shoud i switch to fridrich now?

[daniel0731ex]

so currently I'm sub 30 using 2look OLL, 2look PLL, and my self-invented 2look F2L. my split times are:

cross: 4 sec
FL+SL: 16 sec
OLL1+2: 4 sec
PLL1+2: 5 sec

somthing like that.
should i sub 20 before switching to fridrich? which part should i learn first?

 

[Dene]

What exactly is you self-invented 2lookF2L?
Otherwise: yes I would recommend learning proper corner-edge pairing (I actually recommend you figure it out for yourself. If you're already using a self-invented method I'm sure you can).

 

[Sa967St]

if you're using OLL and PLL, aren't you already using Fridrich?

 

[JTW2007]

if you're using OLL and PLL, aren't you already using Fridrich?

Yeah, but I think he's talking about Full OLL and PLL and algorithmic F2L. My advice would be to switch to a new method that works for you whenever you feel your current method is holding you back. It's easily possible to average sub-20 with decent F2L, 2LOLL, and 2LPLL.

 

[daniel0731ex]

yeah i meant FULL fridrich, though i consider my current method as LBL
i haven't learned any new algs for 5 months, when i was hardly sub-50


BTW canadian cubing classic is two weeks away, should i start fridrich F2L now?(i already know intutive F2L, but just couldn't get used to it. I couldn't sub40 with it.)


and also, the self-invented-super-duper-easy-for-intermediate-cubers-two-look-F2L is nothing but solving corners and edges of the CE pairs seperately.

 

[Dene]

and also, the self-invented-super-duper-easy-for-intermediate-cubers-two-look-F2L is nothing but solving corners and edges of the CE pairs seperately.

Well that's standard LBL. Even if you came up with it yourself, you shouldn't go around calling it "self-invented". I came up with CE pairing by myself one night in bed (without a cube; I was trying to sleep). But I can't go around calling it self-invented. All I can say is that I figured it out for myself. (Incidentally, I also figured out how to make a the F2L by getting a whole layer, and then doing the next 4 edges by myself when I was much younger; but yet again I can hardly call it "self-invented".)

And I don't see why you can't figure out CE pairing for yourself. If you can't, then I see little chance of you learning it via cramming algorithms. If you don't understand the concept then there is little hope for you.

 

[StachuK1992]

BTW canadian cubing classic is two weeks away

no it isn't.
http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=CanadianCubingClassic2009


Learn full PLL. Don't even bother with OLL until you're sub25. Just do 2Look OLL.
Oh. and yeah. Learn you some F2L

 

[Ellis]

should i sub 20 before switching to fridrich?

what?

You should've switched a long time ago.

 

[JTW2007]

(i already know intutive F2L, but just couldn't get used to it. I couldn't sub40 with it.)

I highly recommend intuitive F2L. I know for a fact you can easily sub-20 with it, and it can get faster than that. Learn PLL though.

 

[daniel0731ex]

Well that's standard LBL. Even if you came up with it yourself, you shouldn't go around calling it "self-invented".

yeah i guess so. i didn't really come up with the concept myself, all i did is simply improving the standard LBL by changing the process slightly.

no it isn't.
http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/c.php?i=CanadianCubingClassic2009


Learn full PLL. Don't even bother with OLL until you're sub25. Just do 2Look OLL.
Oh. and yeah. Learn you some F2L

ohhh i kept thinking it's july 14 so i do have enough time to get these stuffs down






BTW how long after starting F2L does your time start to decrease?

 

[JTW2007]

BTW how long after starting F2L does your time start to decrease?

That depends on:

the person
what type of F2L
how hard you practice
how often you practice
how long you practice
whether or not it includes cross
how much the F2L skills help you in other parts of the cube
how many practice/non-timed solves you do to let the F2L skills manifest.

 

[Johannes91]

how hard you practice
how often you practice
how long you practice

how you practice

Repeating a memorized solve 1000 times a day, learning loads of esoteric and useless algs, or doing something equally silly may take a really long time and make you the hardest working cuber ever, but not decrease your times at all.

 

[Dene]

yeah i guess so. i didn't really come up with the concept myself, all i did is simply improving the standard LBL by changing the process slightly.

You did? You said that you do corners and edges separately. I don't see how that is any different?

 

[daniel0731ex]

basicly it's solving F2L pairs by pairs, but instead of solving the pair at once, the corner is inserted into the slot and then the edge. it's similar to the 2 look oll/plls.


sorry for being unclear

 

[JTW2007]

Oh. You should try Keyhole and see how that works. If that's the solution you "invented," I bet Keyhole would fit your style well until you learn pairs.

 

[daniel0731ex]

no, im sure it's not keyhole.
it's more like doing fridrich F2L in two steps, more efficient than the keyhole.
using this method saves the edges that are already in the right slot without the corner,
or even edges that are in the wrong slot

it's like how 2 look OLL/PLL is more efficient than LBL, but not as fast as the real OLLs/PLLs

 

[JTW2007]

I wasn't saying it was keyhole, but I was recommending keyhole, as it sounds like it'd be faster.

 

[rahulkadukar]

Learn Algorithmic F2L Dan Harris has a good site

 

[JTW2007]

Learn Algorithmic F2L Dan Harris has a good site

I recommend intuitive. Teaches you more about the cube and it can be faster.