When to start with OLLs?

[DAE_JA_VOO]

How's it guys.

I started off with LBL, and then at about 55 seconds, i moved over to Intuitive F2L. While doing that, i studied all the PLLs too. I finished the PLLs about 2 weeks ago and have been practicing quite a bit. My average now is 35 seconds. Should i start with the OLLs or should i stick to 2 look OLL for now and keep practicing?

What should my average be when starting with the OLLs?

Also, is there any nice source for OLLs? I used badmephisto's PLL page to study PLLs and i have them all down now.

Thanks in advance

 

[Crzyazn]

OLLs should be learned at leisure

I learned mine around 23sec average ish.

But I believe OLLs are for consistency more than speed, and thus have a very low priority on my "to-do" list for cubing.

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

They really only save 1-2 sec. You should learn the ones with no oriented edges, though.

 

[ooveehoo]

Bob Burton's site has pretty good OLL (atleast I think so, I know 50/57 OLL, ~30 from Burton's). I started learning OLL (other than the 9 basic OLL) when I got to 26 or 27ish average.

 

[DAE_JA_VOO]

Great, thanks guys. I'll stick to just working my average down. I'll learn the OLLs that have no oriented edges though, and then with that i'll work down to 25sec or so, and then i'll start learning them all

 

[JBCM627]

I'd sort of say go ahead and start, but at your own pace. Just make sure to use the cases if they come up... even if it takes you a good minute to recall the alg; the only way to remember them and get faster is to keep using them.

I think I started when I was in the 30's or something... certainly at least the shorter/easier ones. I used the speedcubing.com OLL's (Ron's?) when I started, then expanded a few from there to include better/faster ones as I could find them.

I still don't know 5 or so of them as I never bothered to learn all of the 4-misoriented edge patterns (I just use intuitive partial OLL control instead so I never get those cases if I am paying attention... similar to a partial ZB F2L I think)

 

[Dene]

Just slowly start now. I'm sure there are those cases that you notice all the time but don't know them. You can feel satisfied everytime you see them from now on if you learn them . It certainly feels good to know all the OLL's, so I recommend getting started ASAP.

 

[Statical]

if olls arent that important is averaging sub20 really possible with 2look oll?

 

[ShadenSmith]

Yes, yes it is. Get yourself a 10 second f2l and you're set for a sub-20 average (assuming you're fast with your 2-look OLL and your PLL's)

 

[Leviticus]

I was averageing sub 20 with 2 look OLL, oh wait i still am

 

[Inusagi]

I was very lazy about learning OLL, and that works fine. I think you should slow down a bit, and not learn any OLLs before you're sure there doean't excist a new algorithm that's faster.

 

[AvGalen]

if olls arent that important is averaging sub20 really possible with 2look oll?

Sure it is. I use keyhole (slow compared to F2L), 2 look OLL AND 2 look PLL (so basically 4 look last layer) and averaged 20.12 2 months ago.

 

[fanwuq]

Learning OLL's is too much for me. I actually want to start on ZB F2L. I never liked the cases without oriented edges. I wouldn't learn full ZBLL either. Then again, I could do ELL instead. I don't know. Avoiding learning all of the OLL's is one of my goals in cubing. What would be another good alternative? Roux method?

 

[ExoCorsair]

I average 18 and I've had sub-15 solves with 2-look OLL. So, I don't plan on learning them until I'm around a 13s average.

On that note, I do know a few "special" cases, so I know around 15 OLLs?

 

[cpt.Justice]

If you dont wanna learn all the OLL's, I think MGLS is a good alternative, but there is quite a few cases to learn...
http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/

 

[Lt-UnReaL]

If you dont wanna learn all the OLL's, I think MGLS is a good alternative, but there is quite a few cases to learn...
http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/

If you don't want OLL then why would you want to learn MGLS? :/

 

[Lucas Garron]

If you dont wanna learn all the OLL's, I think MGLS is a good alternative, but there is quite a few cases to learn...
http://cube.garron.us/MGLS/

If you don't want OLL then why would you want to learn MGLS? :/

Because it's cooler?

If you don't like the idea of memorizing that many algs for OLL, MGLS isn't for you.
But if you're not satisfied with OLL for any other reason, MGLS is a very good alternative.It's a matter of what features you prefer, although now it's still more a choice to be different.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

How's it guys.

I started off with LBL, and then at about 55 seconds, i moved over to Intuitive F2L. While doing that, i studied all the PLLs too. I finished the PLLs about 2 weeks ago and have been practicing quite a bit. My average now is 35 seconds. Should i start with the OLLs or should i stick to 2 look OLL for now and keep practicing?

What should my average be when starting with the OLLs?

Also, is there any nice source for OLLs? I used badmephisto's PLL page to study PLLs and i have them all down now.

Thanks in advance

Technically speaking, you've already started learning OLLs since perhaps your first method.

 

[Statical]

if olls arent that important is averaging sub20 really possible with 2look oll?

Sure it is. I use keyhole (slow compared to F2L), 2 look OLL AND 2 look PLL (so basically 4 look last layer) and averaged 20.12 2 months ago.

i saw ur video, u are really good

 

[nicjsb]

I highly suggest using Leyan Lo's OLL #29 and #30 in place of burton's. You can get them here:
http://www.stanford.edu/~leyanlo/oll.htm

All of my OLL and PLL is pretty much Burton, except for those two from Leyan, which I find much faster