• 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!

I'm learning full ZBLL! + Are Alg Trainers the future?

Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
1,060
Likes
108
Location
Ireland
WCA
2012YUTA01
YouTube
taoxyu
Thread starter #1

TL;DW:

Perhaps, instead of creating loads of new methods, we should instead make existing methods easier to learn through algorithm trainers.

What if we had something like Quizlet, except for algorithms? What if, any method creator could just make a study set for their new algorithm set on a website, and anyone could then immediately train that algset using something like Roman's alg trainer?

Would that be more productive than making more new methods?
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
2,879
Likes
803
Location
Hampshire, England
YouTube
Shadowslice
#2
I feel like that if you get better at existing methods, alg trainers will make you faster in the short term though if a "quantum leap" in methods is developed, you would be better off learning the new method.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
1,060
Likes
108
Location
Ireland
WCA
2012YUTA01
YouTube
taoxyu
Thread starter #3
I feel like that if you get better at existing methods, alg trainers will make you faster in the short term though if a "quantum leap" in methods is developed, you would be better off learning the new method.
Fair enough, I probably made it seem like I'm somewhat against developing new methods - which I'm not. I might not have expressed that very well. I do think that some people should explore existing methods though, rather than forever waiting for that "quantum leap" to arrive - there are definitely methods out there that deserve to be experimented with more. Who's to say that the quantum leap has already arrived, except nobody bothered to learn the algorithms?

As well as that, I think it is in the best interests, of anyone who is looking for that "quantum leap", to make algorithms easier to learn. If algorithm sets become easier to learn, the work required to speed gain ratio is decreased for every method, and it will allow people to switch faster. Perhaps it will also allow people like me to learn multiple methods faster and give my opinions on how they compare.

I should probably remove the line "Would that be more productive than making more new methods?". That's probably just wrong. But I do think it would be worth the time to work on a good algtrainer. After all, what point is there in making new methods if nobody bothers to learn them?
 
Top