# Hitting Plateaus; why normal practice isn't enough



## Zarxrax (Feb 24, 2011)

I came across an article in the New York Times about memory: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/20/magazine/mind-secrets.html

While the article might be interesting to blind-solvers, that's not the aspect of it that caught my attention. Rather, it was this part:



> When people first learn to use a keyboard, they improve very quickly from sloppy single-finger pecking to careful two-handed typing, until eventually the fingers move effortlessly and the whole process becomes unconscious. At this point, most people’s typing skills stop progressing. They reach a plateau. If you think about it, it’s strange. We’ve always been told that practice makes perfect, and yet many people sit behind a keyboard for hours a day. So why don’t they just keeping getting better and better?
> 
> In the 1960s, the psychologists Paul Fitts and Michael Posner tried to answer this question by describing the three stages of acquiring a new skill. During the first phase, known as the cognitive phase, we intellectualize the task and discover new strategies to accomplish it more proficiently. During the second, the associative phase, we concentrate less, making fewer major errors, and become more efficient. Finally we reach what Fitts and Posner called the autonomous phase, when we’re as good as we need to be at the task and we basically run on autopilot. Most of the time that’s a good thing. The less we have to focus on the repetitive tasks of everyday life, the more we can concentrate on the stuff that really matters. You can actually see this phase shift take place in f.M.R.I.’s of subjects as they learn new tasks: the parts of the brain involved in conscious reasoning become less active, and other parts of the brain take over. You could call it the O.K. plateau.
> 
> Psychologists used to think that O.K. plateaus marked the upper bounds of innate ability. In his 1869 book “Hereditary Genius,” Sir Francis Galton argued that a person could improve at mental and physical activities until he hit a wall, which “he cannot by any education or exertion overpass.” In other words, the best we can do is simply the best we can do. But Ericsson and his colleagues have found over and over again that with the right kind of effort, that’s rarely the case. They believe that Galton’s wall often has much less to do with our innate limits than with what we consider an acceptable level of performance. They’ve found that top achievers typically follow the same general pattern. They develop strategies for keeping out of the autonomous stage by doing three things: focusing on their technique, staying goal-oriented and getting immediate feedback on their performance. Amateur musicians, for example, tend to spend their practice time playing music, whereas pros tend to work through tedious exercises or focus on difficult parts of pieces. Similarly, the best ice skaters spend more of their practice time trying jumps that they land less often, while lesser skaters work more on jumps they’ve already mastered. In other words, regular practice simply isn’t enough. To improve, we have to be constantly pushing ourselves beyond where we think our limits lie and then pay attention to how and why we fail. That’s what I needed to do if I was going to improve my memory.



In other words, just practicing over and over again will only get you so far. To really improve, you have to constantly push yourself. Work on your problem areas. Get out a metronome and let it force you to move faster.


----------



## Owen (Feb 24, 2011)

Somebody told me this yesterday. Weird.


----------



## CubicNL (Feb 24, 2011)

Quite interesting...


----------



## MaeLSTRoM (Feb 24, 2011)

Definetly works though. 
Have you ever had it when you finish a solve or even during one that you realise that you could do what you're doing alot faster (e.g Push on fnger tricks higher TPS) but not becuase you're going slowly? 
I think this is a perfect example of what happens, you really just have to push through to go faster.


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 24, 2011)

For F2L I can use a metronome, for roux I find it hard


----------



## Evan_Frame (Feb 24, 2011)

That is an excellent article that I am going to apply to other parts of my life. In cubing however I am still looking forward to the OK plateau.


----------



## JustinJ (Feb 24, 2011)

Personally, I don't really agree with the metronome stuff. At least to get to the point where I am, aside from learning algs and stuff, pure practice worked fine. The way I always thought about it was that by practicing, you subconsciously gain a better understanding of how the pieces move and can predict and find things better, although I'd like to hear someone faster's opinion on that.


----------



## Pyjam (Feb 24, 2011)

Interesting. Thanks.
The plural form “plateaus” really hurts my french eyes!


----------



## some1rational (Feb 24, 2011)

Nice find! Interesting read. I think this is something most veteran cubers (or veterans of any skill for that matter) 'understand/realize' innately, but it's always nice to have it spelled out concretely. I especially like the example of the amateur and professional musician.

I have a personal example in this case, which is related to cubing. I was stuck at about 22-23 second averages for at LEAST 4 months. I performed a lot of 'autonomous' practice daily but wasn't improving in the slightest which frustrated me almost to the point of quitting. 

I decided after 4-5 months of almost zero improvement that I'd try something different, and that was to work on solving on another color (I was white cross like most people). I did this with blue until I reached my white cross times. Then I did it with red. And then I worked on opposite cross. In this process of becoming color neutral (took about 1.5-2 months) my times started to steadily go down and now I average around 18-19 seconds.

I've technically plateau'd again though, however, but I still have x-cross techniques to learn so I know that's something just barely out of my reach/limitations that would definitely make me faster if I pursued it. Still havn't built up the patience though "-_- (no one said 'worthwhile practice' was easy, haha).


----------



## cmhardw (Feb 24, 2011)

Oh my, this article is gold in my opinion. I can already see two big things that he does differently with memorizing than I do, and I'm interested to try his take on things. I wonder if a set of those blinder goggles would be of any use for blindfolded solving They would get in the way of the blindfold obviously, but you could take them off and put the blindfolded on after if they were useful enough.

Wow... I almost feel like I should read this article again, while taking notes. Thanks for this link!


----------



## Rob2109 (Feb 24, 2011)

Just my quick two cents worth. I'm a classically trained pianist and I've been attracted to speedcubing as there are loads of similarities between the disiplines. The way I would learn a piece has been the same way I've approached learning algs. I could write a more in depth explanation if anyone is at all interested, Rob.


----------



## cmhardw (Feb 24, 2011)

Rob, I'd be interested. I improved my pb single in 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7BLD all in the space of about two and a half weeks simply by learning how to sculpt with clay. I'm really becoming a believer in the power of cross training and seeing how things are done in other disciplines.


----------



## Anthony (Feb 25, 2011)

JustinJ said:


> Personally, I don't really agree with the metronome stuff. At least to get to the point where I am, aside from learning algs and stuff, pure practice worked fine. The way I always thought about it was that by practicing, you subconsciously gain a better understanding of how the pieces move and can predict and find things better, although I'd like to hear someone faster's opinion on that.


 
Not that I necessarily qualify as someone faster than you, but I totally agree - particularly pertaining to F2L, of course. Generally, people who aren't very fast and have less experience cubing find pieces significantly slower, cannot track pieces very well and stick to solving pairs the most obvious ways. One thing I've noticed for sure is that I've subconsciously learnt a bunch of VHF2L cases without realizing it simply by solving the cube so many times. I'm also not a big fan of using a metronome, but I suppose it may "work" for some people. I've never practiced cubing any way besides just scrambling and solving.


----------



## Erzz (Feb 25, 2011)

Reminds me of http://members.cox.net/visionquest220/mastery.html


----------



## whauk (Feb 25, 2011)

Rob2109 said:


> Just my quick two cents worth. I'm a classically trained pianist and I've been attracted to speedcubing as there are loads of similarities between the disiplines. The way I would learn a piece has been the same way I've approached learning algs. I could write a more in depth explanation if anyone is at all interested, Rob.


 
i am sort of a hobby pianist (currently i am working on schumann's piano concerto, so i am not that bad^^) and somehow i dont see similiarities between cubing and piano... can you explain a bit more? i am really interested.
(sry if this turns ot)


----------



## uberCuber (Feb 25, 2011)

whauk said:


> i am sort of a hobby pianist (currently i am working on schumann's piano concerto, so i am not that bad^^) and somehow i dont see similiarities between cubing and piano... can you explain a bit more? i am really interested.
> (sry if this turns ot)


 
I also am having trouble seeing how there are "loads of similarities" (I am also kind of a hobby pianist, currently working on liszt's hungarian rhapsody). I would love to hear what you have to say about this

@OP, thanks a lot for the link, very interesting read


----------



## freshcuber (Feb 25, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> Oh my, this article is gold in my opinion. I can already see two big things that he does differently with memorizing than I do, and I'm interested to try his take on things. I wonder if a set of those blinder goggles would be of any use for blindfolded solving They would get in the way of the blindfold obviously, but you could take them off and put the blindfolded on after if they were useful enough.
> 
> Wow... I almost feel like I should read this article again, while taking notes. Thanks for this link!


 
The blinders could be looser and when you bring down the blindfold you could knock the blinders down out out of the way so that it'd hang around your neck.


----------



## Selkie (Feb 25, 2011)

A very interesting article and some great thought provoking information. Even though only cubing since the new year I have kind of levelled off the last two weeks, much to my frustration. But there again I am just scramling/solving. Going to try some more intense training on those areas that need most improvement. Thanks OP


----------



## Rob2109 (Feb 25, 2011)

When I was going through the Chopin Etudes I realised I had to work hard at improving technique and through technical studies realised that less is more. The faster you play, the less effort you need to put in – good technique is about eliminating unnecessary movement. Whilst watching the very fast cubers I’ve noticed the same thing, finding good fingertricks and avoiding regrips is a fairly similar process to getting round a passage of music. I admit that is breaking the whole process down to the purely physical movements and that there is a whole lot more to music and cubing than just being able to turn fast but that is how i’ve been approaching learning algs. Using a metronome to increase speed is an approach I’m going to use, one turn per click then gradually speed up the beats. This is how you would get the benefits from a technical study and unlock serious speed without straining, so I reckon the same technique is transferable to cubing.

As far as memory goes, I’ve learnt loads of handy ways of memorising stuff and efficient ways to practice piano. Break material down into manageable chunks, learn the first chunk learn the second then latch the chunks together. Always leave something right, if a section works, leave it for a while, never walk away having done something wrong as that is more likely to stick in your head. Much of this has been discussed on the forum about how to memorise algs and so it might sound like common sense for a lot of you.

I hope this helps, it’s hard to put down in words everything I want to express, this so far relates to CFOP btw, I know there is more freedom in other methods but I’ve only got as far as CFOP, Rob.


----------



## jla (Jul 24, 2011)

Blown away...


----------



## Shortey (Jul 24, 2011)

This is kinda off topic, but Rama told me that when he was in his prime he didn't even practice cubing at all. He just practiced the contrabass. Because of the tightness of the strings he gained a lot of strength in his left hand.


----------



## jrb (Jul 24, 2011)

Interesting.


----------



## spyr0th3dr4g0n (Aug 1, 2011)

I was just away at a camp for 3 weeks. I brought some of my cubes. When I was out there, there wasn't very much access to timers so I just did slow solves mostly. I didn't learn much in terms of new tricks, I mostly just got to recognise old cases faster. 
When I got back, I timed and found that my times were about the same as when I left, just above the 30 barrier. I also noticed I turned slower throughout the solve. When I tried to go faster, it was much easier (LL) to recognise cases at a higher speed. In the past few hours, I did a Avg of 12 and set times under 30 without as much effort. I basically shaved an extra couple of seconds of my time by not trying so hard to shave down my time...
I thought I would be at the 30 barrier for much longer.


----------



## JLarsen (Aug 10, 2011)

Really good thread. I was discussing this with Jostle a while back and I described it as "manually re-entering the cognitive phase". I thought this was a pretty cool way of interpreting it. Like at a certain point in order to improve we need to somehow kick ourselves back into unfamiliar ground to force us to relearn things. For example I went back into the cognitive phase when I used Fridrich for a month and then set a record average when I went back to Petrus.^_^ Similiar things could be switching mice hands to get better at Quake, or shooting free throws. Maybe even adjusting the tension of a cube and having to readjust to the tension.


----------



## Toquinha1977 (Aug 24, 2011)

Good article, thank you. I'm pretty sure that I've peaked myself. I've been cubing for a few years and any improvements I've made have been pretty marginal - compare my better competition averages between 2008 and now and it goes down pretty slowly (2008: 30.67, 2009: 24.71, 2010: 22.78, 2011: 21.00). The largest problem I can see is that I'm practicing without any specific type of focus. Even though I've pretty much had all my OLLs/PLLs for a couple years now, hitting sub20 consistently is a huge struggle. As it is, the bulk of my "practicing" is just doing beginning-to-end solves.

So for sure, I need to start doing the following
-Colour neutrality. Is it better to just pick a different side every time, or dedicate each practice session to a specific colour?
-Relearning PLLs for OH, reversed, upside down, etc.
-Metronome training to improve look ahead (probably the thing I need to improve the most)


----------



## timelonade (Aug 28, 2011)

I find as well that similar to how it says musicians find playing difficult exercises or trying to learn a new, more advanced piece can help make their playing better, I generally do an average a little bit faster after I've learnt a new algorithm or I've had a go at a more advanced BLD memory technique.. But maybe that's just me ;P.


----------



## fastcubesolver (Sep 5, 2011)

JustinJ said:


> Personally, I don't really agree with the metronome stuff. At least to get to the point where I am, aside from learning algs and stuff, pure practice worked fine. The way I always thought about it was that by practicing, you subconsciously gain a better understanding of how the pieces move and can predict and find things better, although I'd like to hear someone faster's opinion on that.


 
*like*


----------



## drewsopchak (Sep 5, 2011)

In my opinion, this does not apply to speedsolving. We don't make a conscious effort to type faster, but we do with cubes. And you can't fail and dnf like u can in ice skating.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Sep 5, 2011)

drewsopchak said:


> In my opinion, this does not apply to speedsolving. We don't make a conscious effort to type faster, but we do with cubes. And you can't fail and dnf like u can in ice skating.


 
I was unaware that you could DNF in ice skating.


----------



## musicninja17 (Sep 8, 2011)

Cracking your head open on the ice constitutes as a DNF imo xP.
Uh yeah. Took a bit of a break from cubing over the summer due to a ton of work; get back to it a couple weeks ago and i'm down to 17-18 sec mark after just barely managing under 20 sec before. wtf went on there?


----------



## pipkiksass (May 28, 2013)

Sorry to bump this old thread, but I didn't want to start a new one when the subject matter is so close to what I want to say.

As a relatively new cuber, I've always heard people say how important it is to go slow and look ahead, but (I guess like a lot of new cubers) I wanted to go FAST, not slow! I don't have much time for cubing, so when I do get a chance, it's normally spent doing timed solves.

Occasionally I'd spent an hour doing some slower solves. 2 weeks ago, I dedicated a week to working on my F2L efficiency and cross planning, something I'd been meaning to do for ages. Not just an hour here and there - all my cubing was untimed.

Then something crazy happened. After not improving at all for around 6 weeks, I demolished every PB except single (although I came close to that too). The session average was over 2 seconds better than my PB Ao50 had been only 2 weeks previously! I'd never had a session with more than 1 sub-20 in it. This one had 7, all none-lucky (and only 2 sup-30s! ).

Anyway, here's my new PBs, and progress in the last fortnight (since spending a week doing slow solves only):



Spoiler



Ao100 - 24.61 (new)
Ao50 - 23.36 (-3.45s)
Ao12 - 22.47 (-1.56s)
Ao5 - 20.24 (-2.38s)



Personally, I believe that you can only become faster by doing slow practice, criticising your own methods, and looking for ways in which you can improve. Timed solves will make you more consistent but, because you don't have time to be analytical, you will always be restricted by the limits of your current (bad) habits and technique. 

Just my 2 cents worth!


----------



## pjk (May 28, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> Sorry to bump this old thread, but I didn't want to start a new one when the subject matter is so close to what I want to say.
> 
> As a relatively new cuber, I've always heard people say how important it is to go slow and look ahead, but (I guess like a lot of new cubers) I wanted to go FAST, not slow! I don't have much time for cubing, so when I do get a chance, it's normally spent doing timed solves.
> 
> ...


It is certainly a worthwhile bump, no need to apologize.

I hadn't come across that article until now, but it brings up a point I've always thought about. Anyone here know who Tim Farris is? He wrote a few good books, but basically he is always testing himself and trying to improve himself physically and mentally. He always tries to analyze anything he does to become better and better at it, and has done some pretty wild things that most people didn't believe was possible. I am a big fan and have believed in a lot of what he says long before I read his books.

To relate to cubing: I think focusing on certain things does help, but more so as you get faster. I think getting down to 20-30 seconds is something that you can do relatively quickly just by solving over and over. You naturally learn things from solving that can't really be described, and it is important. Once you hit a plateau, I think it is important to further analyze your solves. What part is taking the longest? How does it compare to others? Why is it taking so long? etc.

I had a barrier at 24 seconds for several months, which was a long time for me at the time. I think went through my solves and analyzed them, and realized that my movecount was significantly higher than most. So I went through every F2L case that came up, and looked up alternative ways. I think discovered that I was doing a lot of cases differently than normal, and that there were much better ways to do them. I reduced my F2L movecount from around 45 average, down to 35 within 2 weeks or so, and then broke the barrier I was at. My advice for people who are not under 20 seconds and have hit a barrier is to focus on move count. Instead of just solving, make the most of every situation. Solve each situation the best way possible, not just the way you're used to.

This can be applied to almost any puzzle, or almost anything in life that we do. Want to learn a language? Don't just get a book and start studying, create a plan so you can learn it faster. The method you chose will significantly affect how long it takes to learn the language.


----------



## speedcuber50 (May 29, 2013)

JustinJ said:


> At least to get to the point where I am, aside from learning algs and stuff, pure practice worked fine.


That's probably because you haven't reached the plateau yet!

More personally, I've been wondering why my times have stopped improving... Also, the article was interesting as I did indeed experiance what they said about typing.

I learnt to type at around 30 WPM. After years of programming, I had hit 65 WPM and stopped improving. Recently I've been doing drills and stuff, which has improved it to about 70 under optimal conditions.


----------



## PJKCuber (Sep 26, 2014)

Hey Guys, there is one thing that I have noticed about my progress. I improve fairly quickly,but when I get to barrier I fail like a patzer and get stuck on it for 2 months.
It took me around a month to get to 29 seconds. BUT then I stayed at 29 for 2 weeks and then went to 22.
I stayed on 22 for 2 months until I broke sub 20.
I've been sub 20 for a week now and now I average 18.5 seconds(-1.5 seconds in a week????).
I need to practice something other than 3x3 now.


----------



## guysensei1 (Sep 26, 2014)

PJKCuber said:


> Hey Guys, there is one thing that I have noticed about my progress. I improve fairly quickly,but when I get to barrier I fail like a patzer and get stuck on it for 2 months.
> It took me around a month to get to 29 seconds. BUT then I stayed at 29 for 2 weeks and then went to 22.
> I stayed on 22 for 2 months until I broke sub 20.
> I've been sub 20 for a week now and now I average 18.5 seconds(-1.5 seconds in a week????).
> I need to practice something other than 3x3 now.



Sounds like a normal thing.


----------



## PJKCuber (Sep 26, 2014)

guysensei1 said:


> Sounds like a normal thing.


Really,who cares anyway? I didn't think losing 1.5 seconds in a week was common. I have no idea myself how that happened.


----------



## guysensei1 (Sep 26, 2014)

PJKCuber said:


> Really,who cares anyway? I didn't think losing 1.5 seconds in a week was common. I have no idea myself how that happened.



When I broke the sub-20 barrier I went all the way to 16 seconds in around 2-3 weeks. Pretty normal.


----------



## CriticalCubing (Sep 26, 2014)

guysensei1 said:


> When I broke the sub-20 barrier I went all the way to 16 seconds in around 2-3 weeks. Pretty normal.


Same here. with just solving white, I am 16 sec solver, but solving CN, I am sub 18 

EDIT: Wong, how many months in cubing you became sub 15? 9 months?


----------



## G2013 (Sep 26, 2014)

In January 2013 I wasn't even sub-30, lol. Now I'm almost sub-15


----------



## guysensei1 (Sep 26, 2014)

CriticalCubing said:


> Same here. with just solving white, I am 16 sec solver, but solving CN, I am sub 18
> 
> EDIT: Wong, how many months in cubing you became sub 15? 9 months?



only started serious speedcubing around december last year. So ~10 months?


----------



## CriticalCubing (Sep 26, 2014)

G2013 said:


> In January 2013 I wasn't even sub-30, lol. Now I'm almost sub-15


Wow, I started in Feb and I am also almost sub 15  Do you know full OLL?


----------



## G2013 (Sep 26, 2014)

Critical Cubing said:


> Wow, I started in Feb and I am also almost sub 15 Do you know full OLL?


Yes, I am full fridrich since March of 2013.
I learned from Badmephisto's site


----------



## sneaklyfox (Sep 26, 2014)

CriticalCubing said:


> Wow, I started in Feb and I am also almost sub 15  Do you know full OLL?



What does being sub-15 mean to you?


----------



## goodatthis (Sep 26, 2014)

lol Ive been cubing since January and average 18-19. Makes me feel slow haha. But I am better at other cubes than most people my speed (mainly just bigger cubes) since I focused on that relatively early in my cubing career.


----------



## PJKCuber (Sep 27, 2014)

I hate myself because I can't look ahead.


----------



## guysensei1 (Sep 27, 2014)

PJKCuber said:


> I hate myself because I can't look ahead.



Neither can I.


----------



## CriticalCubing (Sep 27, 2014)

sneaklyfox said:


> What does being sub-15 mean to you?


If you can please rephrase that/. Sub 15 is averaging less than 15 seconds that is 14.99 and below. I average 15.8x solving just white so that is what I meant my almost sub 15. I am CN and I average high 17s with it so in that case I am not almost sub 15.


----------



## cubecraze1 (Sep 27, 2014)

CriticalCubing said:


> If you can please rephrase that/. Sub 15 is averaging less than 15 seconds that is 14.99 and below. I average 15.8x solving just white so that is what I meant my almost sub 15. I am CN and I average high 17s with it so in that case I am not almost sub 15.



You are not CN if you have a difference in solve times with other colours.


----------



## CriticalCubing (Sep 27, 2014)

cubecraze1 said:


> You are not CN if you have a difference in solve times with other colours.


??? Only my white is fastest, other 5 colours have similar times. In timed solves, I do all colours except white.


----------



## PJKCuber (Sep 27, 2014)

CriticalCubing said:


> ??? Only my white is fastest, other 5 colours have similar times. In timed solves, I do all colours except white.



Then you are not CN. You should get similar times using all six colors. Even cyoubx is sub 15 CN but averages 11-12 with white. That doesn't make him CN.


----------



## Filipe Teixeira (Jan 23, 2021)

I bought this book today, hope it helps me getting over my plateau after all these years





__





Getting Unstuck: Break Free of the Plateau Effect (English Edition) - eBooks em Inglês na Amazon.com.br


Compre Getting Unstuck: Break Free of the Plateau Effect (English Edition) de Thompson, Hugh, Sullivan, Bob na Amazon.com.br. Confira também os eBooks mais vendidos, lançamentos e livros digitais exclusivos.



www.amazon.com.br





I'll post here when I finish reading and if it helps

Is there anything that helped you guys overcome plateaus?


----------

