# Some advice people give that I don't agree with



## Smiles (Jul 6, 2012)

First off, I would like to say that I think many cubers are smart, and the people who say these things have reasonable arguments to defend their opinion.
I just disagree with some things.




*1. You don't need to be at a certain level to get a better cube like a Guhong or Zhanchi, it's better to get used to it and not have to deal with a bad cube.*

I disagree with this, because of personal experience. There's nothing wrong with the logic here, it makes sense.

I think that using a cube that is not a good speedcube (but not a terrible one) while learning can help one become a better cuber.

For a long time I didn't know that better cubes could be that good, like corner cutting 45 degrees. I used a well broken-in Rubik's storebought cube lubed with tons of Vaseline for very long, and it didn't hinder my improvement rate. The only problem with that cube was the corner cutting ability.

I didn't really start trying to improve my time until around mid-March 2012, when I was averaging 45 seconds. After about a week, I was averaging around 33 seconds. I was developing my FOP of CFOP. By the end of April, I was averaging 23 seconds. I was still using that old Rubik's cube.

After my new Guhong was delivered, my time didn't change. I figured I needed to get used to it. What surprised me was that after about a week, I noticed my times were improving at the exact same rate as with the Rubik's cube. Obviously the corner cutting was a lot better on the Guhong, but I never really noticed it helping. I used to corner cut maybe once every 2 solves, and my execution didn't feel like it was being held back by the cube.

Same with the Zhanchi, my improvement rate was constant. What really made me think it was great that I got used to a bad cube was that my friend was making loud clicking noises during his solves, which were corner cutting. I never made those sounds, I never used torpedoes (even with loose tensions), and all my execution was smoother than his.

For me, the corner cutting of my Zhanchi is like a bonus. If I'm not doing well, it gets me out of trouble. The speed obviously helped, but it's not like I was going to stay with the Rubik's cube forever. My friends who have better cubes kind of rely on the corner cutting ability, which increases the chances of popping and can cause inconsistent solves.

Before Zhanchis existed, people subbed 10 on Guhongs. I don't see why having a Zhanchi is so important to sub-30 solvers.



*2. To practice F2L (applies only to CFOP), you can get an old cube and take off the stickers of the last layer and then just solve what's there.*

I don't think a lot of people actually do this, but I don't like the idea.

Firstly, I'm colour neutral and that doesn't work for me.

However, a few months ago I was a regular white-side-first solver, and this idea was odd to me.
When you're doing F2L, you can obviously do it faster without the last layer in sight. For example, if I'm doing white and I get the orange-blue pair in and I see a piece with blue on it, I immediately know that it has red as well. However, with the last layer existing, there are 2 extra blue corners and 1 extra blue edge, as well as extra red stickers, etc. 

Additionally, being able to recognize the OLL quickly after F2L is good to get used to, and using different inserts such as sledgehammer to orient LL edges is also something to watch out for, unless all your last layer stickers are peeled off.

A big part of look-ahead during F2L is being able to not just see a piece, but tracking it beforehand so that you know its exact orientation and whether or not you're 100% confident you're looking at the right piece. Part of being fluent in F2L is training yourself to ignore the last layer pieces instead of hide them completely. If anyone finds the last layer colours distracting, peeling off the stickers won't help.


----------



## bigbee99 (Jul 6, 2012)

I agree with everything that you said here, especially the second one.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 6, 2012)

The first argument will go on for ever. And I completely disagree with you. The argument that you need to learn to turn accurately first, and then progress, so that you don't become sloppy, sounds nice, but the reality is that no matter how long you use a crap cube, once you start using a 'speed cube' you will start cutting corners. I don't see what everyone's problem is with n00bs learning to cut corners, it is exactly that, cutting the corner, meaning being more efficient/faster. I see no problem with people learning to cut corners , as as soon as it pops, you learn how far you can take it. I don't know if anyone knows, because they never seem to mention it, but you can actually tighten a guhong/zanchi. I suggest that people start with a decent cube, but tighten it. Gradually getting looser as they progress. One should start to learn as they go on, if you wanted to learn to snowboard, you wouldn't go buy ski's to practice on.

The only legit argument about learning accurate turning, is it will hinder you on big cubes if you don't do it. But seens as you have to change your grip and turning style for a big cube, the I thinkit is something you have to re-learn anyway, so it really doesn't matter.

​And FYI the second point is an exelent way to teach/learn F2l. It's a very good way to explain F2l to a nube.


----------



## Ninja Storm (Jul 6, 2012)

I like you. Your points were good, and you had the explanations to back your reasoning. I agree with your first point, and I'm kinda impartial on the second. I really liked how you called corner-cutting a bonus, and that it's backup for when you're not doing well.

Good post, 10/10


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 6, 2012)

Interesting ideas brought up.

*As it goes with your first point,* I agree with you. My experience, albeit a much longer road, takes a similar route. However, I don't think comparing my experience to the experience of other newer cubers today is well worth the trouble since three years ago, GuHongs didn't quite exist.
What I personally fail to understand is the necessity for these top-notch cubes of today. By being exposed to these cubes as they were released, I daresay I can appreciate them a lot more than the run-of-the-mill new cuber who makes the leap from Rubik's storebought to Lubix Elite or whathaveyou.
Not only did I get sub-30 as a beginner with a Vaselined storebought before buying a different cube, but I've seen videos of people getting sub-15 averages with storeboughts, which leaves the mindsets "You need the fastest cube to be fast" or "You need the record-breaking cube to be fast" in the dust.
On top of it all, the old adage "Focus is better spent on the journey rather than the destination", which may or may not seem applicable to the individual, still rings true to my experience. I was able to develop my own cubing style which led to the transition from a crackly A-II to a buttery F-II, which I then used for a year before getting a ZhanChi prototype. I feel like had I not undergone this journey, I wouldn't have benefited nearly as much as I have.
(I really can't find a good way to explain what I'm thinking.)

*As far as it goes with your second point,* I actually disagree from a less advanced standpoint, but agree from a more advanced standpoint. If a person has yet to be fully acquainted with a style of doing F2L (or F2B), then his/her job is made astronomically easier by ridding him/herself of the irrelevant pieces the step is solving. The practice of finding pieces is made less abstract and unpredictable.
However, for colour neutral solvers who wish their colour neutrality remain intact, this practice should be adamantly discouraged for obvious reasons.
An additional however lies with more advanced solvers--in particular, those who are acquainted with solving F2L who are ready to attempt at least a little bit of last layer control. Not having the U layer to worry about could mean that in actual full-cube practice, a cuber is more likely to get a dot case because of a lack of partial edge control. This is why I personally always stress exploring the cube in lieu of mindless solving for hours at a time. Take charge of time and be diligent with it! Experimentation will not only improve a cuber's understanding of the puzzle they're solving, but over time, it'll help a cuber's times.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 6, 2012)

Agree with both points. But yeah, if you have a terrible cube, that's not helpful. Before I got any real speedcubes, I had a Rubik's storebought. It's actually rather decent for a storebought. I had known how to solve a Rubik's cube for decades and I only used the Rubik's brand cubes. They weren't really good enough for me to do fingertricks on though and they broke after years of use. With the more recent storebought, I was able to turn sides with finger flicks and that was what got me interested in speedcubing because I knew you had to do finger tricks to actually get fast.

Anyway, it's ok but actually locks up a lot, even when it looks lined up. It got annoying to use it when I got faster because it held me up tons. And after a point it's fun to use an actually fast cube. So I would recommend getting a slightly better cube that has a bit of corner cutting ability but not much. Getting a cube that isn't too fast is also beneficial because it helps you naturally move slower so you can work on look ahead. Mine just actually locked up when it shouldn't have and that distracted me from looking ahead to trying to get the stupid thing to turn.

It's like giving a beginner vioin student a Stradivarius. It'll sound nicer than a cheap violin of course, but it won't help you improve your tone as much because it already sounds decent. But a good violinist can make a cheap violin sound like a strad (well, somewhat). And Feliks could probably sub-10 with my storebought.

In short, your instrument should be always a step or two better than you. It should not hold you back nor make you seem much better than you really are. Just my opinion.


----------



## cyoubx (Jul 6, 2012)

applemobile said:


> One should start to learn as they go on, if you wanted to learn to snowboard, you wouldn't go buy ski's to practice on..



He's not saying to practice 3x3 on a rex cube.

A better comparison would be buying the best snowboard available from the get-go. And in that respect, there's nothing inherently wrong with beginners using the best product, but there's nothing obviously wrong with beginners using a lesser product either. Under that mindset, I personally found it to be enjoyable when upgrading from a storebought to a DIY and so on. In my opinion, it's not really about the times you end up getting but rather the satisfaction from experiencing something better.


To add to the list:

"It's the cuber not the cube." - while this may have been correct a few years ago, things have definitely changed. I still think it's good to think about, and it's generally true, but it's not a say-all-end-all catchphrase anymore. I've seen a lot of beginners spewing this out and it bothers me a little. At some point, say sub-15, the cube definitely plays a role. This is probably obvious to people here, but it's a little troubling to see how many people abide by this so firmly. I'm probably the only one who thinks this way though, haha.


----------



## drewsopchak (Jul 6, 2012)

Cuber not the cube is right. I don't think it effects someone's improvement to use a speed cube when they're slow, but I think it's nice for them psychologically.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 6, 2012)

cyoubx said:


> To add to the list:
> 
> "It's the cuber not the cube." - while this may have been correct a few years ago, things have definitely changed. I still think it's good to think about, and it's generally true, but it's not a say-all-end-all catchphrase anymore. I've seen a lot of beginners spewing this out and it bothers me a little. At some point, say sub-15, the cube definitely plays a role. This is probably obvious to people here, but it's a little troubling to see how many people abide by this so firmly. I'm probably the only one who thinks this way though, haha.



A scary one, this. It seems that with all of the advancement of 3x3 hardware recently, more than occasionally the cube becomes the primary resultsgiver. But the cuber also plays a role in it too. That's why you have people like Ravi Fernando turning furiously and people like Shelley Chang always letting the moves flow. I think the standard should be set that a cuber should use a cube suited for their current point of learning. Again, I'll bring up experimentation, not only with "software" (technique), but with the hardware as well. As the variety of cubes a cuber is exposed to grows, the more easy it becomes to find a cube suited for the cuber.


----------



## drewsopchak (Jul 6, 2012)

I also don't believe in strategic practicing of a certain step with the exception of time attacks.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 6, 2012)

applemobile said:


> The first argument will go on for ever. And I completely disagree with you. The argument that you need to learn to turn accurately first, and then progress, so that you don't become sloppy, sounds nice, but the reality is that no matter how long you use a crap cube, once you start using a 'speed cube' you will start cutting corners. I don't see what everyone's problem is with n00bs learning to cut corners, it is exactly that, cutting the corner, meaning being more efficient/faster. I see no problem with people learning to cut corners , as as soon as it pops, you learn how far you can take it. I don't know if anyone knows, because they never seem to mention it, but you can actually tighten a guhong/zanchi. I suggest that people start with a decent cube, but tighten it. Gradually getting looser as they progress. One should start to learn as they go on, if you wanted to learn to snowboard, you wouldn't go buy ski's to practice on.
> 
> The only legit argument about learning accurate turning, is it will hinder you on big cubes if you don't do it. But seens as you have to change your grip and turning style for a big cube, the I thinkit is something you have to re-learn anyway, so it really doesn't matter.



Point well taken! But I wonder... when people learn to cut corners, are they practicing cutting at the place where it's most efficient? What I mean is that if you had a cube with great corner-cutting ability and tried not to do any corner cutting, that would not be efficient obviously, but there's a point when the cube can still cut the corner because you're at some ridiculous 45+ degree angle but there's some resistance which actually slows you down again. So we should really be finding the optimal angle at which to cut. No?


----------



## Zarxrax (Jul 6, 2012)

Smiles said:


> I think that using a cube that is not a good speedcube (but not a terrible one) while learning can help one become a better cuber.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...



The only thing that you are supporting in your argument is that having a crappy cube can help you turn more accurately without relying on corner cutting. Its a HUGE stretch to go from that to actually saying this makes you a better cuber. You talk about corner cutting as if its a bad thing. Pretty much all development in cubes over the past several years has been in trying to develop cubes that cut corners better. In fact, this is the whole point of getting something that's not a storebought. The fact is, corner cutting is a good thing that helps improve times. 
You go on to say that changing your cube to a corner cutting one didn't immediately improve your times. Well from your description, it sounds like that's because you weren't even attempting to cut corners. You had trained on a cube that couldn't do it for so long, that you didn't know how to take advantage of this new ability.
And then you list the downside of corner cutting as increasing the chances of popping. I'm sorry, but with correct tensions and a modern cube, popping isn't really an issue anymore. Try using some of the cubes that people were using several years back, such as the original Type-A, and then get back to me about popping.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 6, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> I also don't believe in strategic practicing of a certain step with the exception of time attacks.



You don't believe in strategic practicing or you don't believe in practicing certain steps (like cross, for example) as standalone for any period of time? Completely disagree with either or both.

This is turning into one big debate thread. Haha.


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 6, 2012)

In addition to what Zarxrax said, popping's never an issue on my GuHong v2 which I got about a month ago. However, to say that all advancements were made in pursuit of better corner-cutting is so horribly false.
In any case, corner-cutting isn't something to be treated as a new ability nor as a bonus, but as an integral part of speedsolving the 3x3 (at least). Along with it comes proper tensioning, suitable stickers (chipped feel or perfectly square, etc.), and the cuber's own techniques. Additionally, there comes a point where corner-cutting developments go outside of practical boundaries, and we've gone far past there.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 6, 2012)

applemobile said:


> The first argument will go on for ever. And I completely disagree with you. The argument that you need to learn to turn accurately first, and then progress, so that you don't become sloppy, sounds nice, but the reality is that no matter how long you use a crap cube, once you start using a 'speed cube' you will start cutting corners. I don't see what everyone's problem is with n00bs learning to cut corners, it is exactly that, cutting the corner, meaning being more efficient/faster. I see no problem with people learning to cut corners , as as soon as it pops, you learn how far you can take it. I don't know if anyone knows, because they never seem to mention it, but you can actually tighten a guhong/zanchi. I suggest that people start with a decent cube, but tighten it. Gradually getting looser as they progress. One should start to learn as they go on, if you wanted to learn to snowboard, you wouldn't go buy ski's to practice on.
> 
> The only legit argument about learning accurate turning, is it will hinder you on big cubes if you don't do it. But seens as you have to change your grip and turning style for a big cube, the I thinkit is something you have to re-learn anyway, so it really doesn't matter.



Like I mentioned in my beginning post, the arguments are reasonable, and so is yours.
My friend bought a new Rubik's Cube and i actually couldn't flick, and i had to use my entire hand to turn it. That's not what I'm talking about.
The Rubik's brand cube that I used until I was averaging 23 seconds was very well broken in, I think it had some silicone in it, and it turned very smoothly. I'm not saying beginners shouldn't corner cut, but *in my opinion*, learning with that "shortcut" can decrease efficiency and consistency. And "it's the cuber, not the cube" definitely applies to beginners, which in ways supports both of our arguments.

Also, I'm not sure if I made it clear but what I really meant was that I would never recommend a great speedcube to a beginner, unless they had some freakish talent. I'm just saying that immediately getting a great speedcube is probably not going to help if they plan to be a long term speedcuber.

Less precision causing popping can obviously be fixed with torpedoes or tighter tensions, but the former can cause a slightly less flexible cube and lock ups, and the latter just makes the cube harder to turn (unless the cube was too loose, obviously).



applemobile said:


> ​And FYI the second point is an exelent way to teach/learn F2l. It's a very good way to explain F2l to a nube.



Yeah I can agree with that, but I kinda meant practicing it once you already know it.



Zarxrax said:


> The only thing that you are supporting in your argument is that having a crappy cube can help you turn more accurately without relying on corner cutting. Its a HUGE stretch to go from that to actually saying this makes you a better cuber. You talk about corner cutting as if its a bad thing. Pretty much all development in cubes over the past several years has been in trying to develop cubes that cut corners better. In fact, this is the whole point of getting something that's not a storebought. The fact is, corner cutting is a good thing that helps improve times.
> You go on to say that changing your cube to a corner cutting one didn't immediately improve your times. Well from your description, it sounds like that's because you weren't even attempting to cut corners. You had trained on a cube that couldn't do it for so long, that you didn't know how to take advantage of this new ability.
> And then you list the downside of corner cutting as increasing the chances of popping. I'm sorry, but with correct tensions and a modern cube, popping isn't really an issue anymore. Try using some of the cubes that people were using several years back, such as the original Type-A, and then get back to me about popping.



Well the reason torpedoes were invented is cause cubes can still pop even with good tensions.
What I mean about me not corner cutting is that, no one can turn perfectly. If you take advantage of corner cutting regularly, you are pretty much relying on it. Obviously that can be an advantage, but if you turn a bit off of your normal turns you COULD easily lock up or pop if you don't have torpedoes or good tensions. In an extreme case you could even drop the cube.

Don't get me wrong, I do corner cut all the time, just small enough angles that I can barely feel it on a Zhanchi.

And because of the way the pieces move, even if you cut corners perfectly and intentionally, you will still turn the cube at approximately the same rate. Corner cutting should, most of the time, just save you from locking up on your mistakes or from imperfect turns. However, if you've used a bad cube for a long time, then you tend to fault less during turns and it will help your consistency once you have the ability to corner cut (assuming you're used to the good cube)


----------



## applemobile (Jul 6, 2012)

Rather than spending £12 on a rubik's brand, only to have to change it, why not start with a guhong and tighten I up? What is the aversion to this?


----------



## Ranzha (Jul 6, 2012)

applemobile said:


> Rather than spending £12 on a rubik's brand, only to have to change it, why not start with a guhong and tighten I up? What is the aversion to this?



It's unsafe to assume that a tightened GuHong is at the same quality of a storebought. They're two entirely different feels. Also, tightening a GuHong still can allow fast uncontrollable individual turns as it can still allow impaired turning.
Again, I reiterate: Get a cube suited for your current level of achievement. I'd personally have liked to start with a Ghost Hand.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 6, 2012)

applemobile said:


> Rather than spending £12 on a rubik's brand, only to have to change it, why not start with a guhong and tighten I up? What is the aversion to this?



_"Also, I'm not sure if I made it clear but what I really meant was that I would never recommend a great speedcube to a beginner, unless they had some freakish talent. I'm just saying that immediately getting a great speedcube is probably not going to help if they plan to be a long term speedcuber."_

I did imply something but I guess I didn't make it clear. Oops.
By "immediately getting a great speedcube is probably not going to *help*...", I meant like switching from a Rubik's to a Dayan simply because the Dayan cube is better.

If someone with no cube wanted to learn and could wait for the delivery of a great cube, then fine. But more often than not, they'd simply go to the store and buy the first cube they see. And it's not having a great cube that will bring you down, it's more that getting a great cube early on isn't going to *help*.

Okay obviously your times will be faster, but it's about long term. Like when I switched to colour neutral, or learned F2L or PLL, my times were slower at first. But then later on, they got better, like how not upgrading your cube so early can help you turn more accurately.

But drastic changes don't have to be made, I'm all for going from a Rubik's cube to a DIY to like an Alpha V or F-II, then Dayan, or something like that.


----------



## jeff081692 (Jul 6, 2012)

I think that cubers should be able to buy whatever cube they want for whatever reason they want. However, I do know that some benefits to using a stiff cube is to improve your finger muscles, in the same way that adding weights will make you stronger in the long run than doing the same routine with a lighter weight that moves like air in your hands. I read on here that Breandan use to practice with a stiff cube for this reason but I may be wrong since it's been a while since I saw it. Also I have heard in many areas that to master something, master something harder. So doing a few PLL time attacks on a stiff cube would make PLL on your normal cube feel like a piece of cake but I have not explored this type of training yet alternating between stiff and loose cubes.

As for your second point, not all advice is universal to everyone. As you know being CN makes that exercise for F2L pointless but someone else might like the idea and it would encourage them to practice more because they are having fun and challenging themselves at the same time instead of doing the same boring routine. 

And in reply to someone else above. I like to practice steps individually at times because when I look for weakness in my solves I can usually identify what step is holding me back the most and if I use my practice time to get better at that then things always work out better for me that way. I could also just do solves over and over but that is not fun for me when I know I need to work on cross+1 for example. I can do a lot more cross+1 solves and thus eliminate my weakness if i focus solely on that than if I did an avg of 200 each day. An average of 200 each day is in my opinion enough to have steady improvement but that is not how I like to train which is why people will disagree on advice and practice methods.

My advice on taking cubing advice is to look at it from the perspective of someone who would like that kind of training and compare to see if it is something you would like to do and if you like it then go for it and if not then ignore it and if you are stuck then go back and reconsider the advice you skipped over until you find what works best for you.


----------



## insane569 (Jul 6, 2012)

"Hey look I have a Zhanchi Like FAZ IMA get WR" A fast cube wont help much. Nor will Corner cutting since you dont think about it when you solve. It just happens, Its more about the actual solve than the cube. Yea turning fast might help and a little cornercutting doesnt hurt but if you cant solve reasonably well (like 80 face turns per solve) then your time wont be that good. If the cube is too fast for you then overturning is a problem, too slow and underturning is a problem. So dont just jump into the fastest cube and expect results fast. Find a cube that fits your style. Both speed and cornercutting.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 6, 2012)

The 2nd one is just stupid freakin advice. Who says that?


----------



## sneaklyfox (Jul 6, 2012)

Smiles said:


> I did imply something but I guess I didn't make it clear. Oops.
> By "immediately getting a great speedcube is probably not going to *help*...", I meant like switching from a Rubik's to a Dayan simply because the Dayan cube is better.



Actually this describes me. I went from a storebought to a Guhong...


----------



## samchoochiu (Jul 6, 2012)

I totally agree with your first argument. A rubiks brand with CRC is a really good cube imo (considering it takes like 5 min to lube and break the lube in) I can average nearly the same with mine. The only reason I use dayan cubes is for consistency but beginners are inconsistent anyway and should look into a speed cube after his or her first sub 40 single with his rubiks brand. But the main benefit is that it makes you appreciate the speedcube you're using.


----------



## jonlin (Jul 6, 2012)

Smiles said:


> Before Zhanchis existed, people subbed 10 on Guhongs. I don't see why having a Zhanchi is so important to sub-30 solvers.


And in 2010, people subbed 10 on A5's.
I have some things too.
*3. Lookahead is overrated.*
Let me give you a perfect example. Kevin Hays. I do remember Dan on 5x5 saying:
"Hays has no lookahead. Imagine if he DID have lookahead."
Me: That would be extremely scary. He would break all the records.
Hays has lightning fast recognition, to make up for his lack of no lookahead, yet if he has no recognition, why should he be sub-10? I heard someone on the forum a while ago saying:


someone said:


> "If you want to be sub-15, you have to *lookahead* or you'll never get there."


But why should I lookahead if there's a perfectly good cuber who's very fast who doesn't really use it at all? I'm not saying lookahead is bad, in fact, Lookahead is very useful and gives you an advantage. but you can definitely work on other things to make you faster, because you don't need lookahead to sub-15. You don't even need lookahead to sub-10, you guys.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 6, 2012)

sneaklyfox said:


> Actually this describes me. I went from a storebought to a Guhong...



Well I'm not saying that drastic change is bad, since I did the exact same thing. But it depends on when you switched to it. If you were already consistent on the storebought cube when you switched, then it was a good thing to do. If you were annoyed at your storebought for being a bad cube, then I guess whatever works for you works.

What I don't encourage is switching simply because the Guhong is _supposed to_ make your times better (unless your improvement has slowed due to a bad cube).


----------



## Sa967St (Jul 6, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> The 2nd one is just stupid freakin advice. Who says that?


I know some people who actually recommended it 2-3 years ago. It's supposed to help because you're not distracted by the LL stickers, so you can find F2L pieces faster. I've tried it and it didn't work for me at all, but it somehow worked for some people. I don't think it trains you to you ignore the LL when you're solving F2L on a fully-stickered cube. I'm not sure what's up with it.


----------



## Carson (Jul 6, 2012)

I'm going to address the 2nd point first: Although this is a somewhat common technique for practicing f2l, I don't see this recommended as often as it was a few years ago. Either way, it is a practice technique... it will work well for some and may not help others at all. This one is kind of hard to argue for or against, because the experience will be somewhat different everyone. Personally, I never tried it... no particular reason, just didn't take the time. This practice techniques certainly isn't necessary, but I wouldn't go so far as to say there is anything wrong with it.

As for your first point. You seem to be focusing primarily on corner cutting as others' motivation for recommending good cubes to beginners. While corner cutting is a nice bonus (as you point out), this has little to do with me recommending beginners get decent cubes to start with. My recommendations are based on health and technique.
*
Health: *Rubik's brand cubes are hard to turn... that is just a fact of life. Yes, they can be improved dramatically with lube and some sandpaper... but even then they do not perform as well as even a Ghost Hand cube which can be had VERY cheaply. The amount of effort required to turn most name brand cubes is not healthy. I understand the argument that a cube that is more difficult to turn will build finger strength and that will help in the long run, but I believe that logic is flawed. Have you noticed what part(s) of your hands/forearms begin to hurt after using a stiff cube for some time? It is typically not the muscle, but the tendons instead. Putting stress on tendons isn't the way to build strength, it is the way to get carpal tunnel. I am 30 years old, and have been a computer buff since my childhood, have been cubing extensively for six years, have been playing drums (mostly rudimental) since the age of eight, spent five years in college as a percussion major, and currently teach high school band. I, unfortunately, understand the potential damage to wrists and forearms all too well. Trust me, its worth the extra few dollars to get a good cube if it means saving your hands/arms.

*Technique: *Back in the 1800's,(more like the mid 1990's) when I was in high school, "touch keyboarding" first began to be a requirement for students. Back then, few people really used correct technique when typing. Looking back, some of the "self-developed" techniques for typing were pretty laughable. The two finger technique, the four fingers on one hand and one on the other technique, the little circles people would trace in the air while searching for a key, not to mention the furious up and down motion people made with their heads while glancing from the keyboard to the monitor and back. By then I had already been messing with computers for a few years, so I had developed my own form of "touch keyboarding." My method utilized all fingers (some more than others) and included what BLD solvers would probably dub a "floating home row." I stared at the keyboard, and would only look at the monitor after each paragraph. (if then) While this technique was not very efficient or ergonomic, it allowed me to type somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 wpm. While 30 wpm is pretty slow by today's standards, it put me well in front of anyone else in my class at the time. It also put me 10 wpm above the required score for an A in the class, so I could easily have slacked for the entire semester and gotten an A anyway. Instead, I decided that it was finally time to learn to type "correctly." During that semester I forced myself to use correct technique. Initially, my speed and accuracy dropped significantly, but by the end of the semester I was up to 60-80 wpm with correct technique. While much faster than average, that is still not amazing. However, it was more than double what I was accomplishing previously.

What my long winded parable is meant to bestow, is that technique should be emphasized from the very beginning, and "proper" technique with a brand name cube is nearly impossible without very heavy modding. Be it typing, weightlifting, running, swimming, playing an instrument, ballet, etc etc etc; technique is always taught first, not in the middle. After six years of cubing, I am still trying to break bad turning habits I developed when using my first cube. (and it was modded and better than most) 


If this were something like competitive archery, I could understand. The price difference between a base model bow and a top of the line professional bow is thousands of dollars, and the base models aren't that bad... they only need a few relatively inexpensive accessories and you are set for awhile. With cubing however, the price difference between the "base model" you can get from a chain store and the top of the line cubes (excluding customized cubes) is less than ten dollars, and the "base model" is really bad.

*end rant


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 6, 2012)

There's a lot I could say about the first point but there's already been a lot of discussion about it- if I were to argue for or against I know exactly what someone would come back with and what I'd come back with to that. With all good reasons on both sides.

The only thing I'd like to add is my personal problem with using stiff cubes. My cube as you know is very loose and, well fragile. To use a stiff cube encourages a rough (yet accurate tho) turnstyle, so I explode my cube a lot. The only thing I can take from is is perhaps a very smooth cube that has little corner cutting may be the solution.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 6, 2012)

I've been trying to stop people thinking the first moronic point for years, but **** it. 

If you want to waste time having to relearn how to turn a cube that's fine by me.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 6, 2012)

Gogo one sided unsupported etc

Relearn how to turn a cube? I don't believe it's quite as dramatic as you make it seem. Feel free to destroy this barbarically in your own Kirjava way but IMO learning to turn more gently is not nearly as hard as learning to turn more accurately. 

As you say it's terrible to have a rough turn style, not being able to turn a cube well. That can be worked on. I did it. I'm still quite bad at turning, but I don't blame it on my storebought cube. It's simply because I didn't work on it.

Accurate turning is much harder to (re)develop. However, not turning accurately isn't so terrible. People therefore can live without it unlike rough turning which people are forced to work on. I see fairly fast cubers with innacurate turning. Ok, is this a huge problem- debatable. But turning accurately allows for faster turning- less lockups, pops.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 6, 2012)

Relearning is relearning is relearning.

I just find the conjecture that using a good cube will make you a 'sloppy turner' damaging.


----------



## MalusDB (Jul 6, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Relearning is relearning is relearning.



Exactly. Sloppy turning is from laziness anyway, and its the cuber not the cube. Some cubes may provide the possibility for a greater level of sloppiness, but its the cuber who becomes sloppy in the end, not the cube. Obviously. I don't see what the point of this arguement even is, it's pretty clear to me. There is a disadvantage to giving a cube which is capable of letting you develop sloppy turning if you are the kind of person who would fall into that habit. There isn't for someone who doesn't have this predisposition however.


----------



## CarlBrannen (Jul 6, 2012)

I'm 24 years older than Carson and I agree with him. When I ordered a Guhong it was because I was curious, not because I planned on getting into speed cubing. It was the sweet feel of the cube that dragged me in. I started with a V-cube 7x7x7 and after a few hours on that my hands hurt. With a Shengshou that doesn't happen.

As far as the corner cutting, my times are better the less clicking sounds I'm making. The corner cutting is so that you don't spend your look-ahead time practicing the art of figuring out where you were in your algorithm when the cube locked up. Torpedoes are so you don't have to do the same thing when your cube pops. These are improvements; they allow you to concentrate on the already difficult enough task of recognition (and soon enough, look ahead).

I've got a cube with the last layer stickers removed. For me this was an easy test to make, I plan on painting it anyway, and replace yellow with black, so why not take the LL stickers off and see how that works? I've not used it much; can't really say how useful it is. I think it's moderately useful for beginners who are otherwise faced with too much confusion.

Also, I bought a metronome and got immediate intuitive F2L improvement from using it for just a hundred solves. I believe that I could have got to the same place by following the advice "slow down", but the metronome somehow made it easier for me.


----------



## MWilson (Jul 6, 2012)

1. Get whatever really nice speed cube you want, right away.
2. Practice accurate turning on it instead of being lazy, and let speed come naturally as a result of accurate turning.
3. Profit by not having to relearn anything, _and_ being able to turn fast and accurately.

Or, if a person has no self control, they can do the lazy, less effective thing and get a cube with poor corner cutting to force themselves to turn faster, which as Kirjava said just results in having to relearn other things later.

Both sides of this debate act like it's impossible to practice accurate turning on a cube that doesn't enforce it. Self control is all that's needed. If a person can't control themselves during a solve, maybe they should go the extra stupid mile and try solving with their elbows to enforce slower turning for look ahead.


----------



## CarlBrannen (Jul 6, 2012)

I suspect one handed practice is very useful for two-handed look ahead practice, provided you follow your usual algorithms. But one handed practice makes my hands hurt. I wonder if it's a good finger exercise or if it's carpal tunnel on its way.


----------



## Escher (Jul 6, 2012)

Going from a good cube to a bad cube makes you feel as though you have to turn more accurately. This does not necessarily mean that going from a bad cube to a good cube means you will continue to turn accurately. In my mind you're actually more likely to enjoy exploiting the ease of turning in a good cube. There is a distinction between adapting to the constraints of your cube and training your 'own' technical constraints.

However, I do actually think that training with a tighter, yet good, cube is a decent idea, as long as you force yourself to train with both. I don't think there is value in 'progressing' throughout your cubing career from bad to good.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 7, 2012)

I see there's a lot of discussion about the first point.
To clarify, exactly what I mean is that *beginning with a worse cube should not harm your cubing, and should make you more precise.*

And when I said bad cube I didn't mean an unspeedcubeable cube. If you just went out to the dollar store and bought a cube, I'm not saying that's the thing that'll make you a great cuber. My "bad cube" was lubed and broken in. It was *not* hard to turn and I did *not* need to use weird techniques to turn it. A Rubik's storebought cube can be a valid speedcube.

That being said, starting with a bad cube is not *always* good, for example, like you guys are saying, if the cube is hard to turn then it's not going to help.

I also understand that *beginning with a good cube will not harm you either.* I addressed this in an earlier post. What I don't recommend is switching to a really good speedcube before speed is a factor in one's solves. I found that speed was not a great factor in my solves until sub 20.

I'm not telling people to go buy a bad cube, but many people have a Rubik's cube sitting in their house, and simply lubing it often makes it a good enough speedcube to learn with. But if they *dont* have a cube and they are willing to wait for a good cube to be delivered, that's fine too.

Before I was going to get a better cube, I did some research and at I decided to get a Guhong instead of a Zhanchi, because I was *beginning* to get annoyed at my corner cutting ability (average 25s, before I knew about slowing down during F2L, so I wasn't even slowing down at all). Needless to say, I never really needed to corner cut on the Guhong. I'm obviously not as precise as before, but I still rarely corner cut and my speed has improved.


----------



## Raiz (Jul 7, 2012)

Agree with both!


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 7, 2012)

Smiles said:


> *beginning with a worse cube should not harm your cubing, and should make you more precise.*



I like everything else you've said, but this just seems like something you want to be true but actually isn't.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 7, 2012)

Carson said:


> I'm going to address the 2nd point first: Although this is a somewhat common technique for practicing f2l, I don't see this recommended as often as it was a few years ago. Either way, it is a practice technique... it will work well for some and may not help others at all. This one is kind of hard to argue for or against, because the experience will be somewhat different everyone. Personally, I never tried it... no particular reason, just didn't take the time. This practice techniques certainly isn't necessary, but I wouldn't go so far as to say there is anything wrong with it.
> 
> As for your first point. You seem to be focusing primarily on corner cutting as others' motivation for recommending good cubes to beginners. While corner cutting is a nice bonus (as you point out), this has little to do with me recommending beginners get decent cubes to start with. My recommendations are based on health and technique.
> *
> ...



Yeah it all sounds reasonable to me, but I guess I didn't make it clear, a "bad" cube doesn't necessarily have to be hard to turn. For a long time, around the time I started cubing, idk why it was but my cube was harder to turn than other people's. But even then, it took many, many solves for my hands to get tired. They didn't hurt, they just got tired and I stopped.

But it was lubed with Vaseline, and Silicone would have done better. Other people had Vaseline too, so my cube had problems.

Anyway, the point of having a bad cube is to develop precise turning and adapt to no corners being cut. And if it develops muscle at all, it's technique and muscle memory. I think that having an easy-to-turn cube while not being able to corner cut will disallow you from making errors in turns, the consequence being a lock up. And if you start with a Zhanchi, for example, there's more margin for error when you turn. Taking advantage of that margin will just develop error in your turns, if that makes sense.



Kirjava said:


> I like everything else you've said, but this just seems like something you want to be true but actually isn't.



Well it's not just a belief, I actually am more precise because of how long I used a bad cube. I used it until my average time was 23 seconds. I still didn't really have a problem with the cube, it's just that I already ordered a Guhong and that's when it arrived.

And, I do believe what I said to be true because it's all my experience. I wouldn't go strongly recommending a practice unless I knew for sure that it could work. I'm not saying this would work for everyone, since nothing is 100% universal, but it helped me and there's a reason for why it helped me.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 7, 2012)

Smiles said:


> Well it's not just a belief, I actually am more precise because of how long I used a bad cube.



???

How could you possibly know this?


----------



## Smiles (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> ???
> 
> How could you possibly know this?



Lol good point.

The only accurate comparison I have is with my cubing friends, since I can't really judge anyone else's turning.
The only cuber I know who doesn't really corner cut and is comfortable on a bad cube, used a Rubik's storebought cube for just as long as I did.
I am also still comfortable on a Rubik's brand cube and I can easily sub 20 with a useable one.

Also, it seemed to take me longer than most people to get used to a Guhong. This was not a bad thing, cause it's like learning F2L. You slow down at first, then you're used to it and your times improve.
What I couldn't get used to was the better TPS capabilities, and I felt like I wasn't going as fast as I should be going. That all fixed itself within a week or so.

So, in my perspective, the only thing wrong with my using a Rubik's cube was that it took away from my potential TPS for like a week, which is no harm.

To compare further, my friend who constantly got frustrated with his storebought cube and actually broke it in frustration, got a better cube and then loved it. I can still beat him in PLL time attacks and average LL times, so I know I've adapted to this cube. But my lack of corner cutting compared to his means I'm still pretty precise.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 7, 2012)

Yeah, your anecdotal evidence means nothing.

At least I've made you realise that you're passing off things that aren't true as fact.


----------



## drewsopchak (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Yeah, your anecdotal evidence means nothing.
> 
> At least I've made you realise that you're passing off things that aren't true as fact.



We need some twin studies.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Yeah, your anecdotal evidence means nothing.
> 
> At least I've made you realise that you're passing off things that aren't true as fact.



You didn't make me realise anything, and you saying that is just you passing off things that aren't true as fact.

_"I disagree with this, because of personal experience. There's nothing wrong with the logic here, it makes sense.

I think that using a cube that is not a good speedcube (but not a terrible one) while learning can help one become a better cuber."_

When did I ever say that it's a fact? That's it's true? I never said that using a bad cube makes you better. I said that it SHOULD/CAN make you better, and I backed it up by saying that it made me and my friend better. Believe my stories or not, but I never passed it off as a fact. The reason why the topic is even debatable is because there is no hard fact.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

Unless you can go back in time, and start again with a zanchi, your argument will still be little 
More than speculation.


----------



## ZamHalen (Jul 7, 2012)

Who are you?

Honestly I disagree with point 1. People tend to interpret point 1 as the cube being the be all end all.If that was true I should be at least sub 15 by now.It's, in my opinion, 70%-80% cuber the rest cube and other variables. I didn't get a better cube until I averaged about 25 seconds and believe that working through technical aspects rather than mindlessly spamming move sequences helped me get to that point. I've handed my guhong to people who can solve the cube, and guess what happens?It takes just as long for them to solve it as they would with a store brand. Someone could end up thinking like I did for awhile, that if I hit a wall I just buy another cube.And this just doesn't work.

On the other hand I strongly agree with point 2 because I did this and ended up wasting a cube.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

Wasting a cube? Can you not just put stickers on it?


----------



## ZamHalen (Jul 7, 2012)

applemobile said:


> Wasting a cube? Can you not just put stickers on it?



Not when you have trouble buying anything cubing related.Younger beginners may have this problem as well.


----------



## Smiles (Jul 7, 2012)

ZamHalen said:


> Who are you?
> 
> Honestly I disagree with point 1. People tend to interpret point 1 as the cube being the be all end all.If that was true I should be at least sub 15 by now.It's, in my opinion, 70%-80% cuber the rest cube and other variables. I didn't get a better cube until I averaged about 25 seconds and believe that working through technical aspects rather than mindlessly spamming move sequences helped me get to that point. I've handed my guhong to people who can solve the cube, and guess what happens?It takes just as long for them to solve it as they would with a store brand. Someone could end up thinking like I did for awhile, that if I hit a wall I just buy another cube.And this just doesn't work.
> 
> On the other hand I strongly agree with point 2 because I did this and ended up wasting a cube.



Did you actually read my post?

The 2 points are the things I *disagree with*. I'm on your side.

Edit: after rereading your post I'm somewhat confused. my views are that:
1. having a great cube doesn't always make you better
2. peeling off stickers to practice F2L doesn't help


----------



## Carson (Jul 7, 2012)

A couple people have mentioned that their Rubik's brand cubes were actually decent after lubing and breaking in... while this may be true (as many of them feel different), you should consider yourself lucky. Most storebought cubes will never be better than marginally acceptable without true modding. I use many fingertricks that I am unable to duplicate on a storebought cube even if it is lubed. Many of my LL algs are so ingrained in muscle memory, that I cannot apply them without using the same fingertricks. For this reason, I have been unable to solve friends'/family's/random peoples' cubes and have had to use a beginner's method to do so. I'm not saying that it is absolutely impossible to find a Rubik's brand cube that can be somewhat speedsolved after being lubed, but I am saying that its not the norm.

As for the accuracy argument. There is some logic to that argument, but practicing accurate with a turning style that you will not be using when truly speedcubing is not really useful practice. Perhaps others using the same techniques, but I am unable to turn in the same manner as I typically use when solving a storebought cube. I do practice accuracy fairly often, and here is how: Begin solving as slowly as necessary to keep the noise produced by the cube as minimal as possible. It is better to use a clicky cube for this. I can't use my Lun Hui, as I can do pretty much anything to it and it is still quiet. Gradually increase solving speed, but not so much that the cube becomes loud. The real battle is to get as close to your usual solve times as possible while keeping noise to a minimum. I currently average about :21 over long averages, and can usually get down to the mid :20's solving quietly before the noise really kicks in. It is important to note that you should use the same fingertricks and turning style even when you are trying to be quiet. I'm not saying that this is THE way to practice accuracy for everyone, but it has helped me immensely.


----------



## ZamHalen (Jul 7, 2012)

Oh lol It seems I misinterpreted what you were saying......well nothing to do here.


----------



## Carson (Jul 7, 2012)

ZamHalen: You are in my kitchen looking for the toaster? Good... let me know if you find it. Its still packed in a box somewhere from the last time I moved (1.5 years ago) and I haven't found it yet.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

I have 3 toasters if you need to borrow one.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Yeah, your anecdotal evidence means nothing.
> 
> At least I've made you realise that you're passing off things that aren't true as fact.



How are they not true? How can you say this with no supporting points?



Kirjava said:


> I've been trying to stop people thinking the first moronic point for years, but **** it.
> 
> If you want to waste time having to relearn how to turn a cube that's fine by me.



Are you also trying to pass off things that aren't true as fact? How do we know it's true. Is what you posted here a strong argument? 

Why just tell people they're wrong with no convincing back up points?
Define waste time. Define moronic.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

Probably because it would be like arguing with a Jehovas Witness. It's just pointless, just tell them they are wrong and move on.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 7, 2012)

applemobile said:


> Probably because it would be like arguing with a Jehovas Witness. It's just pointless, just tell them they are wrong and move on.



Ah yes. What a fantastic way to have a constructive discussion.


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

The point being nothing constructive will come out of it, there is a strong divide down the middle, the people who think that you should use a Rubik's brand to start with, and the people who are right. It doesn't matter how much it is discussed, an agreement will never be had. Some people are just happy being wrong.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 7, 2012)

Smiles said:


> When did I ever say that it's a fact? That's it's true? I never said that using a bad cube makes you better.



Here you go;



Smiles said:


> it's not just a belief, I actually am more precise because of how long I used a bad cube.







5BLD said:


> How are they not true? How can you say this with no supporting points?



They are not true because they have no supporting points.



5BLD said:


> Are you also trying to pass off things that aren't true as fact? How do we know it's true. Is what you posted here a strong argument?



Good cube turns differently, you have to get used to turning it - requires learning something new.



5BLD said:


> Why just tell people they're wrong with no convincing back up points?



Sometimes I don't explain things that are braindead obvious in case people fell like I'm patronising them.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> They are not true because they have no supporting points.


Hm



Kirjava said:


> Good cube turns differently, you have to get used to turning it - requires learning something new.


Is this as bad as learning to turn accurately?



Kirjava said:


> Sometimes I don't explain things that are braindead obvious in case people fell like I'm patronising them.


I don't think we should just dismiss peoples' personal experiences... If many share the same then it could be considered rather convincing evidence. Either way I don't see how he can be 'wrong' if it's his personal experience. Sure, I can agree with you it's not good evidence for his point, but it is not worthless- if for example many share the same.


----------



## Kirjava (Jul 7, 2012)

5BLD said:


> Is this as bad as learning to turn accurately?



I see no evidence that using a bad cube makes you accurate. I just see that using a good cube gets you used to using a good cube.



5BLD said:


> I don't think we should just dismiss peoples' personal experiences... If many share the same then it could be considered rather convincing evidence. Either way I don't see how he can be 'wrong' if it's his personal experience. Sure, I can agree with you it's not good evidence for his point, but it is not worthless- if for example many share the same.



Confirmation bias


----------



## applemobile (Jul 7, 2012)

I see no evidence that turning accurately makes you a faster cuber.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 7, 2012)

applemobile said:


> I see no evidence that turning accurately makes you a faster cuber.



Allows you to turn faster without pops/lockups.


----------



## Godmil (Jul 7, 2012)

Agh I lost a big post when my iPod crashed  rest assured I have lots I want to say on this topic... Or I could save some time and mention that there was a large thread a wee while ago where this point was hammered out.


----------



## jeff081692 (Jul 7, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I see no evidence that using a bad cube makes you accurate. I just see that using a good cube gets you used to using a good cube.



I have to agree with this one. I can only speak from my experience but I started off with a Rubik's brand and used that for a while. The hard part about solving a rubik's is that you have to apply way more force to do a turn than a DIY at the time. Eventually I got my DIY and every solve it popped because I was used to the rubik's brand. I think this is the unlearning phase because at that time my focus turned to solving accurately so that it wouldn't pop. For a DIY that meant turning with less force than I was used to. When I went from my type c to my guhong there was a similar story but it wasn't as bad as the transition from rubik's to DIY. However, when I got my zhanchi I had already learned to be as precise as possible on a cube of any tension.

Had I started with a zhanchi or type c for that matter, I would have just learned how to control that type of cube and my progress would have probably been quicker in the long run because everytime I upgraded my cube and adapted to the style that it required I instantly beat all my pbs and realized that the cube was holding me back a little. But again that's just my experience. I didn't see starting out with a bad cube helping me with anything. All it did was give me the bad habits of using wrist movements even when I upgraded to better cubes.


----------



## stoic (Jul 7, 2012)

Godmil said:


> I could save some time and mention that there was a large thread a wee while ago where this point was hammered out.



Does this help:


Godmil said:


> it's getting more and more frustrating that people recommend using a rubbish cube, or even worse BUYING a rubbish cube.
> Here are some reasons for getting a good cube:
> 1. A cube that is easier to turn will facilitate fingertricks. This helps steer the cuber away from developing bad turning habits (wristing and such like).
> 2. A poor cube, that frequently locks up, can be frustrating to use, so solving will be less fun.. and if it's not fun, then you're more likely to give up.
> ...


----------

