• 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 40,000+ people from around the world today!

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

Jperm's Website Review


Jan 4, 2018
Visit Channel
DISCLAIMER: This is mostly my opinion, so if you disagree, don't get annoyed. Instead, leave a pleasant comment and don't start any arguments.

This is my review of Jperm's new website. You can find it at https://jperm.net/

Home Page: this is a simple and clean page, very intuitive. I like it to put it simply.

3x3 Tutorial: this page is also very good. I think that having both the video and text tutorials complement each other well. I'd say that instead of using sune to permute the cross edges, doing sexy left-sexy inverse-sexy inverse-left-sexy works better due to the beginner already learning sexy and left-sexy at the start of the tutorial. I would also say that something like the sexy method, MIRS or 8355 are better options, although that this is only a slight thing and is almost made redundant due to the clarity of the tutorial. There is one error. It says "...and learn the CFOP Method, which is most of the fastest cubers use." It should have "what" between "is" and "most".

CFOP Tutorial: My major problem is using the correct statistic "CFOP is the most popular method for speedsolving the Rubik's Cube. It is the method used by all 3x3 world record holders in the last decade" incorrectly. This suggests that it's the best method - I would completely disagree. ZZ, Roux, LEOR and Zipper are all better than CFOP in the theoretical (almost in the real with Roux, and yes, I have seen Jayden McNiel's video on why ZZ is worse. I disagree). Even if they were equal, this still seems to suggest that CFOP is better. If he were to do that properly, he'd give the numbers and do it in the theoretical.
The cross section and cross pages are both good. They fill in all the information, although the recommended times aren't very good. In my opinion, learn them as soon as possible. If you instead tell them to learn these skills now, they will get so much better at it than if they started at sub 15 for cross+1.
The F2L section is pretty similar to the quality of the cross one. The only problem is the same except for F2L optimisation. I think that for every other technique, there's no set time to learn it, but being around sub 15 is a good time to start optimising F2L from algorithms.
The 2-look OLL algorithms are good, but as a ZZ user I don't know most of OLL so I can't comment on the full OLL algorithms. As a general comment, the trainer looks clean and good.
For the 2-look PLL algorithms, I would use a few alternative ones: for Y-perm, I would say F R' F R2 U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' F'. This is for 2 reasons: 1. I think it's better by a marginal amount. 2. It's easier for someone to learn once they know the t-perm. It's F, T-perm where the first four moves are done at the end, then F'. For U-perm, teach MU as they are faster (or even RUS U-perms). They are also shorter and therefore easier for a beginner to learn. I also think that U instead of U' is more universal in H-perms.
For full PLL, he's got lefty A-perms, which, for the average cuber, aren't as good. He has the righty ones as alts, but they should be the main algs imo. I also prefer for Rb R' U2 R' D' R U' R' D R U R U' R' U' R, although that is more preference. It is an alt though, so not too bad. Again, righty E-perm instead of lefty for the main alg. For Na, he should have F' R U R' U' R' F R2 F U' R' U' R U F' R' as the main alg, or even as an alt. Similarly, for Nb he should have at least one of r' D' F r U' r' F' D r2 U r' U' r' F r F' or F r' F' r U r U' r2 D' F r U r' F' D r. These are definitely better than the algs listed. For the V-perm, both of the RUD algs should be listed, as well as potentially (but not definitely) R U' R' U R F R D' R2 D R D' R D F' R'. He lists the Y-perm I gave above as an alt, which is good, but he doesn't list MU U-perms from the back or RUS ones. My PLL algorithms can be found here, which I'd recommend over his.

Blindfolded Tutorial: It does the job and seems clear enough. I would still recommend Noah Arthur's, but there's no reason why not to recommend this one for someone who wants to learn OP/OP instead of M2/OP.

2x2 Tutorial: The beginner method is simple and uses techniques from the 3x3 tutorial. I like it. I also like how the advanced page guides you through progression with the cube and how to improve. It flows nicely. I would say that the EG algorithms aren't as good as the ones on this doc and would recommend to anyone learning 2x2 to use these ones instead.

4x4 Tutorial: He commits the same fallacy by saying that as the Yau method was used for the world record, it's the best. Some justification would be nice, although I agree with him this time (pretty much). Also, I'd say teach reduction first due to it being more simple to grasp, as centres->edges->3x3 is a simpler concept. It'd also be nice if he finished the example solve soon.

COLL and WV: For COLL, I'd replace a few of the algs. L5 with r U R U' r' F R' F' and L6 with r U2 R2' F R F' R U2 r'. For WV, why would you include it apart from R U2 R', R U R' U' R U' R', L' U R U' R' L and R U' R' U R U2 R'? They're the only useful cases. My COLL algs can be found here as an alternate source, although the majority of the algs are the same and/or equal in speed.

All in all, it's a pretty good site.

Recommendations: Fix the algorithms, mention other methods and give advantages and disadvantages to each one (including CFOP), include more detail on things such as VLS and ZBLL and include some information on OH, bigger cubes and other puzzles.

I would definitely recommend this to someone who was starting off in speedcubing but I would fill in some gaps, such as methods and better algorithms for a few cases. I'd just like to say thanks to Jperm for the site. I'm sure it will be a very good resource, just as your YouTube channel is too.

If there's anything I missed, point it out and thanks for reading.


Aug 14, 2019
Visit Channel
Great in-depth review. I agree with you on the CFOP vs other 3x3 methods. Many beginner cubes are led into CFOP due to the number of tutorials available and not because it is the best method for them. Great job.
Last edited: