Where shall I go from here?

[AvGalen]

http://www.speedsolving.com/showpost.php?p=6815&postcount=4

Using keyhole (method between beginners and F2L) and 4 look last layer I averaged sub 25. Knowing a lot of algs helps a lot, but being able to perform a solve without delays between steps is much more important

 

[Hadley4000]

http://www.speedsolving.com/showpost.php?p=6815&postcount=4

Using keyhole (method between beginners and F2L) and 4 look last layer I averaged sub 25. Knowing a lot of algs helps a lot, but being able to perform a solve without delays between steps is much more important

Sub-25 with keyhole? I haven't heard of someone getting that kind of time with that method before.

 

[JU1CYFRU1T]

http://www.speedsolving.com/showpost.php?p=6815&postcount=4

Using keyhole (method between beginners and F2L) and 4 look last layer I averaged sub 25. Knowing a lot of algs helps a lot, but being able to perform a solve without delays between steps is much more important

It's funny that you say this... when the OP is using cubefreak. Macky says on his site that the most important part of getting faster is NOT learning more algs... it's to learn to look ahead. He says that single solving through F2L and a 4LLL can be done in under a minute (easily) if you don't have any pauses... I think he used an average of 3 tps (turns per second)

Everyone is so focused on the ~80 algs for a 2LLL, but taking the time to practice looking ahead dropped my average from 1:20 to 59.xx in 3 weeks. Practice going SLOWLY through the F2L... focus on what you are going to be doing next... not on what you are doing now, and your times will drop.

When you get bored of solving F2L over and over again, learn a PLL (until you have all 21). Take your time... it's better to learn slowly, and CORRECTLY than it is to try breaking bad habits.

The tutorial where Macky talks about taking your time is HERE.

F2L
0. Before you even start learning F2L, read this page.
1. If you've just started learning, try to make sense of each "algorithm" and group similar algorithms together. Not only will this help with memorization, but also an intuitive understanding of F2L is essential for looking ahead and using advanced tricks.
2. Reduce regripping as much as possible. This requires, among other things, being able to perform each "algorithm" from every direction.
3. Find your perfect style. Some like to keep the centers fixed; others use a lot of double layer turns and tilts (this is what I do). Watch speedcubing videos and learn how fast cubers handle F2L.
4. OK, here's the best speedcubing advice anyone can ever give you: GO SLOW, and LOOK AHEAD.
Wait, what was that?

GO SLOW, and LOOK AHEAD!
​

In case you didn't catch that,

GO SLOW, and LOOK AHEAD!!!​

 

[AvGalen]

http://www.speedsolving.com/showpost.php?p=6815&postcount=4

Using keyhole (method between beginners and F2L) and 4 look last layer I averaged sub 25. Knowing a lot of algs helps a lot, but being able to perform a solve without delays between steps is much more important

Sub-25 with keyhole? I haven't heard of someone getting that kind of time with that method before.

Video from a year ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm6mpS7XL04 (and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ-qIyScA5o if you want to learn)
My best average (weekly competition) was 23.50 and my best official average was 24.26 (http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/p.php?i=2006GALE01)

Practice, look-ahead, practice, no delays, practice

 

[tpsolver]

That's impressive AvGalen. Does using a 4 look last layer improve speed from using a beginners last layer technique?

 

[AvGalen]

That's impressive AvGalen. Does using a 4 look last layer improve speed from using a beginners last layer technique?

Thanks. It took me about 1 year of practice to get there.

Using a 4 look last layer is "the least" you should know when speedsolving. It means you have to know 3 + 7 + 2 + 4 algs (Edge OLL, Corner OLL, Corner PLL, Edge PLL) and require you to perform 4 (or less with skips) algs to solve the LL.

A real beginners method to solve the LL would only require 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 alg for the same situations, but you would need to perform some of them multiple times. According to http://www.speedsolving.com/showpost.php?p=6815&postcount=4 you might need an 11 look last layer if you only know 4 algs.

 

[tpsolver]

Thank you once again AvGalen, you're always a great help . My last layer takes around 6 to 9 looks, so taking that down to 4 I'm sure would speed up my solving .

I just beat my previous PB!! Here's the screen shot, wow 53.28 seconds!

I've been working on my F2l and looking ahead, my first solve of that session was 57.24, so I'm definitely improving .

 

[pcwiz]

You don't have to learn it all

Well here's a simplified way to learn the algorithms

1.Learn all the OLL algorithms that already have the cross. 7 algorithms
2.Learn all the PLL algorithms, the edge and corner cycles first (because you can finish PLL with only using those algorithms. 21 algorithms
3.Now this isn't much learning but If you already haven't, you should learn how to get the cross in 2 second average.
4. After you've gotten #1,2, and 3 down solid, learn the entire F2L 42 algorithms.
5.After you gotten down the F2L, then finally learn the rest of the OLL 50 algorithms

I think it's 120 algorithms around that - should take you 3+ months for everything (unless you're obsessed)

Ooh that's a lot to learn. I'm planning to learn the 4 look last layer, then possibly advance on to 3 look last layer. But full Fridrich looks way to daunting.

Yeah you don't have to learn all of it if you don't want to. I would recommend just learning all the OLLs that start with the cross #1 and then all the PLLs #2. You should probably get down to like 40 seconds average if you do your cross and F2L good. (I don't know yet because I've haven't learned them all) Since you're asking what to learn, you should definitely learn those. If you don't want to learn Fridrich F2L, then just get your F2L really fast (I saw this guy on YouTube solve the cross, and F2l (using Layer by layer) in a record of 9 SECONDS!!!! ) If you can do that in average of 15 seconds (which is probably really hard using LBL method), then you can get like an average of sub 30 seconds learning only 28 algorithms (for OLL and PLL, compared to 120). Then you MAY want to move in to Fridrich F2L and full OLL. Full OLL is definitely the last step because it'll only speed you up by like 3 seconds.

 

[JU1CYFRU1T]

Here's a dumb question:

AvGalen,
Where did you get that timer (from the first video), how much was it, and are they still available?

I have seen the stackmats... but I like the way that timer works (or appears to work based on the video).

Thanks

 

[AvGalen]

http://www.mission-designs.com/timer

It was in the shop on rubiks.com and it works really well. It also gives scrambles and calculates averages.

 

[tpsolver]

Well here's a simplified way to learn the algorithms

1.Learn all the OLL algorithms that already have the cross. 7 algorithms
2.Learn all the PLL algorithms, the edge and corner cycles first (because you can finish PLL with only using those algorithms. 21 algorithms
3.Now this isn't much learning but If you already haven't, you should learn how to get the cross in 2 second average.
4. After you've gotten #1,2, and 3 down solid, learn the entire F2L 42 algorithms.
5.After you gotten down the F2L, then finally learn the rest of the OLL 50 algorithms

I think it's 120 algorithms around that - should take you 3+ months for everything (unless you're obsessed)

Ooh that's a lot to learn. I'm planning to learn the 4 look last layer, then possibly advance on to 3 look last layer. But full Fridrich looks way to daunting.

Yeah you don't have to learn all of it if you don't want to. I would recommend just learning all the OLLs that start with the cross #1 and then all the PLLs #2. You should probably get down to like 40 seconds average if you do your cross and F2L good. (I don't know yet because I've haven't learned them all) Since you're asking what to learn, you should definitely learn those. If you don't want to learn Fridrich F2L, then just get your F2L really fast (I saw this guy on YouTube solve the cross, and F2l (using Layer by layer) in a record of 9 SECONDS!!!! ) If you can do that in average of 15 seconds (which is probably really hard using LBL method), then you can get like an average of sub 30 seconds learning only 28 algorithms (for OLL and PLL, compared to 120). Then you MAY want to move in to Fridrich F2L and full OLL. Full OLL is definitely the last step because it'll only speed you up by like 3 seconds.

Thanks for the advice. I already know most of the Fridrich F2l algorithms, after I learn all of them then I'll move on to the OLL and PLL algorithms. First I'll learn the cross OLL algs and 2 look PLL, then maybe move down to a 3 look last layer (learning all of the PLLs). We'll see.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

I did a Ctrl+F on the four pages... didn't see a single mention of the name "Petrus" come up...

That's where I think you should go. Also, why memorize F2L algs when you can just derive them yourself? After trying to memorize some, I think you can work your way in coming up with the remainder.

 

[tpsolver]

I did a Ctrl+F on the four pages... didn't see a single mention of the name "Petrus" come up...

That's where I think you should go. Also, why memorize F2L algs when you can just derive them yourself? After trying to memorize some, I think you can work your way in coming up with the remainder.

I understand how each algorithm works so it's easy to memorize them for the F2l. My friend uses the Petrus method, but I don't think it has the potential and simplicity of the Fridrich method once you learn the algorithms.

New PB: 47.13

 

[pcwiz]

Thanks for the advice. I already know most of the Fridrich F2l algorithms, after I learn all of them then I'll move on to the OLL and PLL algorithms. First I'll learn the cross OLL algs and 2 look PLL, then maybe move down to a 3 look last layer (learning all of the PLLs). We'll see.

Okay... well.. umm.. just telling you... learning Fridrich F2L FIRST isn't a smart thing to do but you've already started so you might as well finish.

 

[pcwiz]

New PB: 47.13

What?! I thought a few days ago you asked how to solve a cube faster. And you get to 47.13?!!!!!!! OMG, you've beaten my record - 47.46 (the only one I timed - probably got faster times) and OMG!!!!

Well it's probably because you know a lot of Fridrich F2L. All I know is 2 Look OLL and 4 PLLs (and yet I told you how to learn Fridrich - that's one of the best ways - how I explained it before.)

I can't believe it. One day you ask a question like you were a total beginner and less than a week later you beat my record....

You were probably lucky... my 47.46 - the only step I skipped was corners for PLL.... I am REALLY jealous....

 

[pcwiz]

I did a Ctrl+F on the four pages... didn't see a single mention of the name "Petrus" come up...

That's where I think you should go. Also, why memorize F2L algs when you can just derive them yourself? After trying to memorize some, I think you can work your way in coming up with the remainder.

Good point but if you're not good at thinking, Fridrich is the way to go. The Petrus and Roux methods solve with much less moves than Fridrich - yet they get the same speed why? Petrus and Roux need lots of thinking and many people don't like that. That's why Fridrich is the number one speedcubing method.

 

[Lofty]

I did a Ctrl+F on the four pages... didn't see a single mention of the name "Petrus" come up...

That's where I think you should go. Also, why memorize F2L algs when you can just derive them yourself? After trying to memorize some, I think you can work your way in coming up with the remainder.

Good point but if you're not good at thinking, Fridrich is the way to go. The Petrus and Roux methods solve with much less moves than Fridrich - yet they get the same speed why? Petrus and Roux need lots of thinking and many people don't like that. That's why Fridrich is the number one speedcubing method.

I think the why is simply because not as many people use it. I love the Petrus method but when I was learning I only heard about the Fridrich method so never even tried out this until after I was already pretty fast at fridrich...I think Petrus is certainly an option. I'm kinda biased against Roux since it is not good for OH.

 

[tpsolver]

New PB: 47.13

What?! I thought a few days ago you asked how to solve a cube faster. And you get to 47.13?!!!!!!! OMG, you've beaten my record - 47.46 (the only one I timed - probably got faster times) and OMG!!!!

Well it's probably because you know a lot of Fridrich F2L. All I know is 2 Look OLL and 4 PLLs (and yet I told you how to learn Fridrich - that's one of the best ways - how I explained it before.)

I can't believe it. One day you ask a question like you were a total beginner and less than a week later you beat my record....

You were probably lucky... my 47.46 - the only step I skipped was corners for PLL.... I am REALLY jealous....

My 47.13 solve wasn't incredibly lucky, but luck did play it's part. Learning Fridrich F2L really sped up my time, and I'm sure if you learned it you would probably be faster than me. At the moment I average around 1 minute or just over 1 minute, what's your average and how long have you been speedcubing?

I'll be moving on to 4 look last layer soon as I've learned all of the F2L algs that I need to know. I could learn more but that wouldn't significantly speed up my solves.

 

[JU1CYFRU1T]

Thanks. I'll check it out.

 

[pcwiz]

New PB: 47.13

What?! I thought a few days ago you asked how to solve a cube faster. And you get to 47.13?!!!!!!! OMG, you've beaten my record - 47.46 (the only one I timed - probably got faster times) and OMG!!!!

Well it's probably because you know a lot of Fridrich F2L. All I know is 2 Look OLL and 4 PLLs (and yet I told you how to learn Fridrich - that's one of the best ways - how I explained it before.)

I can't believe it. One day you ask a question like you were a total beginner and less than a week later you beat my record....

You were probably lucky... my 47.46 - the only step I skipped was corners for PLL.... I am REALLY jealous....

My 47.13 solve wasn't incredibly lucky, but luck did play it's part. Learning Fridrich F2L really sped up my time, and I'm sure if you learned it you would probably be faster than me. At the moment I average around 1 minute or just over 1 minute, what's your average and how long have you been speedcubing?

I'll be moving on to 4 look last layer soon as I've learned all of the F2L algs that I need to know. I could learn more but that wouldn't significantly speed up my solves.

Okay, my average is on my website (below my signature), and it is from like 2 weeks ago, (worse than yours) and I've been speeducbing for like 2 weeks. I don't really know what you mean by it - I started learning Fridrich 2 weeks ago. I actually started cubing in like December, then I lost my cube for like 2 months and I got another one on February 18.