• 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 35,000+ people from around the world today!

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

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
2,012
no what i meant is the numbers

why is a 4 flip OLL 20 and the h case OLL 57

it doesnt make sense
Yes, it doesn't make sense, and that's because they weren't collated very systematically. There are some patterns here and there, but no overarching reason as to why the numbers are what they are.

I'm seeking to improve my cfop and reduce my shockingly excessive cube rotations during f2l.
Question: Is it good practice after cross to have a certain colour face pointing towards you, so as you match f2l pairs you always know where each corner combination is located?
I know we solve with yellow up and white on the bottom, I just wonder I people then solve knowing red/green is back right, green/orange is back left, etc. Or whether you just have to be fluid and recognise and track which corner combo is where.

Thanks, and hope my ramble makes sense
Don't use a fixed front colour. It's one of those things that might have short-term benefit (except even this is questionable), but hinders long-term improvement.

For that matter, you should try going for full colour neutrality (using any cross colour, not just white). It gets harder the longer you delay it.
 

SatansJester

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2020
Messages
21
Thanks, xyzzy.
I have seen recommendations to start colour neutrality, I tried it once and the solve took five minutes and mashed my brain.
It's clearly important, given how often its suggested, but I'm confused as to its benefit, since everyone solves white down.
I think ill have to research it as my learning of it will only make sense if I know why I'm learning it (I struggle to learn stuff if I don't understand the point of it).
Thanks again
 

PetrusQuber

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
2,790
Location
my house, cubing.
YouTube
Visit Channel
Thanks, xyzzy.
I have seen recommendations to start colour neutrality, I tried it once and the solve took five minutes and mashed my brain.
It's clearly important, given how often its suggested, but I'm confused as to its benefit, since everyone solves white down.
I think ill have to research it as my learning of it will only make sense if I know why I'm learning it (I struggle to learn stuff if I don't understand the point of it).
Thanks again
Not everyone solves white down, top solvers are CN. It gives you an advantage because you have 5 more options at the start, so chances of getting a lucky cross goes up and chances of getting unlucky with all crosses go down
 

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
2,012
Thanks, xyzzy.
I have seen recommendations to start colour neutrality, I tried it once and the solve took five minutes and mashed my brain.
It's clearly important, given how often its suggested, but I'm confused as to its benefit, since everyone solves white down.
I think ill have to research it as my learning of it will only make sense if I know why I'm learning it (I struggle to learn stuff if I don't understand the point of it).
Thanks again
You get to use the best starting colour, which is basically all of the benefit of CN.

Thing is, while for CFOP it seems like CN isn't worth it – you save only one move on average and pay for it with worse recognition – in the long run, it's the only thing that lets you save as much as one move without having to learn any new algs. For example, full OLL saves around 5 moves over 2-look OLL, but at the cost of needing almost fifty additional algs. Full ZB saves 7-ish moves over full OLL+PLL, at the cost of seven hundred additional algs. From an (algs to learn) : (move count saved) perspective, colour neutrality is infinitely better than most other ways to improve on a CFOP solve.

There are second-order effects like shorter cross solutions making it easier to plan cross+1, but tbh I think many people overstate the usefulness of CN in this context, as if it's the only reason to be CN.
 

ZF slow

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2018
Messages
53
Location
My basement
I'm seeking to improve my cfop and reduce my shockingly excessive cube rotations during f2l.
Question: Is it good practice after cross to have a certain colour face pointing towards you, so as you match f2l pairs you always know where each corner combination is located?
I know we solve with yellow up and white on the bottom, I just wonder I people then solve knowing red/green is back right, green/orange is back left, etc. Or whether you just have to be fluid and recognise and track which corner combo is where.

Thanks, and hope my ramble makes sense
with CFOP, I wouldn't imagine attempting fixed orientation would be good. Seems to be that it'd be better to have whichever side is optimal in front. Been a while since I used CFOP though, so I'm not sure
 

abunickabhi

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
851
Location
Yo
WCA
2013GHOD01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Is method neutrality a thing? Do you guys think that becoming method neutral will help out in getting more consistent solves for the 3x3. Which method combination will be the easiest learning curve - CFOP+Roux , Petrus+Waterman or say ZZ+3-style.

Does having more contrasting methods help in forming judgement during the 15 seconds inspection? Will paradox of choice occur when we find good starts from two methods and cannot decide on how to actually start the solve.
 

Spacey10

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
600
Location
Virginia
YouTube
Visit Channel
Is method neutrality a thing? Do you guys think that becoming method neutral will help out in getting more consistent solves for the 3x3. Which method combination will be the easiest learning curve - CFOP+Roux , Petrus+Waterman or say ZZ+3-style.

Does having more contrasting methods help in forming judgement during the 15 seconds inspection? Will paradox of choice occur when we find good starts from two methods and cannot decide on how to actually start the solve.
Ok, so at the bignning of inspection, you ha e to pick between 3 methods (for example)
Roux
ZZ
CFOP
Firstly, you would ha e to pick a method based in the cube, looking for things like amde pairs, AND connected pieces, AND EO, AND solved cross pieces. You have to do all of them to pick the best method.
Secondly, do more in-depth inspection of the method you chose.
For CFOP, look for cross and maybe plus 1
For Roux, inspect into 2nd block
For ZZ, EO and cross
For the first part, the inspection will take 3 seconds, about.
For the second part, if you picked CFOP, it will take about 9 to 10 seconds
For Roux, it is similar
For ZZ it is about 11 or 12 seconds
You may think that, that's nice, it's right around 15 seconds, well, people start freaking out at 12, which means a more rushed inspection, resulting in worse times/more DNFs, and you need time to place the cube and start the timer.
 

swburk

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
64
Location
Wichita, KS
having a problem with my 3x3 its a moyu rs3m. I've had it for 2 months but now for some reason when i turn sometimes a corner flips or it catches and gets stuck and when i try to force it to move some pieces fly out. The pieces can also break a little bit so i have to push the plastic sides back in.
It sounds like your cube may have just loosened up as it broke in. The same thing has happened to my RS3M as well. Maybe try adjusting the tensions a little bit and see if that fixes it.
 
Top