Learning F2L 'algs'

[AvGalen]

How fast are you now?

And what were your times with the beginners method?
How long did it take you before you could do intuitive F2L just as fast as your beginners method?

 

[Sniph]

I average 18 seconds right now.

With beginners method, I was averaging 35 seconds. It took about one month after learning intuitive F2l to get as fast as my old method.

 

[TheRealAdaam]

Oy! You guys are all fast. At current, using an intuitive F2L (Which I have learned many "shortcuts" on my own.) I get around 20-30 for my F2L. I do agree that some people have to look at the algs and know them for awhile before they start to understand how to do the C/E pairs on their own. At first I only used slot and basic U and R moves. Now I use all kinds of different moves. I just make sure to keep looking for a shorter way to do a pair when I am cubing for fun.

That is the trick, understanding the cube. I mean look at Heise (SP?) He can get 20 with a full intuition method, that is pretty intense.

Well I would just advice the people that think they can do a intuitive F2L to go for it. At first it is a lot slower, but once you figure it out, man does it get easy.

Have fun cubing!
Adam

 

[pjk]

Practice is what is key. All the little things you need to learn come with practice.

 

[Johannes91]

Originally posted by AvGalen+Apr 8 2007, 05:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (AvGalen @ Apr 8 2007, 05:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>R U' R' U R U' R' U R U' R'. Starting with the corner on UFL again, so actually it would be U R U' R' U R U' R' U R U' R' or (U R U' R')*3. This is just (R U R' U')*3 backwards. Maybe it would be better for WV and VH, but what does that mean?[/b]

If you looked at the cube while performing those moves, you would see that it's not "just (R U R' U')*3 backwards", but a different approach. WV (Winter Variation) and VH (Vanderbergh-Harris method) are methods where you solve a part of LL while inserting the last c/e-pair.

<!--QuoteBegin-AvGalen@Apr 8 2007, 05:22 PM
From now on, I will recommend people to learn Full Fridrich this way:
Beginners method, 2 algs for middle edges
Keyhole, same 2 algs
Intermediate keyhole, 5 algs for last corner (4th edge already placed, oriented correctly)
Advanced keyhole, 11 algs for last corner+edge (4th edge already placed)
Advanced keyhole + Intuitive F2L for connected pairs
Intuitive F2L
F2L based on algs
F2L based on algs + advanced tricks (empty slots, etc)[/quote]
Sooo many steps...

Working corner (alias keyhole)
Intuitive F2L

 

[AvGalen]

I don't think there is anything wrong with many small steps. This way you can improve all the time without your times going up whenever you switch method. If someone wants to improve faster, he could skip one or more steps, but I won't.

Do you think people should learn all 57 OLL-cases and all 21 PLL-cases at once?

Thanks for clarifying WV and VH. I learned something today

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

I learned all PLLs, and then moved on to intuitive F2L.
Ok now, gotta practice F2L.

EDIT: Learning some really easy OLLs anytime won't hurt either.

 

[Sniph]

I agree Laire, way to many steps. Your's is nice.

 

[csfield]

I think it's best to learn F2L intuitively but after a while, also check algorithm lists to see if you like some other ways of solving some cases. I don't think of F2L sequences as algorithms. To me an algorithm is just a magic sequence and I don't know how it works (or care). Most F2L sequences should be understood.