#### elrog

##### Member
If your good with commutators, you may also like using pair commutators to move the pairs and solve an edge. I also usually take more setup moves than 2 if I want to solve 2 of the corners when all 5 are wrong. For the one pair approach, its not that much of a problem. For recognition, theres no really good way to do it. You do get better with practice, but ultimately, this is what Heise lacks as a speedsolving method.

#### TheNextFeliks

##### Member
"Learning" heise for fmc. The hard part is step three: 5 edges and 2 corners. I cannot get both. I usually do edges then two comms. I want to do it more efficiently. Any tips?

#### Pi

##### Member
Potential of the Heise Method

I've been researching into the different methods in solving the 3x3 in order to better my understanding of the cube. I found an interesting tidbit about the Heise Method that stated that it could be a speedsolving method if learned thoroughly. Just how fast could one solve the cube with this method? Could it be better than Fridrich if used properly?

#### A Leman

##### Member
sub15 is possible with heise. It is very inconsistant during speedsolves though and corner twists instead of comms sort of ruin the movecount that takes much more effort to get IMO. The amount of effort required to become somewhat fluent in avoiding parity during L5E+2C makes it very difficult. This amount of intuition needs to be groomed and is hard to maintain.

#### mark49152

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
I can't find many good example Heise solves out there. Can any one point me at some? Thanks in advance!

#### vanselm66

##### Member
Hello.
I'm an absolute beginner that got interested in rubik's cube some months ago, and got surprised about how many methods exits to resolve it.
I was looking for a simple method and I found Petrus and Heise. Really I prefer understand the cube than memorize algorithms because I don't care too much about speed, so I've chosen going on with Heise, even although it could seem a hard method for a beginner.

#### It3ration

##### Member
Glad to hear it! I've been using Heise for years - though if I'm going for speed, I usually do Fridrich for the F2L, and use Heise for the LL - I've managed to keep my times from about 20-30 seconds tops, even using Heise for the LL. The more you practice it the better you'll get - I also think it increases your understanding of the cube itself, it's definitely worth learning.

#### Hypocrism

##### Member
Hello.
I'm an absolute beginner that got interested in rubik's cube some months ago, and got surprised about how many methods exits to resolve it.
I was looking for a simple method and I found Petrus and Heise. Really I prefer understand the cube than memorize algorithms because I don't care too much about speed, so I've chosen going on with Heise, even although it could seem a hard method for a beginner.
Roux is another option that requires few algorithms.

##### Member
Roux is another option that requires few algorithms.
... that could use few algorithms. There are CMLL algs that effect edge orientation.

#### Hypocrism

##### Member
... that could use few algorithms. There are CMLL algs that effect edge orientation.
For a beginner's solving method, it requires few algorithms. Two if I'm not mistaken are sufficient.

##### Member
For a beginner's solving method, it requires few algorithms. Two if I'm not mistaken are sufficient.
Yup, unless someone counts moo and LSE in general as algorithmic.

#### TDM

##### Member
For a beginner's solving method, it requires few algorithms. Two if I'm not mistaken are sufficient.
Well if you want to use as few as possible, it can be done with no algs. Intuitive corner twists (e.g. [R U R' U' R U R' U',L']) and some easy to understand comms for permutation (e.g. [[R' U L'2],U/U2]).
Yup, unless someone counts moo and LSE in general as algorithmic.
Most people wouldn't, but even if you do, and you say that's 6 algs, they're still only 3 moves each. Which isn't very much. It wouldn't take that long to learn at all.

#### vanselm66

##### Member
Hello.
I'm an absolute beginner that got interested in rubik's cube some months ago, and got surprised about how many methods exits to resolve it.
I was looking for a simple method and I found Petrus and Heise. Really I prefer understand the cube than memorize algorithms because I don't care too much about speed, so I've chosen going on with Heise, even although it could seem a hard method for a beginner.
Finally, after some practise, I'm getting resolved cubes, but it takes me a long time, specially when resolving last layer's corners and I have to find the right commutators and conjugates. Really I start by building the 2x2x2 and expand it to 2x2x3 (Petrus), that it's easier when beginning, then I go on with Heise. But now I think I'm ready to try the "orthodox" way. Anyway I think it's great to complete a Rubik's cube without memorazing any algorithm, even if I'd never get too fast.

#### aspetuck

##### Member
Could Heise be an effective speed cubing method?

I think I'll learn Heise as a FMC method but I was wondering if it could make a speed cubing method? Move count is very low. I don't think people can know for sure though because not many people use it and the ones who do don't speed solve with it.

#### qqwref

##### Member
I think it's possible, but it would take an extreme amount of practice. And even though the movecount is low, the move sequences do not have a lot of structure (compare to all the triggers in Fridrich, or the MU spam in Roux) so your TPS would suffer a lot, negating most of the advantage.

#### Notasurgeon

##### Member
Hello!

I've been working on the Heise Method for the last few days, and I can solve it pretty easily using the edges-first method.

Where I'm having a lot of trouble is with the two-pairs technique where you align two of the edges with the corners before aligning the edges. If I get to a point where any two of the remaining five edges (four on top and one in the manipulation slot) are ordered relative to each other, I can often find a pair 3-cycle or two that will sort them into the correct order so that all that remains is the final three corners. But what has been happening A LOT is that I'll end up with no edges in the right spot or with three edges correct, meaning that I can't use a 3-cycle to fix what's left since only two edges are out of place. As far as I can tell, none of the examples on his webpage are like this, but it's been happening to me a significant amount of the time.

Does anyone familiar with this method know what I'm doing wrong or how I might fix it?

#### Mike Hughey

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
I played with Heise quite a bit last year, and I'm familiar with what you're talking about. I had trouble with this too; I could never get where I could just generate any two pairs and have it work - it seemed like they needed to be in a configuration that would work well in order to work out.

I learned some things by reading the posts in the following thread, especially at about post #81 in the thread. Try working through the examples:

#### 1001010101001

##### Member
What am I doing wrong here? I suck at Heise and don't know why:
R' U' F R2 U2 B' R2 U2 F2 U2 B' F2 U2 R2 U F' R' D U B' D2 R2 B' L R' U' F

Solve:
D U' F2 D L D2 L2 R' U B2 D L2 U2 L U2 L' D' B' R B D L U B U' B2 L2 B R B' L B R L2 F L2 R2 B2 L2 R2 Ff L2 R2 B L

I always get 40-50 moves using Heise, which is what I get with Roux HTM as well.

Last edited:

#### CreativeCubing

##### Member
Hello everyone! I do have a question regarding 3x3 methods. I am a cuber who currently uses cfop, and I can get an average sub 10, though I want to change my method. I would like to change it to Heise, though I have been learning it and it is pretty challenging. If you know how to solve Heise or have any suggestions about whether I should change to Heise or another method, please respond.

#### Mike Hughey

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
Heise is incredibly fun, and I find it somewhat useful to know for fewest moves (very rare to submit a whole Heise solve for fewest moves, but the principles from it definitely can help, and using it for starts can get you pretty tolerable averages, even if they rarely result in winning results), but I know of no one who has ever gotten really fast with Heise. It typically takes me at least a minute to complete a full Heise solve; I average 20 seconds with CFOP. I know there are plenty of people who can sub-20 Heise, but most of them are probably twice as fast with CFOP.