# Example TPS Solves and a Few Tips (Video)



## jskyler91 (Jan 11, 2012)

I made this video for all of those cubers who are stuck at specific time barriers and would like to see the speed they need in order to overcome those barriers. Most importantly, this video is meant to be a visual example of the tps required to overcome certain barriers.The barriers I discuss are Sub 1 Minute, Sub 45 seconds, Sub 30 Seconds, Sub 25 Seconds, Sub 20 Seconds, Sub 17 Seconds and Sub 15 Seconds.

I realize that my turning speed wasn't exactly perfect, nor was the TPS I said you needed, but this was just supposed to be an approximation of the MINIMUM TPS required to overcome those barriers consistently. Please let me now if you have any questions. The moves I alloted for each time are as follows:

F2ll and 4 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 75 moves, cross+f2l- 35 moves, Oll- 8 moves (average) + 10 moves (average for oriented edge olls), Pll- Corners(A perm and V perm average) 11 moves, Edges- 11 moves

F2l and 2 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 53 (I used 50 in the vid) moves cross+ f2l- 30 moves, Oll- 11 moves, Pll, 12 moves

If you feel like skipping to certain parts, the Sub 1 minute is at 1:18, the sub 45 is at 4:33, the Sub 30 is at 7:24, the Sub 25 is at 9:58, the Sub 20 is at 12:26, Sub 17 is at 15:39, Sub 15 is at 18:03.


----------



## iShadows (Jan 11, 2012)

OMG, I love you LOL, thanks for the video mate, the other video that you post about CN, really helps, I don't know why haters say that is not useful... Thanks


----------



## masterofthebass (Jan 11, 2012)

Your assumption for F2L knowledge does not really translate to someone who is even over 30s. Its almost impossible for someone who averages sub15 to say how a person who is at 1:00 solves. Your TPS will not be accurately reflective of what is needed for someone who has a much worse F2L than you.

--Edit--
Also, you are turning MUCH faster at the end of your solves (Aperm on the sub45 example) because you are trying to make sure you get under the barrier. Either you should really take the time to practice 30s solves or not be so authoritative with your videos.


----------



## joey (Jan 11, 2012)

It doesn't really work like that, of course you can solve with really slow TPS using CFOP in 50s.. use beginners and have beginners look-a-head.. and it's not that easy.


----------



## Thompson (Jan 11, 2012)

*Can you sow a sub 10 TPS example please*


----------



## Kyle™ (Jan 11, 2012)

I'll save everyone 22+ minutes. If you want to be faster then turn faster and look ahead.


----------



## RaresB (Jan 11, 2012)

I really admire your dedication to making videos however i find this one slightly misleading once you get to a certain speed (such as sub 15 lets say) your cubing understanding and logic is much more advanced then lets say someone who is sub-1, once you have this logic it would be nearly impossible i would think to use a beginners logic. Think of it like this, once you know how to solve a cube you dont know how to try and solve it as if you didnt know how to solve it. I hope that made sense


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 11, 2012)

pwnAge said:


> I really admire your dedication to making videos however i find this one slightly misleading once you get to a certain speed (such as sub 15 lets say) your cubing understanding and logic is much more advanced then lets say someone who is sub-1, once you have this logic it would be nearly impossible i would think to use a beginners logic. Think of it like this, once you know how to solve a cube you dont know how to try and solve it as if you didnt know how to solve it. I hope that made sense


 
That true, But i think the video is leaning towards more turning speed than lookahead and tricks. To show how fast you should or could be turning.


----------



## samkli (Jan 11, 2012)

Good vid!

Of course this video wont help many to get faster. But I think this is a good video that makes people realize that they should focus more on smoothness than on speed.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

samkli said:


> Good vid!
> 
> Of course this video wont help many to get faster. But I think this is a good video that makes people realize that they should focus more on smoothness than on speed.



That was kind of the idea, but also, and I just thought it might help people to see what certain TPS speeds looked like. 



pwnAge said:


> I really admire your dedication to making videos however i find this one slightly misleading once you get to a certain speed (such as sub 15 lets say) your cubing understanding and logic is much more advanced then lets say someone who is sub-1, once you have this logic it would be nearly impossible i would think to use a beginners logic. Think of it like this, once you know how to solve a cube you dont know how to try and solve it as if you didnt know how to solve it. I hope that made sense



Very true, like I said at the end, I it is hard for me to even try to move that slow 
. 



Thompson said:


> *Can you sow a sub 10 TPS example please*



I could, but Idon't get sub tens often enough to do it smoothly.. They are normally lucky solves. Currently I could do a sub 12 though if anyone really wanted it.. 



masterofthebass said:


> Your assumption for F2L knowledge does not really translate to someone who is even over 30s. Its almost impossible for someone who averages sub15 to say how a person who is at 1:00 solves. Your TPS will not be accurately reflective of what is needed for someone who has a much worse F2L than you.
> 
> --Edit--
> Also, you are turning MUCH faster at the end of your solves (Aperm on the sub45 example) because you are trying to make sure you get under the barrier. Either you should really take the time to practice 30s solves or not be so authoritative with your videos.


 
Yeah I just watched that I lol, I normally sub 1 that with ease so trying to go slow was hard.. I was making the vid mainly for showing the general speed at which you need to move to overcome those barriers. That and to give a few tips to those stuck at those barriers listed



joey said:


> It doesn't really work like that, of course you can solve with really slow TPS using CFOP in 50s.. use beginners and have beginners look-a-head.. and it's not that easy.


 
I knew 4 look last layer at one minute. I also teach my advanced class at UC Berkeley to do 4lll and F2L and they are normally at sup two minutes coming in and leave around 45 seconds.. I don't think it is strange for me to expect people to be using this method.


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> I was making the vid mainly for showing the general speed at which you need to move to overcome those barriers.


 But you're not doing that.... You're doing slow solving when you can solve already in 14s.

I'm sorry, but this video has no merit. It's pretty much impossible to make this video well, since you can't act like a person struggling to get sub-1.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> But you're not doing that.... You're doing slow solving when you can solve already in 14s.
> 
> I'm sorry, but this video has no merit. It's pretty much impossible to make this video well, since you can't act like a person struggling to get sub-1.


 No, I but I can approximate the amount of TPS they need to do in order to solve in less than one minute. and then demonstrate that turning speed in a video entitled example TPS solves and some tips


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

No you can't.... Don't you get it..?

You do ~ 55 moves, with 1tps.. in 55s.
They do like 100 moves or something, with 2tps in 50s...

You are obviously more efficient... Think about it.

Also, the whole "Im going to do my LL algs way faster than they can do", doesn't work out.

Sorry, I'm just going to say for sure you're wrong on this one. Laying down the law, nah mean.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> No you can't.... Don't you get it..?
> 
> You do ~ 55 moves, with 1tps.. in 55s.
> They do like 100 moves or something, with 2tps in 50s...
> ...


 
I see what you are saying, and i even said in the video these were approximations, but my solve wasn't 55 moves in was more like 65 moves since I did 4lll, and I had a skip so it would have been more like 75 moves. 75 moves is not that much to ask of a beginner. Also, it is showing how they SHOULD solve and at what speed they need to do it at. I do agree that I was way too optimal though. I might redo the one minute mark and add in a few mistakes which is to be expected at that stage.


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

I would say not to redo this video, I think it's going to be too hard to make reliably.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> I would say not to redo this video, I think it's going to be too hard to make reliably.


 
It wouldn't be too hard to redo one section, plus I like to make sure that what I do really helps people. I wouldn't make these vids if I didn't care.


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

But these videos are wrong, so you're not actually helping people, even if you, or they, think you are.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> But these videos are wrong, so you're not actually helping people, even if you, or they, think you are.


 Please explain to me how they are wrong? The purpose of this video was simply to demonstrate certain tps's. I used certain time barriers as examples. I didn't do anything crazy or controversial here dude, Why is it that everyone on this forum is so jaded? Can't you guys just appreciate that I am trying to do something nice and not try to hack down all that I do? I even say in my vid and my description that these times aren't exact, I am just giving an example..


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 12, 2012)

Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

I already explained why I thought it was wrong.

If this video was "watch me do solves at different TPS'" then it would be fine. It's trying to say that people at 1min only need 1tps or something like that.

I'm not "hacking" this down because it's something you did, I'm doing it because I think it's wrong.




PandaCuber said:


> Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.


Not really. Just against the things he says.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.


 
Seriously, its like they don't want me to help out the slower cubers. I admit that this video isn't perfect, but it does the job it set out to do i.e. discuss the minimum tps required to solve at certain times given certain perquisites (f2l and 4lll and later 2lll)


----------



## Jaycee (Jan 12, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Theres always that group of people that are against jskyler.


 
Not against him, but against false content.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> I already explained why I thought it was wrong.
> 
> If this video was "watch me do solves at different TPS'" then it would be fine. It's trying to say that people at 1min only need 1tps or something like that.
> 
> I'm not "hacking" this down because it's something you did, I'm doing it because I think it's wrong.


 
I said 1 to 1.2 or .3, seeing as how a person solving with f2l and a 4lll should average around 70 to 75 moves, those speeds were correct (70/1. 2 =58.33) . Also, they will be doing their algs faster so saying you only need 1 tps on average is a pretty safe statement .


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

Ok, whatever, think what you want.

If you post videos that I disagree with, I'm going to say something. That doesn't make me jaded, or not want to help slow cubers, nor does it mean I'm attacking you personally; you should stop defaulting to arguments like that when people don't like your stuff.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> Ok, whatever, think what you want.
> 
> If you post videos that I disagree with, I'm going to say something. That doesn't make me jaded, or not want to help slow cubers, nor does it mean I'm attacking you personally; you should stop defaulting to arguments like that when people don't like your stuff.


You are wrong here dude, how can you honestly argue with mathematical facts? I do agree that I may have gone too fast at times, but I am not perfect and my changes were minute. I appreciate your desire to make sure that people don't spread false information, but this info is undoubtedly true assuming the prequisites I set are met. Now let's end this so that another of my forums isn't closed. This does not mean no questions to those who may have them.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 12, 2012)

Is it okay with you if I make the exact same video? Im not very good at CFOP, but I can still get a sub 20 every once and a while. I dont know ANY tricks or shortcut and barely know PLL. Only know 2 look OLL. So would I be qualified to make a video like this?


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Is it okay with you if I make the exact same video? Im not very good at CFOP, but I can still get a sub 20 every once and a while. I dont know ANY tricks or shortcut and barely know PLL. Only know 2 look OLL. So would I be qualified to make a video like this?



That would be interesting, although I mainly meant this vid to be a what you should do, not a how you might do it. I haven't seen you cube some I wouldn't mind seeing it.


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> [snip]


Sure, but I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

Also, x-cross for a sub-1 solver.. no? And your cross was way too good.. You did a sub15 style cross.. slowly, not a sub-1 style cross.


----------



## Jaycee (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> You are wrong here dude, how can you honestly argue with mathematical facts? I do agree that I may have gone too fast at times, but I am not perfect and my changes were minute. I appreciate your desire to make sure that people don't spread false information, but this info is undoubtedly true assuming the prequisites I set are met. Now let's end this so that another of my forums isn't closed. This does not mean no questions to those who may have them.


 
Sidenote : WHY do you keep calling posts "threads" and threads "forums"? More of the last one. 

Who says it's mathematical? Even if it is, it's not very specific. "You have to do this type of F2L with this type of LL. Those are the only requirements needed you'll be able to sub-1 with those as long as you have 1 TPS". This video is 90% incorrect (Note : just an estimate) because that's basically what you're telling viewers (what I said in quotes), except all you're really saying is "Have 1 TPS and you can sub-1", or of course any of the other time barriers you have in the video. You honestly can't know this information because *you're not at those speeds* anymore. You just made a really really long version of "Let's assume you have an average of 60 turns. If you have greater 1 TPS you can sub-1, greater than 2 TPS you can sub-30, greater than 3 TPS you can sub-20". THAT'S the math, which any of us could do. But we're saying this is false information because many people around the 1:00 mark average much more than 60 turns, and the same goes for the rest of the time barriers. It's false information because there are too many variables.

EDIT :


joey said:


> Also, x-cross for a sub-1 solver.. no? And your cross was way too good.. You did a sub15 style cross.. slowly, not a sub-1 style cross.


 
This is what I'm saying, jskyler. Since you have the mindset and cubing style of a sub-15 person, there is *no way* you can give correct information about someone with a sub-1:00 mindset and style.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

Jaycee said:


> Sidenote : WHY do you keep calling posts "threads" and threads "forums"? More of the last one.
> 
> Who says it's mathematical? Even if it is, it's not very specific. "You have to do this type of F2L with this type of LL. Those are the only requirements needed you'll be able to sub-1 with those as long as you have 1 TPS". This video is 90% incorrect (Note : just an estimate) because that's basically what you're telling viewers (what I said in quotes), except all you're really saying is "Have 1 TPS and you can sub-1", or of course any of the other time barriers you have in the video. You honestly can't know this information because *you're not at those speeds* anymore. You just made a really really long version of "Let's assume you have an average of 60 turns. If you have greater 1 TPS you can sub-1, greater than 2 TPS you can sub-30, greater than 3 TPS you can sub-20". THAT'S the math, which any of us could do. But we're saying this is false information because many people around the 1:00 mark average much more than 60 turns, and the same goes for the rest of the time barriers. It's false information because there are too many variables.
> 
> ...


 

I updated my Op to include these estimates: 

F2ll and 4 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 75 moves, cross+f2l- 35 moves, Oll- 8 moves (average) + 10 moves (average for oriented edge olls), Pll- Corners(A perm and v perm average) 11 moves, Edges- 11 moves

F2l and 2 Look Last Layer- Done relatively optimally- 53 (I used 50 in the vid) moves cross+ f2l- 30 moves, Oll- 11 moves, Pll, 12 moves

You guys are missing the point of this video!!! I know that people who are sup 1 min solvers probably do more than 75 turns, but what I saying is that they shouldn't and that if they can get their moves down to say 75, then they can sub one using 1 to 1.3 tps on average assuming they are using a 4ll and f2l. This video is not and did not claim to be a perfect representation of how a sub 1 cuber would be, it is simply Example Tps solves and a few tips (the title of the thread).


----------



## aronpm (Jan 12, 2012)

Here is a better "impression" of a 1 minute solver. Of course, it's not perfect, because I average 13 seconds. Some of my rotations and turns were a little too fast, and my Y perm was way too fast at the end (and maybe not all 4LLL users would know how to use a Y perm to skip edges like I did, but I'm pretending to be an observant one)


----------



## joey (Jan 12, 2012)

You still don't get it, it's fine.

I'm done, and won't post again in this thread.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

aronpm said:


> Here is a better "impression" of a 1 minute solver. Of course, it's not perfect, because I average 13 seconds. Some of my rotations and turns were a little too fast, and my Y perm was way too fast at the end (and maybe not all 4LLL users would know how to use a Y perm to skip edges like I did, but I'm pretending to be an observant one)



Nice.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

joey said:


> You still don't get it, it's fine.
> 
> I'm done, and won't post again in this thread.


 
It is you who doesn't get it man, I wasn't trying to imitate sup 1 minute solvers. I was showing them that if they did a good solve using 4lll then they only needed 1 to 1.3 tps to be sub 1 min. It is as simple as that dude.


----------



## Weston (Jan 12, 2012)

Until you are like sub 10, you don't get faster by turning faster.


----------



## masterofthebass (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> It is you who doesn't get it man, I wasn't trying to imitate sup 1 minute solvers. I was showing them that if they did a good solve using 4lll then they only needed 1 to 1.3 tps to be sub 1 min. It is as simple as that dude.


 
except you don't get it man... The reason why people are at 1 minute is because of their lack of knowledge, not their lack of turn speed. Thats why people improve when they get better at cubing, they get faster. There are plenty of slower cubers who turn quite fast, but are slow because they lack the understanding that you do. If your entire advice is for a person who is 1 minute to get better at cubing, then there is nothing in your video that relates to TPS. 

Please stop being so bullish in your arguments and just consider the possibility that your initial assumptions are wrong.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

masterofthebass said:


> except you don't get it man... The reason why people are at 1 minute is because of their lack of knowledge, not their lack of turn speed. Thats why people improve when they get better at cubing, they get faster. There are plenty of slower cubers who turn quite fast, but are slow because they lack the understanding that you do. If your entire advice is for a person who is 1 minute to get better at cubing, then there is nothing in your video that relates to TPS.
> 
> Please stop being so bullish in your arguments and just consider the possibility that your initial assumptions are wrong.


 
I don't get how people aren't understanding me. I am not saying that slow cubers are slow because of there tps (please quote anywhere where I say that) nor am I attempting to say that one should only solve at 1 tps if they are at a minute. All I am saying is that assuming my preqs, one only needs 1 to 1.3 tps to solve it in sub 1 minute, nothing more, nothing less. Everyone else seems to be putting words in my mouth because I thought I made the thread title and my intro into the video very explicit. I am just showing how certain tps look like and using the example of certain barriers to demonstrate it. I have seen people tell new cubers that they only need 2 or 3 tps and I thought it would be nice for them to see what that meant. I am not being bullish, I am simply stating that you guys are not understanding me or the purpose of this video. I am not going to let people say my video is wrong or useless and thus make people want to not watch it when it isn't, it achieves its own goal.


----------



## Weston (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> I don't get how people aren't understanding me. I am not saying that slow cubers are slow because of there tps (please quote anywhere where I say that) nor am I attempting to say that one should only solve at 1 tps if they are at a minute. All I am saying is that assuming my preqs, one only needs 1 to 1.3 tps to solve it in sub 1 minute, nothing more, nothing less. Everyone else seems to be putting words in my mouth because I thought I made the thread title and my intro into the video very explicit. I am just showing how certain tps look like and using the example of certain barriers to demonstrate it. I have seen people tell new cubers that they only need 2 or 3 tps and I thought it would be nice for them to see what that meant. I am not being bullish, I am simply stating that you guys are not understanding me or the purpose of this video. I am not going to let people say my video is wrong or useless and thus make people want to not watch it when it isn't, it achieves its own goal.


So all you're saying is that a sub 20 solver can solve it in under a minute with 1-1.3 TPS. How is that useful or significant information?
If we were "putting words in your mouth" it is because we were assuming that this thread had somewhat relevant information.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

Weston said:


> So all you're saying is that a sub 20 solver can solve it in under a minute with 1-1.3 TPS. How is that useful or significant information?
> If we were "putting words in your mouth" it is because we were assuming that this thread had somewhat relevant information.


 
This thread is not for people who are already fast, you already know what I am saying, it is for people who either are curious about what certain tps speeds look like and or people who are curious what the minimum turning speed they would need to turn if they were to solve optimally. It wasn't meant to be saying anything grand, it was just something I had never seen in video form and I thought it would help some people. People make completely useless threads everyday here. Today, for instance, there is a thread on someone's cube popping with an anchor in it!! At least my thread is doing something somewhat original, there have been threads on cubes popping with anchors dozens of times. I am not saying that there shouldn't be the aforementioned thread, I am just saying stop ripping my thread apart and assuming I am saying things which I didn't say when all I am ever trying to do is help people out.


----------



## Forte (Jan 12, 2012)

Ok so just so you know:
People do not like this thread because of the content not being accurate, not because of the fact that it was you who made the thread.
If Feliks had made this thread, we would still be ripping his face out.


----------



## evogler (Jan 12, 2012)

The value I find in this video, like qqwref's slow-turning sub20 video, is the point that even if your manual dexterity is sub-par, if you really learn what you're doing you can still get decent times. I think of myself as having kind of slow fingers, and watching qqwref's video really got me to stop worrying about my finger speed and just keep learning to solve the cube better. This video is like that too. It's obviously (to me at least) not a guide to solving at these speeds, it's just some inspiration for people who might think they can't turn fast enough to reach their goals.


----------



## jskyler91 (Jan 12, 2012)

evogler said:


> The value I find in this video, like qqwref's slow-turning sub20 video, is the point that even if your manual dexterity is sub-par, if you really learn what you're doing you can still get decent times. I think of myself as having kind of slow fingers, and watching qqwref's video really got me to stop worrying about my finger speed and just keep learning to solve the cube better. This video is like that too. It's obviously (to me at least) not a guide to solving at these speeds, it's just some inspiration for people who might think they can't turn fast enough to reach their goals.



Thank you very much for your kind sentiments. I had people like you in mind when I was making this video . Let me know if you have any questions about anything I said.


----------



## Jaycee (Jan 12, 2012)

jskyler91 said:


> Thank you very much for your kind sentiments. I had people like you in mind when I was making this video .


 
How could you have had people like him in mind when making this video when you were NOT talking about what he was in the first place? -.-


----------



## Godmil (Jan 12, 2012)

I liked the faster solves, was kinda useful.


----------



## Ezy Ryder (Jan 12, 2012)

Well, I like Your videos. But People who are Sub-60/50/40/30 and so on, don't need to see how fast they should turn. They just have to learn more algorithms (usually), try to make every LL algorithm Sub-3, every F2L algorithm Sub-1, make Cross Sub-2, work on look-ahead... The list is really long. But they can easily see (at least when they're shown) what should they work on. There are already many videos for "beginners" (which theoretically doesn't mean there shouldn't be more) but not too much for people that are Sub-14 or Sub-11. That's just like with the articles "Road to Sub-20" or "Road to Sub-15", but there's none for people who are close to Sub-10 but are stuck.


----------



## Escher (Jan 12, 2012)

@jskyler91: The 'group' of people don't hate you or anything, the fact that you are willing to make these videos in the first place and put time and effort into them is a good thing - and you obviously have good intentions - it's just that a few of your assertions are based on elements that you haven't thought through completely. The only reason why people are trying to draw these out is because they don't want people to be misled. 

I think the arguments that Joey has raised are fine, but please don't take them as personal attacks.


----------

