# Is it possible for me to solve blindfolded...without algorithms?



## alkanova (May 15, 2010)

Hello,

Ok, so I am a very lazy guy who hates to memorize anything. How I solve the cube usually is solve two layers except for one column, then I use that column to solve the edges on the last layer then I solve the corners using the three-corner cycle, I could barely get below 1 min but that's fine I am not interested in speed lol. I solved all the other cubes till v-7 and I am now wondering if it's possible to solve 3x3 blindfolded as all the stuff I know are stuff that don't need memorization(three-edge cycle, three-corner cycle..etc.). I don't even know what the concept is but the second it says memorization I freak out X(.

thanks


----------



## SuperNerd (May 15, 2010)

If you hate to memorize stuff, then you shouldn't be concerned with blindfold solving.


----------



## Akuma (May 15, 2010)

If you hate memorization I am afraid Rubiks Cubes just entirely ain't your cup of tea...


----------



## joey (May 15, 2010)

nope.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (May 15, 2010)

no


----------



## Mitch15 (May 15, 2010)

haha, these responses made me laugh.


----------



## Cyrus C. (May 15, 2010)

If you don't like memorizing stuff, I don't think blindfold is your thing. SpeedBLD, that won't need any extra algorithms, but it's pretty tough.


----------



## Tyjet66 (May 15, 2010)

You wish to solve a cube blindfolded.... which entails MEMORIZING the POSITION and ORIENTATION of EVERY cubie without memorization? Read your post and think again.


----------



## Edward (May 15, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> If you don't like memorizing stuff, I don't think blindfold is your thing. SpeedBLD, that won't need any extra algorithms, but it's pretty tough.


He will still have to memo his solution >.>.


----------



## Cyrus C. (May 15, 2010)

Edward said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > If you don't like memorizing stuff, I don't think blindfold is your thing. SpeedBLD, that won't need any extra algorithms, but it's pretty tough.
> ...



No new algorithms however.


----------



## alkanova (May 16, 2010)

Akuma said:


> If you hate memorization I am afraid Rubiks Cubes just entirely ain't your cup of tea...



I am sorry but that doesn't make sense to me at all, I can solve all the cubes. I said the way I usually solve it but I always solve it many other ways. I just don't look at algorithms and memorize them. I admitted that speed solving isn't my thing(unless I come up with stuff that are really good) but am not interested in that.

and guys I am sorry I might have miss-explained, what I meant by memorization is memorizing algorithms , if it's memorizing the cube or having an image for it, I am fine with it - I try it sometimes for like three moves or so as much as I can-, so is it possible ?


----------



## joey (May 16, 2010)

You can do it with 3 algs.

Look it up, it's called Old Pochmann.


----------



## Chuck (May 16, 2010)

Just buy a Haiyan Memory. It will memorize for you.


----------



## dannyz0r (May 16, 2010)

Chuck said:


> Just buy a Haiyan Memory. It will memorize for you.



Or buy haiyan himself and he'll do it for you.


----------



## Logan (May 16, 2010)

dannyz0r said:


> Chuck said:
> 
> 
> > Just buy a Haiyan Memory. It will memorize for you.
> ...



In Soviet Russia, You don't buy Haiyan. He buy you.


----------



## Cride5 (May 16, 2010)

alkanova said:


> (three-edge cycle, three-corner cycle..etc.).



I'm no expert, but isn't using corner or edge 3-cycles to directly solve pieces in place just BH?


----------



## Feryll (May 16, 2010)

Using M2/BH is pretty algorithmless. You only need to know the algorithms "M2", "R2", "U2 M' U2 M' ", "M U2 M U2", and however many orientation algorithms you choose to learn. The corners will just require very good intuition and understanding of commutators.

Using Old Pochmann and remembering 2 algorithms (You can get by on one if you want to lose a _lot_ of speed and risk screwing the solve up) is the easiest, and will take you, like, what, an hour to memorize the two algorithms?

But if you can't commit to those puny algorithms, then you aren't putting enough effort into it. It's like not even bothering to remember your own phone number. There's a reason 99+% of the population can't do it with their eyes open.


----------



## Kirjava (May 16, 2010)

8355 variant for corners!


----------



## Joël (May 16, 2010)

Well... I think if you learn how commutators work, you should be able to get there. There are quite a few simple commutators for orienting pieces or 3 cycling pieces that basically don't require memorisation, IMO... If you understand how they work, you don't have to memo them, it's more about 'learning' than pure memorisation.

Btw, it sounds like you are somewhat afraid of memo-ing algs, so may I ask how you normally would memo an alg? You are not actually memoing the RLUDFB's, are you?


----------



## MiloD (May 16, 2010)

I only know 3 algs for bld that I can't explain move for move. Everything else is intuitive. 

1.) Two edge flip
2.) Four edge flip ([MU]x4)
3.) "Lift" 3 cycle for corners (eg. ULF -> URB -> DLF)


----------



## Escher (May 16, 2010)

ABA'B' is the only pre-memorised sequence you need


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 16, 2010)

alkanova said:


> I am sorry but that doesn't make sense to me at all, I can solve all the cubes. I said the way I usually solve it but I always solve it many other ways. I just don't look at algorithms and memorize them. I admitted that speed solving isn't my thing(unless I come up with stuff that are really good) but am not interested in that.



So what _is_ your thing again?


----------



## alkanova (May 16, 2010)

Joël said:


> Well... I think if you learn how commutators work, you should be able to get there. There are quite a few simple commutators for orienting pieces or 3 cycling pieces that basically don't require memorisation, IMO... If you understand how they work, you don't have to memo them, it's more about 'learning' than pure memorisation.
> 
> Btw, it sounds like you are somewhat afraid of memo-ing algs, so may I ask how you normally would memo an alg? You are not actually memoing the RLUDFB's, are you?



I don't memorize algorithm. I go more for intuition and concepts in all the cubes( i just experiment, trying to find better approaches to solve, it maybe the same as coming up with yuor own lousy algs but am fine with it XD). Yes I know commutators and conjugation I use them all the time.



miniGOINGS said:


> alkanova said:
> 
> 
> > I am sorry but that doesn't make sense to me at all, I can solve all the cubes. I said the way I usually solve it but I always solve it many other ways. I just don't look at algorithms and memorize them. I admitted that speed solving isn't my thing(unless I come up with stuff that are really good) but am not interested in that.
> ...



sorry, what do you mean?


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 16, 2010)

alkanova said:


> sorry, what do you mean?



The first part of your post answered my question. It just sounds like memorizing isn't your thing, and using algorithms isn't your thing, and speedsolving isn't your thing, so I was wondering what your thing was.


----------



## alkanova (May 17, 2010)

Feryll said:


> Using M2/BH is pretty algorithmless. You only need to know the algorithms "M2", "R2", "U2 M' U2 M' ", "M U2 M U2", and however many orientation algorithms you choose to learn. The corners will just require very good intuition and understanding of commutators.
> 
> Using Old Pochmann and remembering 2 algorithms (You can get by on one if you want to lose a _lot_ of speed and risk screwing the solve up) is the easiest, and will take you, like, what, an hour to memorize the two algorithms?
> 
> But if you can't commit to those puny algorithms, then you aren't putting enough effort into it. It's like not even bothering to remember your own phone number. There's a reason 99+% of the population can't do it with their eyes open.



Memorizing algorithms is not necessarily a scale commitment or effort -not even close to be an accurate one-. Just because I rather go towards doing the cubes without memorizing algorithms but using concepts and intuition, that doesn't mean I am not putting effort. I might have miss explained my question before, but you guys have just been bashing, you make me sound like a guy who just wants to solve the thing easily without much effort. I don't know if people here don't need to put any effort to get to solve the cube with just some commutators and intuition without even memorizing a single alg then reach under 1 min -which isn't fancy for speedcubing I know, but for me it's enough-,then go to all the cubes and experiment, but for me it took time,thinking and effort.

All I wanted to know is, if what I rely on (commutators,intuition..etc.) is enough for trying to go for Blindfold cubing. I don't know anything about it and I need just some guidance. If it takes understanding more concepts I am fine with it and I already said that I don't have a problem if what I have to memorize is the cube itself. I already close my eyes and try to keep an image of the cube-actually just the parts that matter- when I play around and use commutators with conjugation that are both several moves (looking at the cube with my eyes open just confuse me sometimes) If I have to take it further I'll sure try.

and thank you I'll try to go for what you mentioned and see if I can just understand them.


----------



## shelley (May 17, 2010)

You can do it with 0 algs if you understand commutators and are comfortable with using them. It won't necessarily be easy, but it's doable. Good luck.


----------



## joey (May 17, 2010)

How would you solve parity without 0 algs..

inb4 pre-move = parity


----------



## shelley (May 17, 2010)

joey said:


> How would you solve parity without 0 algs..
> 
> inb4 pre-move = parity



Say you have a T perm on the top layer. Now do U. It can now be solved using 3 cycles.

Like I said, won't be easy, but it's doable.


----------



## cmhardw (May 17, 2010)

alkanova said:


> ...Yes I know commutators and conjugation I use them all the time.





> All I wanted to know is, if what I rely on (commutators,intuition..etc.) is enough for trying to go for Blindfold cubing. I don't know anything about it and I need just some guidance.



To answer your question, can you perform (without looking at the cube) the following cycles using your understanding of commutators and intuition? The cycles I will give you will not *require* conjugation, but you may use it if it helps.

Corner BLD intuition test:
UBL -> FRU -> DFL
Here the first letter represents the particular sticker of that piece. So I am saying that the U sticker of UBL goes to the F sticker of FRU, which goes to the D sticker of DFL (which returns to the U sticker of UBL).

Edge BLD intuition test:
UB -> DF -> FR
So the U sticker of UB goes to the D sticker of DF, which goes to the F sticker of FR.

Performing those cycles would be a good test of how well you current knowledge of commutators/conjugates would hold up during a BLD solve without you having to memorize other algorithms (or learn new ways to perform commutators).

Chris


----------



## joey (May 17, 2010)

shelley said:


> joey said:
> 
> 
> > How would you solve parity without 0 algs..
> ...



So err, I'm silly 
Instead of thinking about it like that.. I thought of doing that U turn as a pre-move


----------



## Feryll (May 17, 2010)

alkanova said:


> Feryll said:
> 
> 
> > Using M2/BH is pretty algorithmless. You only need to know the algorithms "M2", "R2", "U2 M' U2 M' ", "M U2 M U2", and however many orientation algorithms you choose to learn. The corners will just require very good intuition and understanding of commutators.
> ...



Ah, I'm sorry. That last paragraph came out a little harsher than I expected. I was actually coming back here to edit in my post that if you are not just lazy, but just wanting to solve in intuitively, then that's a different question. Solving under 60 seconds is actually really good for no algorithms, as most of us (Including me) need a brain dump of memorized moves to get 'er done. 

If I'm not mistaken, then BH would be your corners method, as it implies commutators, and 3OP would be a good edges method. I think you may have to work out a few cases, though.

Good luck!


----------



## Samania (May 17, 2010)

You cant exactly do a blindfolded solve without intense memorization.


----------



## alkanova (May 17, 2010)

cmhardw
To answer your question said:


> require[/b] conjugation, but you may use it if it helps.
> 
> Corner BLD intuition test:
> UBL -> FRU -> DFL
> ...



Thank you, so I did the first one without conjugating; though, I did flip it-the whole cube- forward and F became D to make a more familiar situation. I did the second one but in this one I did conjugate and I even had to put my fingers on the sides at the beginning so that I don't get confused. I am better with corners but I've been trying to become better with edges these couple of days by solving all the corners then using commutators for the edges.


----------



## Dene (May 17, 2010)

joey said:


> You can do it with 3 algs.
> 
> Look it up, it's called Old Pochmann.



Y perm and T perm. What's the third alg for?


----------



## rcbeyer (May 17, 2010)

Dene said:


> joey said:
> 
> 
> > You can do it with 3 algs.
> ...



R perm, for adjusting parity after corners or edges, whichever was done first, when there is an odd number of swaps you do the R perm to fix parity


----------



## Dene (May 17, 2010)

rcbeyer said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > joey said:
> ...



Ok but you don't need to do that.


----------



## rcbeyer (May 17, 2010)

Dene said:


> rcbeyer said:
> 
> 
> > Dene said:
> ...



you of course, are right -

i misspoke, R perm is generally used when you do old pochmann for corners/m2 edges

i should have said J-perm for purely old pochmann style solves

Y-Perm, T-Perm, and J-Perm are used for old pochman

sorry


----------



## Dene (May 17, 2010)

J-PERM IS FOR WIMPS WHO ARE TOO SCARED TO DO REAL MEN SETUPS.


----------



## Boxcarcrzy12 (May 17, 2010)

Learn M2/Old Pochmann, the Algs are very easy,


----------



## rcbeyer (May 17, 2010)

Dene said:


> J-PERM IS FOR WIMPS WHO ARE TOO SCARED TO DO REAL MEN SETUPS.



not gonna lie - i lol'd a bit


----------



## Dene (May 17, 2010)

rcbeyer said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > J-PERM IS FOR WIMPS WHO ARE TOO SCARED TO DO REAL MEN SETUPS.
> ...



Woo! I guess that's 2 for Dene tonight.

Btw I use J perms for UF and UB edges


----------



## rcbeyer (May 17, 2010)

Dene said:


> rcbeyer said:
> 
> 
> > Dene said:
> ...



just for those?
how do you do the swaps to: 
BD RD FD LD
(assuming using old pochman with buffer at UR, so U sticker would swap with B sticker; R and D stickers swap, etc)


----------



## Dene (May 17, 2010)

I just do set ups. They aren't very nice, but then again I suck at bld.


----------



## riffz (May 18, 2010)

rcbeyer said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > rcbeyer said:
> ...



For any of those 4 I would perform the popular Y perm with the F and F's taken off the beginning and end. I find it really fast. Just use D moves to set up the piece to RDF.


----------



## Sakarie (May 18, 2010)

riffz said:


> rcbeyer said:
> 
> 
> > Dene said:
> ...



Please explain more detailed how you setup FD into RDF!


----------



## riffz (May 18, 2010)

Sakarie said:


> riffz said:
> 
> 
> > rcbeyer said:
> ...



Oh wow... :fp I thought we were talking about corners because I use J perms for Old Pochmann corners. I wasn't thinking about Old Pochmann edges.

(Corners can be denoted by just 2 stickers if you assume they are in a consistent direction)


----------



## cmhardw (May 19, 2010)

alkanova said:


> Thank you, so I did the first one without conjugating; though, I did flip it-the whole cube- forward and F became D to make a more familiar situation. I did the second one but in this one I did conjugate and I even had to put my fingers on the sides at the beginning so that I don't get confused. I am better with corners but I've been trying to become better with edges these couple of days by solving all the corners then using commutators for the edges.



To answer your question from this thread, yes you are pretty much ready to solve blindfolded using commutators then. The only thing is to know how you will solve parity. Do you know how you would solve this without algorithms? You can, of course, just use an alg like T perm or Y perm or something, but it has already been mentioned in this thread how to handle parity by simply using the concept of what parity is (i.e. not using any "algs").

Once you can solve parity, you will be ready to solve blindfolded without any pre-memorized algs.

Chris


----------



## Marco Aurelio (May 19, 2010)

If you don't like to memorize anything, you better not practice BLD. You have to memorize whole cube before start solving, so try another kind of speedcubing.

EDIT: Sorry, but what is the meaning of "Wimps"?


----------



## Sakarie (May 19, 2010)

Marco Aurelio said:


> If you don't like to memorize anything, you better not practice BLD. You have to memorize whole cube before start solving, so try another kind of speedcubing.
> 
> EDIT: Sorry, but what is the meaning of "Wimps"?



It probably means people that acts as if they were experts, but haven't read more than one post in a thread.


----------



## alkanova (May 19, 2010)

cmhardw said:


> To answer your question from this thread, yes you are pretty much ready to solve blindfolded using commutators then. The only thing is to know how you will solve parity. Do you know how you would solve this without algorithms? You can, of course, just use an alg like T perm or Y perm or something, but it has already been mentioned in this thread how to handle parity by simply using the concept of what parity is (i.e. not using any "algs").
> 
> Once you can solve parity, you will be ready to solve blindfolded without any pre-memorized algs.
> 
> Chris



Yes, I do know how to solve a parity. Thank you


----------



## Marco Aurelio (May 20, 2010)

I certainly read all the topic...

Is there any cube that is better for BLD? I didn't heard any comments about this.

PS: If you like algoritms, there is a method that have more than 500, just search in Google and take a look. It's used by the owner of WR BLD.


----------



## Kirjava (May 20, 2010)

XYX'Y' is still an algorithm.

Just do speedbld8355.


----------



## riffz (May 21, 2010)

Marco Aurelio said:


> I certainly read all the topic...
> 
> Is there any cube that is better for BLD? I didn't heard any comments about this.
> 
> PS: If you like algoritms, there is a method that have more than 500, just search in Google and take a look. It's used by the owner of WR BLD.



Rowe Hessler said he's been using an Alpha V instead of an F-II because it's less prone to popping.


----------



## cincyaviation (May 22, 2010)

Sakarie said:


> Marco Aurelio said:
> 
> 
> > If you don't like to memorize anything, you better not practice BLD. You have to memorize whole cube before start solving, so try another kind of speedcubing.
> ...


too bad it doesn't mean that...
your thinking of troll or possibly noob


----------

