• 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!

[Help Thread] One-Handed Solving Discussion

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
818
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
sqAree
I use the CFOP method and I have been using it for OH solving. What is the easiest/most popular method for OH solving?

Also, I average about 1:15 and what is a reasonable goal that most people reach easily?
Even for OH CFOP is probably the most popular method. In general it's a good choice to use the same method for 3x3 and OH (no matter which), because you mutually train both events by doing only one at a time.
In general CFOP, ZZ and Roux are all fine for OH solving. Roux has the advantage of being almost rotationless (and of course movecount), whereas it can be tricky to learn M slices with table abuse. I don't know much about ZZ but it seems like the main difference regarding OH solving between ZZ and CFOP are z rotations vs y rotations. The former is easier to execute. However, no matter which of those is used, the cuber wants to make sure edges are oriented when reaching the last layer, then LL algs are all great.

When I started training OH casually I reached times between 30 and 40 seconds pretty easily without excessive training or learning special OH algs.
 

GenTheThief

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
1,483
Location
Illinois, U.S.A.
WCA
2016GEEN01
YouTube
channel/UCXxvOAAJVVoR7UfjeAv_bjA
I use the CFOP method and I have been using it for OH solving. What is the easiest/most popular method for OH solving?

Also, I average about 1:15 and what is a reasonable goal that most people reach easily?
Many people consider ZZ the best OH method, because it mainly uses <R, U, L> moves, and thus there are no F moves or cube rotations, which are more cumbersome moves.
However, CFOP is still the most popular method, as people don't feel the need to switch/don't know about other methods. Most people use the same for OH as for 2H. It's a pretty good idea too, as any tricks you may have found get passed over to the other event.

*I use ZZ, so these numbers might be different for a CFOP solver*
I remember ~30 was pretty easy to get to, just with lots of solves.
Sub-30 wasn't to hard for me either.

E: ninja'd
 

Shiv3r

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
802
Location
San Diego or thereabouts
WCA
2016LEWI04
YouTube
channel/UCEuVjmTxYfw16pARBLpQaEA
Even for OH CFOP is probably the most popular method. In general it's a good choice to use the same method for 3x3 and OH (no matter which), because you mutually train both events by doing only one at a time.
In general CFOP, ZZ and Roux are all fine for OH solving. Roux has the advantage of being almost rotationless (and of course movecount), whereas it can be tricky to learn M slices with table abuse. I don't know much about ZZ but it seems like the main difference regarding OH solving between ZZ and CFOP are z rotations vs y rotations. The former is easier to execute. However, no matter which of those is used, the cuber wants to make sure edges are oriented when reaching the last layer, then LL algs are all great.

When I started training OH casually I reached times between 30 and 40 seconds pretty easily without excessive training or learning special OH algs.
ZZ is a good method if you use CFOP but don't like rotating. If not, then use CFOP or Roux, depending on what method you use normally. Sub-30 is a good barrier , that's what I am at at the moment.
 

AlphaSheep

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
1,079
Location
Gauteng, South Africa
WCA
2014GRAY03
In general it's a good choice to use the same method for 3x3 and OH (no matter which), because you mutually train both events by doing only one at a time.
I strongly agree with this.

Regarding a reasonable goal, I think that 50-60% slower than your two handed time is a reasonable goal of you put in a decent amount of practice.
 

Sue Doenim

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
447
I use ZZ for one hand, and after I learn more stuff for Roux, I want to learn a more specific branch of ZZ. Alg count is not a barrier, but I would prefer not to have to learn full ZBLL. Would it be best to learn ZZ-b, ZZ-d, ZZ-VH, ZZ-CT, or some other form?
 

CubingGenius

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2016
Messages
238
I use ZZ for one hand, and after I learn more stuff for Roux, I want to learn a more specific branch of ZZ. Alg count is not a barrier, but I would prefer not to have to learn full ZBLL. Would it be best to learn ZZ-b, ZZ-d, ZZ-VH, ZZ-CT, or some other form?
COLL/EPLL is quite low for alg count and is very fast. Otherwise something like ZZ-b, ZZ-orbit or something like inserting the last pair and solving CP would be good.
 
M

Malkom

Guest
Many people say that COLL/EPLL is superior over OLL/PLL. I understand this but geting EO LS with CFOP is something I'm unable to do at my normal TPS. So I wonder what would be best, OLL/PLL or 2LCOLL(EO then COLL)/EPLL. The fact that OLL is one look is a big advantage, but the EO part of 2LCOLL would be pseudo 2gen and EPLL is extremely fast.
 

AlphaSheep

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
1,079
Location
Gauteng, South Africa
WCA
2014GRAY03
Many people say that COLL/EPLL is superior over OLL/PLL. I understand this but geting EO LS with CFOP is something I'm unable to do at my normal TPS. So I wonder what would be best, OLL/PLL or 2LCOLL(EO then COLL)/EPLL. The fact that OLL is one look is a big advantage, but the EO part of 2LCOLL would be pseudo 2gen and EPLL is extremely fast.
I think people say that COLL+EPLL is superior to OCLL+PLL. In reality it only saves about 1 or 2 moves and the algs are only a tiny bit nicer. So what you propose would indeed be better than 3LLL, but since full OLL saves more moves over 2look OLL, it's better to do full OLL.

If you already know OLL, you won't suddenly forget it by learning COLL. You can use both sets, and choose the one that suits the solve.

Learn the nice VHLS cases and orient edges with your last slot only when it won't slow you down. Then you can use COLL half the time, and OLL for the rest. I think this is what many top CFOP solvers do already.

Lastly, there's ZZ, which has the added advantage of making F2L easier too.
 

Dr_Detonation

Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2017
Messages
134
Location
Over da Rainbow
WCA
2017ECKS02
I'm just starting on and I was wondering if there is anything different about it from two handed that I need to know. My OH average is 1 minute. My two handed is 25 seconds. I use cfop.
 

tx789

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
1,873
Location
New Zealand
WCA
2010HUNT02
YouTube
thetx789
There are OH algs, since some turns are harder. Oh is around twice the speed of OH. However there are exspections (how much you focus on OH). I average 15-16 on 3x3 and around 27 on OH (my single vary widely though). Just practise OH to get better at turning and improving at regular 3x3. That should help.
 

AwesomeARC

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2016
Messages
80
Location
India
WCA
2017ROYC01
@Dr_Detonation:

From my experience, improvement in OH is usually very sharp and sudden. Your times will jump from sub-50 to sub-40 and eventually to sub-35 quite rapidly.

As a beginner, you must first try to find a comfortable gripping style. The most common gripping style is placing the thumb on the F center and the middle finger on the B center and keeping the other fingers free. Try doing a few moves while maintaining your chosen gripping style. If you don't find it comfortable, try a different gripping style. As a beginner, you are always free to switch from one gripping style to another to find out what suits you best.

When you've found the most comfortable gripping style, try doing solves. Don't bother about timing your solves for a while. Just concentrate on how you do different turns while solving. At first, your fingers might be a little shaky or unstable. Don't worry; your fingers will adapt to OH and stabilize themselves with time.

At this stage, just casual practice will get you to sub-50.

Alright, once you're sub-50, it's time to do some targetted training. What do I mean by that? You need to practice the different steps of your method separately. For example, if you use CFOP, practice F2L and last layer separately. Later, you can split up the last layer and practice OLL/PLL separately. Even later, you can split up your F2L into different cases and then practice the insertions. But... all that's for another day. For now, just concentrate (you don't have to be too serious, though...) on the main steps. There'll be enough time for you to practice sub-divisions later.

As I've already said, your improvement will be rapid. You don't have to take OH too seriously till you average around 30.

In general, just concentrate on your TPS as your OH look-ahead will always be better than your 2H look-ahead. Practice spamming (R U R' U') or Sune/Anti-sune or pretty much anything that involves R and U moves (and their inverses). If you prefer doing OH with your right hand, then simply mirror the commutators - (L' U L U') or (L' U' L U' L' U2 L)/(L' U2 L U L' U L).

So, that's all. I hope I've helped.

Best of luck to you!
 

jaredye

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
165
Location
Ithaca, NY
I don't know if this has been mentioned because it's a bit hard to search... But how do I do M move with OH quickly? I could do r'R, but that's nowhere near being called quick. Is there a better way to do it? A video would be very useful.

I'm curious about it because sometimes M is just unavoidable, like in the 4-flip ELL. Other algs that don't use M are significantly longer.

I read on Antoine Cantine's website that you can do M' by holding down the R layer with pinky. I don't fully understand that. Can someone post a video about that as well?
 
M

Malkom

Guest
I don't know if this has been mentioned because it's a bit hard to search... But how do I do M move with OH quickly? I could do r'R, but that's nowhere near being called quick. Is there a better way to do it? A video would be very useful.

I'm curious about it because sometimes M is just unavoidable, like in the 4-flip ELL. Other algs that don't use M are significantly longer.

I read on Antoine Cantine's website that you can do M' by holding down the R layer with pinky. I don't fully understand that. Can someone post a video about that as well?
You never need M moves unless you're a rouxer, EPLLs have good RU alternatives and the lower TPS in OH solving makes look ahead and partial edge control much easier.
 

jaredye

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
165
Location
Ithaca, NY
You never need M moves unless you're a rouxer, EPLLs have good RU alternatives and the lower TPS in OH solving makes look ahead and partial edge control much easier.
I see. I use CFOP. I don't want to switch to ZZ coz I'm color neutral and it's too hard to be CN with ZZ.

Basically you mean when inserting the last pair, do anything to avoid a dot OLL case? That sounds quite reasonable.
 

TDM

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
7,009
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
WCA
2013MEND03
YouTube
TDM028
I don't know if this has been mentioned because it's a bit hard to search... But how do I do M move with OH quickly? I could do r'R, but that's nowhere near being called quick. Is there a better way to do it? A video would be very useful.
Some Rouxers (e.g. GuRoux_, I think Kian, and possibly Alex too) have OH fingertrick videos. They're all on YT.

EPLLs have good RU alternatives
They're good, but they're not all as good. I think it's worth learning the MU algs for at least H/Z.
 
M

Malkom

Guest
Some Rouxers (e.g. GuRoux_, I think Kian, and possibly Alex too) have OH fingertrick videos. They're all on YT.


They're good, but they're not all as good. I think it's worth learning the MU algs for at least H/Z.
Maybe H but definetly not Z, the RU is really fast. MU Uperms are even more ridiculous, they are about the same speed as RU for 2H so there's no way the MU could be faster for OH.
 
Top