not going for speed .. but moves

[Tommy]

I posted some time ago that my best time was like 2:08 ... and now it's closer to 1:40 with the same simple F2L method I've been using. I have asked plenty of questions about different methods and while I like the "speedsolving"/"speedcubing" I find myself more attracted to the minimum amount of moves. At least this is my current attraction. My current method often takes me to ~130 moves and I would like to start over learning the cube.

I've researched more on "group method" and am in the process of trying to find a very good resource for understanding this process. What I would like to know ... is that on average which method for solving the cube normally yields the least amount of moves to make a solve from any condition? I understand that starting over will lead me to some horrible times at first but my goal is to solve the puzzle with the least amount of moves. I presume that as I gain experience in method-X my performance will increase. But even if I need to take 10 minutes at first to get a logical solve with under 50 moves I would be very satisfied (but only until I choose to knock off 2 minutes from that time to get better ... until 1 minute is obtained).

Please, Master Cubers, can you direct me to a method that might be clearly over my head in performance (or initial understanding) but would lead me to a path where a minimum amount of moves would unfold a solved cube? I am leaning twords the Roux method but would like some advice.

PS: I got my 7 cubes from cubes4you and they are all very awesome. I chose smooth tiles for all and I love them very much. Having quality puzzles has not directly increased my speed but has definitely kept my interest in the sport. Thanks for all that helped me make my choices.

 

[Lofty]

One of the most popular methods for fewest moves I think is Petrus.
There are also a few guides adn threads of fewest moves if you want to use the search feature.

 

[Tommy]

Typically, does Petrus or Roux come out to be a FM solve? Is there another method that I should be looking into ... found a "ZB" method but I don't know if that's anything.

 

[Johannes91]

Is there another method that I should be looking into

Heise.

found a "ZB" method but I don't know if that's anything.

It's an attempt to push LBL style to its limit. I don't know of any speedcuber who knows the full method, and it's not useful for fewest moves solving at all.

 

[somerandomkidmike]

If you want to improve your current method (as a middle step to simulaneous F2L) I would do as follows:

Solve the Cross

Solve 3 Corners on the first layer

Solve 3 edges in the F2L (without the corner in place it is 3-4 turns to get an edge in place

Solve the last corner in the F2L without messing up the edges.

Solve the last edge using the algorithm from the LBL method

If you do this, you can really improve your turns.

 

[MistArts]

If you want to improve your current method (as a middle step to simulaneous F2L) I would do as follows:

Solve the Cross

Solve 3 Corners on the first layer

Solve 3 edges in the F2L (without the corner in place it is 3-4 turns to get an edge in place

Solve the last corner in the F2L without messing up the edges.

Solve the last edge using the algorithm from the LBL method

If you do this, you can really improve your turns.

You know, block building improves it more.

 

[Tommy]

Heise?

I searched the forum and couldn't find anyone that was using this and could comment on it over Petrus. I think that by looking at the Heise method it seems to be very interesting because it seems to almost solve the entire cube at the same time. When looking at his site it seems that the cube is constantly in a state of mess and then within just a few turns it's magically solved. I really like the idea.

I think what I can't get a clear picture of is that if Petrus was used over Heise then which method generally yields a FM solution. If anyone can comment more on this I would appreciate it. While most people seem to be commenting on the Petrus method on the forum I can find almost no real comments on Heise.

Thanks again for listening to a beginner trying to get a real earnest start.

 

[smskill12]

If you want to improve your current method (as a middle step to simulaneous F2L) I would do as follows:

Solve the Cross

Solve 3 Corners on the first layer

Solve 3 edges in the F2L (without the corner in place it is 3-4 turns to get an edge in place

Solve the last corner in the F2L without messing up the edges.

Solve the last edge using the algorithm from the LBL method

If you do this, you can really improve your turns.

just call it keyhole man

 

[fanwuq]

If you average about 130 and want to get to 50 moves on average, any of the common speedcubing methods would work. Petrus and Heise are designed to have fewer move count if you are good at block building, but really Fridrich and Roux can also easily yield sub-50 move solutions.
Petrus is probably what you should be practicing. There is a "beginner Petrus solution," but I don't think Heise is could be simplified. Heise requires lots of thinking and understanding. Using the guide for Heise may also help with Petrus block building.

 

[MistArts]

Heise?

I searched the forum and couldn't find anyone that was using this and could comment on it over Petrus. I think that by looking at the Heise method it seems to be very interesting because it seems to almost solve the entire cube at the same time. When looking at his site it seems that the cube is constantly in a state of mess and then within just a few turns it's magically solved. I really like the idea.

*AHEM*I use it.*AHEM*

Here's an example solve

 

[Tommy]

Ah, then I think I have my answer. I think it's either "Heise" or trying to find information on "Human Thistlethwaite" (because I found some interesting posts on this from a search on the forum).

MistArts: That example was pretty awesome!! Was that using the Heise method for the 3x3x3? Oh, I really loved that! I think you just changed my entire perception of the cube with your solution.

fanwuq: For me it's not about how to get a numeric count and be satisfied but rather to have a puzzle that I can think through ... and possibly improve my performance based on understanding rather than algors. I think you once wrote that you were giving up speedcubing in exchange for FM solves. I would love to hear more about that experience and how your journey is going.

Anyone have detailed information on Human Thistlethwaite?

 

[MistArts]

http://www.ryanheise.com/cube/human_thistlethwaite_algorithm.html

There. I haven't really looked at it yet.

 

[Johannes91]

Heise?

I searched the forum and couldn't find anyone that was using this and could comment on it over Petrus.

Petrus is easier to use in speedsolving, but Heise is more move efficient. Even though people often say so, I don't think pure Petrus is used that much for fewest moves solving, because a LL step just isn't a good idea.

While most people seem to be commenting on the Petrus method on the forum I can find almost no real comments on Heise.

There aren't much people using it. If you want to know how different methods compare to each other, learn them all.

 

[fanwuq]

That went pretty well. I never had enough patience to write down my solutions and do a true FMC of one hour. But not I do have a better understanding. I like doing linear solves of about 1-10 minutes more. I can often get sub-45 moves (never going over 50 (unless it was less than one minute), and sometimes even getting sub-35 moves.)

Sometimes I just randomly play around with the cube. I never really learn any algs that I find worthless. (Fridrich OLL algs.)

 

[ch_ts]

Even though people often say so, I don't think pure Petrus is used that much for fewest moves solving, because a LL step just isn't a good idea.

I think pure Petrus is almost never used

Tommy:
Have a look at some of Ryan's solutions here:
http://www.ryanheise.com/competitions/linearfmc/
btw, I don't think anybody has ever seriously used human thistlethwaite for anything

fanwuq:
Why not do the 10-minute FMC?
http://fmc.mustcube.net/

 

[MistArts]

Heise?

I searched the forum and couldn't find anyone that was using this and could comment on it over Petrus.

Petrus is easier to use in speedsolving, but Heise is more move efficient. Even though people often say so, I don't think pure Petrus is used that much for fewest moves solving, because a LL step just isn't a good idea.

While most people seem to be commenting on the Petrus method on the forum I can find almost no real comments on Heise.

There aren't much people using it. If you want to know how different methods compare to each other, learn them all.

Heise is not really different from Petrus. It just has intense block building for the last layer + slot so it saves moves from using LL algorithm. I didn't use Petrus because I couldn't find a efficient way to solve pieces after the 2x2x3 Block so I went with Heise.

 

[fanwuq]

fanwuq:
Why not do the 10-minute FMC?
http://fmc.mustcube.net/

Wow! That's really cool! I suck at writing down the solutions, but I got to try that out! (I'll use Gabbasoft or ryanheise.com to simulate if I don't have a cube on me.)

 

[MistArts]

fanwuq:
Why not do the 10-minute FMC?
http://fmc.mustcube.net/

Wow! That's really cool! I suck at writing down the solutions, but I got to try that out! (I'll use Gabbasoft or ryanheise.com to simulate if I don't have a cube on me.)

Or use the companion.

 

[fanwuq]

fanwuq:
Why not do the 10-minute FMC?
http://fmc.mustcube.net/

Wow! That's really cool! I suck at writing down the solutions, but I got to try that out! (I'll use Gabbasoft or ryanheise.com to simulate if I don't have a cube on me.)

Or use the companion.

Wow! that's even better!!!!!

 

[BlueSpark92]

i'm using petrus averaging about 70-80moves. in 4X seconds.