Why is it so hard to solve 5x5x5 BLD fast?

[mrCage]

@Per

I think your arguement has some valid points, but I have one problem with it. I don't think there are "far" more algs to solve 5x5 blind. In fact, I did a sighted 5x5 blind on gabasoft and all the algs I needed I already knew because of 3x3/4x4 blind. So I don't think having "far" more algs is a reason.

Hi. I guess you understand my number-of-algorithms comment wrongly.

I do not necessarily mean a larger algorithm databank. But during a solve you have to use your algs many more times - for example edge-pairing, if such an approach would be used of course - this is solely an example.

- Per

 

[alexc]

Oh, I get what you mean now.

 

[Mike Hughey]

i dont know if any of yall had this problem, but when i did my first attempt i had trouble on the middle edges. I forgot to orient them at first so i had to backtrack. as well i couldnt use my normal algorithm which also made me kinda overcautious.

I think this might be part of it - people simply haven't done 5x5x5 BLD that often, for the most part. I've probably done more attempts than most people, but I suspect I'm still under 200 attempts. It takes a while to get used to the parts that are not quite like what you've done before, specifically the central edges and the + centers. So you tend to be overcautious, like you mention. After a while, it starts to get faster. I had my biggest jump in 5x5x5 BLD times when I started really focusing on doing the + centers as fast as I can - I think I was being overcautious with them prior to that, as you mention.

 

[masterofthebass]

+ centers seem to be the most troublesome for me. I haven't done a full solve yet, but during sighted solves, the + center commutators are a little tricky.

 

[Mike Hughey]

It's funny - I've always thought of the + centers as being the easiest commutators to see; I'm not sure why, but I have - I've always thought of them as easier to see than x centers or edge commutators. (Probably just varies from person to person.) However, when I timed myself a couple of months ago, I discovered the + centers took longer than the x centers, which didn't make sense. That's when I started pushing myself to go faster on the + centers, and they sped up a lot when I did.

Oh, and I'm really rotten at doing commutators sighted - seeing all the pieces out of place throws me off. I'm usually better off seeing what needs solving, then closing my eyes to actually do the commutators. (I should probably practice sighted commutators more, but I'd always rather do a real BLD solve. Probably part of why I'm so slow to improve - I rarely "practice"; I usually just solve, which is generally not the best way to improve.)

 

[joey]

I find some commutators impossible to execute with my eyes open! Especially cyclic ones, like:
L F' U2 F L' F' L U2 L' F
(took me ages to write out )
But when searching for new commutators/tricks I find it a lot easier to do it eyes open. I have found lots of tricks, I just need to incorporate them into solving now!

ps: Mike, I PMed you.

 

[tim]

+ centers seem to be the most troublesome for me. I haven't done a full solve yet, but during sighted solves, the + center commutators are a little tricky.

Like Mike i also never had problems with the + centers, since you can use the same commutators for them as for the x centers.

 

[masterofthebass]

I haven't really had "trouble" with them, but I know that they are much slower compared to my x centers. Like Mike said, he found them easy, but they were still slow. I tried one sighted solve:

Wings: 1:40.05 (parity)
Midges: 38.68
x centers: 1:58.36
+ centers: 1:51.11
Corners + Parity fix: 1:04.75

that gives me a 7:12 execution with flawless memo . That time I guess I saw the + centers pretty well.

 

[alexc]

I haven't ever done a 5x5 blind yet, (but I will soon, after I get back from vacation.) but I've done sighted solves on gabbasoft and there are double the amount of centers on 5x5 than 4x4. Then, you still have wings + the 3x3 part of it. I think that there are just a lot of pieces that need to be solved.
4x4: 24 x centers + 24 wings + 8 corners = 56 pieces (Even less because you can solve some centers by choosing an orientation.
5x5: 24 x centers + 24 + centers + 24 wings + 12 edges + 8 corners = 92 pieces. (And there are typically less centers solved because you cannot choose an orientation.)

 

[dbeyer]

Quoting Chris:
"Also, Daniel Beyer and I noticed that when we cycle to the wrong piece (this is freaky) we nearly every single time replaced a hard cycle in our, correct, memo with a much easier and faster cycle using a piece close to the real one. I find this fascinating, it's like subconsciously wanting a fast time your brain replaces hard cycles with easy ones. Seriously, this has happened to Daniel and I often enough (when our error is cycling to a wrong piece) to be freaky, and suggests to me something neat is going on subconsciously with BLD cubers' brains."

This is too true. At WC07 this was my fate on two occassions, of my big cubes blindsolved.

I had two x-centers swapped on the R and D face, and of course they were the last two faces I glanced at. That was a gutwrenching feeling, as this was on a sub 25m 5x5 blind.

For one of my 4x4 attempts, I believe it was 10-15m, anyway, my very last cycle

Q->F->C, and I saw a Fax machine with Cosmo from Fairly odd parents making hundreds of copies of things and bringing things to life out of the magazines. Good Fairly Odd Parents Episode

Anyway;

URb -> BRd -> RDb was the cycle.

The solution is DB'D' b' DBD' b

I guess I subconsciously wanted a fast solve, it was the last friggin cycle, and I was being so careful, I knew I had it all! I did b U'BU b' U'B'U

URb -> RBu -> RDb !?