The Solve Critique Thread
- Thread starter Noahaha
- Start date
kcl
Legend
Haha half the reason my movecount is high is because I use a lot of algs that don't make me rotate.
sneaklyfox
Legend
Actually, I use some rotationless F2L algs too. Do you use those rotationless F2L algs that use M slice moves? Because I hate those. Like... setup: R U R' U' y'
M-slice alg: r' U' R U M'
I use: B' R B R' (x' U' R U l')
Or: U r' U r U' r' U' r
What are some of the algs you use?
kcl
Legend
I use the m slice ones sometimes. I do them for skipping OLL or to build an extra pair. Other than those I do f R' f' for inserts in the back. I don't do the B mover.. Can't stand those.
sneaklyfox
Legend
Hm... I must have known that trick at some point. Maybe I should start doing f R' f'. I think I like it.
But that doesn't explain your higher movecount. f R' f' is short.
Or maybe B U' B'. You'd hate that...
Last edited:
kcl
Legend
My higher movecount is because I prefer speed optimal over move optimal. My cases are faster for me than some of the more efficient ones. That being said I'm noticing more and more that are pretty sucky that I can do in different ways, so I'm implementing those.
sneaklyfox
Legend
I understand that. I was looking for specific examples... but I think we should probably continue this somewhere else... maybe pm? Because I don't want to hijack the thread any longer...
kcl
Legend
Sure. I need to go through my solves for some examples of these haha
guysensei1
Legend
16.90. A little better than average (I'm slightly below sub 18)
What's good? What's bad?
PS that's not spring noise in the video. Youtube did something weird to the audio and now the loudness of the huanying became a spring noise?
Last edited by a moderator:
ninja cuber
Member
Well Guysensei1 that solve was pretty good, there were only a few small flaws;
First one is the cross you should try doing it on the bottom instead as it allows better transition to F2L,
Second one is look-ahead, you should try to have no pauses in your solves, this just comes with practice
Third is OLL and PLL recognition, you paused a bit on OLL
And lastly you might wanna look into faster turnspeed cos you dont really have any big weaknesses
First one is the cross you should try doing it on the bottom instead as it allows better transition to F2L,
Second one is look-ahead, you should try to have no pauses in your solves, this just comes with practice
Third is OLL and PLL recognition, you paused a bit on OLL
And lastly you might wanna look into faster turnspeed cos you dont really have any big weaknesses
ChickenWrap
Veteran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4OCI_i_Hkg
I did a 2x2-4x4 relay and was hoping for some tips on the 3x3 and 4x4. Just so you know, I just learned 4x4 three days ago and usually average around 1:10 (1:18 solve in the video).
Thanks, all advice is appreciated!!
I did a 2x2-4x4 relay and was hoping for some tips on the 3x3 and 4x4. Just so you know, I just learned 4x4 three days ago and usually average around 1:10 (1:18 solve in the video).
Thanks, all advice is appreciated!!
For 3x3, pause less during F2L. Speedy-pause-speedy-pause is not a good way to go, you want it to be a continuous flow, even if that means turning slower. Also, try to recognise your PLL faster. Execution seems fine, but you wasted a good second or more recognising one of the easier PLL cases, even if it was an OLL skip.
I don't own a 4x4, but it seems like you could definitely do some work on your edge pairing. Try pairing only specific edges at a time (ie, only ones with green on them) so you can track and locate them quicker.
CriticalCubing
Veteran
What should be the breakdown for a sub 17 aberage?
sk8erman41
Veteran
This is just for critique, I know that I messed up the timer on solve 11 and solve 3 was probably a +2, but just looking for critiques of the solves themselves more than the times. This is representative of a typical session for me. I know that there are a lot of mistakes and room for growth. I'm sure I can get down to sub-20 by eliminating a lot of the larger issues. If you do- thanks for taking the time to review!
Last edited by a moderator:
guysensei1
Legend
Critique for a OH solve?
Thanks!
Thanks!
Last edited by a moderator:
pipkiksass
Veteran
Let's go...
Only 4 second inspection, but good cross (3s). Watch this space in the rest of the critique for the correlation between your times and your cross times!
What lets this solve down is F2L 4, which takes over 5s (from 9-14s), including a second pause to find it. You go to insert from one side, then realise you're on the opposite side, cancel your setup, redo the setup, cube-rotate, then insert from the other side. :s
I hate that OLL too - it's sucky and slow. It's great that you're managing to use new algs in speedsolves, not resorting to old ones/2look.
What lets this solve down is F2L 4, which takes over 5s (from 9-14s), including a second pause to find it. You go to insert from one side, then realise you're on the opposite side, cancel your setup, redo the setup, cube-rotate, then insert from the other side. :s
I hate that OLL too - it's sucky and slow. It's great that you're managing to use new algs in speedsolves, not resorting to old ones/2look.
GREAT F2L. Seriously. You inspected well, and another good cross (3s). Your F2L was fluid, barring a little stutter after 2 and a double-rotation on 4. So still room for improvement and you reached LL at 14 seconds!
Shame it was 2 look OLL, or might have been sub-20. For double-sune OLL I'd recommend R U R' U R U' R' U R U2 R' strongly over F (3xsexy) F'. I know it's another alg to learn, which is daft when you still have other OLLs to learn (like me), but you won't regret it, it's much faster.
Shame it was 2 look OLL, or might have been sub-20. For double-sune OLL I'd recommend R U R' U R U' R' U R U2 R' strongly over F (3xsexy) F'. I know it's another alg to learn, which is daft when you still have other OLLs to learn (like me), but you won't regret it, it's much faster.
I'll spend a little longer on this solve, because there's more to learn from a bad solve than a good one.
Despite using your inspection time, it was a 4.5 second cross followed by a 1 second pause, meaning you're at 6 seconds before you tackle F2L.
Here's where I pick up my point above re: correlation between cross and times. Note your first two solves (3 second cross) were just over 20 seconds. This solve you didn't reach OLL till 18 seconds, and it resulted in a 29 (+2) =31.10. But where did the solve go wrong? Let's take a look at the breakdown:
Cross: 4.5
Transition (including U, U, U', U' - yes, three wasted U turns then a U' setup!): 3 seconds
F2L: 11 seconds
OLL: 4 seconds
PLL recognition: 3 seconds including 2 cube rotations, despite the cube already being in the correct position to execute your algs.
PLL: 5.5 seconds
So what went wrong here? Short answer: cross to F2L transition. Because you don't start F2L until almost 7 seconds in, you're playing catchup and rushing. And what happens when you rush in a speedsolve? You end up having a bad time!
A quick comment, if I may, on your OLL - the pi OLL here your right hand lets go of the cube twice. I use the same alg, but after the first R I move my right thumb to the right-back edge and execute the remaining R2s and R with no further regrip required. It's quicker, and you're less likely to lose control of the cube. Give it a go?
PLL is what you blame for this solve, but somewhat unfairly. It's an alg that I'd say 80% of CFOPers use, and it's not a bad alg. I don't like it personally - get lots of lockups with A perms, but it's not to blame for the bad time here. What's to blame is the cross>F2L transition stressing you out, and the 3 second pause before PLL, which meant you start your PLL at 23.5 seconds, flustered and stressed because you (rightly) think you're on a bad solve. When you look at the timer all you remember is the bad execution of the PLL, not the bad transitions that added 6 seconds to the solve. Cut out those transitions and, even with a badly executed PLL and a +2, you're still looking at a 25 second solve...
Despite using your inspection time, it was a 4.5 second cross followed by a 1 second pause, meaning you're at 6 seconds before you tackle F2L.
Here's where I pick up my point above re: correlation between cross and times. Note your first two solves (3 second cross) were just over 20 seconds. This solve you didn't reach OLL till 18 seconds, and it resulted in a 29 (+2) =31.10. But where did the solve go wrong? Let's take a look at the breakdown:
Cross: 4.5
Transition (including U, U, U', U' - yes, three wasted U turns then a U' setup!): 3 seconds
F2L: 11 seconds
OLL: 4 seconds
PLL recognition: 3 seconds including 2 cube rotations, despite the cube already being in the correct position to execute your algs.
PLL: 5.5 seconds
So what went wrong here? Short answer: cross to F2L transition. Because you don't start F2L until almost 7 seconds in, you're playing catchup and rushing. And what happens when you rush in a speedsolve? You end up having a bad time!
A quick comment, if I may, on your OLL - the pi OLL here your right hand lets go of the cube twice. I use the same alg, but after the first R I move my right thumb to the right-back edge and execute the remaining R2s and R with no further regrip required. It's quicker, and you're less likely to lose control of the cube. Give it a go?
PLL is what you blame for this solve, but somewhat unfairly. It's an alg that I'd say 80% of CFOPers use, and it's not a bad alg. I don't like it personally - get lots of lockups with A perms, but it's not to blame for the bad time here. What's to blame is the cross>F2L transition stressing you out, and the 3 second pause before PLL, which meant you start your PLL at 23.5 seconds, flustered and stressed because you (rightly) think you're on a bad solve. When you look at the timer all you remember is the bad execution of the PLL, not the bad transitions that added 6 seconds to the solve. Cut out those transitions and, even with a badly executed PLL and a +2, you're still looking at a 25 second solve...
6 second cross. See my point above re: correlation between cross time and solve time.
Cross stressed you out again, and there was a lot of unnecessary rotation in F2L. Watch this solve on .5 speed and spot the cases where you rotate then rotate back. Look at ways of solving these cases without rotation, or with a single rotation.
Try working on fingertricks for common OLLs, like this sune case, as it will really pay off in the long run. I can sub-1 this OLL, and I'm a slow turner. Also 2 second PLL skip with a U3. :s
Cross stressed you out again, and there was a lot of unnecessary rotation in F2L. Watch this solve on .5 speed and spot the cases where you rotate then rotate back. Look at ways of solving these cases without rotation, or with a single rotation.
Try working on fingertricks for common OLLs, like this sune case, as it will really pay off in the long run. I can sub-1 this OLL, and I'm a slow turner. Also 2 second PLL skip with a U3. :s
Again, you blame the PLL for the bad time, but really it was the 7 second cross!
Hey, whaddya know? 3s cross, 22s solve!
Look for different ways of tackling F2L cases when they come up in different angles. You seem to always set up the front-right case, which means that it plays to your strengths (R and U turns), but there are often efficient ways of doing them with R and U turns in the back right as well as the front-right.
Look for different ways of tackling F2L cases when they come up in different angles. You seem to always set up the front-right case, which means that it plays to your strengths (R and U turns), but there are often efficient ways of doing them with R and U turns in the back right as well as the front-right.
To test my theory, I estimated your solve time as 25-26 based on 5 second cross here. Spot on!
3 second cross - 19 second solve... You get the idea!
Because your cross was fast, you're less stressed. There is still room for improvement in your F2L, and you still force cases that you're familiar with, rather than taking the cases you're presented with. This isn't necessarily bad, but there are more efficient ways.
Because your cross was fast, you're less stressed. There is still room for improvement in your F2L, and you still force cases that you're familiar with, rather than taking the cases you're presented with. This isn't necessarily bad, but there are more efficient ways.
Nothing new here - good cross => good solve. Same as above re: F2L With OLL again you release the cube a couple of times, maybe it's just your style, but I feel that the less your right hand is off the cube, the more control you have.
Nice solve! 13 second cross + f2L and 7 second LL is pretty much where you need to be for 20 seconds. Yeah, there's stuff that can be improved everywhere, such as rotations in F2L, learning the 1-look OLL case, and improving PLL execution, but for where you want to be, if every solve was like this, you should be happy.
The best thing about there being things to improve everywhere? It means you can be faster!!!
The best thing about there being things to improve everywhere? It means you can be faster!!!
That triple-sexy double sune OLL has come up 3 times in 11 solves - try the alg I suggested above, it's nice. If you don't like it, stick with triple sexy, but it's 2 turns shorter, and those turns are both F's. It's the F turns that slow down your execution here. Just saying!
Pretty much the same as above. Good cross, but inefficient F2L. Good LL.
In summary:
Cross: the difference between a 19 second and a 29 second solve is all in your cross. When you get a 3 second cross, your worst time was about 22 seconds. When you had >3 seconds, it could be anything up to 31.
When you get an easy case that's great, but there was one solve where you lost a cross edge, and another with a 6-7 second cross that was (or seemed to be) planned. Work on bld crosses, including hard cases.
Cross > F2L transition: goes wrong on a couple of occasions, where it costs you up to 3 seconds. The better you get at bld cross, the easier this transition will be.
F2L: try to tackle cases from different angles, and without reducing them to cases you prefer. There are many ways to execute any given F2L case, and often you're using 3 moves to break up a case that might have a say 5/6 move insert from its existing position, then rotating, then performing a longer insert. Lots of slow turning will help with this - try to resist your existing F2L 'algs', and try new stuff. Because the timer's not on, it doesn't matter if it doesn't work. If it does, it might turn out to be faster than what you're doing right now.
OLL: better finger tricks will speed up your corners OLL (OCLL) cases. You don't need to change algs (except triple sexy, did I mention that?
), the algs you are already using can be made faster. Keep learning new OLLs. PLL: don't blame PLL for bad solves. That A perm is fine! There are loads of different algs for awkward PLLs - I have a set which I really like, and I'd be happy to share if you have any you hate, but the best source is the interweb. Don't waste your time drilling an alg your hands don't like. Find one they DO like, and drill that instead. Then get good at recognising it.
Summary: The things that really let you down here are cross > F2L transition, F2L efficiency and PLL recognition. Tackle the first with cross+1 practice, the second with slow solves, and the 3rd I guess just with practice. There are 'rules' you can use to recognise PLLs from any 2 sides, which might help here.
If I were to film an Ao12 it would probably be around 18 seconds, and I can honestly say almost all of the advice above would apply equally to me. Your cross is probably a little better than mine, but my F2L is slightly more efficient. I know c.35 OLLs, but my LL finger speed is a little faster than yours. Why should you care about this? Because it means that this advice is good for at least another 6-7 seconds of improvement, if not even more!
GL!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
sk8erman41
Veteran
@pipkiksass- THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU! Your breakdowns are extremely helpful and I will take every word into consideration. I'll definitely switch out the 3xsexy alg and continue to work on the others. Much appreciated.
D
Deleted member 19792
Guest
Thanks for the help.
Amress
Regular
Two hand average of 5. This was a normal average of 5 except for the single 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thatcraftingfox
Member
If anyone could give me feedback on this average, that would be awesome!
Last edited by a moderator:
