Old man (50+) starting to cube - (pønten's progression thread)

[OtterCuber]

Thanks for tips and info! I would like to understand the algorithms, but I think that needs quite a bit of experience. Currently I've quite enough with single moves, and can't plan more than 2 or 3 moves before I start a solve. But when I'm learning a new algorithm, I do like to try it on a clean cube, so I can see exactly what has happened, not only the main pieces that I'm moving/turning, but also the other pieces (of course I don't remember that afterwards, yet). Also, the first evening when I got the cube, and I spent most of the evening only doing "sexy moves", it was mainly to get a feel for the cube, how fast I could move before I messed up, etc. But it was also kind of mesmerizing to follow the corner-pieces when I did those moves, and see how they moved back and forth between a few positions, while flipping color on their way.

Pling! SuperAntonioVivaldi is now on my sub-list.

When I bought this first cube, I had absolutely no experience to use in my decision. All I could do was to read reviews. Next time I should know a bit more what I'm looking for, however I do like VRM

By the way, as an older cuber myself, I also do not like sluggish cubes. You would like the GAN 12 MagLev a lot, because it is very easy to turn.

 

[Tabe]

A few things:

1) Yes, the cubes today are smaller than what you remember. The original Rubik's Cube you're familiar with is 57mm. Current cubes run 54-56mm (generally). The WR M 2021 is 55mm. 2mm doesn't seem like a big difference but, as you've seen, it is. If you want something 57mm or larger, you'll have to take a step down in quality and features. You can buy a Qiyi Sail (they come in multiple sizes up to 68mm) but they aren't adjustable and you would have to magnetize it yourself. Most Gan cubes are 56mm, however, and you may find that size more suitable to you.

2) Maybe this matters to you, maybe it doesn't, I'll just mention it anyway: If you ever plan to compete (AND YOU SHOULD REGARDLESS OF YOUR TIMES!), be aware that your cube is not competition-legal. Cubes for competitions must be stickerless or have stickers over one color of plastic, not a mixture like you've got.

Kudos on your progress! You and I are basically the same age although I've been cubing for a lot longer (learned in 1981, same as you but picked up speedsolving in 2017).

 

[pønten]

A few things:

1) Yes, the cubes today are smaller than what you remember. The original Rubik's Cube you're familiar with is 57mm. Current cubes run 54-56mm (generally). The WR M 2021 is 55mm. 2mm doesn't seem like a big difference but, as you've seen, it is. If you want something 57mm or larger, you'll have to take a step down in quality and features. You can buy a Qiyi Sail (they come in multiple sizes up to 68mm) but they aren't adjustable and you would have to magnetize it yourself. Most Gan cubes are 56mm, however, and you may find that size more suitable to you.

2) Maybe this matters to you, maybe it doesn't, I'll just mention it anyway: If you ever plan to compete (AND YOU SHOULD REGARDLESS OF YOUR TIMES!), be aware that your cube is not competition-legal. Cubes for competitions must be stickerless or have stickers over one color of plastic, not a mixture like you've got.

Kudos on your progress! You and I are basically the same age although I've been cubing for a lot longer (learned in 1981, same as you but picked up speedsolving in 2017).

1) Thanks for confirming what I felt about the size. 2mm (57 vs 55) doesn't sound much, but it is about 3.5 % difference, which means over 11% difference in volume. I guess I would choose slightly bigger than my 55mm VR M if available. Though I do like quality! There have been many mentions about Gan cubes already in this thread, so I will definitively have that in mind next time.

2) I did suspect that my cube wouldn't meet official rules for competitions, though I've no plans to compete in the near future. And if I should, I could either peel of the extra stickers, or more probable, have a more suitable legal cube at that point. I have a colleague at work (who told me he had bought his son a speed cube for a gift), and my colleague wasn't rejecting my suggestion that he too should learn to solve it, so we could have a little internal fight

 

[Tabe]

2) I did suspect that my cube wouldn't meet official rules for competitions, though I've no plans to compete in the near future.

Go. Don't wait. Go. They're a lot of fun, even if you know you'll finish last. And it's really great seeing people who are actually fast up-close. And you may get really bitten by the cubing bug and start organizing competitions

 

[Dan the Beginner]

I have wanted to dye those yellow pieces for a long time, but have been too busy with other less daunting or more interesting things. This is the product that I have found that will work, after checking lots of written and video reviews. I believe it will provide a nice permanent solution to the problem. The colour can be adjusted, i.e. lighter or darker yellow, by the amount of time the pieces are treated. I might try it one day, when I know for sure the best cube for my requirements. The WRM 2021, which I have used for many months already, looks like the one I will dye. If anyone here has tried this dye and can give advice, I shall be very grateful.

Rit DyeMore Liquid Dye for Polyester, Acrylic, Norway | Ubuy

Shop for Rit DyeMore Liquid Dye in Daffodil Yellow on Ubuy Norway. Get the best deals on fabric color dye for your DIY projects. Fast shipping and secure payment options available.

www.ubuy.co.no

 

[pønten]

Didn't do much solving today, but ended the evening with about 15 timed solves, that went pretty well, with PB in Single, Ao5 and Ao12:

• Single: 1:25.09 (old: 1:27:40)
• Ao5: 1:50.95 (old: 2:28.75)
• Ao12: 2:22.76 (old: 2:56.17)

The single solve was just 2 seconds better, but I'm especially satisfied with the new Ao5 PB with almost 40 seconds. Until now I've been very unstable, with a typical Ao5 hovering around 3 minutes due to frequent errors, where I typically mess up my blocks, and almost have to start over.

I've only had a handful of sub-2 minutes solves before, and never two in a row. But today I had four sub-2 minutes in a row, hence the Ao5 sub 2 minutes.

Also, when doing scrambles, I generally have made it wrong more than half the time. For some reason, I can't stop thinking "Bottom" when I see a "B". I've told myself several times, with a stern voice, that "B" is "Back", and that there is no word called "Bottom" any longer. But still, when I try to scramble fast, it rarely match the picture of how the scrambled cube should look.

However, this evening almost all my scrambles were correct, so quite a good Friday evening

 

[qwr]

I have wanted to dye those yellow pieces for a long time, but have been too busy with other less daunting or more interesting things. This is the product that I have found that will work, after checking lots of written and video reviews. I believe it will provide a nice permanent solution to the problem. The colour can be adjusted, i.e. lighter or darker yellow, by the amount of time the pieces are treated. I might try it one day, when I know for sure the best cube for my requirements. The WRM 2021, which I have used for many months already, looks like the one I will dye. If anyone here has tried this dye and can give advice, I shall be very grateful.

Rit DyeMore Liquid Dye for Polyester, Acrylic, Norway | Ubuy

Shop for Rit DyeMore Liquid Dye in Daffodil Yellow on Ubuy Norway. Get the best deals on fabric color dye for your DIY projects. Fast shipping and secure payment options available.

www.ubuy.co.no

I have not tried it but I've heard it's hard to get consistent results, and would likely be competition illegal if it is not very consistent in color.
Much simpler to buy a stickered cube and put on custom shades (which are allowed in comp).

If you ever plan to compete (AND YOU SHOULD REGARDLESS OF YOUR TIMES!),

I remember wanting to go to a competition in 2010/2011 but didn't because I thought I was too slow. I still haven't yet.

 

[pønten]

I planned to write nothing here today, because even though I've done quite a few timed solves today, my times haven't been better, except just 3 seconds on the Ao12 from 2:22 to 2:19.

But then, I should only do one last solve for the evening. It started well with the blue edge piece for the first block already in place. Then I got a skip on the Niklas-algorithm (swapping the upper corners into right place), and quite easy L6E too, so new single PB with over 12 seconds:

• 1:13.63

Today I learned the last two (U and T) of total seven algorithms for turning the corner pieces to have the correct color (yellow) pointing upwards when they are already in right place. So instead of using Sune normally 2 or 3 times, I can just use one of these 7 algorithms that are part of the CMLL set.

I guess many mistakes using these algorithms was the main reason for my many slow solving times today, as they are not into my finger memory yet.

 

[pønten]

Until now I've only used Bottom=White and Front=Red, always starting with Blue block/Blue-White edge-piece. I did this in order to not overflow myself with too much information and decisions when I was learning.

But the plan was always to be color neutral in the way that both White/Yellow can be bottom, and all of the other 4 colors can be front, i.e. I can start building the block in any of the 4 colors. I think this is called x2/y neutrality (?)

So I decided today was the time to start with x2/y, after about 180 timed solves in CubeDesk so far.

First half of the day I did lots of untimed solves, to train starting with other colors, as well as getting the 7 CMLL-algorithms I've learned so far better into my fingers.

After a couple of hours, when I felt that I had identified the worst of my brainfarts related to suddenly mixing up the colors, I started to time the solves again; 60 timed solves today.

In average my times today are a bit faster then before. Average times are still between 2-2:30 minutes (Ao50 and Ao100), but everything is going the right way with small improvements from day to day.

Some PB's today too:

• Single: 1:09.69 (old: 1:13.63)
• Ao5: 1:41.70 (old: 1:50.95)
• Ao12: 1:54.55 (old: 2:19.12)
• Ao50: 2:09.40 (old: ?)
• Ao100: 2:23.71 (old: ?)

The new single PB came after a full skip of step 3 (Upper corners permutation and orientation).

The fact that the AoX-times are improving more than the single solve is a good thing, I suppose, as it means that the times are becoming more consistent. For instance I had 6 solves in a row between 1:34 and 1:56 this evening.

This conclude a full week of Winter Holiday for me. Tomorrow I start working again, and much less time for cubing

 

[OtterCuber]

Great progress!

 

[qwr]

Maybe it was mentioned before but why did you choose Beginner Roux over CFOP?

 

[pønten]

Maybe it was mentioned before but why did you choose Beginner Roux over CFOP?

No, you are right, I didn't mention why I chose Roux. Only thing I mentioned in my introduction post (another thread) when I compared CFOP and Roux, was: "... it seems better for me."

I ordered the cube knowing nothing about solving methods. All I knew, was that I had solved the cube about 40 years ago, and that I wanted to do it again. So I read/watched some cube reviews, and ordered a cube.

While waiting for the cube, I started to look on internet about how to solve it. Then I learned that there were a lot of methods (CFOP, Roux, ZZ, Petrus, etc.) It became clear for me that CFOP was the most popular method, and knowing nothing about the different methods, I decided that what is preferred by most people (CFOP), probably is best for me too.

I used a day or two reading about CFOP (included a lot of general cubing information). I didn't actually start to look at any algorithms, but I learned that:

• OLL has 57 algorithms, where only 9 are needed for a simpler 2-look
• PLL has 21 algorithms, where only 6 are needed for a simpler 2-look
• So, as I understood that information, was that I needed to learn 15 algorithms. and I thought that should be doable.

When searching for solving information, I started to see references to another method called "Roux" quite often. In the beginning I ignored it (to prevent information overflow I suppose), as I had already decided for CFOP. But after a few days, curiosity made me do my first specific search for "Roux".

In the end, after reading and watching videos about Roux, I decided that I wanted to start with Roux instead of CFOP. Most of what I had learned until then was just basic cubing information anyway, nothing specific to CFOP, except the general outline of the method (no algorithms).

Remember, reading and watching videos was all I had to base my decision on. I am sure I could have chosen any method, and absolutely no negative feeling for any of them. But I guess the points that made me tip over to Roux were:

• Only 2 algorithms needed for a beginner version of Roux
• Only <10 algorithms needed for a slightly better 2-look for CMLL, compared to 15 when doing 2-look OLL+PLL)
• Only 42 algorithms for full CMLL, compared with 78 for full OLL+PLL
• In general/average fewer moves for a full solve using Roux (which probably suits me better, getting older with slower hands, not being able to perform super quick finger-movements anyway).
• Some people saying they prefer Roux to CFOP, as it is fewer algorithms and a bit more intuition, even though they maybe perform faster with CFOP.
• Some people (at least DeeDubb in the Beginner Roux videos that I was watching) stating that Roux actually is a much easier way to learn solving than the normal beginner method (I don't know that, just stating what I heard/read).
• In some ways I generally like to do things slightly different than "everyone else", though I know (at least what I have read) that Roux is still the second most popular solving method.

So all these small points, combined with my gut feeling, made me choose Roux. However I don't rule out that I might learn other methods (for instance CFOP) in the future, if/when I fully master Roux/CMLL, and if I keep being as interested in solving as I'm at the moment

 

[qwr]

Idk if it is easier to learn. Roux is better for intuitive block building, but maybe not better for hands in speedsolving unless you are able to do middle slices fluently. I guess older CFOP algs, like CubeSkills ones, are easiest to execute.

 

[pønten]

Idk if it is easier to learn. Roux is better for intuitive block building, but maybe not better for hands in speedsolving unless you are able to do middle slices fluently. I guess older CFOP algs, like CubeSkills ones, are easiest to execute.

For some reason M2 (i.e. double M' ) is maybe the move I like best to do. Single M however... (I need more training, I think I would make M3' faster)

 

[qwr]

For some reason M2 (i.e. double M' ) is maybe the move I like best to do. Single M however... (I need more training, I think I would make M3' faster)

M is the hardest move to do for Roux. I use a ring finger push and I prefer fast cubes to do this easily as it's quite a weak finger (well, I do have some years of stringed instrument training that helps. My turning still sucks tho)

 

[OtterCuber]

So all these small points, combined with my gut feeling, made me choose Roux. However I don't rule out that I might learn other methods (for instance CFOP) in the future, if/when I fully master Roux/CMLL, and if I keep being as interested in solving as I'm at the moment

Yes, definitely branch out to other methods. It adds a lot of fun to cubing, when you know multiple ways of solving/approaching the same problem.

 

[Dan the Beginner]

For some reason M2 (i.e. double M' ) is maybe the move I like best to do. Single M however... (I need more training, I think I would make M3' faster)

You were speaking for me with most of your thoughts about the choice of methods, at least in your initial search and research!

I will never be very fast, whatever I do. Enjoyment is more important to me, and that means less algorithms to learn and, importantly, less algorithms for my old fingers to have to practise repeatedly to get them into muscle memory. Roux block building was daunting at first, but soon it became more and more natural to do (without memorising anything). I love it, i.e. some kind of active solving of the problem using my head (vs doing everything from memorised algorithms that can be done automatically after countess practise hours). Time is NOT on my side!

Getting motivated to continue to cube (and getting some mind and physical exercise) is more important to me than the best possible speed, although I will still try but not as the main priority to get faster, with a method that I enjoy. Your analysis of the requirements of the 2 most popular methods and your approach to selection were very similar, even though I had a go at Beginner CFOP and 4LLL before I decided to switch to Roux.

I used Sian's 4-part tutorial. Then, I continued to learn the Basic Roux and after the CMLL, I started to learn LSE, but then I asked myself, why I should continue to learn it, since I found I was not enjoying these parts after the block building. I left Roux. I made up my own hybrid and simplified method with the same block building but finishing with simple algorithms learnt from Beginner LBL methods. My method, which need only about 9 easy, short algorithms (and lots of Sunes), allow me to keep going. Like you, I enjoy the M' moves, and my method always ends with one of those M' algorithms (Ua, Ub, Z and H perms). I decided I should limit my goal and I just want to be able to solve the cube within a minute. I found that it is quite achievable even though my TPS was about 0.8, with my slow fingers and long recognition times. I wanted to be able to pick the low hanging fruit and enjoy myself on the way by making the journey easier, before aiming higher. I may come back to the proper Roux if I can get better, but that's a big IF at this time.

Please keep posting, it's very interesting.

 

[OtterCuber]

You were speaking for me with most of your thoughts about the choice of methods, at least in your initial search and research!

I will never be very fast, whatever I do. Enjoyment is more important to me, and that means less algorithms to learn and, importantly, less algorithms for my old fingers to have to practise repeatedly to get them into muscle memory. Roux block building was daunting at first, but soon it became more and more natural to do (without memorising anything). I love it, i.e. some kind of active solving of the problem using my head (vs doing everything from memorised algorithms that can be done automatically after countess practise hours). Time is NOT on my side!

Getting motivated to continue to cube (and getting some mind and physical exercise) is more important to me than the best possible speed, although I will still try but not as the main priority to get faster, with a method that I enjoy. Your analysis of the requirements of the 2 most popular methods and your approach to selection were very similar, even though I had a go at Beginner CFOP and 4LLL before I decided to switch to Roux.

I used Sian's 4-part tutorial. Then, I continued to learn the Basic Roux and after the CMLL, I started to learn LSE, but then I asked myself, why I should continue to learn it, since I found I was not enjoying these parts after the block building. I left Roux. I made up my own hybrid and simplified method, which need only about 9 easy, short algorithms (and lots of Sunes). I decided I should limit my goal and I just want to be able to solve the cube within a minute. I found that it is quite achievable even though my TPS was about 0.8, with my slow fingers and long recognition times. I wanted to be able to pick the low hanging fruit and enjoy myself on the way by making the journey easier, before aiming higher. I may come back to the proper Roux if I can get better, but that's a big IF at this time.

What are you goals right now then, Dan? I know you got into hardware for a while.

 

[Dan the Beginner]

What are you goals right now then, Dan? I know you got into hardware for a while.

I had a break due to thumb injury and was playing with hardware, and also other toys, but I am back and practising again. I have to limit my solves, for fear of reinjuring. I can do about 30 solves a day now and mainly practising accurate turning, lots of slower solves to help understand and hopefully automate recognition and execution. For example, I am trying learn to carry on a conversation or watch TV while solving. So, the goal is not speed. I will later practise and aim to get Ao12 times of 1 minute.

Hardware is interesting and during the period, I have bought the WRM2021 Maglev, the Primary Colour Tornado V2, (hoping that the later edition has some improvement, but it is just different in feel), the Cubers Home core magnet conversion kit for the WRM2021, the Diansheng S3M, Guhong V3, and switching, comparing them with the Gan Mini M Pro, the Moyu AI etc. Also bought some Maglev magnets, ...

 

[OtterCuber]

I had a break due to thumb injury and was playing with hardware, and also other toys, but I am back and practising again. I have to limit my solves, for fear of reinjuring. I can do about 30 solves a day now and mainly practising accurate turning, lots of slower solves to help understand and hopefully automate recognition and execution. For example, I am trying learn to carry on a conversation or watch TV while solving. So, the goal is not speed.

Hardware is interesting and during the period, I have bought the WRM2021 Maglev, the Primary Colour Tornado V2, (hoping that the later edition has some improvement, but it is just different in feel), the Cubers Home core magnet conversion kit for the WRM2021, the Diansheng S3M, Guhong V4, and switching, comparing them with the Gan Mini M Pro, the Moyu AI etc. Also bought some Maglev magnets, ...

Sounds like a lot of fun!

For some reason M2 (i.e. double M' ) is maybe the move I like best to do. Single M however... (I need more training, I think I would make M3' faster)

Ponten, you might enjoy trying out M2 with different cubes. Some cubes are easier to slice than others!