How fast can you learn Fridrich? (And How fast can I?)

[desertbear]

I would like to see how long it took the CFOPers to learn all of the F2L algorithms (or every case intuitively). Not necessarily get fast on them or have amazing recognition, but just to the point where you can recognize all of the Fridrich F2L cases and solve every one. Let's rule out ridiculously long solves though. Let's set the bar at 1 minute for the F2L (at most, and that's a pretty gracious amount of time), with no algorithms/help in front of you. How long did it take you from the day you started learning the Fridrich F2L until you reached the day when you could solve every case, and your F2L solve took no more than 1 minute?

Be honest with your answers. I'd like to see the spread of answers, as well as the comparison in learning time between the purely intuitive and the purely algorithmic.

This thread will also be a challenge to myself. I consider myself fairly new to the world of cubing (4 months just messing around with 3x3 beginner method, 3 months of speedsolving). I don't usually spend too much of my time solving the 3x3, I spend a considerable amount on Pyraminx, Megaminx, and 2x2. I have only used keyhole and petrus f2l (meaning petrus for the f2l, then oll and pll) for my speedsolves, and lately I have been testing out new methods to see which one would be the best for me. CF methods seem quite boring, and while Roux is quite fun, I cannot grasp some of the last steps conceptually yet. CFOP seems the most logical solution for me as I learned simplified fridrich LBL long before I found petrus. I wish I would have been introduced to blockbuilding and CFOP simultaneously, but I learned the simple beginner method by heart, until I could solve using 1st layer, 2nd layer, OLL, and PLL to solve in under a minute. So I have concluded that it would be the best approach for me to expand on my LBL knowledge by learning all of Fridrich F2L. I can solve F2L very slowly if I use all intuitive solving, but this is also an experiment to see how good my memorization skills, so I will be doing all algorithmic F2L. My goal is to know each case and its solution in 9 days. Hopefully, with all this practice I should also be able to break the 1 minute barrier in 9 days. I started today, and memorized (along with muscle memory) the first six cases and algorithms. I will update my current status in this thread every day until the 9 days are up, at which point I will assess my progress for the entire challenge.

Thanks for taking the time to read this long post!

 

[Feryll]

Hmmm, using Dan Brown's beginner method, I could very rarely break 1 minute, but now I've started learning 2LOLL, intuitive f2l, and PLL. I loosely learned all 21 of the PLL algorithms in 2 or 3 days, meaning I had gone over every one, and I could do them 3 or 4 times without looking at it written down. I also did this withy a few OLLs. Now, I'm completely memorizing them, so I wouldn't say that I could do all the PLL's without a sheet of algorithms, but if I know the first few steps, I can usually do it. I can get around 70-80 seconds usually with my limited Fridrich knowledge, and 60-70 with my practiced pogobat method. I can't wait to completely know all of the PLLs and OLLs (FAR from now) I will also be tracking my progress.

 

[Mike Hughey]

I would say it took me about 2 months, but I was also learning one-look PLL and two-look OLL at the same time. Prior to that, I had been solving using an essentially corners-first method. That was about 3 years ago.

 

[Anthony]

I was already averaging around 45 seconds using a "beginner's method" before I switched to solving the first two layers simultaneously. I'm assuming this helped me at least somewhat. Anyway, it only took me a week or so to be able to solve the first two layers intuitively using corner-edge pairs and get times under a minute.

However, you said we had to get "to the point where you can recognize all of the Fridrich F2L cases and solve every one." It took me much longer to be able to recognize every F2L case individually and instantly know exactly what moves I needed to do solve it. I could solve every case right after learning, but it was just much slower and much less efficient.

I would suggest trying out intuitive F2L before moving on to algorithms, but if you really want to jump straight into algorithmic F2L, go for it. In the end it's pretty much the same thing anyway.

Just my two cents. Hope that helps.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

I watched MMAP's video. At first, I understood the general concept, where the corner is facing, where's the edge, what happens when 3 slots are filled but one, etc.
I'd say 2 months with actual devotion.

 

[Zarxrax]

Um... if you learn intuitive f2l from badmephisto's video, I think there are only like 3 or so cases that you have to learn. You should be able to learn and get your f2l under a minute in 1 day, easily.

 

[Zane_C]

F2L should be fairly easy to get the hang of, just learn all the cases, later you will see how they work and it would become intuitively.
As for the last layer it depends on how good your memory is, it shouldn't be to hard to learn at least 2 algorithms a day. If you start forgeting some, that means you have to slow down.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

A week just about? It's been a while since then (1 1/2+ years?) I've cubed for 2 years and my F2L is easily sub-10. I'm not sure exactly what you are asking for but that's all I think I need to say.

 

[Litz]

1 day. I watched badmephistos' tutorial on F2L once, tried to solve it myself and I didn't remember how to do one of the cases so watched it again and trained it. By the end of the day I could do it in less than 1 minute and so can you if you do this.

There's only 3 cases (6 if you count the "mirrors") and if you watch the video and try to understand what he's doing and not just memorizing algorithms, you'll see it's pretty easy to recognize them and do them. You won't have to memorize anything and you'll be able to do it so I really don't recommend learning the algorithms.

Obviously there will be many cases where you won't be doing the best movements you can do, but that's not needed at first. When you train you'll start figuring out faster ways of doing things, and you can then check all the F2L algorithms and you'll see they're pretty much what you do intuitively.

 

[eastamazonantidote]

To be quite honest, I understood F2L very well right away but had issues finding the pieces. In the end, it took me 1 month to get under a minute on my F2L. It wasn't serious cubing by any means and I imagine if you really set out to work on it you could get it down in less than a day (same as BLD).

Purely algorithmic F2L is highly unnecessary as with time your "intuition" tells you what you have to do anyway.

 

[chris410]

F2L was easy to learn however, as others have stated my problem is finding the pieces especially when the corner/edge are not on the top layer. I am still working on a way to improve the way I find pieces. F2L itself is not difficult, the challenge is F2L quickly and accurately. When I see videos of people who solve faster than 30 seconds I am amazed at their recognition skill along with their F2L execution efficiency.

I learned 2-Look OLL/PLL in about a day, what I did was create note cards with the case on one side and the algorithm on the other. In addition to that, I associated the shapes with something that I could reference the algorithm. However, it took me several days to get to the point where I would not forget the algorithm or confuse them. Each person is different, some people are better at memorization/recognition so my advice is to use any creative method that works for you.

I read several threads that suggested slowing down and practicing the look ahead while learning F2L and it helped me quite a bit. I am currently still working on breaking bad habits which lead to fast/stop type of solving which leads me to horrible times, consistent TPS is my goal so that my times will be come more consistent.

Of course, I am one of the slower people here so I am sure the experts will have some very helpful advice.

 

[Enter]

fast very fast one month for f2l and pll than I took it slow with the oll's 2 months I think now i know over 100 algorithms and still learning something new every day!!!

 

[desertbear]

I understand intuitive Fridrich, this is an exercise for me to optimize the solutions to every case in the best way for me. So in a way, I'm sort of doing both intuitive and algorithmic.

Thanks for all the answers you guys gave me, it was quite a help to get a general time frame in my head!

anyway,

Day 2: Practiced the first 6 cases until it was habitual. Began to intuitively solve the next 6 cases and write down the shortest solutions I found (either by myself, or online if I was stumped)

Day 3: Practiced the first 12 cases, set down a specific set of algorithms for the second group, and began to memorize them as well as work on my recognition.

 

[cincyaviation]

well i have been using intuitive F2L for about maybe 2 months now, and i jsut recently learned what seems to be close to the most efficient solution for all the trickier cases, so thats your answer, my F2L averages around 20 seconds now

 

[desertbear]

UPDATE:

It is day 8, and having learned every case intuitively (and the most common ones both algorithmically and intuitively) I took my First Fridrich Average.

Average of 5: 1:03.45

1:17.89
58.31
1:15.36
1:03.89
41.81 New PB with any method

 

[MichaelErskine]

Good work - those times are sure to reduce as you get more used to F2L cases.

I learned intuitive F2L pretty quickly. It took maybe four hours including the time to watch badmephisto's video a few times. I was already averaging a minute with a layer-by-layer method and I found it quite easy to switch.

 

[Litz]

UPDATE:

It is day 8, and having learned every case intuitively (and the most common ones both algorithmically and intuitively) I took my First Fridrich Average.

Average of 5: 1:03.45

1:17.89
58.31
1:15.36
1:03.89
41.81 New PB with any method

Good job. Don't worry about inconsistent times by the way. They're like that because you just learned the method so you're still getting used to it, but give it a couple weeks and you'll get consistency. Keep on practicing!

 

[happyface352]

I learned 4LLL before F2L. My times actually took longer after a short period with F2L (Around 20 minutes), then they started getting lower and lower (Starting around when the 20 minutes ended).

 

[OregonTrail]

Lance's F2L video was actually the first cubing video I watched.
I didn't have a cube at the time, but I watched the whole thing out of fascination.

I later learned Dan Brown's method, but still had some of that F2L knowledge in my mind (the basic F2L cases etc.).

Just with that memory, I was able to do very slow F2L solves while getting practicing Dan Brown's method. (around 5 minutes using Dan Brown's last layer)

When I hit sub 1 averages I decided to take a better look at F2L, so I watched about three different tutorials on youtube (including Erik's which is great). I then started to practice F2L.

At first I was angry that I would never be faster using F2L, but after about a week I went from a PB a12 of 52.XX to 46.XX.

Now I'm learning PLLs.

 

[Arendil]

Like 3 days for me. Algorithms? pshaa. Just need to learn those like 3 cases and than u gots it. <lol grammar fail