interested for months!

PLL will be useful even for roux because some do roux for the F2L, then finish with a regular LL.

I didn't learn the nasty 61 OLL nor the 42 F2L yet. Just the F sexy F' or the f sexy f' is good enough for me, and I use the keyhole method (mixing the corners and edges opportunistically).

Perhaps the most unblocking at your stage, like it was for me, would be to learn the keyhole method instead of dealing with the 42 algos of F2L, not for its speed (ultimately keyhole is possibly limiting) but for it's intuition. You would intuitively learn to deal with 3-turns which is the basics of longer F2L.

Doing coarse math, 5s cross (use plenty of inspection), 20s keyhole, then a generous 5 seconds for each of 4 looks, gets you a 45s solve. I can't guide you below that, I don't know what it is like yet!

Whatever you learn is not a waste. just fight the reflex to do what you know and try what you don't know as much. It will sink in.
 
so many advices, so few questions about you...

so what is your goal? 60s in next year? 15 sec. in next month? somewhere in between? how realistict and obsessive/perseverant are you? how old are you (the young have it a bit easier).

do you have a speed cube at all? lubed? Just get rid of the obvious brakes if any.

do you hope to do finger tricks like a master pianist? Not everyone can articulate extremely fast, it takes a long time to get the tiny muscles to do what you want like a reflex.

are you doing F2L with algos? your head is likely way too full and you could be pausing too much, or worse, making errors.




all right, my turn to dump my personal experiences:

you can learn most of the 21 PLL (I skipped the 4 G perm) at a pace of 1-3 per week. It crucial that you experiment with many if not all the variant algos of all the PLL, and find the algo you prefer. Take the time to recognize/identify the permutations too (don't skim of that!). Those little weekly goals are satisfying and kept me interested for months!

PLL will be useful even for roux because some do roux for the F2L, then finish with a regular LL.

I didn't learn the nasty 61 OLL nor the 42 F2L yet. Just the F sexy F' or the f sexy f' is good enough for me, and I use the keyhole method (mixing the corners and edges opportunistically).

Perhaps the most unblocking at your stage, like it was for me, would be to learn the keyhole method instead of dealing with the 42 algos of F2L, not for its speed (ultimately keyhole is possibly limiting) but for it's intuition. You would intuitively learn to deal with 3-turns which is the basics of longer F2L.

Doing coarse math, 5s cross (use plenty of inspection), 20s keyhole, then a generous 5 seconds for each of 4 looks, gets you a 45s solve. I can't guide you below that, I don't know what it is like yet!

Whatever you learn is not a waste. just fight the reflex to do what you know and try what you don't know as much. It will sink in.


Most of this is good advice.

Don't learn the 42 F2L algs, you really should never need them. You can learn maybe four algs or so, just for the odd and annoying cases. Learn full OLL starting once you're at 15 seconds, so you shouldn't worry about that anytime near now. You should probably try to use partial edge control for your last f2l pair(inserting your pair so that you get a better OLL case). One thing I have to say about this bit of advice is that although keyhole is nice to use when the corner is already placed and the edge is not, it's not the best idea to use keyhole for your whole second layer. Learning [intuitive] F2L will get you a lot further than keyhole(it's basically end-game).
 
you can learn most of the 21 PLL (I skipped the 4 G perm) at a pace of 1-3 per week.

Or you could learn them all in 24 hours, it's not that hard and there's only like 10 to actually learn if you take advantage of mirrors/inverses/etc. see here
PLL will be useful even for roux because some do roux for the F2L, then finish with a regular LL.

Name one sub-20 rouxer who does this more than 2% of the time.
 
I find ZZ method much more interesting. Will it be ok at this stage to try a switch??

The ZZ method was my first speedsolving method. When I first learnt it, I had done only a couple of timed solves in my life, and all in the 2-3 minute range. It took me a 15 hour plane flight to get the hang of EOLine, and another day or so to get used to blockbuilding for F2L. EOLine is very simple to understand if you just blindly follow the rules on cube.crider.co.uk and asmallkitten's Youtube videos.
 
I never timed myself, and I used to be at your level around ~4 months ago. Now i'm at 20 seconds.
Just solve slowly, relaxed, not trying to push yourself, at least not speedwise. With your problem of being unable to look ahead, I would recommend finding one unbuilt F2L pair, thinking about how to solve it, and then solving it blindfolded.
Do that until you think it's not too difficult, and then instead of keeping your eyes closed, look at the cube as a whole and track everything without the (I would guess yellow for you, but whatever opposite your cross) sticker.
You also might want to look at a sticky CFOP guide in the How-To section. It's pretty good.
And 4LLL (4 Look Last Layer) is good enough for sub-30.
 
It's ok to switch at any stage. At your stage, it's not going to be as hard as it is for someone with a 20 second average. You should get back down to your current times fairly quickly.

He's right, switching at any time is fine. (Unless you're like sub-10) I switched from CFOP to roux when I was sub-17.
 
Or you could learn them all in 24 hours, it's not that hard and there's only like 10 to actually learn if you take advantage of mirrors/inverses/etc.

That is the perfect example of what NOT to say to a student of... well, pretty much anything. Don't say it is easy, don't flash unrealistic goals. Instead, provide a strategy for them to learn with.

fact: the only mirrors are for A, G, J, N, R, U perms. So, 15 cases (I don't think anyone intended to speedcube learns inverses because they don't usually flow well).


Name one sub-20 rouxer who does this more than 2% of the time.

The poster could be one of your completely-reliable stat outlier. Let him/her decide what feels ok at the moment, and change later if necessary.
 
PLL will be useful even for roux because some do roux for the F2L, then finish with a regular LL.

This isn't Roux. This would be considered a form of FreeFOP, and quite an inefficient form. If anyone is doing Left Block and Right Block and then solving the Down Front and Down Back edges before moving on to the LL, they should consider switching to CFOP or Petrus (if they really like block building).

There's only two PLL algorithms that any efficient Roux user will ever use, and those are some kind of adjacent swap (usually a J) and some kind of diagonal swap (some kind of Y), and some Roux users don't even use those, because there are CMLL algs that are slightly more efficient.

Some people coming from CFOP will use U/Z/H Perms as well, but this is generally because they are not doing their last six edges efficiently, so they end up with U/Z/H Perms often. Personally, I come across U/Z/H Perm maybe 1 in 1000 solves (if that), and I just solve it Roux style.
 
That is the perfect example of what NOT to say to a student of... well, pretty much anything. Don't say it is easy, don't flash unrealistic goals. Instead, provide a strategy for them to learn with.

fact: the only mirrors are for A, G, J, N, R, U perms. So, 15 cases (I don't think anyone intended to speedcube learns inverses because they don't usually flow well).
1: it's not unrealistic, I did it.
2: I did provide a strategy, did you not see the link I gave?
3: fact: he already knows 2LPLL. That means he already knows E, A, U, Z, and H. That leaves F, G, J, N, R, T, V, and Y = 8. J, N, and T are very similar; F and V differ by two moves. There's really only 5 totally separate move sequences to learn and a couple variations/mirrors/inverses. I don't know why you think no one uses inverses. Do you realize F' r U R' U' r' F R (aka bow tie) is an inverse of chameleon?



The poster could be one of your completely-reliable stat outlier. Let him/her decide what feels ok at the moment, and change later if necessary.

I don't even understand what you're trying to say.
 
1: it's not unrealistic, I did it.
we get it, you're god... this thread is not about you. please beg for validation somewhere else.

Do you realize F' r U R' U' r' F R (aka bow tie) is an inverse of chameleon?
that's not a PLL inverse.

I don't even understand what you're trying to say.
you BS that 2%, I called you on it, and stats are meaningless to make a personal choice of cubing technique.
 
you BS that 2%, I called you on it, and stats are meaningless to make a personal choice of cubing technique.

You're actually right about the 2% number being wrong. It's 0%.

As Dan so helpfully explained, anyone who does this isn't using Roux, they're using a moderately inefficient FreeFOP variant that would be better swapped out for CFOP or Petrus.

Thanks DeeDubb, you're the best! <3 <3 <3
 
That's not a PLL inverse.
But people do use PLL inverses. Often. My <R,U> U perms are inverses of each other. I use A perms that are inverses. Inverses aren't that useful for PLLs that aren't 3 cycles, though, because the 2 corner/2 edge PLLs do the same thing to the cube forward and backward.
 
I practise some 50 solves a day and am currently exploring the zz method too
Two possibilities:
1) You're lying
2) You have a serious hand deformity

If you do 50 solves a day for 1-2 months, and know CFOP w/ 4LLL, you would be averaging about 30-40 seconds, not 1:25. There's no need to lie man, if you really want to get faster please tell us the truth. Oh and if youre using a storebought dollar store cube, that might also be the problem, but still. Tell us how many solves you actually do a day.
 
we get it, you're god... this thread is not about you. please beg for validation somewhere else.
If I were trying to boast, I would have made some comment about how I did it but others shouldn't expect to accomplish the same . I legitimately think anyone who has the dedication can go from knowing. 2LPLL to 1LPLL in the course of about 24 hours. And if you only want to put it an hour a day or something like that, it may take you a week or two, but I guess I just assume everyone is as dedicated as I am. Sorry.

that's not a PLL inverse.

As pointed out above, people do use A and U inverses. I use G inverses as well, and that's all I was really expecting the op to learn.


you BS that 2%, I called you on it, and stats are meaningless to make a personal choice of cubing technique.

You still have not demonstrated any sub20 rouxers who ever solve the way you described. I'll admit I used to before I knew CMLL because 2look CMLL is boring, but that's the only reason to do that. It's less efficient than normal roux, and so people who do know CMLL never use it.
 
you BS that 2%, I called you on it, and stats are meaningless to make a personal choice of cubing technique.
I have to say that please don't teach new people to solve this way (solving DF and DB in roux solve instead of UR and UL)
It has been tried and is much less efficient than solving with real roux.
There is a reason not even one fast roux solver does this.

Also saying this:
Let him/her decide what feels ok at the moment, and change later if necessary.
Is very bad!
He is new to speedsolving and obviously what "feels good" at first might be actually counter productive later. It is better/easier/more efficient to learn good habits right from the start than first learning bad habits then trying to re-learn the better way...

tl:dr Don't comment with bad advice if you don't know what you are talking about.
 
Technically, there are no inverse A and U perms, when a mirror does the same job. Only G perms have inverses (hence 4 g perms)

I maintain that inverses are not flowing as well, in general.

Removing the choice of a problem solving method is among the worst things you can do to harm the learning process of someone. Just look at the school system to see its ultimate failure at work. I maintain that the learner has to experiment and make choices. When ZZ came out, would you have slammed it down like you do now just because it is different? Not everyone is the same, and the OP may be far better than the average at some composite method. The cube is about having fun solving by oneself. Let him have fun experimenting; it is obviously what he showed us he is interested in.

10-4.
 
Just a suggestion...
It is super easy to get under a minute with beginner LBL. It is still really easy to get to sub-40 with beginner LBL and a tiny bit of shortcut algs.

But at this stage, I don't think you should be knowing CFOP. It's just: why would you learn a bunch of algorithms when you can just use some easy (albeit repetitive and somewhat slower) method? If you are not sub-1 minute and you are using CFOP, well... I think you might want to stick with beginner LBL. You don't need to learn a new method until you are extremely sure that you cannot improve with beginner LBL. I stuck with pure beginner LBL until I was sub-40 before I started learning CFOP.

Just work on fingertricks. At this stage, the reason you cannot get faster is probably because you cannot fingertrick well enough or fast enough. So just work on your fingertricks and you will improve significantly.
 
Last edited:
But at this stage, I don't think you should be knowing CFOP. It's just: why would you learn a bunch of algorithms when you can just use some easy (albeit repetitive and somewhat slower) method? If you are not sub-1 minute and you are using CFOP, well... I think you might want to stick with beginner LBL.

I completely disagree. If someone wants to learn a method, they are more than welcome to learn that method, no matter what their times are. Like I said earlier, I learned the ZZ method when I was averaging 2-3 minutes. If I hadn't, I would probably never have gotten any faster than that. LBL is fine if your objective is just to solve the cube mindlessly, but it's extremely boring, and I see no point in sticking with it just for the sake of getting faster.
 
Back
Top