• 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!

Three Style Not Blind

Rainger

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
72
I had a question, refrain form judging me harshly ha, would there ever be a reason for using a blindfolded method such as three style as your main method without a blindfold? I know that the other methods are very optimized where as blindfolded methods are meant for easy to follow patterns and such in your head but some beginner cubers may only want to learn one method starting out and may want to get into blindfolded solving eventually. I figure the answer is a simple “no” but I would like to start the discussion.

Thanks,

Rainger
 

shadowslice e

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
2,914
Location
Hampshire, England
YouTube
Visit Channel
There are some top class blders who use 3style as their main 3x3 method though none are sub-10 with it.

Given the time investment required to do 3style quickly, it's just not worth it. 3-style by itself is more work than any sighted method.

With that said, there might be an argument for teaching M2/OP (or even just pure op) if the only aim is to be able to solve a cube with no regards to speed.
 

GenTheThief

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
1,692
Location
Illinois, U.S.A.
WCA
2016GEEN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
With that said, there might be an argument for teaching M2/OP (or even just pure op) if the only aim is to be able to solve a cube with no regards to speed.
I remember reading on Stefan's site (or maybe some other tutorial) that some people learned how to solve using just OP as opposed to beginners, because there are less algs to learn.
I want to try teaching just OP to someone, although one of the main barriers I can see is that you would have to teach them both Y perm and J perm right off the back as opposed to letting them fumble through sexy while they get through the first two layer' on their own.
 

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
1,981
I want to try teaching just OP to someone, although one of the main barriers I can see is that you would have to teach them both Y perm and J perm right off the back as opposed to letting them fumble through sexy while they get through the first two layer' on their own.
You could get by with just one 2c2e alg, although the setups would get worse/longer.
 

CuberStache

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
733
Location
Washington State, USA
WCA
2016DAVI02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Ultimately, what it boils down to is that the movecount for 3-style is far higher than that of CFOP, roughly double (~100/~50) at the highest level for both. Even though ergonomics is better and lookahead is nonexistent assuming you memo in inspection, the higher movecount offsets those two benefits and always will.
 

Sub1Hour

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2018
Messages
1,383
Location
*Insert Comical Location or Coordinates"
Ultimately, what it boils down to is that the movecount for 3-style is far higher than that of CFOP, roughly double (~100/~50) at the highest level for both. Even though ergonomics is better and lookahead is nonexistent assuming you memo in inspection, the higher movecount offsets those two benefits and always will.
Yeah. Even though your TPS will be very high your limit will always be much higher than any other method despite the ability to 1-look and ergonomics.
 
L

lucarubik

Guest
i average 22 with 3style without inspection and 13 with cfop, with inspection and practice i'd be right about there, it's a way to commit to 3bld being able to compete in 3x3
 

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
would there ever be a reason for using a blindfolded method such as three style as your main method without a blindfold?
Fun. I have done almost nothing except 3 style for a couple of weeks, mostly blind but also sighted. It's just that much fun.
 

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
What are your times? What’s possible?
I'm not really concerned with being fast - I make up the commutators on the fly rather than memorizing them. I just do it for fun, since I will never get competitive times no matter what. After a learning 3 style as my first blind method a couple of weeks ago, I can do a sighted solve in about 2 minutes. Full blind solves take me about 3-4 minutes. This is compared to my Roux times of 35 seconds.

Top blind solvers can easily get under 20 seconds including memorization, so if you give them 15 seconds of inspection time (and a chance to fix errors after they finish execution) I imagine they could do a sighted 3 style solve in 10 seconds. Here is Jack Cai doing this exact thing:

 

Rainger

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2020
Messages
72
I'm not really concerned with being fast - I make up the commutators on the fly rather than memorizing them. I just do it for fun, since I will never get competitive times no matter what. After a learning 3 style as my first blind method a couple of weeks ago, I can do a sighted solve in about 2 minutes. Full blind solves take me about 3-4 minutes. This is compared to my Roux times of 35 seconds.

Top blind solvers can easily get under 20 seconds including memorization, so if you give them 15 seconds of inspection time (and a chance to fix errors after they finish execution) I imagine they could do a sighted 3 style solve in 10 seconds. Here is Jack Cai doing this exact thing:

That’s awesome! Thanks for the link
 

CuberStache

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
733
Location
Washington State, USA
WCA
2016DAVI02
YouTube
Visit Channel
He is slower than 2% of speed solvers and faster than 98%
Interesting statistic! I would like to add something though: He's in the top 2% for 3x3, but he has the WR for 3BLD (mean). So top 2% is effectively the best you can possibly be with 3-style - still nearly double the WR average for 3x3. Think about it. If 3-style was viable as a speedsolving method, you would expect the WR holder in 3BLD to be close to the WR for 3x3 - not over 2000th in the world.
 

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
Interesting statistic! I would like to add something though: He's in the top 2% for 3x3, but he has the WR for 3BLD (mean). So top 2% is effectively the best you can possibly be with 3-style - still nearly double the WR average for 3x3. Think about it. If 3-style was viable as a speedsolving method, you would expect the WR holder in 3BLD to be close to the WR for 3x3 - not over 2000th in the world.
Yes - it's not competitive sighted methods, but it's possible to be faster than most cubers if you are very good. You can probably expect to have double the times you would have with a sighted method, if you put the same amount of work in. So, if you are in the 50th percentile then you would have a time of about 1 minute using sighted 3 style as a regular 3x3 method.
 
Top