How I think New cubers should start out ;)

[uberCuber]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I got sub-25 with Rubik's brand, others have gotten faster with it. There is no reason you need to buy a good cube right away, it is up to the person in question.

Also, completely agree with cincyaviation, this really should not be considered a guide, with no mention at all of other methods/sub-methods. For me personally, one of the most fun things about speedcubing is learning different methods and practicing all of them at times when I feel like it.

 

[Cyrus C.]

Just because you can sub 25 with a Rubik's Brand doesn't mean you should. Also, there's nothing wrong with this guide not mentioning other methods, it's meant for the average cuber who probably uses CFOP.

 

[uberCuber]

Just because you can sub 25 with a Rubik's Brand doesn't mean you should.

what you should do is whatever you want to do; this is a hobby, and is meant for enjoyment, not having to do something specific.

Also, there's nothing wrong with this guide not mentioning other methods, it's meant for the average cuber who probably uses CFOP.

If this guide is only directed to CFOP users, there is really no good reason for it to exist, because there are already much more detailed guides on how to get fast with CFOP. If the OP would like to edit in some stuff about other methods, then it could potentially become useful.

 

[skateboardboy20]

use robhos tutorial then learn f2l (brings down your time by 4-5 secs) then learn oll then pll full i avg aroun 14-20 secs

 

[uberCuber]

just did an avg12 with a Rubik's brand because I felt like it, it was only 2 seconds above average, and included a few recognition fails since I have gotten used to white plastic.

 

[~Adam~]

That isn't very informative without the times.

When I was averaging around 24 seconds I had the same average with my GuHong and mini Diansheng.
The slower speed was made up for by better look ahead.

Since uber seems to be doing it

Spoiler

1st 5 solves with mini Diansheng - 22.17, 19.66, 17.80, 23.11, 22.38 = 21.40avg
1st 5 solves with GuHong - 20.17, 19.23, 21.65, 22.76, 18.11 = 20.35avg

 

[uberCuber]

Rubik's brand
17.58, 17.58, 17.80, 16.05, 17.38, 17.18, 19.06, 19.17, 16.67, 19.53, 21.88, 17.61 = 17.95
that is only a fraction of a second above average

 

[cincyaviation]

Rubik's brand
17.58, 17.58, 17.80, 16.05, 17.38, 17.18, 19.06, 19.17, 16.67, 19.53, 21.88, 17.61 = 17.95
that is only a fraction of a second above average

Beginners usually don't have good Rubik's brands, they usually have ones right out of the package that have nothing done to them. Just because you can do well with yours, doesn't mean others can do well with theirs.

 

[Cyrus C.]

what you should do is whatever you want to do; this is a hobby, and is meant for enjoyment, not having to do something specific.

Glad you understand.

If this guide is only directed to CFOP users, there is really no good reason for it to exist, because there are already much more detailed guides on how to get fast with CFOP. If the OP would like to edit in some stuff about other methods, then it could potentially become useful.

The problem is lack of new stuff, not that it's based around CFOP.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

Cincyaviation is right.

I completely disagree with all the tutorials that way "wait until you are sub-n to learn x." That is by far one of the biggest things I regret about learning full OLL and PLL (so late). I personally believe if you are going to commit yourself to a method, it is not such a good idea to get yourself great at a certain sub-method of this given method. People say "Well you don't need to do x and you and still sub20" or "Feliks did 2LOLL and got a sub10 average." Going back to cincyaviation's point: Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. While I certainly agree that you should learn the 2 Look methods before one look method (after all, learning 2 Look gives you algorithms you'll use in one look), that doesn't mean you should wait until you are sub30 to learn OLL/PLL, or sub20, sub15, etc. The sooner you start learning your cases, the sooner recognition/recall issues go away.

Not to be harsh: But I also agree with cincyaviation in the aspect that you seem to be not so qualified to write such a tutorial. No offense, but it wasn't the best tutorial either, and seems like you wanted to share an opinion rather than write a tutorial. While sharing your opinion isn't exactly a bad thing, but the forums are different than just something you'd ramble on to a cubing friend about while having some heads up races or something.

I don't know how fast you are, but there are certainly an abundance of "how to get faster" threads (both in question form (mostly) and tutorial form). I think you'd benefit to read "How to get faster using the Fridrich Method" thread or the "Road to Sub15 Averages" on the wiki (which links to the thread I mentioned). There are some other great threads on F2L tips and tricks, OLL tricks, etc. I think you should research these things, I think you would benefit from it (no offense intended).

 

[abctoshiro]

Maybe the OP thinks that most beginners start out with LBL then shift to CFOP. For me, it is true, but it is a bit biased. His guide/opinion focuses mostly on transition to CFOP and nothing else. There is lack of new stuff. How about if you want to try other methods?

Also, new cubers have their own pace and some would love to try things at their own pace. For me, I explored blockbuilding when I was averaging about a minute, then OLL/PLL at sub-40, then shifted to Roux when I was sub-25, and still no full OLL/PLL/CMLL till today.

Just my opinion.

 

[emolover]

I averaged 1 mins with a Rubik's Brand, and Beginner's method.
I learned 2Look OLL and PLL, and averaged 40-45 seconds.
I bought an AV and modded it to Haiyan Memory. Thne learned Full PLL. Started averaging 27-33.
I am now focusing on F2L, and average around 20 seconds.

That is the exact way I did it... the only difference is I use a GuHung now, but I do use my haiyan memory sometimes.

 

[Tyjet66]

I strongly disagree with your guide (and just about everyone else's.) Why would you wait to learn full PLL and full OLL? It seems pointless, if you wish to learn it then do so; learning it early would just allow you to practice it more and get accustomed to it much much sooner, which, in my opinion, is purely beneficial. You are also saying that EVERYONE should start with Fridrich (after LBL of course), why is that? A lot of people prefer other methods and some are even better suited to other methods, what makes Fridrich so special?

Just to clarify, I use Fridrich, I learned full PLL in between 1:00-:40 average, working on full OLL in between :40-:33 (current) average.

 

[Cubing]

I strongly disagree with your guide (and just about everyone else's.) Why would you wait to learn full PLL and full OLL? It seems pointless, if you wish to learn it then do so; learning it early would just allow you to practice it more and get accustomed to it much much sooner, which, in my opinion, is purely beneficial. You are also saying that EVERYONE should start with Fridrich (after LBL of course), why is that? A lot of people prefer other methods and some are even better suited to other methods, what makes Fridrich so special?

Just to clarify, I use Fridrich, I learned full PLL in between 1:00-:40 average, working on full OLL in between :40-:33 (current) average.

This my opinion hence the term "How I think"

 

[Cubing]

Slow cube promotes frustration and quitting.

Yes, but Rubik's brands aren't usually that slow. Frustration and quitting is for sad people.

 

[Magix]

Nobody really cares about your opinion though if you bring no reasonable justifications for it

 

[ianography]

If you guys hate this thread so much, then why don't you all just ignore it?

 

[cincyaviation]

If you guys hate this thread so much, then why don't you all just ignore it?

Mostly to prevent more dumb threads from being made.

 

[Dene]

Mr. Pochmann promotes frustration and quitting.

Ya fixed that for you.

 

[Cool Frog]

Ya fixed that for you.

haha
As for a different method of being learned there is the mainstream CFOP. They have ZBF2L(it orients the edges as you put in the last slot I think). MGLS(You put in unoriented corner + edge into the last slot and then orient the corners in one step usually 2 gen and fast-like) CLL/ELL (This solves the corners and then you solve the edges) and probably a bunch more (like winter variation, Orient edges+ permute corners, and then EPLL), and of course 4LLL.

You have block building methods like, Petrus where you make a 2x2x2 block and then extend it to a 2x2x3 block (This allows a lot of freedom in your solve) you then do edge orientation and block build the rest of the first two layers. Then you can go different ways for the last layer from ZBLL(solve the last layer in one step) COLL/EPLL(Solves corners while keeping edge orientation), Winter variation/Pll, and from what I hear a common step of CLL/ELL. The advantages of this method are your block bulding the f2l while also orienting the edges.

Another block building method is ZZ where you orient all the edges while you create a line on the D face, This is commonly referred to EO+Line then you block build the F2l using all R U and L moves. The last layer is like above, but there is also another variant where you unorient the last layer then solve it in one step (From what I have read it has less cases, but don't quote me on that). Advantages of this method are that it is 3 gen and was built for speed.

Yet another block building method is heise where you build 4 1x2x2 blocks that have one color in common then create F2L Minus a slot. You then orient and permute the remaining edges then use commutators to solve the corners, the main advantage of this method is how it has a low move count and is done intuitively.

Roux is a block building method also where you build a 1x2x3 block on commonly the left face, create a 1x2x3 block on the right side, Solve the four remaining corners with CMLL (you can also use CLL, or COLL) then solve the middle layer with M and U moves only. Advantages of this method are how steps two and four are 2gen, and how most of it is intuitive.

There is corners first (Don't quote me on any of this as I am not certain at all) where you solve a side with block building then solve the remaining corners then solve the last eight edges. I don't know a lot about this method.
If you want some help for any of this I could try to help you out but usually they are just a quick forum/google search away.