definitely practice just the algs you're working on over and over, and their reverses (and the inverse and its reverse if applicable). often the reverse, or set up moves, is an alg you're going to want to know anyway, esp. in OLL and PLL, though sometimes they can differ from what you'll do with the other case. i.e., when I'm practicing some new OLL algs, start with solved cube, do an OLL alg you know and you're left with a different OLL case (call it the first OLL's pair). you can do those moves in reverse order to get back to solved and again to set up the OLL case you know, or if you know a different OLL alg for the pair, just do that alg 2x, then the first one's alg 2x and you can get some good practice on just those algs.
also helpful for me was to not even look at the cube (hold it under your desk), and see how fast you can do the algs over and over again several times, then look at the cube at the end to make sure you did it right. I know I'm not alone in saying I find it helpful to sometimes just focus on F2L algs over and over again (and later OLL, PLL, etc.). and then put it all together for some solves. good luck --Kirk --- In [email protected], "Aron Stansvik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/23/06, kirk83616 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Welcome, Aron > > > > I tried that method (printing out the F2L algs and looking at the > > sheet as I did them). everyone learns differently, but for me that > > didn't help because there were just too many and I just got > > confused. better approach for me was to learn a few at a time and > > also explore intuitively so I understood what the alg does. Also > > helpful is meeting up with other cubers to learn from them directly-- > > don't know where you are, but these days it seems odds are good > > there's another cuber somewhere relatively close. > > Okay. When learning just a few of the algorithms, do you train them > "back and forth", i.e. doing them and then doing their reverse and so > on? Or is that a bad way to practice? Should I just cube along and if > one of the cases I'm training comes up, I'll do the algorithm, and if > it's another case I'll solve it using my old layer-by-layer method? > This is what I'm doing now. > > I'm in Sweden, and I had plans to go to the Swedish Championships last > week, to meet some other cubers for the first time, but I'd forgot > that I was booked up that weekend. I'll be going to Chalmers Open > though, also here in Sweden. > > > I don't know all of the algs, but I know enough for where I'm at as > > a cuber. If you learn a handful really well, and you get a case for > > an alg you don't know yet, with very little practice you can usually > > manipulate it rather easily into a case for which you do know the > > alg. [I suppose that could be viewed as knowing an alg for that > > case, just not an optimal alg]. > > Yea, pretty often I can do that, or I can resort to doing what I did > using the layer-by-layer method, though that doesn't really count, as > the side is not layed down simultaneously with the corner :) > > > Good luck! > > Thanks! > > Aron > > PS. Do people want to also be Cc:d messages to the list? Different > lists have different rules. DS. > > > --- In [email protected], "Aron Stansvik" > > <elvstone@> wrote: > > > > > > Hello cubeheads! > > > > > > This is my first mail to the list, I just joined yesterday. I'm 22 > > > years old and solved the cube for the first time a few months ago, > > > using a beginner layer-by-layer method. I haven't started my > > > speedcubing carrier very intensively, just cubing a little here and > > > there, so my average is around 60 seconds, still with the beginner > > > method. > > > > > > Recently I started looking at improving my cross speed, solving the > > > cross in D and the Fridrich F2L algos. If any of you wickedly fast > > out > > > there can remember what it was like when you first learned the F2L, > > > and have any tips/suggestions et.c. you're more than welcome to > > share > > > them with me. > > > > > > At first I started with having the algos for the 41 cases beside > > me, > > > printed on a piece of paper.. But the last couple of days I'm > > starting > > > to think that it's better to work out them out intuitively. What > > was > > > your approach? Trying to figure them out by myself, it feels as if > > I > > > learn them better, as if they "stick" better in my head, but I'm > > > worried that often I make unneccessary moves, that could fast turn > > > into a bad habit. > > > > > > Anyway, glad I found this fine sport. It kills off time when I'm > > > sitting in my bookshop with no customers ;) > > > > > > I'm sure there are more questions for this list that I've thought > > of, > > > but can't remember at the moment. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Aron Stansvik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/speedsolvingrubikscube/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
