Older cubers discussions

cmhardw said:
I've been at a 15 second average solve time on 3x3 for about 10 years now. It's relatively easy to maintain that level, but difficult to get faster. My pb average is 12.87 seconds.

I realized recently that I don't think I look ahead really when I solve. I think 15 seconds has become the speed at which I can recognize pairs with minimal if any lookahead.

I've been getting more 11-12 second solves, and even some 10 and sub-10 second solves, lately by really trying to look ahead and reduce my pauses.

My long term goal is to be a 12 second average cuber. One day (fingers crossed).

Has anyone else made the realization that they do not really look ahead, or look ahead minimally? I'm trying to figure out how common this is, and if so how best to overcome it.
Click to expand...
I am also quite slower than you, at around 18.5 - 19 average and PB Ao5 over 15.5 seconds. I also feel like I could just stay there for 10 years without improvement, in fact it's been two years more or less since I felt I was getting any better.

My experience is very similar, I feel like I only lookahead in some solves and most of the time is more pairs shouting at me than I searching for them. When I can really force myself to lookahead and it works I can get easily several 15 and 16 second solves in a row and it's quite satisfying but it doesn't happen very frequently.

I would be more than happy with a 15 - 16 second global average but I can't seem to be able to get there. Maybe I don't know how to practice lookahead. Good luck with your goal!

Sent from my Nexus 4 with Tapatalk
 
cmhardw said:
I've been at a 15 second average solve time on 3x3 for about 10 years now. It's relatively easy to maintain that level, but difficult to get faster. My pb average is 12.87 seconds.

I realized recently that I don't think I look ahead really when I solve. I think 15 seconds has become the speed at which I can recognize pairs with minimal if any lookahead.

I've been getting more 11-12 second solves, and even some 10 and sub-10 second solves, lately by really trying to look ahead and reduce my pauses.

My long term goal is to be a 12 second average cuber. One day (fingers crossed).

Has anyone else made the realization that they do not really look ahead, or look ahead minimally? I'm trying to figure out how common this is, and if so how best to overcome it.
Click to expand...

I came to the same conclusion last week after a particularly good session when I got a 14.20 average of 5 on a busy train. It felt like all of the F2L pairs were easy for half a dozen solves and that continued on my next leg of the journey when I didn't time myself but I could feel the solves were just as fast. I realised that the pairs that evening weren't "easy" per-se but that all pairs become easy when you're truly looking ahead.

I think my typically / lazy / partial look ahead speed is mid-17's but when I focus on look ahead I seem to be 1-2 seconds faster. I need to be more disciplined and force myself to solve at the speed where I can maintain look ahead. I think a lot of people are probably guilty of this bad habit!
 
@cmhardw: I have been stuck at around 18 seconds for two years and the difference between good and bad solves for me is often lookahead. The best way I can describe it is that my "lookahead" feels like I'm avoiding watching the pair I'm solving, but not necessarily tracking the next pair. Instead I'm kind of gazing at the cube. That helps me recognise the next pair quicker, but it's not genuine lookahead. On the rare occasions I do seem to see the next pairs earlier, I certainly get faster solves, without them really feeling faster.
 
Another nice 4x4 session this weekend, with more than 150 solves. I put two drops of Maru on my WuQue and that seemed to help with slugishness. Not that the lube made the cube fast but at least now it's a tiny bit lighter to turn without losing any of the stability. I might refrain from buying another one for now. Got several sub 1:05 solves and another 1:01.xx (not PB) but no sub 1 minute yet :( I got my 1st sub 1:10 Ao5 though and PB Ao12 went down to 1:13.

It feels great to improve again at something. Probably the reason why I have almost abandoned 3x3 lately. The bad thing is that I'm forgetting a couple OLLs that I had problems with on big cubes and was doing 2L OLL for. Will have to review them.

Any recommendations on a 3x3 that could revive my interest? One that is available in stickerless (the reason why I have not tried the SS FangYuan even though Marcel seemed to like it a lot). I have heard good things of the Yan3 and I'm also thinking about getting a magnetizing kit from SCS but not sure it any of that will be worth it or I should stick to my Valk3.
 
mark49152 said:
If you care at all about BLD times, you should *aim* to have a significant proportion of failures. Success rate and fast times trade off against each other. Personally I shoot for 50% accuracy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's one of the things I've picked up via osmosis here. It makes perfect sense: if I'm looking to get faster and my accuracy is very good... I'm not pushing memo enough.

JanW said:
With practice you should very quickly get memo down to 3 minutes and below.
Click to expand...

Here's hoping, it's a big jump from my initial 7-10 min memo but I'm optimistic due to all the points you raised.
 
pglewis said:
Yeah, that's one of the things I've picked up via osmosis here. It makes perfect sense: if I'm looking to get faster and my accuracy is very good... I'm not pushing memo enough.



Here's hoping, it's a big jump from my initial 7-10 min memo but I'm optimistic due to all the points you raised.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. I made big improvements when I stopped trying to get a success every solve and just tried to memo quickly.
 
And being the fickle cuber I am my practice routine is about to take a left turn. Another comp popped-up too close to pass by, in early March. No 3-bld or Pyraminx for me to debut there so I decided to sign up for my 4x4 debut, given the liberal 1:35/3:00 cutoffs. C'mere, WuQue.
 
Although in my method I am solving E2L pairs instead of F2L pairs the concept for lookahead is the same. An excellent and challenging exercise is very simple. First, execute your F2L algorithms on a solved cube, and try to memorize what happens to the other pieces. Even some understanding is okay. Then do a regular solve, and pause before solving your pair. Try to solve 2 pairs blindfolded. So predict where the pieces will be after the first pair, then mentally identify the case for the 2nd pair before even solving the first one. Close your eyes and try to solve both pairs blindfolded. One of the problems of lazy solving is that there are many pieces to track when solving your pair and setting up for the next pair. With the above method you don't even need to track any pieces because you know in advance where they will end up.

This like many other things shows how real improvement requires structured and sometimes unpleasant tasks. For example learning where the 'other' pieces will go when using each F2L algorithm is not a very fun task. Of course when doing intuitive F2L you need to track pieces the old way.
 
Hi guys. I just received my WuJi 7x7 and 6 MF3RS. The 7x7 I just did first turns but it feels nice so I finally have changed completely to stickerless puzzles except for megaminx.

The budget 3x3s come completely unlubed but they are surprisingly nice. They could perfectly be someone's mains if correctly set up and I think they will be nice enough for MBLD. Not sure if better that a bunch of Thunderclaps but cheaper for sure at 1.99 each. If I end not liking them I will give them away as presents to try and spread the cubing bug.

Sent from my Nexus 4 with Tapatalk
 
newtonbase said:
2/3 MBLD. I was left with a bizarre edge cycle. I had to flip UL and went for the lazy method of doing UL then LU but must have done UL FU. I don't get it. Memo and recall were perfect though.
Click to expand...
Not sure how you hit FU but I still frequently make the mistake of flipping UL after my parity fix, when the offending piece has been swapped to BU. And vice versa.
 
mark49152 said:
Not sure how you hit FU but I still frequently make the mistake of flipping UL after my parity fix, when the offending piece has been swapped to BU. And vice versa.
Click to expand...
Lord knows what I did but I tried the scramble again with my regular edge flip and solved it so it was definitely an execution error. Its still my closest attempt at 3. My new rooms are working well so I'm expecting a success very soon.
 
Chris H.
Speaking as an oldie with dodgy lookahead, I'm reluctant to give much advice, but...
Have you tried filming your solves, and seeing if that sheds any light on what makes a good / bad solve? I'm contemplating doing this soon, it's likely to show that 3rd /4th slots on the back is one of my stumbling areas, my better solves are the ones with great lookahead, and that's helped by having the pairs reasonably visible. But forcing solves to the back two slots at the start of F2L is not easy to integrate seamlessly into a solve.
 
Shaky Hands said:
Cheers Mike.

Have you considered adding names of individual OLL algs, e.g.: Stealth, Zamboni?
Click to expand...

Have you tried clicking on the case icons?

Lots of details when you click through to the case view, including the names. :)

I should perhaps show the case names on the front pages when there is enough space.

Edit: Zamboni page - http://cubing.mikeg.me.uk/algs/oll.html#case-2
 
Logiqx said:
Have you tried clicking on the case icons?

Lots of details when you click through to the case view, including the names. :)

I should perhaps show the case names on the front pages when there is enough space.

Edit: Zamboni page - http://cubing.mikeg.me.uk/algs/oll.html#case-2
Click to expand...

Ah gotcha, thanks. Yes I was just looking on the index pages.

Something just under the case number on the index pages would be useful if it looks right to you. Currently trying to fill in some OLL gaps I have where I can FMC stuff but not speedsolve them reliably.
 
Shaky Hands said:
Ah gotcha, thanks. Yes I was just looking on the index pages.

Something just under the case number on the index pages would be useful if it looks right to you. Currently trying to fill in some OLL gaps I have where I can FMC stuff but not speedsolve them reliably.
Click to expand...

If you're ever interested in the composition of LL algs you might like the comments that I've added to the individual case pages.

e.g. Jb-Perm - http://cubing.mikeg.me.uk/algs/pll.html#case-Jb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Burrito
Any older kid/teen cubers in Durham Region, Ontario?
Replies
0
Views
794
Burrito
Burrito
Jilli0
  • Locked
Any Teen/Older Kid Cubers in Wayne County, Michigan?
Replies
11
Views
2,506
Deleted member 74176
D
Mr Cubism
How many older members (registered before 2010) are still active here?
Replies
1
Views
99
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
O
[Member Intro] Older beginner in scotland
Replies
17
Views
3,175
Cuberto333
C
Humble Cuber
Selling Older Puzzles | 2-5's & Megaminx's
Replies
6
Views
2,267
Humble Cuber
Humble Cuber
Back
Top