# TPS and the brain



## DaveyCow (Jul 11, 2013)

I couldn't really find where to best post this so please put in the appropriate thread if necessary 

Silkie's thread at http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?29266-What-are-the-best-methods-for-improving-TPS is relevant. I'm wondering what your opinions are on how TPS relates to age/mental abilitiy. I'm 37 and a 5 tps is do-able for me. For example, my F-perm (the one with T-perm in it) should be sub4 with a 5 tps, which seems very doable, but yet I ave a little over 4 with it. Now it seems to me a 15 yo would get sub 4 and even sub3 easily with this (say in 10 mins, at most, practice). So dexterity is not the issue as far as I can tell. What do you think the issue may be? Some psychological barrier that makes me have to be "safe" so that I don't mess it up or... ? I don't even know what the possibilities are  I'm very happy to know that (mathematically) it's not finger dexterity. So I started wondering (in general, not just in regards ot my F-perm) what could be the psychological issue? I think maybe there's an element of "younger age = not as much inhibition mentally". But idk what are your thoughts?


----------



## Username (Jul 11, 2013)

I did the F-perm you talked about in 1.47 (Not gonna reveal my exact age but it's around the 15 mark)


----------



## DaveyCow (Jul 11, 2013)

Username said:


> I did the F-perm you talked about in 1.47 (Not gonna reveal my exact age but it's around the 15 mark)



and what do you think the "inhibitor" for someone my age is?


----------



## Username (Jul 11, 2013)

DaveyCow said:


> and what do you think the "inhibitor" for someone my age is?



I actually don't know. It's a good question. My first thought was hand size, but that isn't really a good answer because there are many good cubers with big hands.


----------



## tseitsei (Jul 11, 2013)

I think people tend to have better reactions and/or (finger)dexterity when they are younger... So young people will be able to turn faster more easily


----------



## YddEd (Jul 11, 2013)

2.46 same F perm, 11 yo ( Then 2.18 and 2.55 picking it up)
What do you average? Maybe that could have something to do with how fast you do your algs. I used to just keep doing my PLL until it felt fast. Your fingertricks should also be good.


----------



## cowabunga (Jul 11, 2013)

A 15yo learns faster because his brain is still developing, making him more adept in learning and training. 
In your 30s the brain cells begin to die and your brain is filled with "stuff"...


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Jul 11, 2013)

2.48. About 15 yo.


----------



## kunparekh18 (Jul 11, 2013)

Me too 15yo


----------



## Wassili (Jul 11, 2013)

1.5 for me, 15 years old.


----------



## mark49152 (Jul 11, 2013)

DaveyCow said:


> and what do you think the "inhibitor" for someone my age is?


I'm a few years older than you and average ~34 with only slow improvement. Here's my thoughts on tps and age.

Fingers, eyes and brain all slow down with age. If you developed skills at a younger age, you have a better chance of sustaining them as you get older, whereas learning new skills at an older age is much harder.

Analyzing my own performance: My PLL execution during drills averages ~3.5 and my algs average 12.9 moves, so that's about 3.6tps. That's my peak tps during a solve. Maybe they will get faster with practice, but it took me a lot of drills to get to the speed I'm at, and improvement comes slowly. The algs are well embedded in muscle memory so there's no speed loss due to recall or unfamiliarity. Therefore I take this as a reasonable measure of my theoretical maximum tps for any part of a solve right now - i.e. what my fingers are capable of, provided my eyes and brain can keep up.

F2L (excluding cross) takes me ~17 seconds and typically 30-33 moves, so <2tps. Execution of F2L cases is pretty well locked into my muscle memory as well. If I could achieve 3.6tps to match my PLL speed, while retaining my current move efficiency, F2L would take me ~9 seconds. Ergo, during F2L I waste about 8 seconds on pauses, hesitations, searching, fumbling, or executing at slower than maximum tps. Conclusion: it's not just finger speed holding me back, it's eyes/brain as well. My eyes/brain cannot track or recognize pieces or coordinate finger responses fast enough to permit my fingers to go faster than 2tps during F2L, let alone reach their maximum 3.6tps.

My plan following that analysis was to focus on lookahead and aim to wipe 5 seconds off my F2L time, on the assumption that even if my fingers are old and slow, my brain is in pretty good shape - and guess what - it's really hard . My progress in learning to ignore the pieces being solved and find and track the next pair, is just as slow as my tps improvement through PLL drills - but I'm persevering with it on the basis that a "breakthrough" is more likely in the brain department than the finger department.

I would strongly recommend the Fastest Fingers Competition. This is a great way to assess the current limitations of your brain and fingers. For example, on my first entry:

Initial solve was ~36 seconds. This was reasonably move-efficient and gave me nice OLL/PLL cases so I kept the same solution for the practice solves.
After about 3-4 solves I was at ~20 seconds. At this point I'd practiced enough to know what was coming next, and eliminate most pauses. I wasn't really faster at any individual part of the solve, but almost half of my original solve time was revealed to be pauses or fumbles!
After about 20 solves I got my PB of ~15 seconds. Now I not only knew what was coming, but had practiced the case sequence, transitions, AUFs and so on to get the overall solve as smooth and fast as my fingers would allow. Unrealistic for a perfect-lookahead first solve though. Note that the solve was 58 moves so this PB was about 3.6tps, my theoretical maximum tps from above.
Conclusion: Both tps and eyes/brain aspects of solving develop slowly for me, but eyes/brain is a much bigger factor than tps in holding back my overall average and therefore gives better potential for gains through practice. Regardless of whether my slow development is due to age, the fact it's slow means that focusing on areas with most potential is even more important. 

Basically, lookahead is much more important than tps, especially if your development is slower due to age.


----------



## TeddyKGB (Jul 11, 2013)

2.42 Avg of 12 on that F-perm and i'm 28...


----------



## weirdesky (Jul 11, 2013)

Woo Teddy.
I'm curious what your guys's cubes are. Because I never broke 30 until I got a Dayan cube. And also how much you practice. I'm 20, average around 15, have been cubing for seven years, and solve at least 100 solves a day.


----------



## Ninja Storm (Jul 11, 2013)

weirdesky said:


> Woo Teddy.
> I'm curious what your guys's cubes are. Because I never broke 30 until I got a Dayan cube. And also how much you practice. I'm 20, average around 15, have been cubing for seven years, and solve at least 100 solves a day.



I was hitting sub30 using a Rubik's brand back when I wasn't aware of speedcubes(before Dayan, though). 

I don't practice a ton, but I can still average around 15 with a Rubik's brand nowadays.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 11, 2013)

F-perm was 1.90. And I'm 32.

But in my younger days I did a lot of violin and piano (I'd say semi-professional level) so my finger dexterity has been practiced. Maybe that's why I'm still able to move them fairly fast. Muscle development hasn't left me quite yet.


----------



## Cubinguy (Jul 11, 2013)

0.99 on the F-perm and I'm 12


----------



## speedcuber50 (Jul 11, 2013)

A bit off topic I know, but what F-perm is it? I absolutely hate my current F-perm; it takes at least 5 seconds, whereas my PLL average is around 3 seconds. (BTW I turned 15 the other day.)


----------



## Cubinguy (Jul 11, 2013)

speedcuber50 said:


> A bit off topic I know, but what F-perm is it? I absolutely hate my current F-perm; it takes at least 5 seconds, whereas my PLL average is around 3 seconds. (BTW I turned 15 the other day.)


(R'U'F')T-Perm(FUR)


----------



## KongShou (Jul 11, 2013)

1.15 

15 yrs old

my cube keep locking up, stupid maru lube


----------



## Schmidt (Jul 11, 2013)

R' U' F'.... Fastest time 2.00
R' U2 R' d' .... 2.50

age 41


----------



## kcl (Jul 11, 2013)

This is the one I'm used to so I can sub 1 it. I messed up the first one and got 1.88. Second one was a .93. I think it's just finger dexterity. IMO you are at your top capability in teens through mid 20s. Like sneaklyfox said, activities using a lot of dexterity may extend you beyond this range. But I mean it's the same reason young people run faster than old people. People just slow down with age. That's my take on it anyway..


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 11, 2013)

Why is everybody 15 years old?

Probably like has been mentioned in this thread, beyond a certain age, your cells don't regenerate as well anymore. I would say my muscles are "rusty". Not too badly though but not at peak age. I bet if I were still 15 I would be faster than I am now.

Edit: And I count the brain cells. I usually believe the brain is limiting factor more than the fingers themselves. About what kclejeune said about running though... I think it's easier for older people to keep their brains and fingers active than to keep their bigger muscles working properly. There's more power involved in doing athletic things that definitely benefits with a younger body. But I don't know... maybe that's just me. From an athletic standpoint, I'm waaaay out of shape. (But I can blame my prego belly for that lol.)


----------



## Schmidt (Jul 11, 2013)

About the brain: I heard/read that you peak at age 6 for the game of memory (find two matching pairs/cards). So don't feel sad if you lose to your younger siblings or children.


----------



## qqwref (Jul 11, 2013)

I believe that even into the 50s or 60s it is still very much possible to achieve a sub-15 average. It's possible that older people improve slower, but I think it's more likely that there are other factors holding them back, such as:
- lack of time to practice, compared to teenagers
- most of your life spent not moving your fingers quickly
- psychological effects - thinking you are too old/slow to have any chance at being fast
- unwillingness to push yourself and go faster than you are comfortable with
- lower neuroplasticity, making it harder to learn completely new techniques such as lookahead

My evidence? Look at professional pianists. Many of them play extremely complex and difficult pieces, which require finger dexterity and speed that is comparable to sub-15 averages (if not faster ones). However, age does not affect pianists nearly as much as we think it affects cubers. Being able to play properly (i.e. continue their career) until middle or old age is the norm, and indeed, many professionals seem to improve with age, as they get more experience and learn more pieces. Youtube has tons of examples of this.

Oh, and for what it's worth, Ron van Bruchem got a 12.62 official average when he was 44.


----------



## kcl (Jul 11, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Why is everybody 15 years old?



I'm 14.. WAT PLOT TWIST


----------



## CarlBrannen (Jul 11, 2013)

qqwref said:


> I believe that even into the 50s or 60s it is still very much possible to achieve a sub-15 average. It's possible that older people improve slower, but I think it's more likely that there are other factors holding them back, such as:
> - lack of time to practice, compared to teenagers
> - most of your life spent not moving your fingers quickly
> - psychological effects - thinking you are too old/slow to have any chance at being fast
> ...



I'm now 55 and have been speed cubing for a year. Most of the trouble is not getting enough time to practice. And then there's days when my fingers are just slow. They feel fast today... Right now my best Ao12 is 30.29 seconds which would be a world record at age 55 by about a second. My PB Ao100 is 34.09 seconds right now. But I don't think that's anywhere near my limit. I believe that a year from now I can get Ao12s maybe 27 seconds, with Ao100s around 30 seconds.

But I think the big reason why older people are slower is that they've got other things to do in life.


----------



## wontolla (Jul 11, 2013)

qqwref said:


> My evidence? Look at professional pianists. Many of them play extremely complex and difficult pieces, which require finger dexterity and speed that is comparable to sub-15 averages (if not faster ones). However, age does not affect pianists nearly as much as we think it affects cubers. Being able to play properly (i.e. continue their career) until middle or old age is the norm, and indeed, many professionals seem to improve with age, as they get more experience and learn more pieces. Youtube has tons of examples of this.
> 
> Oh, and for what it's worth, Ron van Bruchem got a 12.62 official average when he was 44.



I guess it all depends on WHEN these pianists learned to play. If they started when children, then their brain is made to play, but if they started older, they will have great difficulty to keep up when old.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 11, 2013)

qqwref said:


> My evidence? Look at professional pianists. Many of them play extremely complex and difficult pieces, which require finger dexterity and speed that is comparable to sub-15 averages (if not faster ones). However, age does not affect pianists nearly as much as we think it affects cubers. Being able to play properly (i.e. continue their career) until middle or old age is the norm, and indeed, many professionals seem to improve with age, as they get more experience and learn more pieces. Youtube has tons of examples of this.



Music is a little different. I'm not talking about finger dexterity because music is a lot more than just playing a bunch of notes accurately. When musicians are older their real life experiences help them to understand and express complex emotions so they usually become better as they age (like fine wine, I suppose). If you're too young for certain pieces, sometimes you just can't play it that well. For example, if you've never experienced grief, heartbreak, or loss of a loved one, it's much harder to understand than if you've gone through the experience.


----------



## mark49152 (Jul 11, 2013)

wontolla said:


> I guess it all depends on WHEN these pianists learned to play. If they started when children, then their brain is made to play, but if they started older, they will have great difficulty to keep up when old.


This


----------



## qqwref (Jul 11, 2013)

Well yeah, I agree that doing something since you were younger helps a lot. But the point is that it's certainly not impossible to move your fingers quickly and accurately if you are in your 30s or 40s or 50s.


----------



## DaveyCow (Jul 12, 2013)

mark49152 said:


> I'm a few years older than you and average ~34 with only slow improvement. Here's my thoughts on tps and age.
> 
> Fingers, eyes and brain all slow down with age. If you developed skills at a younger age, you have a better chance of sustaining them as you get older, whereas learning new skills at an older age is much harder.
> 
> Analyzing my own performance: ...



and



qqwref said:


> I believe that even into the 50s or 60s it is still very much possible to achieve a sub-15 average. It's possible that older people improve slower, but I think it's more likely that there are other factors holding them back, such as:...
> 
> Oh, and for what it's worth, Ron van Bruchem got a 12.62 official average when he was 44.



Very nice analysis and thoughts! I will take this to heart and use it to help me figure out my weak-areas and improve! (funny how most people just posted their Ao12 for F-perm which wasn't at all the point of the post, so thx for not doing that too!  )


----------



## Antonie faz fan (Jul 12, 2013)

.70 with skip hahahahah lol 
Real time got like .95 and I am 12lol


----------



## Username (Jul 12, 2013)

Antonie faz fan said:


> .70 with skip hahahahah lol
> Real time got like .95 and I am 12lol



With a skip? You don't get skips in F-perms


----------



## cowabunga (Jul 12, 2013)

DaveyCow said:


> funny how most people just posted their Ao12 for F-perm which wasn't at all the point of the post


Thats what you get from attention-seeking narcissistic kids who lack empathy.


----------



## Wassili (Jul 12, 2013)

Antonie faz fan said:


> .70 with skip hahahahah lol
> Real time got like .95 and I am 12lol



lolwut

and you can sub-1 the f-perm with the t-perm in it?


----------



## cubesonfire (Jul 12, 2013)

Average f perm around 3 though it is sub 3. 12 years old and I am a relatively new cuber


----------



## ottozing (Jul 12, 2013)

cowabunga said:


> Thats what you get from attention-seeking narcissistic kids who lack empathy.



Wow can you please not make ******y assumptions like that? XD


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 12, 2013)

I posted a time for F-perm. I'm not a kid. My point of doing it was to show that one can be "older" and still be decently fast.


----------



## cowabunga (Jul 12, 2013)

ottozing said:


> Wow can you please not make ******y assumptions like that? XD


It's an overstatement and generalizing but entirely untrue? nah
I don't have positive things to say about people myself included. I have aspergers sry 
Can you please stop saying ******y? XD


----------



## KongShou (Jul 12, 2013)

cowabunga said:


> It's an overstatement and generalizing but entirely untrue? nah
> I don't have positive things to say about people myself included. I have aspergers sry
> Can you please stop saying ******y? XD



Since when do we post sup 1 PLLs to show off? Only sub 1 PLLs are even remotely impressive. That's like saying people post sub 20 times to show off.

******y


----------



## IanTheCuber (Jul 12, 2013)

1.97, 13 years of age.


----------



## ultimatecuber (Jul 12, 2013)

so how old r u?


----------



## JasonK (Jul 12, 2013)

ultimatecuber said:


> so how old r u?


See OP


DaveyCow said:


> I'm 37 and a 5 tps is do-able for me.


----------



## uberCuber (Jul 12, 2013)

KongShou said:


> Since when do we post sup 1 PLLs to show off? Only sub 1 PLLs are even remotely impressive. That's like saying people post sub 20 times to show off.



Defensive much? Regardless of whether or not it was 'showing off', none of it should have been in this thread. The OP never asked for, nor does he remotely care about, the times 12-15 year olds can get on an F perm. There aren't many conclusions that can be drawn for why so many of that age group are posting their times: they want to seek attention, as cowabunga assumed, and/or they simply have no reading comprehension capabilities.


----------



## DaveyCow (Jul 12, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> I posted a time for F-perm. I'm not a kid. My point of doing it was to show that one can be "older" and still be decently fast.



oh yes meant to include you in my previous post.. I appreciate your further confirming that "olderish" people (like me  ) can still achieve decent tps.


----------



## KongShou (Jul 13, 2013)

uberCuber said:


> Defensive much? Regardless of whether or not it was 'showing off', none of it should have been in this thread. The OP never asked for, nor does he remotely care about, the times 12-15 year olds can get on an F perm. There aren't many conclusions that can be drawn for why so many of that age group are posting their times: they want to seek attention, as cowabunga assumed, and/or they simply have no reading comprehension capabilities.



Or everyone else is doing it and they think that's what you are supposed to do.

Trust me, none of us is seeking attention or showing off, I won't even go into detail about how ridiculous that is.


----------



## uberCuber (Jul 14, 2013)

KongShou said:


> Or everyone else is doing it and they think that's what you are supposed to do.



So then, a combination of having no reading comprehension skills or an ability to think for themselves. You're just making this look even better.

But you have to realize that from the point of view of the OP, these 2-second F perms (which fast cubers wouldn't find remotely impressive) _do_ seem like showing off, regardless of actual intent. If I make a post saying that I can do something at a certain speed and ask for advice or thoughts, and numerous people start posting how they can do better, without any response to the actual question at hand, I'm going to view it as showing off, even if those faster times aren't particularly impressive from the point of view of faster cubers.


----------

