Dan Brown's New Video

[riffz]

But Rikane, his vids give misleading info, which is bad for us actually.

But the person who is learning doesn't know that. They just want to learn. Like he said, if they really wanna get faster, they would go through the effort like a number of us have. We shouldn't blame him. He is just a person on youtube trying to teach. That's it.

The problem I have with it is that it does not transition smoothly into a faster method. When people learn that they need to throw away most of those algorithms and relearn the LL, they often lose interest in getting faster. I still think badmephisto's video is much better because if they want to get faster they can learn one more algorithm. Then another when they feel like it.

 

[badmephisto]

I'd just rather people have a REAL reason to hate on him, not what I'm feeling like I'm seeing is a bunch of people thinking "Oh everyone hates him, let's do that too"

I unloaded on him in the Video's section thread on this same topic. Go there if you want to see MANY good reasons to "hate on him". I even posted twice that angry i was
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17944&page=3
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17944&page=4

Just because you learned from him should not make you feel you have to somehow defend him, or that you owe him something. When I meet the person that wrote the beginner's method tutorial I learned from, I will kick him straight in balls. That *******.

 

[Jokerman5656]

Dan Brown = :fp

 

[Rikane]

I'd just rather people have a REAL reason to hate on him, not what I'm feeling like I'm seeing is a bunch of people thinking "Oh everyone hates him, let's do that too"

I unloaded on him in the Video's section thread on this same topic. Go there if you want to see MANY good reasons to "hate on him". I even posted twice that angry i was
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17944&page=3
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17944&page=4

Just because you learned from him should not make you feel you have to somehow defend him, or that you owe him something. When I meet the person that wrote the beginner's method tutorial I learned from, I will kick him straight in balls. That *******.

Yes, yes, I understand your points as I've read them already in the other thread. Thanks for pointing it out again here though so you were sure that I'd read it .

All I'm saying is that I didn't find it that hard to switch the fridrich after learning the method that he teaches. Yes, a little effort needs to be used, but I still ended up doing decent anyway. Hell, I'm using roux now.

anyway, all I wanted was a good reason for someone to hate on him, something logical. Instead of "I hate him for whatever reason", you have at least given a thought out answer to my question and for that, I can't argue. It is YOUR opinion and I'll do nothing to change it. Though, I thank you for giving a real reason.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

I say Dan Brown is funny and amusing. Sure it isn't a faster method, but he STARTED a LOT of people into speedcubing. He probably doesn't have time to learn Fridich.
Also, he's awesome at juggling.

 

[DAE_JA_VOO]

Bleh, it's actually quite ridiculous how some of you guys hate Dan.

I really can't see much difference in speed between his tutorial and badmephistos. I think there may just be some prejudice going on, his tutorial is completely valid, except for the horrible method.

What else would people be not liking?

He goes too fast, he's not qualified to teach, the notation is wrong, he told people to lube with vaseline(more of a reason why it's obvious not to watch his videos), Dan Brown hate.

Not QUALIFIED? Now how exactly would one become "qualified" to teach someone how to solve a cube. As far as I'm concerned, if you can solve a cube, you're "qualified" to teach someone else how to solve it. All Dan is doing is teaching a total n00b how to solve a cube. He's not teaching them a speedsolving method, he's teaching them a basic solving method, and it WORKS. That's how many of us here (including myself) learned how to solve.

I think Dan's doing a great thing. While my transition to Fridrich would most certainly have been easier with Badmephisto's method, the fact that I learned using Dan's method didn't make life any tougher.

But Rikane, his vids give misleading info, which is bad for us actually.

But the person who is learning doesn't know that. They just want to learn. Like he said, if they really wanna get faster, they would go through the effort like a number of us have. We shouldn't blame him. He is just a person on youtube trying to teach. That's it.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[AvidCuber]

1) Dan Brown is funny and I guess it's good for him to get more views while he's funny, and teaching at the same time.
2) It's a pretty good tutorial.
3) Though the previous two points may have seemed like I'm endorsing him, I am by no means doing so.
4) The notation thing irritated me greatly, but I'm at least glad he switched from "inverse" to "prime".
5) Dan Brown is just a guy who knows how to solve a Rubik's cube, but he is by no means experienced nor good enough to teach it (meaning, he doesn't know what those algorithms really do...like the thing he does on LL when you're permuting the last layer, it's actually a SUNE but he uses it to PERMUTE the LL edges. What?!?!?!?)
6) But I suppose the method he teaches is the one that comes in a little marginally helpful booklet thingy when you get a storebought, so I guess it's legit that he's teaching that method...but it's kind of unoriginal.
7) I had a friend who learned how to solve it just from that booklet, so I guess Dan Brown isn't the only reason for slow cubers these days...

The bottom line: Dan Brown is completely unqualified to be teaching how to solve a Rubik's cube, it just seems like he applies algorithms blindly, without a care as to how they work or what other things that they do. But it's not entirely his fault, I suppose.

Sorry for the long post haha, I had a lot to say. xD

 

[Chapuunka]

...he switched from "inverse" to "prime".

Who knows? Maybe he did some research, but was too stubborn to switch methods.

 

[Edward]

...he switched from "inverse" to "prime".

Who knows? Maybe he did some research, but was too stubborn to switch methods.

To properly teach a new method, he'd have to learn it (inside and out). I don't think alot of people would do that just to make a few youtube videos (especially since he doesn't care that much about cubing).

 

[RyanO]

I'm going to start calling cubies cublets becaues it makes me chuckle.

 

[Chapuunka]

...he switched from "inverse" to "prime".

Who knows? Maybe he did some research, but was too stubborn to switch methods.

To properly teach a new method, he'd have to learn it (inside and out). I don't think alot of people would do that just to make a few youtube videos (especially since he doesn't care that much about cubing).

That's kinda what I was getting at--maybe he found the whole speedcubing world, but didn't want to put the work into actually learning a better method and stuck to his.

 

[blakedacuber]

I like many, lerned from Dan's original video which at the time i tought ws gret but once I solved it two or three times i didnt feel the need to get faster.That only changed because i tought it ws impressive and the it might come in handy some time!!so when i went and watched videos to get fatser i learned f2l but didnt find the last layer that big of a problem but it was only then i saw badmephisto's vid which i think is much better for anyone who intends to get faster but as a basic method i think Dans is perfectly fine except for thos few little mistakes he made i.e cublets(sounds posh compared to cubies), nd 2F(that annoyed me alot because as a noob people like to learn but when you lern something you dont want to relearn things!so if you recommending someone who is interested in just learning to solve send them to Dan but if someone wants to be a relativly decent cuber send them to badmephisto.



also how cn his subscribers say this is confusing compared to all the other crap he goes on about??


And the whole inverse thng i think is ok because its catchy for a noob,maybe not correct but nobodys perfect

 

[jiggy]

so if you recommending someone who is interested in just learning to solve send them to Dan but if someone wants to be a relativly decent cuber send them to badmephisto.

I don't think I'd even do that, meph has a fantastic beginners' tutorial.

 

[infringement153]

Dan Brown is not evil.

Just trying to teach people how to solve a cube.

/topic

 

[Stefan]

he doesn't know what those algorithms really do...like the thing he does on LL when you're permuting the last layer, it's actually a SUNE but he uses it to PERMUTE the LL edges. What?!?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, well, you're an idiot.

 

[DavidWoner]

he doesn't know what those algorithms really do...like the thing he does on LL when you're permuting the last layer, it's actually a SUNE but he uses it to PERMUTE the LL edges. What?!?!?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, well, you're an idiot.

Hahahaha oh that's golden.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

To me, Dan's mistakes were:
-Using i instead of '
-VASALINE. I think
-Almost all of the 4x4 notation -_-

 

[Muesli]

so if you recommending someone who is interested in just learning to solve send them to Dan but if someone wants to be a relativly decent cuber send them to badmephisto.

I don't think I'd even do that, meph has a fantastic beginners' tutorial.

So does Dan Brown.

 

[lorki3]

I love gerald moves

 

[jiggy]

so if you recommending someone who is interested in just learning to solve send them to Dan but if someone wants to be a relativly decent cuber send them to badmephisto.

I don't think I'd even do that, meph has a fantastic beginners' tutorial.

So does Dan Brown.

That's fair enough, so let me explain why I would send a beginner to badmephisto over Dan.

My biggest issue with Dan is the method he teaches. Ok, it's the same method you can find in a Rubik's cube booklet, but that doesn't make it good. Meph, however, teaches a beginners' method which naturally leads onto what is currently the most popular speed solving method in use.

Secondly, as a beginner, why would you settle for learning from someone who can teach you "just to solve the cube" when you could just as easily learn from someone who could teach you to be "a relatively decent cuber"? Dan isn't a speed cuber, so he doesn't really know what he's talking about. He shows this frequently with mistakes in notation and advising people to use Vaseline on their cubes (a tired and overused point, perhaps, but still true).

To be fair to him, he has that slightly over enthusiastic attitude which keeps a lot of people interested, and he's clearly having fun as he teaches. On the other had, if you look through the comments on any of meph's videos you'll always see viewers saying what a good teacher he is and he manages to do it without that annoying bubblegum voice Dan uses.

Another thing is his cross colour convention. He teaches beginners to solve the cross on the green side. Ok, in theory, there isn't much difference between solving for green or for white but the fact remains that it's convention to solve a white cross. Not such a big deal, but a beginner who learnt to solve on the green face and then goes on to learn F2L (etc) will most likely see tutorials using a white cross (and, thus, different middle layer colours) and will have to either translate it in their own head or wrestle with a new colour scheme. Neither is particularly ideal for a beginner.

I really don't mean to start an argument or lose a friend before I make one so I'll finish by saying that Dan gets the job done and has a good attitude. But I'd still send a friend learning to solve the cube to a better teacher, teaching a better method in a more competent manner any day.