• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Praetorian

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
496
Location
California
YouTube
Praetorian
why is my lookahead better on 4x4? I did a 4x4 mean (which was 2:03.55) and the 3x3 stage it was just so much easier to find pairs, then after that I go to do 3x3 and my times are better cause it seems easier than 4x4. my lookahead is usually bad on 3x3 cause I have a hard time finding pairs but lately I've been getting better at that
 

Cale S

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
2,401
Location
Iowa, USA
WCA
2014SCHO02
YouTube
mathtornado7
why is my lookahead better on 4x4? I did a 4x4 mean (which was 2:03.55) and the 3x3 stage it was just so much easier to find pairs, then after that I go to do 3x3 and my times are better cause it seems easier than 4x4. my lookahead is usually bad on 3x3 cause I have a hard time finding pairs but lately I've been getting better at that
It's probably because you turn slower on 4x4 (can't turn big cubes as fast as 3x3) and lookahead is easier
 

2180161

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2014
Messages
748
Location
Illinois
WCA
2014HEDR01
YouTube
LiquidFizz
why is my lookahead better on 4x4? I did a 4x4 mean (which was 2:03.55) and the 3x3 stage it was just so much easier to find pairs, then after that I go to do 3x3 and my times are better cause it seems easier than 4x4. my lookahead is usually bad on 3x3 cause I have a hard time finding pairs but lately I've been getting better at that
Larger edges, so more to see, therefore faster to recognize
 

Dadd

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2015
Messages
102
Location
South Carolina
WCA
2015SEIG01
YouTube
channel/UCLWcyB-8N6OnksKbofEDfyw
I average 17-18 secs on 3x3 with CFOP and have the following:
Full OLL (except for the dot cases) (sledgehammers)
Full PLL
Advanced F2L (algs for bad cases) and inserting pairs from different angle
Cross on Bottom (Decent at BLD cross)
90/100 look-ahead
Reduced Cube Rotations

Also, what is the optimal way to insert cross pieces that are not facing up on the opposite layer? (Ex. White/Blue edge on yellow side with blue facing up)

Thanks!
 

TDM

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
7,009
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
WCA
2013MEND03
YouTube
TDM028
I average 17-18 secs on 3x3 with CFOP and have the following:
Full OLL (except for the dot cases) (sledgehammers)
Full PLL
Advanced F2L (algs for bad cases) and inserting pairs from different angle
Cross on Bottom (Decent at BLD cross)
90/100 look-ahead
Reduced Cube Rotations

Also, what is the optimal way to insert cross pieces that are not facing up on the opposite layer? (Ex. White/Blue edge on yellow side with blue facing up)

Thanks!
100/100 is better than 90/100 ;) Practising slow turning can help you improve that.

For those types of cross edges, if there's just one, then R' F R is a quick way to insert them and leaves your hands in a nice position to continue with F2L. If there's two, something like R' F R' can be used.
 

rj

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2013
Messages
1,445
Location
Rochester, NY
WCA
2015PLAT03
YouTube
rjdayan
So, I'm averaging about 19, halfway through full OLL, and very good at LS edge manipulation. My lookahead's decent, BLD cross is good, and here's my breakdown:
Cross with first pair setup: 1-3
F2L: 8
OLL: 3
PLL:3
 

2180161

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2014
Messages
748
Location
Illinois
WCA
2014HEDR01
YouTube
LiquidFizz
So, I'm averaging about 19, halfway through full OLL, and very good at LS edge manipulation. My lookahead's decent, BLD cross is good, and here's my breakdown:
Cross with first pair setup: 1-3
F2L: 8
OLL: 3
PLL:3
You are fine in terms of cross+f2l if that is the time. Shorten your LL to about 5 seconds for now. F2L only (without the cross time) should be around 7 seconds for sub-15


For me on the other hand, I feel like movecount is an issue, but don't know how to work on it.

Scramble:R' D' B2 R2 D2 R2 U' L2 F2 L2 F2 D' L' B L2 F2 D2 F' D L2 U'
U' D R' D2 F2 B// Cross
y' L U' L'// F2L1
L' U2 L U' L' U' L//F2L2
U2 RU' R' U R U' R' U2 R U' R'//F2L3
U' R' U R U' R' U R U' R' U' R//F2L
f R U R' U' f'//OLL
U' R' U' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' U' R U R' U R//PLL
65 HTM, 71QTM, 65 STM, 66 ETM
 

unseeingdog

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
1
When should I start learning Fridrich?

I started cubing four days ago but I'm still pretty slow, averaging around 3 min so I was wondering when shoukd I learn Fridrich to get faster.
 

Dimeg

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
54
Location
Netherlands
'The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. the second best time is now.'

Just go for it. Take small steps, and you will improve
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
819
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
sqAree
Agreed, the important point is to get rid of beginner's method. And most of the advanced methods can and should be learnt directly.

Fridrich (it's called CFOP now by the way) is probably the easiest to understand.
But just out of curiosity: Petrus can't be really fast, or am I wrong? (I agree CFOP, Roux and ZZ are all worthy..)
 

shadowslice e

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
2,879
Location
Hampshire, England
YouTube
Shadowslice
Agreed, the important point is to get rid of beginner's method. And most of the advanced methods can and should be learnt directly.

Fridrich (it's called CFOP now by the way) is probably the easiest to understand.
But just out of curiosity: Petrus can't be really fast, or am I wrong? (I agree CFOP, Roux and ZZ are all worthy..)
you can definately sub-15 Petrus so if you don't mind not getting fast quite as easily it's probably the best method to develop a good understanding of the cube as well as helping to enhance many other transferable skips such as eo, block building etc
 

TDM

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
7,009
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
WCA
2013MEND03
YouTube
TDM028
Watch videos on different methods, and learn whatever suits you.
To add to this: As well as watching videos (though I don't know of any) on method comparisons, I would definitely recommend reading through the first post of this thread. It has lots of information and is definitely worth reading through the important parts.

I don't really think any of those three methods is "better" than the other, aside from personal preference. So even though people may say they regret not learning Roux, you might actually prefer CFOP. Although they obviously made that decision based on something, I wouldn't assume you'd think the same as them!
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
819
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
sqAree
Yeah, for example I find Roux really cool, but I'm not comfortable with M moves thus it's just not the right method for me..

And ok, Petrus certainly helps with understanding the cube, but sub15 is not anywhere near the potential of Roux/CFOP, so I wouldn't call it really fast.
 
Top