# Race to Be Color-Neutral



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

First of all, I have neither the time nor the dedication to run this thread, but I really think it's a great idea. I hope someone else has the energy to run this thread.

The host posts 12 scrambles. If you have one main cross color, you will only be using the first 10 scrambles. If you are partially color-neutral, then you will use all 12. Every scramble must be executed with the same orientation. If you have trouble deciding or remembering scramble orientation, do yellow on top and red in front. Every scramble must be solved with a predetermined cross color (or bottom color). We'll use this order, skipping your main cross color(s):

RED
ORANGE
YELLOW (yellow)
GREEN
BLUE
WHITE/BLACK/ETC
If you have one main cross color:

Solve scrambles #1 and #2 with one color, scrambles #3 and #4 with the next color, etc., skipping your main cross color.

For example, if your main cross color is yellow, then scrambles #1 and #2 should be solved with red cross, #3 and #4 with orange cross, #5 and #6 with green cross, #7 and #8 with blue cross, and #9 and #10 with white/black/etc cross.

If you have two main cross colors (partially color-neutral):

Proceed similarly, except doing three scrambles for each of the four non-main colors.

If you have three main cross colors (does this even exist?):

Do four scrambles for each of the three non-main colors.

What if I have no main cross color?

Then you are already color-neutral and this thread is not for you.

Then:

Average your times (remove the fastest and slowest). Then, solve all 10/12 scrambles with your main cross color(s) and find your average. If the first average is under 1.03x (might be changed; input please) your second average, then you have passed one round. You must pass three rounds (not necessarily consecutive) without any failed rounds in between to graduate. In your first post, you must state whether you have 1, 2, or 3 main cross colors, and you must proceed accordingly until you graduate.

Please post any suggestions or comments.

Note:
If this thread is actually successful, I'll let the host decide what format competitors should post averages in. Perhaps a moderator or I can edit that format into this post.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 9, 2011)

Could you use this thread for all sizes of cubes?


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 9, 2011)

I think it'd be better to do an average of five with the same scrambles on each colour.
It wouldn't be an obscene number of solves either--just thirty--and the goal would be consistency. There would be no "graduating"; it'd be a test for each person against themselves to be more consistent with different crosses.

EDIT: I'd be happy to provide scrambles for this way of doing it. Rankings would be based on consistency by taking the standard deviation of the averages. You could get faster and more consistent at the same time! =D


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 9, 2011)

If we end up working formatting out, I'll host the thread.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> I think it'd be better to do an average of five with the same scrambles on each colour.
> It wouldn't be an obscene number of solves either--just thirty--and the goal would be consistency. There would be no "graduating"; it'd be a test for each person against themselves to be more consistent with different crosses.


 
I appreciate your comment, but I must say that thirty solves is a bit too much. (and they have to go through the scrambles twice to get their second average). Remember, this thread isn't just for fast people. Anyone can participate, even if their averages are over a minute. If someone with a 1:00 average participates in one round with 2*5*5=50 solves total, it's almost an hour of pure solving, not to mention scrambling and recording results. Surely it's too much. In comparison, in a round with 2*2*5=20 solves total, it's max 30 minutes.

Even a graduate should be allowed to participate. It just gives people a specific goal to reach, and the bragging rights that they're "officially color-neutral". It really doesn't hurt to include the graduation aspect.


----------



## TheMachanga (Feb 9, 2011)

No no no no no no. This is not how you learn color neutrality. This reminds me of language learning, or Rosseta Stone commercials. Don't learn by doing useless drills and memorization. "Solve scrambles #1 and #2 with one color, scrambles #3 and #4 with the next color, etc., skipping your main cross color." -> You're not supposed to force what color you start on, that's not how you learn, and that isn't what color neutrality is. 
You're not supposed to go through every cross during inspection, then decide which one is easiest either. You look for the cross that already has the most done, then look at the 1 or 2 sides next to it to see if it might be easier. Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people, so I think you guys might start solving every cross with the techniques of a Non CN person. 
The best way to learn a language is by acting like a baby. Start doing CN solves using beginner method for a while. Then switch to CFOP.
Instead of doing 5 averages of 5 with with a cross color dedicated to one avg of 5, do an avg of 12 with the easiest cross on every solve. If I did an average of 10 with the format you suggested, my average will be 10 seconds slower. 
I average in the low 14s, and if I did and average with just one color, I would be at 20. You're goal isn't to be able to start on a random color and get consistent solves.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people


 
What led you to arrive at this conclusion?


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> No no no no no no. This is not how you learn color neutrality. This reminds me of language learning, or Rosseta Stone commercials. Don't learn by doing useless drills and memorization. "Solve scrambles #1 and #2 with one color, scrambles #3 and #4 with the next color, etc., skipping your main cross color." -> You're not supposed to force what color you start on, that's not how you learn, and that isn't what color neutrality is.
> You're not supposed to go through every cross during inspection, then decide which one is easiest either. You look for the cross that already has the most done, then look at the 1 or 2 sides next to it to see if it might be easier. Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people, so I think you guys might start solving every cross with the techniques of a Non CN person.
> The best way to learn a language is by acting like a baby. Start doing CN solves using beginner method for a while. Then switch to CFOP.


 
So I totally was like "Yes... yes... good..." Then I was all "What is this, I don't even..." when you said the last part. The only thing that really changes from beginner methods to CFOP is F2L... Cross doesn't change. So doing beginner methods makes not difference in learning colour-neutrality.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people


Have any sources?

edit: sorry was ninja'd


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 9, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> I appreciate your comment, but I must say that thirty solves is a bit too much. (and they have to go through the scrambles twice to get their second average). Remember, this thread isn't just for fast people. Anyone can participate, even if their averages are over a minute. If someone with a 1:00 average participates in one round with 2*5*5=50 solves total, it's almost an hour of pure solving, not to mention scrambling and recording results. Surely it's too much.
> 
> Even a graduate should be allowed to participate. It just gives people a specific goal to reach, and the bragging rights that they're "officially color-neutral". It really doesn't hurt to include the graduation aspect.


 
I see what you're saying. However, the averages could be broken up. It's only thirty solves in groups of five. Easily manageable.
The scrambling aspect is good--it gives the non-CN solver an idea of what it's like to plan many different ways for a single scramble.
Also, graduating could be implemented, but imo it's unnecessary.

@TheMachanga: Switching your method just to try something starting on a different side helps nothing. I think my method solves your problem better.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> No no no no no no. This is not how you learn color neutrality. This reminds me of language learning, or Rosseta Stone commercials. Don't learn by doing useless drills and memorization. "Solve scrambles #1 and #2 with one color, scrambles #3 and #4 with the next color, etc., skipping your main cross color." -> You're not supposed to force what color you start on, that's not how you learn, and that isn't what color neutrality is.
> You're not supposed to go through every cross during inspection, then decide which one is easiest either. You look for the cross that already has the most done, then look at the 1 or 2 sides next to it to see if it might be easier. Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people, so I think you guys might start solving every cross with the techniques of a Non CN person.
> The best way to learn a language is by acting like a baby. Start doing CN solves using beginner method for a while. Then switch to CFOP.


 
This thread might not work for you, but I believe it will work for many others. Part of learning color neutrality is being able to quickly plan out the first few moves of any cross color. During inspection, whichever side "seems" easiest may in fact not be; it might seem easy just because you're more used to that color cross. By forcing people to solve a particular color, they become better with all different cross colors (at an equal rate, too).


----------



## freshcuber (Feb 9, 2011)

Not how I learned CN. I did a certain cross color every day for two weeks and ingot me CN when I came back from a three week 3x3 break. But I do agree that this thread is not the best way to become CN. The Ao12 idea isn't good and the Ao30 only slightly better. It's also a pretty useless thread since most people who actually want to be CN just start in the Race to sub-30 thread.


----------



## IamWEB (Feb 9, 2011)

I was of the impression that this thread would be an anti-racism discussion.


----------



## TheMachanga (Feb 9, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> So I totally was like "Yes... yes... good..." Then I was all "What is this, I don't even..." when you said the last part. The only thing that really changes from beginner methods to CFOP is F2L... Cross doesn't change. So doing beginner methods makes not difference in learning colour-neutrality.


 
The Beginner method was focusing on the Corner and Edges. You can do it with cross on bottom and do OLL and PLL. 



Kirjava said:


> What led you to arrive at this conclusion?


 
Getting consistent solves with one cross color...which means they can build crosses just as fast as an average CN person. I don't know how they do it, but it's very difficult to do.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> If I did an average of 10 with the format you suggested, my average will be 10 seconds slower.


 
That means you're already color neutral ;D This wouldn't be the case for non-color-neutral people


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 9, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> That means you're already color neutral ;D This wouldn't be the case for non-color-neutral people


 
When I was CFOP and went CN my average was slower by about 8-10 seconds? and white was normal.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

He was referring to his not being able to choose the easiest cross and being forced to solve a cross that might be hard.

When someone first goes CN their average will of course increase. The point of this thread is to see when this increase disappears.


----------



## minime12358 (Feb 9, 2011)

Ok, I have to completely agree with themachanga. I am 100% color neutral (always been, i never learned to solve a white cross, i just learned to solve a side ) And trust me, Non-CN are much better at cross, because CN people don't need to be. ITs always a few move cross. The point of being color neutral isnt just to randomly solve a side, it is to get an easy cross. I would suggest posting scrambles with what side is the easiest side to do it with, or let people figure it out quickly.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

All right, I see what you're saying (that practicing cross is not helpful since it's not necessary). But truly it's better to systematically balance out the colors?


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 9, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> All right, I see what you're saying (that practicing cross is not helpful since it's not necessary). But truly it's better to systematically balance out the colors?


 
Yes it is, but not your way, imo. I think that doing one scramble on each cross colour (which, in my proposed method, is implemented for five different scrambles) and seeing your possibilities makes a person more aware of what they can accomplish. It solves a problem multiple ways.


----------



## kpcube (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> Getting consistent solves with one cross color...which means they can build crosses just as fast as an average CN person. I don't know how they do it, but it's very difficult to do.


 
http://www.cubezone.be/crossstudy.html evidence to the contrary at least in terms of move count.

edit: also a difficult cross case is a difficult cross case regardless of color. So a CN person can and does identify that and moves on, where as a non CN person just has to deal. Getting good at the cross requires you to know just how much work it requires and producing the most effective solution. Also we can pretty well say once you learn a cross case the moves are the same regardless of color in my mind its more about the combination of cross and 
f2l. That being said some colors also have an easy f2l if the reconition is there something that is very difficult for those who are not CN and slows down times. http://www.youtube.com/user/badmephisto#p/u/24/I42eytmGiQE skip to 3:20


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 9, 2011)

minime12358 said:


> Ok, I have to completely agree with themachanga. I am 100% color neutral (always been, i never learned to solve a white cross, i just learned to solve a side ) And trust me, Non-CN are much better at cross, because CN people don't need to be. ITs always a few move cross. The point of being color neutral isnt just to randomly solve a side, it is to get an easy cross. I would suggest posting scrambles with what side is the easiest side to do it with, or let people figure it out quickly.


 
IMO, that way is better because that's how you would do it in a competition. At a competition, you're not forced to don't solve a red cross that has 4 bad edges, so why force it in this thread?



TheMachanga said:


> Getting consistent solves with one cross color...which means they can build crosses *just as fast* as an average CN person. I don't know how they do it, but it's very difficult to do.





kpcube said:


> http://www.cubezone.be/crossstudy.html evidence to the contrary at least in terms of move count.


 
Move count is irrelevant to this, even if a cross can be solved in 8 moves or less, hard crosses take much longer and more thinking to complete than easy crosses.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

kpcube said:


> http://www.cubezone.be/crossstudy.html evidence to the contrary at least in terms of move count.


 
lol only 1 more move for fixed cross... That's good info, thanks!



danthecuber said:


> IMO, that way is better because that's how you would do it in a competition. At a competition, you're not forced to don't solve a red cross that has 4 bad edges, so why force it in this thread?


 
In a competition, you're not forced to turn extra slowly to practice F2L, so why force yourself to do it in practice?


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 9, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> In a competition, you're not forced to turn extra slowly to practice F2L, so why force yourself to do it in practice?


 
Isn't that what you were proposing?


----------



## Faz (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> Non-color neutral people are better cross builders than most CN people


lolwut.



TheMachanga said:


> Getting consistent solves with one cross color...which means they can build crosses just as fast as an average CN person. I don't know how they do it, but it's very difficult to do.



CN people have faster crosses and better lookahead into F2L because of those short crosses. You can't argue against that.


----------



## tertius (Feb 9, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> If you use the same line of thinking that I use on that site, then clearly color neutrality is far better. I personally don't want to put forth the effort to learn to get used to changing edges during the F2L phase, but if you do you reap the benefits of very high odds of getting easy cases. If you want to stick with color neutrality I say awesome. The odds of getting even something as simple as a good cross are phenomenal.
> 
> Say you get a super easy cross 10% of the time when solving with one color. That means, assuming you can analyze all colors equally well in under 12 seconds, then you will have a 1-(0.9)^6 = 47% chance to get a super easy cross when solving with color neutrality.
> 
> ...



So from what I understand here, CN is looking for the most solved cross more than any other item in particular? What would be the second thing to look for? For the CN people what is your sequence during inspection?


----------



## EricReese (Feb 9, 2011)

It's sort of hard to explain..you just...find the easiest cross...


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 9, 2011)

I feel like the whole CN issue has been beat to death. Feliks broke the WR and the whole CN thing came up again. It's been mentioned time and time again that the benefit of CN is not *only* an easy cross, but seeing a nice x-cross, preserving a pair, etc; basically, being CN gives you a chance at a better F2L.

I think since the point of this thread is a "race to Color Neutrality," that the arguments of why it's a good/bad thing to do should be dropped, and a decided format be added.

My proposed format: Everybody does an average twice. Once with their main color. Then do the average the next time while finding the best cross/first pair combo. I know that some fast cubers (especially Rowan) are really good at using the cross to at least set up a first pair, I would expect somebody fully CN should be able to find a nice pair almost every time (since they have 4 more chances to do this than Rowan (he's Opp. Neutral). On the second set of averages, note which color you used for your cross color.

To those practicing to be CN (more than just in this thread, I hope): I suggest becoming Opposite Neutrla first, then learning the remaining 4 colors in pairs. Such as Blue/Green and Red/Orange. Learning to be opposite neutral is actually fairly easy (in my opinion).


----------



## peterbone (Feb 9, 2011)

I'd be interested to know at what stage Faz became CN. Was it right at the beginning while he was learning to cube or was he already pretty fast and then decided to become CN? Did he become opposite neutral first? Faz?


----------



## Faz (Feb 9, 2011)

Beginning.


----------



## peterbone (Feb 9, 2011)

Thanks. That's what I guessed. It must be much easier to learn it like that since you don't get used to one side. How did you know it would be a good idea at that early stage? Did you do a lot of research before starting to learn?


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 9, 2011)

He explained how he became color neutral in CubeCast Episode 2. It was because Dan Brown said to not only do the green cross, but to do whichever was easiest, so he stuck with that.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 9, 2011)

don't you think that it is better when everybody pick the color of cross? imagine that you can have two move green cross, but according to rules, you have to do blue cross (which could be very bad case).... when you're starting to be CN, you should learn to recognize easy and hard cases


----------



## amostay2004 (Feb 9, 2011)

Actually, the whole switching to CN thing only started when CN people like Faz and Rowe got fast. Before that people simply started CN or opposite CN or non-CN from the beginning.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 9, 2011)

amostay2004 said:


> Actually, the whole switching to CN thing only started when CN people like Faz and Rowe got fast. Before that people simply started CN or opposite CN or non-CN from the beginning.


 
I don't think it's bad idea, but forcing someone in color for solve isn't right in my opinion... and I think you need more than 10-30 solves weekly to be CN, when someone want to learn it, he must strat doing it at his normal solves


----------



## NeuwDk (Feb 9, 2011)

amostay2004 said:


> Actually, the whole switching to CN thing only started when CN people like Faz and Rowe got fast. Before that people simply started CN or opposite CN or non-CN from the beginning.


 
I actually started off CN, but all the guides, tutorials, ect. were with fixed cross colour(obviously white) so I thought it was what people did, later I realised(around avg. 22) that CN was smarter, but I was so used to fixed cross colour that I sticked to it, but since two weeks ago I have been practising colour neutrality, and I don't feel the same slowness as I've seen other complaint about, I'm like 2 secs off or so. I suspect being CN the first 5 months(that was as long as i stayed with beginners method) as being my reason not to be so bad at CN I suppose. So I suppose I'm a mix xD


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 9, 2011)

Well, my hosting offer still stands, but the format has to be nailed down...


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 9, 2011)

Well, one thing's certain. While we may decide to let people choose their crosses, we must not let them use their main cross color(s) for one average, for obvious reasons.

Let's say someone's main crosses are yellow and white/black. Then, they would do 2 averages: first using any cross other than yellow or white/black, and second using only yellow or white/black. We've got to preserve the distinction between an unfamiliar-cross average and a familiar-cross average, for this is the only way to determine someone's progress.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 9, 2011)

I suppose, that this could work, you should really respond to JonnyWhoopes if you can't do this race on your own...


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 10, 2011)

yes he can host. I thought that was resolved but I guess I never explicitly said that... truly sorry


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 10, 2011)

TheMachanga said:


> Getting consistent solves with one cross color...which means they can build crosses just as fast as an average CN person. I don't know how they do it, but it's very difficult to do.


 
...wha


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 10, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> yes he can host. I thought that was resolved but I guess I never explicitly said that... truly sorry


 
No problem, really. =)


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 10, 2011)

So how are we going to settle out this formatting issue?


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 10, 2011)

I think, that we should just try something and if it works, stick with it... but now it's mainly on Jon and Jonny


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 10, 2011)

Let's get a warm up started like the BLD race did. We'll work out formatting before the first round.

Warm Up

First do an Ao12 with your main cross color(s), then do an Ao12 with the easiest cross that is not a/one of your main color(s).

1)B' L2 D L' D2 U L' U D L B2 R L' U B U' F U' F2 B L' U D B L'

2)B U L F' U' F' R B D' U F2 D' L2 R D2 U2 R2 D B F2 R2 B U R D2 U' B' L' B L

3)F U F' L2 D2 U B D' R D B U' R B2 R' D2 L D2 F R D2 U L' R2 F' U' B2 D2 L2 R

4)F' L' B' U L F2 D2 R2 F L' R2 B' L2 U' R F U2 B2 L' R' U' F' R D2 F2 L U' R2 B' D2

5)D U' B F2 U2 R' U' F2 D2 B' D F R2 F' U' R' B F L U F D' U2 B L' D B' D' R' U2

6)F' L B F R2 F' L2 D' F2 L2 R F2 U' L' B2 U' B L R2 D2 U' F R' F' L D U' F2 D2 R2

7)R B' U B' L R2 D R' B D F2 D' L2 F' D F' L2 D2 U L U2 L2 R U F' D U2 R2 B2 L'

8)R' D2 B F2 D B' R B' D' L R' F2 D2 L' B2 F2 L' B2 F2 U F' R2 B2 L2 R2 D R2 D U2 R2

9)B F2 U F' D L D2 U2 B2 F U' F2 D' L R' D U2 R2 B2 U L R' F L' B R2 D F' L' R

10)D2 F2 D B F L' R B' R' D' L' B U R' B L R2 F2 D2 U2 B D2 F L2 D2 B2 L2 R' D' U2

11)B F' L' R U2 R' B' L R2 D U' B2 D2 L2 R2 D B R B2 L D' U' R2 B F2 U L2 R' D2 U'

12)U2 F D R2 F D' L2 R' D2 B2 F2 L2 U L2 U' B D U B2 F2 L' R D U L U2 B L B' L2


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 10, 2011)

just for clearing up... fist we do Ao12 normally, then same scrambles CN (order doesn't matter) and then compare, ok?


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 10, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> Let's get a warm up started like the BLD race did. We'll work out formatting before the first round.


 
Yah, lets try out a few formats and find which one works, then I'll get this thing running officially.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 10, 2011)

Ok, so here it goes:
*White corsses*
28,38
31,75
23,86
21,42
28,92
24,80
25,17
25,75
21,55
17,78 (OLL skip, my PB is 0,06s lower )
23,22
23,88
*Ao12=24,70*

*Color neutral*
40,38 yellow
31,39 green
34,68 blue
45,61 green
41,50 orange
35,42 green
36,91 red
35,78 blue
24,62 green (lucky x-cross )
29,97 orange
35,31 orange
38,14 red
*Ao12=35,97*

I have to improve a lot


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 11, 2011)

*White*
40.49
39.01
41.71
41.26
36.84
36.68
44.45
45.01
40.80
41.76
46.90
42.17
*Average:41.35*

*Color Neutral*


1. (3:14.03) 
2. 2:11.94 
3. 1:25.54 
4. 1:07.58 
5. 1:09.93 
6. 1:33.77 
7. 1:44.58 
8. 1:44.24 
9. (43.97) 
10. 1:24.84
11. 1:49.53
12. 46.98

*Average:1:34.08*


----------



## qqwref (Feb 11, 2011)

If you want to be color neutral, the end goal is to not care at all what color you use. Ideally, the cross color wouldn't affect the later parts of the solve at all. Once you're good enough at CN, it should actually be a little easier to use the best color than to use the same color each time, because you get easier starts.

To determine your CN progress, you'll need to compare the times of an average with the best cross and an average with a fixed color (or two colors)... but the problem is that to become CN you need to be spending a lot more time doing best-color crosses than you spend doing fixed-color crosses. Plus, deliberately avoiding your favorite color will actually _hinder_ your progress! So I like the idea of doing a fixed-color average and a best-color average and comparing how you do on each, but it's important to know that you won't become more CN unless almost all your solves outside the race are done starting with the best color. It's not like a "Race to be Sub-X" type of thread where you can actually improve just by doing those solves.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 11, 2011)

qqwref said:


> It's not like a "Race to be Sub-X" type of thread where you can actually improve just by doing those solves.


 
You could say, though, that it's a race to a sub 2 (or whatever it will be) difference between CN and regular solves.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 11, 2011)

qqwref said:


> If you want to be color neutral, the end goal is to not care at all what color you use. Ideally, the cross color wouldn't affect the later parts of the solve at all. Once you're good enough at CN, it should actually be a little easier to use the best color than to use the same color each time, because you get easier starts.
> 
> To determine your CN progress, you'll need to compare the times of an average with the best cross and an average with a fixed color (or two colors)... but the problem is that to become CN you need to be spending a lot more time doing best-color crosses than you spend doing fixed-color crosses. Plus, deliberately avoiding your favorite color will actually _hinder_ your progress! So I like the idea of doing a fixed-color average and a best-color average and comparing how you do on each, but it's important to know that you won't become more CN unless almost all your solves outside the race are done starting with the best color. It's not like a "Race to be Sub-X" type of thread where you can actually improve just by doing those solves.


 
it's exactly like race to sub-x, you wouldn't get sub-30 if you'd do just 12 solves per week... but I totally agree with you, and as I'm slow in OH and I'm practicing it a lot lately, I thought I'll improve these two at once


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 11, 2011)

qqwref said:


> If you want to be color neutral, the end goal is to not care at all what color you use. Ideally, the cross color wouldn't affect the later parts of the solve at all. Once you're good enough at CN, it should actually be a little easier to use the best color than to use the same color each time, because you get easier starts.
> 
> To determine your CN progress, you'll need to compare the times of an average with the best cross and an average with a fixed color (or two colors)... but the problem is that to become CN you need to be spending a lot more time doing best-color crosses than you spend doing fixed-color crosses. Plus, deliberately avoiding your favorite color will actually _hinder_ your progress! So I like the idea of doing a fixed-color average and a best-color average and comparing how you do on each, but it's important to know that you won't become more CN unless almost all your solves outside the race are done starting with the best color. It's not like a "Race to be Sub-X" type of thread where you can actually improve just by doing those solves.


 
Agreed, however, this "race" could be more of a "progress checker" of sorts.

On that note, I believe that progress should be noted in standard deviation, not actual speed.


----------



## uberCuber (Feb 11, 2011)

White Cross
20.05
17.82
20.03
16.11
19.94
16.38
16.37
18.40
13.57
19.63
18.19
20.64

Avg12 = 18.29 (standard deviation 1.52).......wtfail :fp

Color Neutral
27.42 Green
21.33 Green
23.52 Orange
20.88 Blue
18.61 Orange
17.36 Yellow
24.09 Orange
20.62 Red
20.22 Red
18.82 Yellow
24.94 Blue
30.71 Orange

avg12 = 22.04 (standard deviation 2.70)



there would normally be a bigger difference between white cross and non-white cross, but that avg12 with white cross was absolutely abominable


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 11, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> Agreed, however, this "race" could be more of a "progress checker" of sorts.
> 
> On that note, I believe that progress should be noted in standard deviation, not actual speed.


 
but you could have aproximatly the same standard deviation, but about 10s better white cross than others...


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 12, 2011)

Ordos_Koala said:


> but you could have aproximatly the same standard deviation, but about 10s better white cross than others...


 
I agree, standard deviation doesn't check progress, because it doesn't take speed into account.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 12, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> I agree, standard deviation doesn't check progress, because it doesn't take speed into account.


 
Ok, two (non argumentative) things. First, I was horrible at clarifying. I meant take your dominant cross average, and find the standard deviation of your CN solves to that. Second, colour neutrality has nothing to do with speed. It has to do with being consistent in all your solves no matter what colour you solve on.

But, meh.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 12, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> Ok, two (non argumentative) things. First, I was horrible at clarifying. I meant take your dominant cross average, and find the standard deviation of your CN solves to that. Second, colour neutrality has nothing to do with speed. It has to do with being consistent in all your solves no matter what colour you solve on.
> 
> But, meh.


 
I understood it that you wanted to take SD from white cross and compare it with SD of CN solves... that way you could have consitent solves with others than white, but white still ten secs better
btw the original idea seemed nice to me:
k*(white cross average)>(CN average)
k is number higher than 1, I really don't know what it should be


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Feb 12, 2011)

Logically it should be 6/5 as there are 6 different colors to choose from against having to do one of them. Therefore probablility tells us that 1/6th of the Solves would have a white as the best case, so 10/12 solves wouldn't so the inverse of that is 12/10 or 6/5.
Please don't attack me if this is considered way off the mark...


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 12, 2011)

Ordos_Koala said:


> I understood it that you wanted to take SD from white cross and compare it with SD of CN solves... that way you could have consitent solves with others than white, but white still ten secs better
> btw the original idea seemed nice to me:
> k*(white cross average)>(CN average)
> k is number higher than 1, I really don't know what it should be


 
Haha, told you I'm horrible at clarifying. What I meant was not comparing SD of both averages. I meant that when calculating SD for the non-dominant average, you calculate it compared to the dominant average. Haha, that's probably still not clear enough.


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Feb 12, 2011)

Deviation is a masure of spread, not speed, so you could be really consistent on both but a lot slower on CN, meaning that its not really better for you. I think times should definetly have something to do with it, after all, you are trying to get faster.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 12, 2011)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> Deviation is a masure of spread, not speed, so you could be really consistent on both but a lot slower on CN, meaning that its not really better for you. I think times should definetly have something to do with it, after all, you are trying to get faster.


 
I am aware... Haha. Ok, so if I understand correctly, SD is taking the average of the absolute value of the difference between each solve and the average. So, you would mark progress by creating a SD of the difference between the solves in the non dominant average, to the dominant average. So, we're comparing the the deviation between the two averages, not between the solves in their respective averages.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 12, 2011)

well I don't get it, but it could be just as well because english isn't my native language... I guess you could try it on example


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Feb 12, 2011)

I think i get it, you are trying to see if the CN solves are more consistent, and then speed will come with time. Have I got it right?


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 12, 2011)

MaeLSTRoM said:


> I think i get it, you are trying to see if the CN solves are more consistent, and then speed will come with time. Have I got it right?


 
::EDIT:: Just been informed that I'm using improper definitions, thanks JonWhite. Only read further if you're curious. ::EDIT::

Haha, man I can't explain for squat...

Kay, example. Let's take two Avg5. 

15.00, 15.00, 10.00, 22.00, 15.00 = 15.00 (SD = 2.40)
30.00, 30.00, 23.00, 40.00, 30.00 = 30.00 (SD = 3.40)

Okay. Now, the SD I'm proposing would be calculated by taking the standard deviation of the difference between the higher average's solves, and the faster average's average. So, since the average of the first average is 15.00, the first solve of the higher average has a 15.00 deviation. Do that for all the solves: 15.00 + 15.00 + 8.00 + 25.00 + 15.00 = 78.00. Now, we divide 78.00 by 5 to find the standard deviation. 78.00/5 = 15.60. THAT is the SD I'm saying we should mark progress by, the deviation of colour neutrality to the average of the dominant colour.


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 12, 2011)

I hope I got your point now  we should try it, it looks good to me


----------



## uberCuber (Feb 12, 2011)

Ordos_Koala said:


> I hope I got your point now  we should try it, it looks good to me


 
Were you trying to fix it? because he had it correct in the first place


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 12, 2011)

oh, sry, my bad  but I know what he meant


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 13, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> Haha, man I can't explain for squat...
> 
> Kay, example. Let's take two Avg5.
> 
> ...



First of all, what you propose is in no way a standard deviation. wikipedia

Second, why are we using the best/worst times in your calculation? We should leave them out. What happens if one solve just sucks? What about DNF? We should not include the best/worst times.

Assuming we do not include those times, this is equivalent to finding the differences of the two averages (Algebra skills win). Clearly this is not what we want; a slower average should allow a higher difference of averages.

We need to use a sort of percent error: \( \frac{Average_{1} - Average_{2}} {Average_{2}} \), where the first average is unfamiliar and the second is familiar.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 13, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> First of all, what you propose is in no way a standard deviation. wikipedia
> 
> Second, why are we using the best/worst times in your calculation? We should leave them out. What happens if one solve just sucks? What about DNF? We should not include the best/worst times.
> 
> ...


 
*Gives large shrug* I could care less if I'm using the correct terms honestly. I'll just have to scratch that definition of SD from my mind. Lulz. Thanks for the correction.

This is why I've stayed out of the conversation thus far, and only offered to host if help was needed. I don't actually know much haha. I'm just a "jock" who cubes.


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 13, 2011)

Dominant cross colour = white
White average: 18.24 (σ = 1.12)


Spoiler



times:
19.87, 16.12, 19.19, 19.15, 17.80, 16.00, 17.99+, 19.71, 17.14, 19.41, 18.70, 17.22
stats:
number of times: 12/12
best time: 16.00
worst time: 19.87

current avg5: 18.44 (σ = 0.91)
best avg5: 17.64 (σ = 0.36)

current avg12: 18.24 (σ = 1.12)
best avg12: 18.24 (σ = 1.12)

session avg: 18.24 (σ = 1.12)
session mean: 18.19



"The rest" average: 20.23 (σ = 0.98)


Spoiler



times:
21.34[Yerrow.], 18.36[Red.], 20.10[Orange.], 19.49[Green.], 20.35[Yerrow.], 18.99[Red.], 21.25[Red.], 21.50[Green.], 17.79[Green with double x-cross. =3], 21.40[Orange.], 20.79[Blue, for once.], 20.20 [Orange.]
stats:
number of times: 12/12
best time: 17.79
worst time: 21.50

current avg5: 20.80 (σ = 0.49)
best avg5: 19.53 (σ = 0.45)

current avg12: 20.23 (σ = 0.98)
best avg12: 20.23 (σ = 0.98)

session avg: 20.23 (σ = 0.98)
session mean: 20.13



The regs for warmup are nice, imo. I think this is how to train most efficiently for CN now.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 16, 2011)

So when is the testing phase over? Do we agree on a format?


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 17, 2011)

*Results of Warmup*​
Note that green represents a lesser difference than last round. All of the differences are green because there was no last round.






Are there any other formats to try before beginning this race formally?


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 17, 2011)

Once again, I strongly suggest we use a percent difference: \( \frac{Average_{1} - Average_{2}} {Average_{2}} \), where the first average is unfamiliar and the second is familiar.

Simply taking the difference is more lenient on faster cubers, and extremely hard for slow (1min+) cubers. It's the percent difference that matters. We just have to decide what percent is "acceptable".


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 17, 2011)

\( \frac{Average_{1} - Average_{2}} {Average_{2}} \)

Just to be clear Jon, average 1 is the CN average and average 2 is the regular average?

Warmup #2: Use the above format.
1. D' U B2 L2 U2 R2 U2 L2 R' F' L R2 B L2 R B R D' F2 D' U2 L' U2 B2 F	
2. D2 U2 L2 U2 F2 R' B' F2 L2 R B U' F U B F' L R' U2 B' D' U2 F L' R2	
3. U B2 F' D' U B' L2 F U B' R2 U' R F R' F2 L R2 B' D2 L F' L' D F	
4. U R U B2 U F' R' B' D2 U F' R U' R2 D L2 R2 B' L B2 L F2 L2 F' L	
5. D2 U' B' F2 L' B2 F2 L B' D' U B' F U L2 D F' L U B U2 F' L F U2	
6. L B' D L2 R' F2 R2 D2 L' B2 D' R D2 U B L2 R F R B' L' U' B' L2 D2	
7. D F U' L R D U' R' B2 F L' B2 L R' D2 B' L' B2 F R2 B L2 B' L B	
8. R D U' R' D' U' L2 B' U2 L F2 D R2 F D2 U R' B' D2 U' F' U' R' B' F'	
9. U2 L2 B2 D' U2 R U2 B' F' R2 F' U2 F' U' R' F R2 B2 U L' R' U L' U2 L2	
10. R' U2 B' D F' D2 B2 F2 R' D U2 B U' B2 F2 L2 U2 R' B' R' U' F U' R' D2	
11. L B' R D' L2 R F' D' B' F2 R' U2 B' F' U2 L U2 B F R2 D' B' U R F'	
12. U2 F' R F2 R U L' R' B2 D U' B2 R D B2 L2 F U' R' B2 F2 L U' B' F2


----------



## Erzz (Feb 18, 2011)

Two questions. One: Why are those scrambles so long. Two: Are we allowed to use our main cross colour in the CN solves?


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 18, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> Just to be clear


 
you are correct, sir ;D


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 18, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> one: thanks for noticing: fixed
> two: no, you can't use your main colour in the CN solves


 
Doesn't that defeat the purpose of being color neutral, to take the easiest/fastest crosses?


----------



## Erzz (Feb 18, 2011)

Yellow Cross Ao12: 25.76, with a SD of 3.42
27.50 26.79 28.30 (20.92[PLL Skip, no AUF]) 25.85 24.23 31.35 25.24 23.14 21.56 (32.41) 23.65[X-cross]

CN Ao12: 29.48, with a SD of 4.17
18.46[PLL Skip] 24.83 29.30 27.65 33.93 32.48 32.14 24.93 31.14 30.20 30.39 31.75

Result: (29.48 - 25.76)/25.76 = 0.1442, multiply that by 100 for percent and it gives *14.42%* difference.


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 18, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of being color neutral, to take the easiest/fastest crosses?


 
It does, very slightly (less than 1/6 chance, for some crosses may be equally easy). However, it causes major problems:

First, that particular scramble would be meaningless in the second average, since it would essentially be a rehearsed solve. 

Second, we're trying to make a system that can't be easily abused. What if someone solved with his main cross on every CN solve? If we allow main cross color on the CN average, he would have undoubtedly cheated without having broken any rules at all.


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 18, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> It does, very slightly (less than 1/6 chance, for some crosses may be equally easy). However, it causes major problems:
> Second, we're trying to make a system that can't be easily abused. What if someone solved with his main cross on every CN solve? If we allow main cross color on the CN average, he would have undoubtedly cheated without having broken any rules at all.


 
What did they win by cheating? besides the fact that they didn't improve?


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 18, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> Are you still arguing your point? Its hard to tell...


 
Trying to say that there is no point in cheating because that would be pointless...

Could I join even though im block color neutral.
Wanted to work on pseudo blocks?


----------



## JonWhite (Feb 18, 2011)

giving noobs the right to say "I am officially color-neutral because I graduated from the 'Race to be Color-Neutral' Thread", and thus invalidating this thread's reputation and status


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 18, 2011)

Okay guys, wanted to run something by you guys. Hows this for a progress tracker/weekly results? Suggestions?






::EDIT:: Anybody know how to put images inline?


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 18, 2011)

*Ranzha's Warm-up #2*

Fixed cross: 17.96 (WHAT HOW DID I DO THIS)


Spoiler



times:
17.40, 22.75, 15.98, 17.81, 17.66, 18.46, 14.43, 21.23, 18.72, 17.92, 17.82, 16.64

stats:
number of times: 12/12
best time: 14.43
worst time: 22.75

current avg5: 18.15 (σ = 0.40)
best avg5: 17.15 (σ = 0.83)

current avg12: 17.96 (σ = 1.33)
best avg12: 17.96 (σ = 1.33)

session avg: 17.96 (σ = 1.33)
session mean: 18.07



The rest: 19.32


Spoiler



times:
19.95[Yerrow.], 18.48[Red.], 16.53[Yellow. =D], 19.77[Green. Ew.], 19.50[Green.], 16.45[Red. =DDD], 21.66+[Orange. >_<"], 20.78[Yerrow.], 18.20[Blue.], DNF(20.77)[Red. RageDNF.], 18.43[Green.], 19.87[Blue.]

stats:
number of times: 11/12
best time: 16.45
worst time: 21.66

current avg5: 19.69 (σ = 0.97)
best avg5: 18.17 (σ = 1.23)

current avg12: 19.32 (σ = 1.38)
best avg12: 19.32 (σ = 1.38)

session avg: 19.32 (σ = 1.38)
session mean: 19.06



\( \frac{19.32 - 17.96}{17.96} \) = 7.572% difference.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 18, 2011)

Okay guys, what are we deciding for the "acceptable" percentile range?


----------



## JonWhite (Mar 3, 2011)

i say 3% difference?


----------



## Elbeasto94 (Mar 3, 2011)

JonWhite said:


> i say 3% difference?


 
How about 1%, I know it kind of sounds ridiculous, but the point is to be color neutral not kinda sorta color neutral, and the point of color neutral is to be faster than with just one set color. Also, to eliminate confusion, if anyone gets a negative percentage, that means they are better cn than on one set color.


----------



## JonWhite (Mar 5, 2011)

any other percent opinions? come on, you guys need to speak up


----------



## y235 (Mar 5, 2011)

I am opposite color nuetral (Yellow, White).
CN Avg of 12:
current avg12: 40.55 (σ = 4.61)


Spoiler



:33.79, (31.20), 47.12, 43.85, 45.73, 44.94, (49.90), 40.79, 38.21, 38.67, 39.32, 33.06


Regular Avg of 12: 27.62 (σ = 2.88)


Spoiler



:33.53, 25.96, (36.56), 26.69, 29.28, 26.83, 26.34, 30.07, (19.32), 22.23, 26.11, 29.14
Got pop on the 3rd one.


(40.55-27.62)/27.62= 46.8%


----------



## JonWhite (Mar 5, 2011)

btw that's not 0.468%, it's 46.8%.


----------

