# I'm quiting speed-cubing for FMC



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

Speed-solving puzzles is no longer very interesting for me. It is rather thoughtless, I can solve a cube brain dead using Fridrich. Solving puzzles is still more interesting than ever, but speed solving sighted appear to be quite trivial. Who cares if you are at 15 seconds and I'm at 25. Training finger speed and recognition is not really worth it. My fingers are simply this slow, even with Harris speed recognition, I would still be at 20 second average at best.
There are hundreds of posts (questions and answers) about what cube should I get, which PLL to learn first, what lube to use, etc. These questions have been answered in the sites of many cubists. Speed-cubing is nothing like how I expected when I first started cubing. It just became a mindless sport where noobs ask stupid questions.
I've tried to ask more interesting questions when I first joined and few responded. Some of the few responses I got were very nice, but apparently, few are interested. Perhaps my questions required more thought and few could understand my points. I often repost to try to clarify my points. (some of my ideas weren't right and I thank Lucas Garron for pointing them out.) I was really happy about my most not stupid idea about TuRBo memo. It's nice to see that other have thought of it before too and it is a nice idea. 
Few people seem to be interested in group theories and new methods. Interesting threads just seem to die away and get replaced by the annoying questions. The one that seem to thrive is the orient first method, which seems to be quite interesting. I would like to learn it if the move count is low. I can't do that right now because I haven't touched a cube in about a week. Gelatinbrain simulator was used often.
There are still some posts in the BLD sections that's quite interesting. But generally, the quality of questions and ideas has been low and they've been answered many times. 

I don't see anyone asking about commutators, groups, parities, etc. I want to learn more about them and truly understand cubing as well as Per rather than blindly apply algs.
The commutator section of Joel's site was really interesting. I don't really have any specific questions about it, but I would like to understand some of the ideas better. So I would like to suggest a section about cube math here. I expect few are really interested in this topic. And I will soon annoy the experts by my stupid questions, so 
Some questions & comments:
1.Prove that a group of 4 is commutative. (question from math teacher)
2.Explain some basic terminologies of group theory.
3.I don't think this is off topic. This is an interesting part of cubing that deserves more discussion. There's no sub-forum relating to this type of discussion.
4.To build a skeleton for FMC, what are some types of skeletons other than just making the F2L. Can it be random blocks?
5.In a regular corner 3-cycle, how can you control the orientation of pieces (what kind of set-up moves to apply?)? (I want explanations, not junk comments symbolic of noobs that think they know everything.) I don't think you can easily find an answer to at least a few of these question online.)
6.Thanks for any replies! (expecting few if any at all, though I would hope for more.)


----------



## dChan (May 1, 2008)

I don't see why you have to burden us with this just because you can't move your fingers fast enough. Instead of writing a whole post about why you are quitting speed-solving you should have used that time to put up threads to find out answers to the questions you really want answered. Chances are, if people were not interested before you posted this then they won't be interested anymore than they were before so there is no point in making this whole post.

Also, you should not blindly put down cubers who have dedicated a large amount of time to getting fast and achieved it. They put in a lot of work and don't need people like you putting them down just because you are slower or because you can't seem to get any faster.


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

I'm not trying to say speed cubing is bad. I just think that there should be more discussion about ideas like some theories rather than about buying lube. If you (not you personally) want to get fast, practice yourself; you don't need to ask people which OLL to learn in which order, etc. Many of the questions are just stupid and easily search-able elsewhere. I'm trying to encourage people to figure things out themselves. I'm also trying to get some interesting questions about cube theory answered. Of course they are basic and obvious to a good mathematician, but I'm in the learning process and needs clear explanations. Thanks for any useful replies! (I expect 10 more useless replies on repeated questions mention above, then a bad answer here and this thread is lost forever. Some one answer? I do have questions, not just complaints, you know.


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

Also, why is this moved to off-topic when it is about cubing? Well, that's OK as long as I get useful replies.


----------



## abbracadiabra (May 1, 2008)

I don't think he's putting anyone down - he simply stated that he was looking for something more. 

Good for you, Fanwuq. I think you might find some interesting posts here . 

Speed is great, but it's not the only (nor is it the most important) part of puzzle solving.


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

Thanks abbracadiabra, you are always nice and understanding. There's only one thread about FMC. I'm trying to read the whole thing, it's quite interesting! I'm interested in “how to” and also “why it works.” I guess, I don't know, I expected cubists to discuss things that I don't understand and prove all sorts of weird things that crazy super geniuses like to prove. I'm somewhat disappointed that I understand much of the discussions. I like to read discussions about things that I don't understand, so I can learn some interesting things. I would like to see more discussion about FMC. For now, I make random comments when ever I should be doing homework.
For now, still waiting for experts to answer random commutator/FMC questions...


----------



## Lofty (May 1, 2008)

You could become one of the first to speedsolve using the Heise Method?
Any Speedsolving isn't that mindless. Try going past the standard 41 F2L cases and OLL+PLL and you will think a lot more... Things like blockbulding F2L or creating pairs optimally. Their are loads of tricks to learn in optimizing F2L that I doubt you have mastered already. As for LL try forcing and predicting skipped steps. For me knowing OLL+PLL+COLL helps. Just sometimes something simple like executing a sune a different way or doing a niklas to get a skip. Set-up moves for PLL skips... there are so many things like that.
Of course if some discussion on group theory arises I'll try to join,a better understanding of the cube has to help with (OH) speedsolving.
good luck for your quest for a deeper knowledge of the cube.
Edit: As for skeletons, I'm no expert in fewest moves but as far as I understand it you try to solve as many pieces as possible in as few moves as possible usually using things like Petrus/Heise and then look for an insertion on solving the last cycle or two. commutators... I think Joel's site was really good! I learned how to do corner cycles there but beyond that I have not thought about it much. Do you want thinks like [X,Y]=XYX'Y'? I'm a noob in this area.


----------



## cmhardw (May 1, 2008)

> 5.In a regular corner 3-cycle, how can you control the orientation of pieces (what kind of set-up moves to apply?)? (I want explanations, not junk comments symbolic of noobs that think they know everything.) I don't think you can easily find an answer to at least a few of these question online.)



I think this is the only question I could really explain and know what I am talking about. Daniel Beyer and I have studied corner commutators, and we both know optimal algs to every possible case, so this area I do know a bit about ;-)

Take this corner cycle for example:

1) R' F R' B2 R F' R' B2 R2

Pretty easy, it's just the A perm. But for the BH method we consider this an "A9 mover" algorithm case. The A means that the commutator (ABA'B') cancels with the setup move in the "A" part of the commutator. For consistency we use only freestyle commutators which are commutators where one of the parts is a single slice turn. Also we define the B and B' parts to always be the slice turn.

Ok, so there are 9 corner cycles that cycle the same direction as the particular A perm listed above, and here is how we think of them.

Let's call the regular A perm UBL->URB->UFL

Here are the other 8 cases, as well as how to visualize "controlling" the orientation.

For each case the A part is the insertion move, the B part is the interchange move on the slice. This is a way to think about why each move works. Unless I say otherwise next to a case, perform all commutators as ABA'B'

1) UBL->URB->FRU
B L B' R B L' B' R'
A: B L B'
B: R

2) UBL->URB->RUF
B2 D B' U2 B D' B' U2 B'
Setup move: B
A: B D B'
B: U2
do as B (B D B') (U2) (B D' B') (U2) B'

The cancellation of the setup move cancels with the A part, so this is an "A9 mover"

3) UBL->RBU->UFR
F R2 F L2 F' R2 F L2 F2
setup move: F
A: F L2 F'
B: R2
do as F (F L2 F') (R2) (F L2 F') (R2) F'
cancellation is with the A part of the commutator, so this is also an "A9 mover"

4) UBL->RBU->FRU
B' R' F' R B R' F R
A: R' F' R
B: B'
do this commutator as a BAB'A' commutator.

5) UBL->RBU->RUF
U' L' U R U' L U R'
A: U' L' U
B: R

6) UBL->BUR->UFR
L2 F2 L B2 L' F2 L B2 L
setup move: L'
A: L' F2 L
B: B2
do as L' (L' F2 L) (B2) (L' F2 L) (B2) L
another A9 mover

7) UBL->BUR->FRU
L F' U2 F L' F' L U2 L' F
This one is neat, it's the cyclic shift of a 10 move commutator. We call this one the "cyclic shift" case.

The original commutator is F L' F' L U2 L' F L F' U2
this commutator is:
A: F L F' L
B: U2

Now instead of starting on the first move, start on the 3rd to last move and perform a cyclic shift. 

8) UBL->BUR->RUF
R' U2 R' D' R U2 R' D R2
setup move: R'
A: R' D' R
B: U2
do as R' (U2) (R' D' R) (U2) (R' D R) R
This is still an A9 mover, since the cancellation of the setup turn is with the A part of the commutator. However this one is more like a:
(setup turn) BAB'A' (undo setup turn) alg

For the other direction of these corner 3 cycles you need only use the inverse of the algs given.

For a more general way of how to do this using any 3 corners you need to learn the BH corners method ;-)

Chris


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

wow! that is awesome! I'll print that and try to read it a few times to understand it! Thanks a lot, Chris, you always give detailed and useful answers! This is the reason I joined this site!
Edit: I just realized that my phrasing of that question is kind of bad. Glad you can even understand it!
Is there a link to the entire BH method?


----------



## Crzyazn (May 1, 2008)

Now come on....

noobcuber's posts couldn't have turned you off that badly


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

Crzyazn said:


> Now come on....
> 
> noobcuber's posts couldn't have turned you off that badly



you are somewhat missing the point. I simply realized that FMC should deserve just as much attention as speed solving. Also realized that noob speedcubist don't think.


----------



## Crzyazn (May 1, 2008)

It's all cool. Your decision to leave hardcore cubing shouldn't be influenced by any post here.


----------



## cmhardw (May 1, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> Is there a link to the entire BH method?



Daniel and I are working on that, but the short answer is no. Daniel already posted up a list of all the corner commutators, but I can't remember where it is. We cycle out of a fixed buffer location, so the corner algs on that list aren't every possible case you can get for corners. However, you can use the same idea to extend that to any possible cycle. The idea though is that BH is a BLD method, so you only need to know the algs from a fixed buffer corner.

When the website is complete we will post links to it, definitely.

Chris


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

thanks, I can't wait for it!
Just to clarify: I won't practice speedsolving anymore. But I'll still participate in it at DC open. Maybe a few sunday contests, but it definitely won't be a priority anymore.


----------



## Paiev (May 1, 2008)

As an aside: from your PM on another forum (which you never visited again ), you started cubing because of CTY, and specifically the cubers there. Say hello to the guy from the talent show 

Anyway...your main arguments against speedcubing seem to be:

1) No thinking involved in speedcubing.
2) People spend too much time working out the perhaps minor details. 

#2 is completely irrelevant. #1 is false. There is no thinking involved in straight Fridrich besides the cross, yes. There's more to speedcubing than just CFOP, though. If you're bored with speedcubing, learn something new. Learn Roux. Learn Heise. Learn Petrus. Learn the human thistlethwaite algorithm. Learn how to solve the cube with freestyle block building and commutators (for lack of a better phrase). Experiment. Play with the cube. "Understanding" the cube and speedsolving are not mutually incompatible. FMC is great, but you don't have to give up speedsolving to do it.


----------



## ch_ts (May 1, 2008)

There's a fewest moves yahoo group here:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/fewestmoveschallenge/


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

Paiev said:


> As an aside: from your PM on another forum (which you never visited again ), you started cubing because of CTY, and specifically the cubers there. Say hello to the guy from the talent show
> 
> Anyway...your main arguments against speedcubing seem to be:
> 
> ...



You are that guy from the talent show! Very nice BLD!
I have been always speedsolving by doing a combination of Petrus and Fridrich. I’ve always either built cross or 2x2x2 block, then finish F2L with partial LL edge orientation. That results in usual move counts 50-65 when speedsolving. I’ve also done partial Roux when I can’t see a good cross, but LL is always done with Fridrich algs. Heise is where I’m trying to learn about commutators at the moment. Perhaps more commutator knowledge would help with TuRBo or BH or freestyle BLD.
human thistlethwaite algorithm? What is that?
As of now, most of the time I have no cube with me. I either play around with FMC on gabbasoft or gelatinbrain for varies puzzles. Finding some simple commutators for solving them, or speedcubing on Heise sim. But my finger/typing speed seems to be reaching a limit.
I may eventually go back to speedsolving after being able to average sub-40 move count.


----------



## Johannes91 (May 1, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> human thistlethwaite algorithm? What is that?


JFGI


----------



## ch_ts (May 1, 2008)

answer to (4) and (5)

The most common type of skeleton solution (I think Per made up this term) is 2x2x3 plus edges plus as many of the other corners as possible. It can be made from random blocks as you mention. More later below...

As an example, let's say that there are 3 remaining corners after your skeleton (note that there is no requirement that these corners be in a layer). Then insert a corner commutator to solve those 3 corners (The idea of insertions is to solve pieces where it's convenient to do so. Usually this means to solve them where moves can be canceled)

After your skeleton solution (let's say that you've solved everything but 3 corners to cycle in our example) use stickers to label the cycle 1,2,3. (I use post-it notes for these stickers (bits torn from the sticky strip)) Where you've placed the stickers will solve the orientations. Focus on one facelet from each corner and the other facelets must naturally follow.

For FMC, the most common corner commutator type (the 8 moves type htm) is like:
A: F U* F'
B: D*
A': (F U* F')'
B': (D*)'
(do ABA'B')
where U* is the U layer turned any amount and D* is the D layer turned any amount. 

Also useful to know (but not used often) is the 10 moves type corner commutator like:
A: R'FRF'
B: D*
(do ABA'B')

For FMC, I would suggest that you do not use cube rotations x,y,z or moves that move the centres M,E,S. (It makes doing insertions a very messy business) Instead, do something like D=white, F=red, etc. Then whenever you turn the red side, write down F in your solution. (You don't need to use these particular colours, use whatever you're comfortable with)

When doing insertions, I like to hold the B part in the commutators example as the down layer. Note that it may be some other layer - for example, if it were green (using the above colour scheme), I would write R in my solution (even though I am holding it as D)

Other useful skeleton solutions solve everything but (in no particular order but maybe getting used less often going down the list):
- 5 corners
- 4 corners
- 6 corners (if they can be solved with 2 commutators)
- 3 edges
- twist 3 corners
- twist 2 corners
- swap 2 corners and 2 edges
- cycle 3 corner-edge blocks
- ... ?

Understanding the 8 moves type corner commutator and how to insert it will get you far in FMC. The next logical topic would be "how to find short skeleton solutions" which somebody else can write


----------



## MiloD (May 1, 2008)

fanwuq, I think you are just in a funk. The way you describe your f2l does sound rather boring and inefficient(perhaps you should actually use Petrus, its fun!). There is a million and 1 things to learn in cubing. Don't just expect the information to be put right in your face(as was the case in this thread). You just need a few side projects. Go ahead and just take a speed solving break to work on your theory. I think after a while a few new techniques will become so painfully obvious that you will want to use them in a speed solve. Getting into BLD is a great way to expand your general cubing knowledge, and have you tried big cubes? commutators? commutators on big cubes? big cube bld? other puzzes? I get sick of 3x3 speed solving on a daily basis as it is in my opinion the hardest to make progress on(because of how few pieces there are and the small time window involved). So I just go to 4x4 and 5x5 when that happens and look at me now . Just round yourself out and you will be having fun again.


----------



## fanwuq (May 1, 2008)

MiloD said:


> fanwuq, I think you are just in a funk. The way you describe your f2l does sound rather boring and inefficient(perhaps you should actually use Petrus, its fun!). There is a million and 1 things to learn in cubing. Don't just expect the information to be put right in your face(as was the case in this thread). You just need a few side projects. Go ahead and just take a speed solving break to work on your theory. I think after a while a few new techniques will become so painfully obvious that you will want to use them in a speed solve. Getting into BLD is a great way to expand your general cubing knowledge, and have you tried big cubes? commutators? commutators on big cubes? big cube bld? other puzzes? I get sick of 3x3 speed solving on a daily basis as it is in my opinion the hardest to make progress on(because of how few pieces there are and the small time window involved). So I just go to 4x4 and 5x5 when that happens and look at me now . Just round yourself out and you will be having fun again.



Yes, I think you are right, I hope to find some new techniques that I might be able to use in speedcubing when I return to it. I did try a few commutators on big cubes and many of the puzzles available on gelatinbrain simulators. I used commutators to solve the gigaminx. However, I do have trouble with some puzzles that rotation on different axes and/ or moves pieces in ways I'm not used to. Examples of such I'm trying to figure out the moment are skewb, pyraminx crystal, and the spheres. I've been successful figuring out dino cube, alexander star, gigaminx, magic octohedron...
I want to get into big cubes commutator BLD eventually, but not now. After I can find a way to memorize 3x3's accurately. 
Also I would like to get good at petrus block building. I'm getting pretty good at 2x2x3 blocks (probably consistently under 15? moves, full F2L 25-30 moves, less than 40 always to get LL Edges oriented. This for speedsolving. Going slow I can reduce by about 20%) Orienting edges I only know FRF' to orient 2. How to orient more at a time?

Well, thanks for everyone's suggestions and explanations! I didn't expect so many!


----------



## alexc (May 1, 2008)

I understand your point. I find 3x3 incredibly boring, monotonous, and hard to get good at. However, some speedcubing I find quite fun, such as 2x2 and 4x4. However, blindfolded is still my favorite, with multi bld topping the list. I like it because it is different from speedcubing. While speedcubing is just solving the same old cube for speed, multi bld is different. It is a test of memory, recall, and accuracy. Each cube is unique and different. It can always be a challenge because you can attempt more and more cubes, while speedcubing is not challenging after you can solve it well. You go do FMC, or whatever you want. Good luck!


----------



## Mike Hughey (May 1, 2008)

alexc said:


> I understand your point. I find 3x3 incredibly boring, monotonous, and hard to get good at. However, some speedcubing I find quite fun, such as 2x2 and 4x4. However, blindfolded is still my favorite, with multi bld topping the list. I like it because it is different from speedcubing. While speedcubing is just solving the same old cube for speed, multi bld is different. It is a test of memory, recall, and accuracy. Each cube is unique and different. It can always be a challenge because you can attempt more and more cubes, while speedcubing is not challenging after you can solve it well. You go do FMC, or whatever you want. Good luck!



Me too about the 3x3x3 (and if you compare my 3x3x3 speed with Alex's, you can clearly see that Alex enjoys the 3x3x3 a lot more than me! or, more likely, he's just a lot more talented at it than I am, I guess). But I'm still trying to get better at the 3x3x3 because I see it as a fundamental, much like the fundamentals that help out in sports. I still spend way more time on the 5x5x5, and I spend way more time still on BLD. I don't care much for multiBLD; I'd rather do BLD relays, because I think big cubes BLD are a lot more fun than 3x3x3 BLD. (I'd rather do a 5x5x5 multi than a 3x3x3 multi, but since 3x3x3 multis are in the forum competition, I do a lot more 3x3x3 multis, I'm afraid.) So it's different for everyone. For me, big cubes BLD are way more fun than anything else.


----------



## Harry (May 5, 2008)

I read the thread, What is FMC? BH? For Mr Cmhardw, I read the reply a few times but I can't understand...... Can you explain in simpler words, sorry if I expect too much.....

Oh yeah, actually, after a few days after I can solve the cube 3x3x3, I get bored until I saw this girl, 3 year old girl can solve it in sub-2 min. So I get challenged and I try to bet her, my average is 1 min 22...... Still far way to go until I can get sub-30. Like me Don't give up MR!!!!!!!!!


----------



## pcwiz (May 5, 2008)

I think FMC means Fewest Moves Contest - but I don't really understand what FMC has to do with speed cubing. :confused:.

cmhardw is saying something about commutators - but I don't understand him either


----------



## qqwref (May 6, 2008)

Come on pcwiz, have you read the thread or not? Fanwuq is saying he wants to give up speedcubing and do FMC *instead*. (By the way FMC stands for the Fewest Move Contest but many people also use it for fewest-moves solving in general.) So it doesn't have to do with speedsolving, in fact it is a different thing entirely.


----------



## fanwuq (May 6, 2008)

Found a nice use for speed solving. It is a nice way to relax the day before AP exam. FMC would just hurt my head thinking too much, which in that case I'd be better off just studying. I guess my quiting is not like not doing it at all, but more like not caring about it and not expecting to ever get much faster, so I won't seriously practice for speed. Perhaps more knowledge of FMC would make me see things differently in speed solving and it would nice too if I get faster in the process. That means I wouldn't truly get into FMC for another week. I still practice OH when it isn't convenient (like on the bus). It is quite fun. I would like to be one of these weird people who are faster OH than 2H.


----------



## badmephisto (May 6, 2008)

I agree with you about stupid questions, there certainly have been a lot. I get a ton at YouTube, and I used to answer all of them but recently I started to care less and less. 
anyway I am greatly interested in all commutator stuff and group theory stuff, and new methods and all of that, and I do agree with you that we should have a Math/Theory section for Rubiks cube on here. That would be pretty awesome. I am on the same boat by the way as you  I would much rather learn a new interesting 3cycle than a new algorithm to solve the F perm 0.12 seconds faster

-
EDIT: I posted about the new subforum in Help/Suggestions. I do believe it is a good idea


----------



## Johannes91 (May 6, 2008)

qqwref said:


> (By the way FMC stands for the Fewest Move Contest but many people also use it for fewest-moves solving in general.)


Isn't it Fewest Moves _Challenge_?


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (May 6, 2008)

> 1.Prove that a group of 4 is commutative. (question from math teacher)



For any a in G:

From Lagrange's theorem, o(a) = 1, 2, or 4.

If any element has order 4, then G is cyclic. If not, then all non-identity elements have order 2, in which G is obviously abelian*.

*If this isn't obvious, note this:

For all x,y in G.

(xy)^2 = e
xyxy = e
xy = y'x'
xy = yx (y^2 = e, x^2 = e)


----------



## Karthik (May 6, 2008)

fanwuq said:


> 1.Prove that a group of 4 is commutative. (question from math teacher)


Umm..I would do it this way.
Say we start with a (abelian)group of 3, then
G={e,g,g'} 
n.b-' implies inverse and e is the identity.No is we were to add another element h,
then we need to find a h' belonging ot G so that all the group axioms are satisfied.
h' is not equal to g' because then h=g
So h'=g
Thus h*h'=h*g=e
Also g is the inverse of h,so
g*h=e
So adding another element to G still keeps the group G abelian.
QED


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (May 6, 2008)

Karthik said:


> fanwuq said:
> 
> 
> > 1.Prove that a group of 4 is commutative. (question from math teacher)
> ...



Meta-Edit:

Karthik there are some inconsistencies: let me name five of them:

1) Your original group isn't closed if you can add "h" to this. The order of subgroups must divide the order of the larger group. Your first group is in fact a subgroup of your target group.
2) With that, G with respect to * is not necessarily closed when adding "h".
3) G is also not necessarily associative when adding "h".
4) h = g' in your proof.
5) You do not consider the case hg' = g'h.


----------



## Karthik (May 6, 2008)

Well yes, that was a bad way of approaching the problem.
Now looking at it, there are only two possible groups the cyclic group C4 and C2xC2.
Consider C4.Here g^4=e.
C4={e,g,g^2,g^3}
Writing Cayley tables for this group easily shows that it is abelian.
For C2xC2, g^2=e and h^2=e
So C2xC2={e,g,h,gh}
Clearly gh=hg

```
Cayley Table
    e      g      h     gh
e   e      g      h     gh
g   g      e      gh    h 
h   h      gh     e     g
gh  gh     h      g     e
```
 
This again is an elaborate restatement of what Tim said earlier.


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (May 6, 2008)

Sorry about the brutal attack on your first proof, though.


----------



## Karthik (May 6, 2008)

Swordsman Kirby said:


> Sorry about the brutal attack on your first proof, though.


Nah never mind.Thats how you learn.


----------



## AvGalen (May 6, 2008)

This forum hasn't been the place for "the math behind the cube" and probably never will be because http://cubezzz.homelinux.org/drupal/ already exists.

If that is to much for you, start with http://kociemba.org/cube.htm

I agree with many things others have said.

1) Try other puzzles (not just bigcubes but also "non-speedcubing puzzles". skewb/skewb ultimate require a very different approach because every twist moves half the puzzle), 
2) Try different methods (Petrus, Roux, Corners-First, Heise or even completely freestyle)
3) Start doing Fewest Moves Challenges. Not just for 3x3x3 though. Try scrambling a 2x2x2 or Pyraminx and don't start solving it untill you "just see" the entire solution (not speedblind, but more like FMC-blind)
4) Start doing "match the scramble". You will soon find out that pattern recognition plays a HUGE role and that doing "regular Cross, 4xpair, OLL, PLL" becomes very hard.
5) Teach others
6) (might require 5) Start doing teamsolves, and not just on 3x3x3.


----------



## fanwuq (May 6, 2008)

plenty of nice ideas for me to think about. Time to close this thread?
Thanks to everyone for their suggestions!


----------



## MistArts (May 7, 2008)

Johannes91 said:


> qqwref said:
> 
> 
> > (By the way FMC stands for the Fewest Move Contest but many people also use it for fewest-moves solving in general.)
> ...



Fewest Move Count


----------



## Lucas Garron (May 8, 2008)

MistArts said:


> Johannes91 said:
> 
> 
> > qqwref said:
> ...


Ford Motor Company?
Fantastic Manipulation of the Cube?

I agree with Johannes. Fewest Moves Challenge is most standard.


----------



## Dene (May 8, 2008)

I always thought of it as Fewest Moves Competition >.<


----------



## immortalcube (May 9, 2008)

I thought it was competition too.


----------

