# BLD method choice



## WTSnacks (Feb 15, 2009)

Sorry if this was already answered, but I used that search thingy and didn't find any useful info.

Could you please tell, what is the best BLD method for beginner, which is also "compatible" with more advanced methods? What I mean is: it should be relatively easy to learn, but I don't want to re-learn everything from scratch when moving to more advanced/difficult methods. Like, for example, beginner's method with 2-look OLL, 2-look PLL for "normal" solving, which allows smooth transition to Fridrich.

What do you suggest to learn first and what next? (Yes, I have read the descriptions of most popular methods, but all of them still look equally scary to me...)


----------



## byu (Feb 15, 2009)

Do not be scared by blindfold methods, I was at first, but after I tried them, they became easier. You have several options. You could go in these main directions for blindfold cubing:

1. Learn 3OP, uses three cycles and handles orientation and permutation separately

2. Learn Old Pochmann (sometimes also called Classic Pochmann) that uses two cycles and does orientation and permutation together.

I prefer Old Pochmann, but 3OP uses three cycles, which is what is used in freestyle (most of the time), which is currently the fastest method (and hardest).

EDIT: After learning either one of these, when you get better, you can learn M2 for edges blindfolded, it's very fast.


----------



## Rubikgenius (Feb 15, 2009)

Hi there,

For a beginner, I suggest you learn Pochmann. It is really easy to understand and execute. You can then learn 3OP and then 3OP with M2 for edges, and then learn how to do 3 sticker cycling, which is very fast.


----------



## WTSnacks (Feb 15, 2009)

Thanks!

Well, M2 is something I'm looking forward to learn, I just *love* those M-slice moves. 

So I guess I should try classic Pochmann and 3OP for a week each and then choose one of those, as M2/* is definitely not something I can start with right now.


----------



## Rubikgenius (Feb 15, 2009)

Yes, that is correct. Good luck!


----------



## joey (Feb 15, 2009)

WTSnacks said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Well, M2 is something I'm looking forward to learn, I just *love* those M-slice moves.
> 
> So I guess I should try classic Pochmann and 3OP for a week each and then choose one of those, as M2/* is definitely not something I can start with right now.


No, start with M2, I see no reason not too.


----------



## Gparker (Feb 15, 2009)

joey said:


> WTSnacks said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks!
> ...



yea but with classic pochmann you dont really need to learn new algs


----------



## happa95 (Feb 15, 2009)

Gparker said:


> joey said:
> 
> 
> > WTSnacks said:
> ...



 You don't learn algs for M2!!!! They're just completely intuitive setups. Except for maybe shooting to UF and DB but seriously, how hard is it to learn U2 M' U2 M'?


----------



## puzzlemaster (Feb 15, 2009)

my recommendation... use classic pochmann for the corners and use M2 for the edges to start...M2 is by far the easiest and is an amazing method for edges...for the corners, use old Pochmann and switch to 3-cycle if you feel that you have got the hang of it...pochmann corners are somewhat fast and are extremely easy to memorize and execute...3 cycle are a little bit faster but are much more difficult to understand, memorize, and execute...that's my recommendation


----------



## DavidWoner (Feb 15, 2009)

yeah start with Pochmann Corners and M2 edges. I never got a success with classic Pochmann edges, but I got a success on my first attempt with M2.


----------



## Stefan (Feb 15, 2009)

My recommendation will be old pochmann first. Not just corners, but also edges. It's still easy to switch to M2, but to learn and understand the concepts, old pochmann is cleaner. Particularly because edges are solved exactly like the corners, including the same kind of side effect. Mixing old pochmann corners with M2 edges is already mixing two very different side effects, and the M slice toggling does throw many people off at first.


----------



## WTSnacks (Feb 15, 2009)

joey said:


> No, start with M2, I see no reason not too.





happa95 said:


> You don't learn algs for M2!!!! They're just completely intuitive setups. Except for maybe shooting to UF and DB





puzzlemaster said:


> my recommendation... use classic pochmann for the corners and use M2 for the edges to start...





Vault312 said:


> yeah start with Pochmann Corners and M2 edges.





StefanPochmann said:


> My recommendation will be old pochmann first. Not just corners, but also edges. It's still easy to switch to M2, but to learn and understand the concepts, old pochmann is cleaner.



Well... indeed. You have convinced me.

I've just started with classic Pochmann, it turned out to be an insanely easy method with eyes open, but... but... oh well... really have to practice with memorization. 

So it looks like if I familiarize myself with both methods first (classic Pochmann and 3OP) and pick M2 right after that without waiting too long, it will do no harm.

Okay, thanks again.


----------



## byu (Feb 15, 2009)

I think that is a very good plan.


----------



## rahulkadukar (Feb 15, 2009)

Well I could never understand Pochmann and I prefer 3OP and try to get Macky's bldguide it is brilliant


----------



## byu (Feb 15, 2009)

rahulkadukar said:


> Well I could never understand Pochmann and I prefer 3OP and try to get Macky's bldguide it is brilliant



Funny. I find Pochmann simple, and I never truly understood 3OP. Orienting pieces before permuting doesn't work for me. I have to do them together.


----------



## Sir E Brum (Feb 16, 2009)

Classic Pochmann is wonderful because it is very easy to do setup moves.


----------



## kjeldsen (Feb 20, 2009)

Excuse me, i'm trying to get into blindfold cubing, but i'm seeing the terms "M2 for edges", or similar (R2, U2?). What manner of method is that? 

I'm currently taking a look at classic Pochman for corners atleast.


----------



## byu (Feb 20, 2009)

M2 is a blindfold method for edges.

R2 is a blindfold method for corners. U2 is just a variation of R2.


----------



## Sir E Brum (Feb 21, 2009)

byu said:


> rahulkadukar said:
> 
> 
> > Well I could never understand Pochmann and I prefer 3OP and try to get Macky's bldguide it is brilliant
> ...



Have a look at the ZZ method. The very first step is Edge Orientation. If the edge is correctly oriented, you can move it into its solved position using any moves except F, F', B, and B'. The EO allows you to place your edges easily to cycle them.


----------



## Rubikgenius (Mar 4, 2009)

I have a question about the M2 method. Like, I can shoot to all the targets except the ones on the M- slice. Any suggestions?


----------



## happa95 (Mar 5, 2009)

Rubikgenius said:


> I have a question about the M2 method. Like, I can shoot to all the targets except the ones on the M- slice. Any suggestions?



What exactly is your question?


----------



## Gparker (Mar 5, 2009)

Rubikgenius said:


> I have a question about the M2 method. Like, I can shoot to all the targets except the ones on the M- slice. Any suggestions?



learn the algorithms for the m slice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_iHsQ045EM


----------



## Gparker (Mar 5, 2009)

happa95 said:


> Gparker said:
> 
> 
> > joey said:
> ...



dont forget BU and BD and FU


----------



## happa95 (Mar 5, 2009)

Gparker said:


> happa95 said:
> 
> 
> > Gparker said:
> ...



i do without those. It is very easy to keep track of flipped M-slice edges.


----------



## Stefan (Mar 5, 2009)

Rubikgenius said:


> I have a question about the M2 method. Like, I can shoot to all the targets except the ones on the M- slice. Any suggestions?


I figured it out on my own and I'm not the "Rubikgenius" here, so I'm sure you can figure it out on your own as well.


----------



## Rubikgenius (Mar 5, 2009)

Ummm... ok. Thanks for your help


----------



## peterbat (Mar 5, 2009)

Don't worry, Stefan is just complimenting you on your hilarious choice of user name.

For shooting to the M-slice, I just use:

UB, BU: M2
DB, BD: M U2 M U2
UF, FU: U2 M' U2 M'

For BU, BD, and FU, you'll be putting your edge in flipped the wrong way. 

When you're memorizing, if you know you're going to shoot to BU (for example) somewhere in your solve, just make sure that the next sticker you memo is the sticker that UB shoots to. This is because after your M2, UB will be in the buffer, not BU. Same goes for BD and FU.

While you memo, just make sure you keep track of all "wrong" M-slice edges you encounter, and flip them at the end. Hope that helps.

EDIT: I'm assuming your buffer is DF


----------



## rjohnson_8ball (Mar 6, 2009)

For what it's worth, I started with 3OP method and still have not changed yet to either Classic or M2 Pochmann or free style. I am accustomed to memorizing the edge/corner orientations/cycles separately. I've always like the fact that it's easy for me to train on each of those 4 phases independently.


----------



## Gparker (Mar 7, 2009)

OR you can actually learn the algs for every position on the m slice, i think its easier because you dont have to keep track of flipped edges. The algs are not that long or hard to memorize and theres only 5, and 3 are so simple, oh and parity but thats a really easy alg too


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_iHsQ045EM


----------



## Lord Voldemort (Mar 13, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> My recommendation will be old pochmann first. Not just corners, but also edges. It's still easy to switch to M2, but to learn and understand the concepts, old pochmann is cleaner. Particularly because edges are solved exactly like the corners, including the same kind of side effect. Mixing old pochmann corners with M2 edges is already mixing two very different side effects, and the M slice toggling does throw many people off at first.



Take it from mr. Pochmann.
I tried a few other methods before settling on Old Pochmann (starting out)
and it seems the most logical and obvious for me.

But for you guys that advocate other stuff, could you maybe link to a *good* tutorial so we can see what it's all about.


----------



## Sune (Mar 19, 2009)

Need some help here deciding what to learn next after classic Pochmann...

I learned classic Pochmann because it's probably the easiest method to understand. However, I felt that it isn't very effective in terms of speed since you waste a lot of moves for swapping just 2 pieces a time. On the other hand, 3OP permutations looked pretty nice, but I totally failed with 4-step memo. Also, I read the description of TuRBo method and instantly liked it, howewer, it's probably too much to start with (all the additional algs and such).

So, I came up with this idea: do a solve as in classic Pochmann, but instead of preparing pieces for T/J/Y-perms, prepare them for U/A-perms. It's like classic Pochmann solve, but solving two pieces a time instead of one. Or 3-cycles with orienting "on the fly". Or very simplified TuRBo, only with longer setup moves. And it feels kind of "natural" and noob-friendly. I tried to use this for edges, with success. Using UF as buffer, I place next 2 pieces to UL/UR, UL/UB or UR/UB and do U-perm. Of course, there can be the usual parity issues, but still...

So what do you guys think of this "method"? Are there any real downsides I missed? Is it worth continuing to use this for edges? For corners? (with probable transition to TuRBo later on)

Also, I know M2 is considered one of the fastest methods for edges, but how is M2 compared to TuRBo edges in execution speed and move count? Since I'm standing in the middle of a crossroads, I might as well just learn M2 instead... Are there any top BLD cubers who use TuRBo as their main method for edges?


----------



## byu (Mar 19, 2009)

Most top BLD cubers use freestyle, which is similar to TuRBo


----------



## TheBB (Mar 19, 2009)

Sune said:


> So what do you guys think of this "method"? Are there any real downsides I missed? Is it worth continuing to use this for edges? For corners? (with probable transition to TuRBo later on)



I'm sub-3 using this method for corners and edges, and improving still. Extending to TuRBo and freestyle is easy. So yeah, it's not bad.


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 20, 2009)

Is this old pochmann?


----------



## byu (Mar 20, 2009)

Zeroknight said:


> Is this old pochmann?



Yes, that is old pochmann


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 20, 2009)

Thanks, but I think I should learn cube theory first? Y/N?


----------



## Gparker (Mar 20, 2009)

so is  this video

i reccomend the video because he explains everything so well


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 28, 2009)

Hey I don't want to sound like a n00b, but I tried old pochmann, and I didn't really understand it. There is only on alg to orient corners, and how do you know what is going to go were next? Am I mising something? Thanks in advance. 

EDIT: Also, if this is the same as old pochmann, should I read it to better understand how it works? Or is it different?


----------



## byu (Mar 28, 2009)

Yeah. That's old pochmann. Read it.


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 29, 2009)

Thanks man. I also just found the tutorial here, and I heard it's really great; it also looks like it covers things extensively.


----------



## Kian (Mar 29, 2009)

Zeroknight said:


> Hey I don't want to sound like a n00b, but I tried old pochmann, and I didn't really understand it. There is only on alg to orient corners, and how do you know what is going to go were next? Am I mising something? Thanks in advance.
> 
> EDIT: Also, if this is the same as old pochmann, should I read it to better understand how it works? Or is it different?



you don't orient anything separately using pure classic (old) pochmann, you do it together.


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 29, 2009)

Sorry man, could you reiterate please?

and btw, how do you get a wca profile, do you need to go to an event first?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Gparker (Mar 29, 2009)

Zeroknight said:


> Sorry man, could you reiterate please?
> 
> and btw, how do you get a wca profile, do you need to go to an event first?
> 
> Thanks in advance.



you orient and permute at the same time, no orientation seprate needed. and for the wca profile, you need to go to a competition first then og on your settings and you should see an option to enter your code


----------



## Zeroknight (Mar 29, 2009)

Okay... so you orient using setup moves, and then one of the restrictive algs?


----------



## Kian (Mar 29, 2009)

Zeroknight said:


> Okay... so you orient using setup moves, and then one of the restrictive algs?



well, no.

i think you still have to learn a good bit more about the method. maybe check out a few other tutorials, they may help more.

basically you are solving one piece at a time, in the correct orientation and permutation, with classic pochmann. that goes for both edges and corners.

and yes, your wca profile will include your times from official competitions. you will get a wca id when you got to your first competition.


----------



## MatsBergsten (Mar 29, 2009)

Another opinion , maybe you don't need it any longer since you have already chosen. 

I tried different methods and found Classic Pochmann the easiest to understand, by far!
(Edit: when this happened I did not know neither J- T- or Y-permutations)
And execute. Then it is natural to add M2 and with M2 it is easy to adapt to bigger cubes blind (r2 instead of M2).


----------



## Rubikgenius (Apr 11, 2009)

Personally, I don't think any of the methods : 2cycle or 3 cycle are "easier". You just have to chose one and just stick with it. To me, both the Pochmann method and 3 cycle seem easy, but I use freestyle edges and 3OP corners.


----------



## rahulkadukar (Apr 13, 2009)

I could never understand Classic Pochmann and I think 3OP is too easy and quite fast. PB 1:52.38


----------



## Rubikgenius (Apr 13, 2009)

Yes 3op is quite fast, but not as fast as freestyle!


----------

