# My progression thread | new strategy for improving | Currently First Block



## StrategySam (Jul 7, 2021)

I am currently around 27 seconds but I think a found a new approach to learning to be faster, faster, and wanted to document how it goes. My end goal is to be sub-6 with roux.

My new approach to learning significantly better is by first focusing on move count then focusing on tps which I can always drill later. I found that the main reason why I am as slow and inconistant is not because of tps but because of the move count. Getting good habits early will make it easier for my future self to go faster.

My plan of action is to first learn full CMLL then First block effincency then Second block effincent pairing then LSE EOLR all the while being CN. I will update my progress with move count and solve time to see how much saving moves saves on final time.




Spoiler: Ao5 July 6th 2021



Generated By csTimer on 2021-07-06
avg of 5: 27.145
Time List:


1. (22.645) B2 R2 L F' B2 D' L U2 B' D2 B' L2 F U2 F2 U2 L2
2. 30.420 R D' L U2 L2 D' U2 B2 L2 D L2 U F' U R' B2 L' U2 F'
3. 25.359 L B L' U2 B2 R D' R' U' F B D2 F' L2 B D2 F2 R2 D2 B2
4. 25.656 B' D2 R2 U' F2 L2 U' F2 L2 D2 R2 D2 B U R' U L D' U' R'
5. (30.643) B2 R' B2 L' D2 R F2 L2 B2 R2 U2 F D' L' F' U' B' R' F2 U2



All CMLLs sub 1.3! https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...oVAHEIwWD2ME0S18z7SYNGrYG0/edit#gid=881196109


----------



## BenChristman1 (Jul 7, 2021)

Sub-6 is very ambitious. I don’t think that there’s anybody right now who is globally sub-6. Good luck!


----------



## Eli Apperson (Jul 7, 2021)

BenChristman1 said:


> Sub-6 is very ambitious. I don’t think that there’s anybody right now who is globally sub-6. Good luck!


Yeah I agree. There are people now like Max, Tymon and Ruihang that are only now getting close, after years of cubing...


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 7, 2021)

CubableYT said:


> Yeah I agree. There are people now like Max, Tymon and Ruihang that are only now getting close, after years of cubing...


I will surpass them by working smarter not harder.


----------



## Waffles (Jul 8, 2021)

Smarter not harder is a good idea...



Spoiler



But both are necessary to be good


----------



## Eli Apperson (Jul 8, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> I will surpass them by working smarter not harder.


Just curious, what is your strategy for working "smarter"?


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 8, 2021)

CubableYT said:


> Just curious, what is your strategy for working "smarter"?


My strategy is after I get my move count as low as possible instead of drilling minor bad habits and doing solves with no direction. I will review my solves and focus only on which step I need to improve and figure out the best way to improve it.


----------



## LBr (Jul 8, 2021)

My strategy is to set small, achievable goals and not set an end goal because I don't want to disappoint myself if I dont reach them


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 9, 2021)

LBr said:


> My strategy is to set small, achievable goals and not set an end goal because I don't want to disappoint myself if I dont reach them


Sub 6 on roux is a short term goal. My plan is to be sub 6 with every speedsolve method. CFOP, Waterroux, zz, mehta TDR/petrus,


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 9, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Sub 6 on roux is a short term goal. My plan is to be sub 6 with every speedsolve method. CFOP, Waterroux, zz, mehta TDR/petrus,


Is that possible with so many methods? Maybe two methods sub-6 is doable but 5-6 different methods!?! Would you choose which method to use based on the scramble too?


----------



## Waffles (Jul 9, 2021)

Basically 3x3 OS that guarantees you a great solve...

That would take 20-30 years but when time travel exists...



Spoiler: the answer



No wtf


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 9, 2021)

Waffles said:


> Basically 3x3 OS that guarantees you a great solve...
> 
> That would take 20-30 years but when time travel exists...
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan the Beginner (Jul 9, 2021)

I like strategies and planning, and people who challenge the standard approaches.


----------



## the dnf master (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> Is that possible with so many methods? Maybe two methods sub-6 is doable but 5-6 different methods!?! Would you choose which method to use based on the scramble to?


It can be possible. Current predictions are often way off from what actually happens. Jessica Fridrich predicted that her method's potential would be 13 seconds, but here we are. However it would be incredibly hard, but I think it's possible.


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

the dnf master said:


> It can be possible. Current predictions are often way off from what actually happens. Jessica Fridrich predicted that her method's potential would be 13 seconds, but here we are. However it would be incredibly hard, but I think it's possible.


Back then the cubes were really bad tho. They had to only use wrist turns.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 10, 2021)

Would you consider Nautilus a speedsolving method?


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> Would you consider Nautilus a speedsolving method?


Haven't heard of it before. Is there a thread about it?


----------



## PiKeeper (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> Would you consider Nautilus a speedsolving method?


Yeah, why wouldn't it be?


----------



## the dnf master (Jul 10, 2021)

Here it is 








Nautilus: A versatile 3x3 method


Nautilus Website Introducing a different kind of 3x3 method. The main first two steps are: 1. Solve a 1x2x3 on the left 2. Solve the dbr 2x2x2 Then the method has a few main variants afterward. Below are the main variants and additional variants are described on the website. L5E Variant: 3...




www.speedsolving.com


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

Nautilus method sounds like roux but you solve the BD edge. I would consider Nautilus a speedsolve method because it can be done very fast. I like how it solves the problem of a 6 flip and the only way to avoid it in regular roux is to learn a 2nd algorithm/KCMLL. I don't think the 2nd step (2×2×2 block) is that effincent but will add it to the list of methods to get sub 6 after roux.


----------



## PiKeeper (Jul 10, 2021)

It still has the potential to be near the level of the big 3. I don't know much about waterman, but in theory Mehta petrus and Nautilus would be able to get similar times if more people put the time in to learn them. Even though petrus is agreed to be slower than the big 3, there have still been sub 10 solvers proving that it is still a solid speedsolving method.


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 10, 2021)

Mathsoccer said:


> It still has the potential to be near the level of the big 3. I don't know much about waterman, but in theory Mehta petrus and Nautilus would be able to get similar times if more people put the time in to learn them. Even though petrus is agreed to be slower than the big 3, there have still been sub 10 solvers proving that it is still a solid speedsolving method.


I definitely think it's better than Waterman, Petrus and HK. In my opinion the "Best-3" are CFOP, Roux, and Mehta (In no particular order) with ZZ and Nautilus following close behind. Of course I should learn it before I reach that conclusion.


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> I definitely think it's better than Waterman, Petrus and HK. In my opinion the "Best-3" are CFOP, Roux, and Mehta (In no particular order) with ZZ and Nautilus following close behind. Of course I should learn it before I reach that conclusion.


I think water roux has a lot of potential because it is algorithmic and L7E is very effincent. It also is about the same amount of moves as mehta


----------



## tsmosher (Jul 10, 2021)

WaterRoux L7E is tremendously underrated, though recognizing L6EP with your R layer offset takes some getting used to. (Roux with NMB, which is how I solve, has the same issue.) 

If you guarantee that DR (or FR) is always the unsolved edge, we are talking about 24 algs and a quick setup step to enable L7E.

Personally, I prefer solving one U layer edge then doing modified LSE with the unsolved edge. (Since in the way I run into L7E, the 7th edge is always oriented.) or just inserting it with S' U2 S / S R2 S' R2.

Oh, and Nautilus is good stuff.


----------



## Cubing Forever (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> I definitely think it's better than Waterman, Petrus and HK. In my opinion the "Best-3" are CFOP, Roux, and Mehta (In no particular order) with ZZ and Nautilus following close behind.


Umm.. not yet. Big 3 imho are still CFOP, Roux and ZZ. Mehta has to get a larger following before it becomes a major method and with all these people at the ZMS Discord server opposing Mehta, I doubt it happening in the foreseeable future. Seriously, someone must get fast and shut their mouths lol (sorry if I offended people. I was in a bad mood)


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

I have finished learning full CMLL. I still need to work on recog tho. My list of PBs for CMLLs are here. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...oVAHEIwWD2ME0S18z7SYNGrYG0/edit#gid=881196109 
My next step is to work on first block efficiency. I will do it by starting at level 4 on https://cubegrass.appspot.com/block_trainer/ and going up to level 6.


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> Umm.. not yet. Big 3 imho are still CFOP, Roux and ZZ. Mehta has to get a larger following before it becomes a major method and with all these people at the ZMS Discord server opposing Mehta, I doubt it happening in the foreseeable future. Seriously, someone must get fast and shut their mouths lol (sorry if I offended people. I was in a bad mood)


I totally agree with with you. A method needs someone that is good with it to show the flaws and strengths. You never really know how good at speedsolving it is until a fast speedsolver does it.


----------



## LBr (Jul 10, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Haven't heard of it before. Is there a thread about it?


there is a thread from @Athefre


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 10, 2021)

Cubing Forever said:


> Umm.. not yet. Big 3 imho are still CFOP, Roux and ZZ. Mehta has to get a larger following before it becomes a major method and with all these people at the ZMS Discord server opposing Mehta, I doubt it happening in the foreseeable future. Seriously, someone must get fast and shut their mouths lol (sorry if I offended people. I was in a bad mood)


I said *my *opinion for the "Best-3", not Big-3. ZZ still is big-3.


----------



## Cubing Forever (Jul 10, 2021)

Thecubingcuber347 said:


> I said *my *opinion for the "Best-3", not Big-3. ZZ still is big-3.


Oh lol I misunderstood.


----------



## Humble Cuber (Jul 10, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Sub 6 on roux is a short term goal. My plan is to be sub 6 with every speedsolve method. CFOP, Waterroux, zz, mehta TDR/petrus,


That’s super ambitious, it’s possible with maybe a few methods, but definitely not all of them (maybe in like 15 years or something…) especially considering some of those are underdeveloped still comparatively to some other more user methods


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 10, 2021)

Humble Cuber said:


> That’s super ambitious, it’s possible with maybe a few methods, but definitely not all of them (maybe in like 15 years or something…) especially considering some of those are underdeveloped still comparatively to some other more user methods


I will only do speedsolving methods that are similar. This will make it way easier. Like ZZ, ZB, petrus, Mehta-tdr all use ZBLL and Mehta, waterroux, roux, and nautilus all have the same first step (first block). Mehta-OS, roux, waterroux, and nautilus end in Last edges.


----------



## EvanCuber (Jul 10, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> I will only do speedsolving methods that are similar. This will make it way easier. Like ZZ Cfop-vls, petrus, Mehta-tdr all use ZBLL and Mehta, waterroux, roux, and nautilus all have the same first step (first block). Mehta-OS, roux, waterroux, and nautilus end in Last edges.


Using all these methods will be very hard, because you will have to learn about 1500-2000 algorithms which you will probably eventually forget because you are not repeating them some of them enough. And if you are willing to learn that much algs, you might as well just learn 1LLL


----------



## DuckubingCuber347 (Jul 10, 2021)

MJbaka said:


> Using all these methods will be very hard, because you will have to learn about 1500-2000 algorithms which you will probably eventually forget because you are not repeating them some of them enough. And if you are willing to learn that much algs, you might as well just learn 1LLL


1LLL has 3915 algs... That is a huge difference and very inefficient. A lot of algs are similar or the same for different methods and if you have them all down you won't have to big of a problem. Thanks to tricks like EO, VLS, etc. 1LLL is not worth it and most of it probably would have horrible fingertricks


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 11, 2021)

I just Sub 1.3ed all my CMLLs. Personal opinion best to worst CMLLs are T, L, S, Pi, As, H, O, U.


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 11, 2021)

I have decided not to be full CN with roux and to be duel color instead. I think being duel colored is better because it is good for lookahead. For example after F2B it is way easier to predict EO when doing CMLL and during SB it is way easier to predict CMLL. Basically I think it will remove a lot of pauses in my solves.


----------



## Swagrid (Jul 11, 2021)

Very ambitious goal, I agree efficiency before TPS is the better approach, I'm doing that myself. Will be fun to hear about your progression.


----------



## ruffleduck (Jul 12, 2021)

You might want to have better short-term goals. Sub-6 is going to take years, at best. Maybe aim for sub-20 for now.

Also, why does everyone think CN roux is hard/not worth using? There's really nothing that makes it any more difficult than x2y. Block building is just as easy, CMLL and EO recognition is trivial, and LSE isn't any harder.


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 12, 2021)

Short term goals list:
CMLL recon
Plan all FB
All SB pairs sub 0.6
Plan FB + DR edge
EOLR
Sub 10
2 CMLL algs/kcmll
Sub 8
Plan F2B in inspection.
Sub 6


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 21, 2021)

zzoomer said:


> You might want to have better short-term goals. Sub-6 is going to take years, at best. Maybe aim for sub-20 for now.
> 
> Also, why does everyone think CN roux is hard/not worth using? There's really nothing that makes it any more difficult than x2y. Block building is just as easy, CMLL and EO recognition is trivial, and LSE isn't any harder.


Alright. You've changed my mind lol. After trying CN L10P it really isnt as hard as I thought and it will only get easier as a practice.


----------



## Filipe Teixeira (Jul 22, 2021)

are you sub6 already?


----------



## Brouxt Force (Jul 23, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Alright. You've changed my mind lol. After trying CN L10P it really isnt as hard as I thought and it will only get easier as a practice.


I once tried to be color neutral, but when I realized I would be sub 12 with only x2/y color neutrality, I stopped. I agree that CN L10P isn't that hard. When I did CN solves, I feel like my CN L10P was almost the same as my x2/y CN. CMLL recognition didn't change much, and LSE recognition was still easy. The step that I was significantly worse at (probs around 1-2 seconds worse) was second block. For me, recognizing second block cases was just slower and I had to turn slower to keep things fluid. I was horrifically bad at first block at the very beginning of trying CN, but after a while, it mostly just hurt my inspection time. So, it was mainly my block building that got worse.

I don't think switching to full CN is worth it, because on top of spending a really long time to master all the other colors, it would, at best, make your solves marginally faster. There are other ways to get faster that take less time. That being said, though, that is just my opinion, and the slower you are, the easier it would be to switch to full CN. If I started Roux being CN, I probably would have stayed CN. Ultimately, you can do whatever you want, and if you want to become CN, you have to at least give it a genuine try.

I may be wrong about full CN being worse than x2/y CN, but, for me, at least, I don't think it's worth it. I already gave it a try a while ago, and after hundreds of CN solves, I decided I didn't want to put in the time needed to become fully CN.


----------



## Neatcubing (Jul 23, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> I am currently around 27 seconds but I think a found a new approach to learning to be faster, faster, and wanted to document how it goes. My end goal is to be sub-6 with roux.
> 
> My new approach to learning significantly better is by first focusing on move count then focusing on tps which I can always drill later. I found that the main reason why I am as slow and inconistant is not because of tps but because of the move count. Getting good habits early will make it easier for my future self to go faster.
> 
> ...


Sub-6 is a really ambitious goal
Edit:I am only sub 30 so I'm not qualified to say this,but I think it could probably be reached in 3 years


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 29, 2021)

Gah, got really burnt out the last week so like I didn't practice. I am trying a new strategy where I only practice a couple hours max a day. Sub-6 is much harder then I first thought. New short term goal: Sub-20 ao5 by Next Friday (August 6th).


----------



## the dnf master (Jul 29, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Gah, got really burnt out the last week so like I didn't practice. I am trying a new strategy where I only practice a couple hours max a day. Sub-6 is much harder then I first thought. New short term goal: Sub-20 ao5 by Next Friday (August 6th).


how hard did you think sub 6 was?


----------



## StrategySam (Jul 29, 2021)

the dnf master said:


> how hard did you think sub 6 was?


I thought if I worked hard I could be sub 8 by the end of the year.


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 8, 2021)

Generated By csTimer on 2021-08-08
avg of 5: 19.91

Time List:
1. (22.35) F2 D2 U2 R2 F2 D2 R D2 L F2 L' D' R U B' U' R' F2 L' U2
2. 19.80 D B U' F D' F R' D2 F' U' L2 D' F2 U2 D' F2 R2 F2 U' B2 U' 
3. 19.22 D' L D R2 D2 R2 D2 U' B2 U' L' B2 F D U F R2 
4. (16.98) B' D2 B D2 B2 L2 B' F2 D2 U2 F' L F L2 B' R' D B F2 U2 
5. 20.71 D' U2 B2 D2 R' B2 R B2 L U2 F2 R2 F L2 R' U' F D' L2 R2


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 9, 2021)

My next short term goal is all CMLL recognition by Friday (August 13). The issue is I know all the algs and can do them fast. I know how to recognise (left bar, forward slash, X, etc.) But I am having a hard time matching them together. It might seem weird but its very frustrating.


----------



## GodCubing (Aug 10, 2021)

Good luck man. I suggest learning nmcmll too. And maybe UF UB neutrality. These are the things I want to work on too.


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 13, 2021)

I only have Anti sune and L to go. Plan to finish them up tonight.


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 14, 2021)

Next short term goal is to get a sub 18 ao5 and a sub 20 ao12 by friday (August 20th). I want to work on acually FB building in solves and do CMLLs in solves.


----------



## UNO_FASY (Aug 16, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> I am currently around 27 seconds but I think a found a new approach to learning to be faster, faster, and wanted to document how it goes. My end goal is to be sub-6 with roux.
> 
> My new approach to learning significantly better is by first focusing on move count then focusing on tps which I can always drill later. I found that the main reason why I am as slow and inconistant is not because of tps but because of the move count. Getting good habits early will make it easier for my future self to go faster.
> 
> ...


Quite ambitious but good luck


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 21, 2021)

I didn't complete my goal and it was definity because of F2B. This next week I will be working on finding better FB solutions. Instead of having a second goal for next week, I will try to do an ao12 where every FB is done in 7 moves or less.


----------



## StrategySam (Aug 31, 2021)

Wow I am a lot worse at FB then I thought. I did some solves where I only solved the FB then scrambled it again then entered my movecount for FB. My mean was 7.7 moves. I am going to only work on FB next week.


----------



## GodCubing (Aug 31, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Wow I am a lot worse at FB then I thought. I did some solves where I only solved the FB then scrambled it again then entered my movecount for FB. My mean was 7.7 moves. I am going to only work on FB next week.


7.7 is good, I am 15.xx with roux and I average around that. anything under 8 is good enough


----------



## UNO_FASY (Aug 31, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> Wow I am a lot worse at FB then I thought. I did some solves where I only solved the FB then scrambled it again then entered my movecount for FB. My mean was 7.7 moves. I am going to only work on FB next week.


Depends on how many solves that you did, i think 12 solves is still not accurate


----------



## UNO_FASY (Aug 31, 2021)

Also don't forget to improve your fingertricks for FB


----------



## StrategySam (Sep 6, 2021)

UNO_FASY said:


> Depends on how many solves that you did, i think 12 solves is still not accurate


it was just the mean of the session, around 60 solves. I am using https://onionhoney.github.io/roux-trainers/ now to practice FB.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Sep 6, 2021)

StrategySam said:


> ... good enough isn't enough. If Imma be sub 6 my FB gonna be sub 6 too.


You don't set long-term goals and try to achieve them at once though. Smaller goals help you break down what's in between.


----------



## StrategySam (Apr 8, 2022)

2.05 FB mo25 untimed inspection. As long as I plan my entire FB I usually can execute it in under 2.5s. This week I will practice by finding more then 1 FB solution and picking the faster one to execute. Current goal is 1.5 FB mo25, I have been getting about a third of my FBs under 1.5s.


----------

