# Suddenly you realize there is an easier way, and it was staring you in the face



## Kattenvriendin (Jun 30, 2012)

I just thought of myself as a big goof. That I didn't SEE it.. unbelievable. It was like a light went on.

I was looking at the vid by cyoubx, sune and fatsune (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq3cC6wgEGg <-- that one), just reading and watching some OLL and I realize I already do the sune *giggles*

What I DIDN'T realize was that when the last layer wasn't oriented properly I'd rotate the cube entire, and watching that vid just now right up to 5min 48secs into it made me go: oh shoot I can rotate the layer itself, it won't affect anything!

:fp

I wonder what this is going to do to my times now, I mean every time I rotate the entire cube in my hands it takes a second or so. 

MAN how goofy that I didn't see it before! All this time I have been solving that cube on autopilot, thank goodness for youtube hahaha.



So.. anyone else have a similar situation happen where you simply don't see there is an easier way while it was staring you in the face the whole time?


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 30, 2012)

I used to do [[F'R:d2],U] then L2E instead of just [F2 r2:[F' R' F, M2]].

>_<


----------



## Endgame (Jun 30, 2012)

I don't see how you would want to learn to solve OLL using only Sune and its derivatives.. 2-look OLL is easier to grip and faster to execute in my opinion.

Anyway, it took me a while to realise the PLL I couldn't solve was an E-permutation. :fp






I realised my problem when I was watching RiDi's Hunting Story and spotted this video in the related videos tab:






RiDi is my saviour, lol.


----------



## FinnGamer (Jun 30, 2012)

had the same realization a few months ago. I always did y instead of U until I saw a walkthrough solve


----------



## aaronb (Jun 30, 2012)

5x5 edge pairing. 
On the last 4 edges, I was performing 5 or 6 parities, and pairing pieces one at a time. I eventually realized how you could do a slice move, flip the tredge, and undo the slice move to pair the L4E.
Before the realization, L4E took almost 1:30, after the realization, the L4E can't take much more than 25 seconds for me.


----------



## drogg (Jun 30, 2012)

I spent a good two months learning F2L and NEVER touching my left (non-dominant) hand until I saw a badmephisto f2l video (?sp) who inserted with his left hand and I almost fell off my chair!


----------



## ~Adam~ (Jun 30, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I used to do [[F'R:d2],U] then L2E instead of just [F2 r2:[F' R' F, M2]].
> 
> >_<



I've been giggling away for a good 30 seconds.


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jun 30, 2012)

Endgame said:


> I don't see how you would want to learn to solve OLL using only Sune and its derivatives.. 2-look OLL is easier to grip and faster to execute in my opinion


Might be true, but I am not cubing for speed, I am cubing for fun mostly. Learning new things, whether ideal or not at the time , is what is key for me  Regardless what they are and regardless the order they come along on my path


----------



## ben1996123 (Jun 30, 2012)

Used to do (M' U')4 instead of U' M2 U' M' U' M' for LSE lol


----------



## Dene (Jun 30, 2012)

I had a massive duh moment recently, and it was all thanks to my practising gigaminx. I'm not sure of the quickest way to set it up, but this works: take a 5x5 and do Rw' U2 Rw U Rw U' Rw'. This leaves the top centre with a 2x2 block, with a convenient 1x2 block on the front centre. For the past 5 years, when I was confronted with this I would proceed by going U Rw U Rw' to make the 2x3 block, when that first U is completely unnecessary. MAJOR FACEPALM EXPLOSION :fp . It's funny that I only noticed this when I was looking for ways to trim down my move count on gigaminx because each move wasted is a lot of time.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 30, 2012)

When I get CMLL skip, im like duhhh....and after 7 seconds i realize...


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 30, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> Used to do (M' U')4 instead of U' M2 U' M' U' M' for LSE lol



M2 U M' U M' is even shorter


----------



## ben1996123 (Jun 30, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> M2 U M' U M' is even shorter



I'm faster at U' M2 U' M' U' M' though.


----------



## Aero (Jun 30, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> Used to do (M' U')4 instead of U' M2 U' M' U' M' for LSE lol


i wasnt aware of this lol thank you


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 30, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> I'm faster at U' M2 U' M' U' M' though.



you can do U' M2 U' faster than M2 U ?!


----------



## Ranzha (Jun 30, 2012)

That whole moment when I realised how to do Petrus EO effectively.


----------



## cubernya (Jun 30, 2012)

I interpreted the title of the thread as stuff like this:
Setup U L2 D' R B2 R' D L U2 L
Orient the cube optimally (R U R' U')

Anyway, yeah. The F2L case (solved with) R U R' F R U R' U' F' R U' R' I used to do R U R' U' F' U F U2 F' U' F U y' R' U' R, or something similar


----------



## sa11297 (Jun 30, 2012)

Learning BH and 4x4 centers, I learned commutators, and occasionally I use them to solve other things. 
Also, when I was trying to solve my pillowed master pyramorphinx (I think that is what it is called).


----------



## cmhardw (Jun 30, 2012)

Definitely the moment I first "got" commutators. I had read this site several times and was trying to see if any algorithms I was using were of the form of a commutator. I remember looking at the A perm: R' F R' B2 R F' R' B2 R2 and realizing that it was (R2) (R F R') (B2) (R F' R') (B2) (R2) or rather R2 [R F R', B2] R2

I totally freaked out when I "saw" it. I felt like it had been staring me in the face the whole time, and I had just never seen it.


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jun 30, 2012)

R' F R' B2 R 
F' R' B2 R2

I know that one and apply it every time. 

Unfortunately I am not experienced enough with the notation to actually read the ( ) and [ ] parts proper, because when I do the (R2) (R F R') (B2) (R F' R') (B2) (R2) I simply do them without the ( ) (not a clue what those do) and it seems just as long to do. There must be something to it that I am obviously missing!

http://www.speedcubing.com/moves.html <--- got that down I think, but the rest with the brackets and parentheses are a mystery.

Would appreciate a link to where that is explained as I can't find it. Can someone help me with that? Thanks


----------



## MarcelP (Jun 30, 2012)

Kattenvriendin said:


> I was looking at the vid by cyoubx, sune and fatsune (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq3cC6wgEGg <-- that one), just reading and watching some OLL



Hi Kattenvriendin, I was really impressed with your average of 5. I can't manage that although I have a better PB than you  Today I had a few 1:11 and 1:14 and 1:17 but also a few around 1:40 and 1:50.. Do you have youtubes of your solves? I recon we are at same expertise level so it might be fun to see. anyway, I watched this video that you mentioned. I first did also alone the sune stuff. But now I have been doing the badmephisto 2 look OLL and 2 look PLL. I can do them without looking at the paper where I have the algorithms and I am getting fatster at it. I would highly recommend you start to do it as well. It is a step up to full OLL and full PLL if you ever want to be really fast. (and in my dreams I really want that  )


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jun 30, 2012)

Thank you! 

I am doing the advanced white cross, then F2L for the .. well obvious.. heh. Then the youtube vid thing to get the yellow top.

Where I am doing that Rw thing (bigsune variety) as of today I used to use a different algorithm to get to the cross, R' U' F' U F R, which I have now dropped in favor of the other method as it is easier to perform for my hands, and then I can follow it up with that sune variety to complete the yellow when I get that cross (which is what I was already doing). 

Then R' F R' B2 R F' R' B2 R2 to get the edges correct and after that last bit is F2 U (or U', depending) R' L F2 R L' U (or U', depending) F2 for the corners.

Very beginner *giggles*

I don't have solve vids, only have a few where I explain to absolute beginners how to get their cube fixed with the very basic method. 

I do have this https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AukX8yWR7fusdHoxZmxZQ1VkSjk3MmRER1lxUDZNRXc#gid=0 where I document my progress (or lack of it, I don't do that many sessions of 5 that are timed, I practice till I see blue in the face more than I time myself).

I went to check out the 2-look OLL on youtube, and I was overwhelmed by it (wayyy too much info at once for me) so I need to take this back a notch and do it one step at a time. That Rw and Rw' thing is already a cool new thing for me to learn.


I realize now reading back what I wrote that it makes complete sense to me.. an absolute beginner would go HUH at that *chuckle* I have come a long way already


----------



## MarcelP (Jun 30, 2012)

Kattenvriendin said:


> I went to check out the 2-look OLL on youtube, and I was overwhelmed by it (wayyy too much info at once for me) so I need to take this back a notch and do it one step at a time. That Rw and Rw' thing is already a cool new thing for me to learn.



Yes, I understand what you mean. I had that too. I figured I would never learn that. I have a colleage at work who is a member here (guusrs) and he showed me some awesome stuff. knowing full OLL and PLL will really make people like me who can not turn quickly fast cubers  I think you are fine doing the Rw thing for now. I just printed out OLL 21 untill OLL 27. Btw, OLL 27 is Sune! and OLL 26 is reverse Sune, so you allready know these.  

You can practise them by performing them on a solved cube. For example Performing OLL 23 on a solved cube will result in OLL 25. That way you can do hundreds of OLL solves to get your fingers used to the algoritms.


----------



## ben1996123 (Jun 30, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> you can do U' M2 U' faster than M2 U ?!



M' U M' is the part I'm slower at.


----------



## vcuber13 (Jun 30, 2012)

Kattenvriendin said:


> R' F R' B2 R
> F' R' B2 R2
> 
> I know that one and apply it every time.
> ...



the () are just to separate and group things
the [] are used for comms, and the : or , inside tell you what to do.



Kirjava's ELL page said:


> The following algorithms are written in commutator or conjugate notation. With this notation, [X,Y] translates to XYX'Y', and [X:Y] translates to XYX'.
> 
> NOTE: [A:B] [C:B'] = A B A' C B' C' = [C: [C' A, B]]


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jun 30, 2012)

vcuber13 said:


> the () are just to separate and group things
> the [] are used for comms, and the : or , inside tell you what to do.
> 
> The following algorithms are written in commutator or conjugate notation. With this notation, [X,Y] translates to XYX'Y', and [X:Y] translates to XYX'.
> ...



*blink blink*

*rubs eyes*

*peers*

Ooookay, I will need to read that tomorrow methinks.. my brain's gotcha part has been disabled for the night *chuckles*


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 30, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> Used to do (M' U')4 instead of U' M2 U' M' U' M' for LSE lol



You also use M2UM for some cases?


----------



## ben1996123 (Jun 30, 2012)

5BLD said:


> You also use M2UM for some cases?



Nope.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 1, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> M' U M' is the part I'm slower at.



You can also do M' U' M' instead


----------



## choza244 (Jul 1, 2012)

Dene said:


> I had a massive duh moment recently, and it was all thanks to my practising gigaminx. I'm not sure of the quickest way to set it up, but this works: take a 5x5 and do Rw' U2 Rw U Rw U' Rw'. This leaves the top centre with a 2x2 block, with a convenient 1x2 block on the front centre. For the past 5 years, when I was confronted with this I would proceed by going U Rw U Rw' to make the 2x3 block, when that first U is completely unnecessary. MAJOR FACEPALM EXPLOSION :fp . It's funny that I only noticed this when I was looking for ways to trim down my move count on gigaminx because each move wasted is a lot of time.


Ok, so I just realize this... just because I'm trying everything that is said in this thread, but this one.... OMG how could I didn't see that!!


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jul 1, 2012)

Alrighty, I have taken a look at the notation and I find it's too much for me to grasp, I see the complex code and find I am writing it all back out again to make it understandable.

All I am thinking is: WHY? Why write it down so unclearly when you have to "unzip" it anyway to understand? Isn't it easier to leave things in its original state? I mean sure, cubing has to go faster, but you don't have to "zip" the notation, that won't help. *giggle* It is likely just me but it is SO hard to remember things that way (first remember the notation and THEN figure out what it actually says) that I can't do much with it, which is a bummer. 

I am not judging you, just stating how this comes across to me personally. Maybe someone else CAN make easy heads and tails out of it, and I just learn new things differently, I don't know.  

When I was learning the R' F R' B2 R F' R' B2 R2 I went "eek way too much, whoa baby". Then I grouped them, I "patternized" them, and remembering after that was a peach. I did this:


```
R' F  R' - B2 R
   F' R' - B2 R2
```

See what I mean? This looks easier to remember for me than the [ : ] thingies.

Again, it is just me, not judging anyone or anything, just pointing out my thought pattern, and the [ ] and such notation is probably a standard used worldwide which isn't working for me. I guess I'll just have to learn the new things a different way *giggle*


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 1, 2012)

Kattenvriendin said:


> All I am thinking is: WHY? Why write it down so unclearly when you have to "unzip" it anyway to understand?



I actually find algorithms to be clearer when written in commutator notation.



Kattenvriendin said:


> Isn't it easier to leave things in its original state? I mean sure, cubing has to go faster, but you don't have to "zip" the notation, that won't help.



It does help a great deal with teaching how the algorithm works. It also makes it easier to remember. 

You can write things out quicker, and are likely to make less mistakes.

The notation seems to help a lot when explaining things like the cancellations in A9 commutators, or comms that cancel into each other ([A,B,C]).

Once you get over the initial learning curve of understanding what it actually all means, it starts to become useful.


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jul 1, 2012)

I get it, thanks 

It's just that my brain doesn't wish to hobble over the hurdle just yet. Maybe in time, maybe not. 


Another thing that I bumped into now that I happen to be on the subject of notation.. the notation of rotating two layers at once. Fatsune for example, r U R' U R U2 r'

I see that written down on other pages on the web as Rw U R' U R U2 Rw' as well.

Are both commonly accepted and just used by preference of the writer, or am I missing a difference here? (now that I am on the subject, this is easy enough and I might as well get my wee brain wrapped around this from the getgo *chuckle*)


----------



## applemobile (Jul 1, 2012)

Slightly different...but have never used proper scrambles because i hated doing them....yet within a week of using them i have improved, when doing hand scrambles, if they were too easy i would always re-do it, and now i use scrambles it feels like i get an easy scramble at least 1 in 5.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 1, 2012)

Kattenvriendin said:


> Are both commonly accepted and just used by preference of the writer, or am I missing a difference here? (now that I am on the subject, this is easy enough and I might as well get my wee brain wrapped around this from the getgo *chuckle*)



They're both the same for 3x3x3. For bigcubes, it depends what notation system you're using as to what certain things mean.


----------



## bobthegiraffemonkey (Jul 1, 2012)

K4 F3L edges. At first when I was randomly messing around with the method I really struggled with recognition, then when I figured out how to do it I realised it was so obvious.


----------



## Kattenvriendin (Jul 1, 2012)

I'll run into that on the 4x4 and 5x5 later on I am sure  

thank you Kirjava!


----------



## Cheese11 (Jul 3, 2012)

ben1996123 said:


> I'm faster at U' M2 U' M' U' M' though.



This is the one that I use. The finger tricks just work better.


----------



## MarcelP (Jul 3, 2012)

My biggest wakeup moment was when I found out doing this: In inserting pairs in F2L when both items of the pair are in the top layer and both are facing same color on top, you just have to look at where the white sticker is to know how to insert them. At first I was looking at : red is right to blue to I must turn left bla bla... Now I see immediatly white sticker is in the right, so turn U, or white sticker is on the left so turn U'.


----------



## MostEd (Jul 3, 2012)

I used to do 3U'(which i suck at) in roux, till i switched to Kir's grip+fingersticks for MU...


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 3, 2012)

^well, they aren't blindingly obvious... But do you mean U3'? If so, why?


----------



## MostEd (Jul 3, 2012)

5BLD said:


> ^well, they aren't blindingly obvious... But do you mean U3'? If so, why?



my M' grip was: index onBLD corner sticker, and Middle Ring Combo, so it be a messed up thing for me to do a regrip to do U, since my right was, M'ing


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 3, 2012)

Try index pushing then too


----------

