What is necessary to be sub-10?

[Tim Major]

Well GJ for missing the point. The point you just made is that a 10s solver will be faster than a 20s solver on the colors they don't normally solve. That's so obvious it should go without saying. Do you really think that's what I meant?

Do you think that's what I meant? You aggressively attacked me for misinterpreting you when you have completely misunderstood me. I'm saying that an 18s solver will struggle to become 18s with colour neutrality just as much as a 9s solver would struggle to average 9s with colour neutrality. I feel like speed is a irrelevant, and it's more how accustomed you are to solving with only one colour.

Forget your original color. Would it be easier to get sub 20 on a color, or sub 10 on a color? I think that's your answer

...and what I was saying is that I disagree. I think for a 9 second solver it'd be equally difficult to get back to their original speed as for an 18s solver.

I was saying it isn't easier

 

[MikamiHero]

I would agree with this. If you are dual color neutral, IMO that brings you close enough to CN with the benefit of more consistent recognition.

Yeah, being dual colour neutral has been a tremendous help over the years. I honestly just thought, "How hard would it be to do the opposite colour?" and just went along from there. Being dual CN is actually a lot easier than people make it out to be I picked white when I started cubing because it is the brightest colour and easy for me to recognise.

Trying to become CN is like trying to become ambidextrous.

Ironically, this is another goal of mine. My dad is ambidextrous (though he is "naturally" left-handed), but he was forced to use his right hand to write back at school. It started a while ago, but I began by first performing small tasks (e.g., brushing my teeth) using my left hand and I'm slowly add more daily activities to the lot (just some random trivia).

 

[mark49152]

I've thought many times about whether to try to become CN while I'm still slow, and I keep coming back to the question, what is the best way to tackle a hard cross? Head-on, or avoid?

Apart from the 1 in 5000 that requires 8 moves, every fixed colour cross case can be done in 7f moves or less. That's not a big deal. Perhaps my time would be better spent learning to find better fixed cross solutions. Optimal doesn't necessarily mean finger trickable, but since the optimal solutions are often not obvious, there are undoubtedly better finger-friendly solutions that are non-obvious as well.

IMHO, Cornelius Dieckmann's solves are excellent examples of ingenious, efficient, finger-friendly cross solutions.

 

[Hypocrism]

I've thought many times about whether to try to become CN while I'm still slow, and I keep coming back to the question, what is the best way to tackle a hard cross? Head-on, or avoid?

Apart from the 1 in 5000 that requires 8 moves, every fixed colour cross case can be done in 7f moves or less. That's not a big deal. Perhaps my time would be better spent learning to find better fixed cross solutions. Optimal doesn't necessarily mean finger trickable, but since the optimal solutions are often not obvious, there are undoubtedly better finger-friendly solutions that are non-obvious as well.

IMHO, Cornelius Dieckmann's solves are excellent examples of ingenious, efficient, finger-friendly cross solutions.

Well the benefit of going dual-CN over fixed-colour is .4 of a move on average. And the benefit of full-CN over dual-CN is another .6 of a move on average. So you're learning a lot more than the change to dual, but gaining just a little more. There will still be hard crosses on CN scrambles. However I think learning just one non-opposite cross colour will help with all the other colours-really the aim is to have colour-neutral recognition, based on the relations between pieces rather than their absolute colours, and so learning green (for example) will help with red because you are more used to CN-recognition. At the same time if you knew green and red, you also know blue and orange (opposite-CN is easy). In addition, having more crosses to choose from lets you choose one that is fast to execute or gives a good lookahead/first pair; the benefit is much more than just fewer moves.

So really there are only three cross axes, and learning one of your non-main colours will help you to learn the next one quickly when you get around to it.

I'm fairly confident that I'll be able to go CN when I reach my goal speed. It won't be frustrating for me (like anecdotally it has been for others, becoming a limiting factor) because I was always going to take a break from 3x3 when I make sub-10 and work on big cubes for a while, so losing speed on 3x3 won't bother me. I plan to be completely CN on big cubes, back that up with casual CN practice on 3x3, and then work on choosing the fastest cross colour on a scrambled cube if I eventually come back to training 3x3.

 

[Marvin]

It's fascinating to me how on the speedsolving forum, threads get derailed from their subject so quickly and they are so hard to get back on track.
As someone who is actually looking for more constructive advice on how to get times down, this whole color neutrality debate really shouldn't be here. It should've ended a few pages ago and moved to its own thread instead.

This whole discussion adds virtually nothing to the topic itself and I don't see why it's even allowed for this to consistently happen to threads.

On topic; I'm barely sub20 so I can't help you much but I feel like at that point it's refining everything you already know, working towards a high and steady TPS and trying to get sub10 times more and more consistently.

 

[Ninja Storm]

It's fascinating to me how on the speedsolving forum, threads get derailed from their subject so quickly and they are so hard to get back on track.
As someone who is actually looking for more constructive advice on how to get times down, this whole color neutrality debate really shouldn't be here. It should've ended a few pages ago and moved to its own thread instead.

This whole discussion adds virtually nothing to the topic itself and I don't see why it's even allowed for this to consistently happen to threads.

On topic; I'm barely sub20 so I can't help you much but I feel like at that point it's refining everything you already know, working towards a high and steady TPS and trying to get sub10 times more and more consistently.

People are debating the usefulness of color neutrality and relating it to what needs to be done to be sub10.

Advice is aimed at specific users, but can be applied generally.

 

[goodatthis]

Haha if this is derailment then you should have seen what when on in pages 5 and 6, Stefan was trying to start an argument with someone about the definition of sub 10. I agree with ninja storm on this, this is definitely relevant to the discussion.

 

[CriticalCubing]

Just sharing my experience with CN and not going into debate

I changed to CN when I was averaging 18 sec on white. Currently, I avg 16 sec on white and 19 sec being CN and it is tough. Like someone said, it is like solving a cube from start. But, once you get the hang of it, you will be faster with CN than doing a single colour. Also, solving 2 colours takes you close to 2 colours, but you cannot take full advantage of the scramble where in some other colour, you might have a better cross solution. So, being CN is not a necessity for sub 10 or even sub 8. There are fast people solving just one colour like Cornelius Dieckmann and then there are sub 10 people solving 2 colour like Kennan L and Jacob Hutnik.
CN is not necessary but surely helps in the long run and in you are already fast solving just a single colour, then stick with it as CN will do more harm than good. In the end, CN is completely your choice, so if you want, go for it or just practice you current colour.

Cheers

 

[MikamiHero]

I think the discussion on colour neutrality has provided some good insight. As Keaton said, it is relevant as the debate is centered around how it can be implemented to achieve sub-10.

Nevertheless, I might stick to dual colour neutrality. Working on lookahead and finding efficient algorithms can be far more advantageous.

For example, I used this E perm for the longest time:

R2 U R' U' (y) (R U R' U')2 R U R' (y') R U' R2'

Only because I hated doing D moves. But yesterday, I decided to give the "standard" E perm algorithm,

(y x') R U' R' D R U R' D' R U R' D R U' R' D' (x),

another attempt. After drilling the fingertricks for this algorithm, I can say it's definitely faster than my previous one. I actually don't mind the D moves now.

Next algorithm will probably be Ra since I still use a lefty version of it.

 

[CyanSandwich]

For example, I used this E perm for the longest time:

R2 U R' U' (y) (R U R' U')2 R U R' (y') R U' R2'

Only because I hated doing D moves. But yesterday, I decided to give the "standard" E perm algorithm,

(y x') R U' R' D R U R' D' R U R' D R U' R' D' (x),

another attempt. After drilling the fingertricks for this algorithm, I can say it's definitely faster than my previous one. I actually don't mind the D moves now.

Funny, I've always been using the 2nd one, but now I'm going to switch to the first one because I'm faster with it. Those darn D moves.

 

[MikamiHero]

Funny, I've always been using the 2nd one, but now I'm going to switch to the first one because I'm faster with it. Those darn D moves.

I'm still not a big fan of D moves, but I find after practicing this algorithm, my execution has gotten a lot better. I use the first one for OH.

 

[Ninja Storm]

I think the discussion on colour neutrality has provided some good insight. As Keaton said, it is relevant as the debate is centered around how it can be implemented to achieve sub-10.

Nevertheless, I might stick to dual colour neutrality. Working on lookahead and finding efficient algorithms can be far more advantageous.

For example, I used this E perm for the longest time:

R2 U R' U' (y) (R U R' U')2 R U R' (y') R U' R2'

Only because I hated doing D moves. But yesterday, I decided to give the "standard" E perm algorithm,

(y x') R U' R' D R U R' D' R U R' D R U' R' D' (x),

another attempt. After drilling the fingertricks for this algorithm, I can say it's definitely faster than my previous one. I actually don't mind the D moves now.

Next algorithm will probably be Ra since I still use a lefty version of it.

That's a good case of using a suboptimal alg. Check out the algs you use and see which ones you find too slow. Some cases are inherently bad, but most cases have at least one decent alg.

 

[IamSpeedcubing]

Sorry for the bump. Soo...... about the sub 10 tips XD

 

[Lazy Einstein]

Sorry for the bump. Soo...... about the sub 10 tips XD

1 - Pick a method. Roux, CFOP, ZZ, Petrus, etc (Rowe Hessler suggests Roux)
2 - Learn some stuff about your method.
-------Roux - Learn CMLL, get gud with blox
-------CFOP - PLL and 2LOLL, F2L is the key
-------ZZ - OCLL and PLL, Be good with EOL in inspection and blox.
-------Petrus - ummm
3 - Practice everyday
4 - You'll be sub-10 in 1 to 1.5 years if you solve Ao100 everyday.

 

[shadowslice e]

4 - You'll be sub-10 in 1 to 1.5 years if you solve Ao100 everyday.

Tbh I would say even faster with that amount of practise

 

[IamSpeedcubing]

I'm sub 15 right now, hoping to be sub 10 by the end of the holidays