# I encourage you to learn blind solving



## hotufos (Aug 21, 2017)

I'd like to encourage people here to learn how to do blind solving. It's kind of like learning how to solve a Rubik's cube for the first time. When you are a non-cuber, solving a Rubik's cube seems extremely difficult. Cubers who can't do blind solving think the same way about 3BLD. People who don't know blind solving have lots of misconceptions, just like non-cubers have lots of misconceptions about how 3x3 works. The method you use is way different from any popular speedsolving method. You solve one piece at a time, and you don't have to remember what the cube looks like by just trying to remember where every piece is. There's none of, "I remember that the orange-blue edge was in the back left, but where would it be after putting that F2L pair in?". It takes a lot of effort, but it feels so rewarding when you have finally succeeded, and you will be a more well-rounded cuber.

If you're wondering why this isn't in the blind solving section, it's because it is aimed at people cannot do BLD. People who look in the blind solving section will already be able to do BLD.


----------



## adimare (Aug 21, 2017)

hotufos said:


> ...and you don't have to remember what the cube looks like by just trying to remember where every piece is.


That's exactly what you have to do.


----------



## hotufos (Aug 21, 2017)

adimare said:


> That's exactly what you have to do.


 Maybe I phrased that poorly. I mean to say that you don't remember it by "red-green-yellow corner is in RBU with green facing up" for all of the pieces. Instead you just remember a single letter.


----------



## Sajwo (Aug 21, 2017)

I agree, it's quite cool ability. But on the other side.. using Old Pochmann or M2 for 3BLD is like using Beginners Method for 3x3. It becomes boring quite fast, and I don't have enough self-denial to start learning 3style, just to enjoy 3BLD a little bit more


----------



## Malkom (Aug 21, 2017)

Sajwo said:


> I agree, it's quite cool ability. But on the other side.. using Old Pochmann or M2 for 3BLD is like using Beginners Method for 3x3. It becomes boring quite fast, and I don't have enough self-denial to start learning 3style, just to enjoy 3BLD a little bit more


I feel the exact same, OP/M2 feel so slow and primitive but learning 3-style is such a huge commitment. I should probably try to give it a chance, but naah megaminx is too much fun.


----------



## adimare (Aug 21, 2017)

I think 3style has a rep of being way harder than it really is. I only had one success using M2/OP before deciding I hated it and moving on to 3style. M2's algs for some pieces are just ridiculous; and doing a 2 move setup, Y-Perm, undo 2 move setup to solve a single piece using OP is insane when you compare it to sometimes solving 2 corners at once with an 8 move comm.

If you've dedicated thousands of hours to cubing, it's kinda silly not to spend ~10 min watching the first explanations from this video to get how comms work.


----------



## CornerCutter (Aug 21, 2017)

hotufos said:


> I'd like to encourage people here to learn how to do blind solving. It's kind of like learning how to solve a Rubik's cube for the first time. When you are a non-cuber, solving a Rubik's cube seems extremely difficult. Cubers who can't do blind solving think the same way about 3BLD. People who don't know blind solving have lots of misconceptions, just like non-cubers have lots of misconceptions about how 3x3 works. The method you use is way different from any popular speedsolving method. You solve one piece at a time, and you don't have to remember what the cube looks like by just trying to remember where every piece is. There's none of, "I remember that the orange-blue edge was in the back left, but where would it be after putting that F2L pair in?". It takes a lot of effort, but it feels so rewarding when you have finally succeeded, and you will be a more well-rounded cuber.
> 
> If you're wondering why this isn't in the blind solving section, it's because it is aimed at people cannot do BLD. People who look in the blind solving section will already be able to do BLD.


I really would like to start learning! I see what you mean. Do you have a tutorial you recommend?


----------



## GarethBert11 (Aug 23, 2017)

Yep. I totally agree with you. 3BLD Is hard to master but fun to learn. It has their own benefits. Even tough I'm still using M2/OP and average around sub-4, I would like to push my memo down to sub-2. Then I really like to learn a new method.


----------



## leeo (Aug 26, 2017)

Having more-or less built up my own method, a variation of TuRBo, I'd like to see a good textbook on the subject. I might develop my own and publish it as a wiki book. Currently, it is expected to apply Old Pachmann, then substitute a faster method later. However piano students don't start on a piano with fewer keys, and violin students don't start on a violin with fewer strings.

Over the last three years, I have been increasing my core of algorithms until now I have about 40, and can reach all 400 or so 3-cycle positions by setting up to one of the core altorithms all with at most only one intermediate setup position. A software programmer by training, I developed my own software program to concurrent with learning the method. A search of my posts here in Speedsolving shows the core of the ideas.

Learning BLD for me was a very _Zen and Archery_ like experience. To encourage it for more compeition is great, but there really needs to be better method books out there.


----------



## genericcuber666 (Aug 26, 2017)

I know the method but I've only tried a couple times and messed up alot, i think I'm going to go for my first success in the couple of days any tips?


----------



## Fábio De'Rose (Aug 29, 2017)

GarethBert11 said:


> Yep. I totally agree with you. 3BLD Is hard to master but fun to learn. It has their own benefits. Even tough I'm still using M2/OP and average around sub-4, I would like to push my memo down to sub-2. Then I really like to learn a new method.



I can get sub 50 singles with M2/OP alone, but yeah, 3Style is far superior.


----------



## AlphaSheep (Aug 29, 2017)

I have a really poor short term memory, but people kept saying you don't need a good memory to do blindfolded. I tried learning it to prove them wrong. Turns out they weren't. There are 12 edges which can usually be encoded into 6 pairs of letters, which using audio memory, is 6 syllables. There are 8 corners, which adds around 4 syllables. That make a total of typically 10 syllables. 

If you live in an English speaking country, you probably did some Shakespeare at school and probably encountered some sonnets. Sonnets are written in iambic pentameter which is 10 syllables per line. That means that memorising a cube is equivalent to memorising just a single line of a sonnet.

For a world class blindfolded solver, the memory effort that goes in is roughly the equivalent of reading one line of poetry, and then closing your eyes and saying it out loud within 20-25 seconds. Once you realise that, it actually doesn't sound that hard. 

Even with my terrible short term memory and not very much practice, I can solve a cube with a 30% success rate within about 4 and a half minutes. If I can do it, anyone can.


----------



## h2f (Aug 29, 2017)

AlphaSheep said:


> I have a really poor short term memory, but people kept saying you don't need a good memory to do blindfolded. I tried learning it to prove them wrong. Turns out they weren't. There are 12 edges which can usually be encoded into 6 pairs of letters, which using audio memory, is 6 syllables. There are 8 corners, which adds around 4 syllables. That make a total of typically 10 syllables.



Maybe you should change you memo system to images/audio pairs? It leads you to 6 images/5 syllabes for cube and can be easier?


----------



## AlphaSheep (Aug 29, 2017)

h2f said:


> Maybe you should change you memo system to images/audio pairs? It leads you to 6 images/5 syllabes for cube and can be easier?


Unfortunately, I can't use images because I have aphantasia (I don't see images in my mind). I basically do audio with sentences to tie things together which seems to work for me. I've even managed a 4/4 MBLD which I was surprised to discover I was capable of.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Aug 29, 2017)

AlphaSheep said:


> Unfortunately, I can't use images because I have aphantasia (I don't see images in my mind). I basically do audio with sentences to tie things together which seems to work for me. I've even managed a 4/4 MBLD which I was surprised to discover I was capable of.


Apparently Maskow mostly memorizes as you do - sentences, not images. Mark Boyanowski told me Maskow thinks it's an advantage to do it that way. And my impression from Mark is that Mark has something like your condition. So perhaps you're a lot more capable at this than you think?


----------



## jdh3000 (Jan 7, 2020)

I've solved the 3x3 twice BLD. I'm just happy I was able to do it and got one solve on video(though it took me several minutes) and although the algs aren't that difficult(3 of them)it is for me a little bit of a drag to have to go through and write down all the notation then memorize a little pneumonic device, then still make a mistake(it only takes one) and remove the blindfold to see maybe a half solved cube.
However I continue to practice the two main algs and one for parity, about once a week. I'll give it a shot again sometime.

If I could do my memorization without writing down the letters and had a better way of keeping up with what pieces I've labeled already, I would try to do it more often.

I speed solve for relaxation and BLD causes me some anxiety. If I can get it past the point of stress to enjoyment, which will probably be better than solving more than halve the time rather than the 50 to 1 solves I have going now. That may not an accurate account but it seems like the number of attempts.

I know, practice more... I just cube when I have time and feel better doing my speed solves and OH every so often.

But I agree with the OP that it is good to keep it in perspective. It does remind me of my struggles with the cube when I first started.

I'll keep on trying to do it at any rate!


----------



## Habsen (Jan 7, 2020)

jdh3000 said:


> If I could do my memorization without writing down the letters and had a better way of keeping up with what pieces I've labeled already, I would try to do it more often.



Making words or images from letter pairs and connecting them in a sentence helps a lot with memorization. I also struggled a lot with memo in the beginning and this made it so much easier.
Try to put a finger on every piece you have already memorized. This should help you to keep track.


----------



## jdh3000 (Jan 7, 2020)

Habsen said:


> Making words or images from letter pairs and connecting them in a sentence helps a lot with memorization. I also struggled a lot with memo in the beginning and this made it so much easier.
> Try to put a finger on every piece you have already memorized. This should help you to keep track.


I need to try putting my finger there... It's when I get to swap hole piece that ends a cycle where I have to start over that I think I lose track.

But I will try putting my fingers on there to keep track ...thanks!


----------



## Habsen (Jan 8, 2020)

jdh3000 said:


> I need to try putting my finger there... It's when I get to swap hole piece that ends a cycle where I have to start over that I think I lose track.



I'm not entirely sure if I get what you mean. Anyway, the first piece of a new cycle is special in a way that you get to it twice. So I don't put my finger on it the first time when starting the cycle, but only at the end of the cycle. This way you don't forget it.


----------



## jdh3000 (Jan 8, 2020)

Habsen said:


> I'm not entirely sure if I get what you mean. Anyway, the first piece of a new cycle is special in a way that you get to it twice. So I don't put my finger on it the first time when starting the cycle, but only at the end of the cycle. This way you don't forget it.


Ok, thanks!


----------



## Mischiiii (Jan 8, 2020)

I will definitely go for it someday but since i have to learn algs for it i rather start with 2x2, 5x5 or square 1 .

Would you guys recommend setting up a cube with the letters on it to learn?


----------



## Habsen (Jan 8, 2020)

Mischiiii said:


> I will definitely go for it someday but since i have to learn algs for it i rather start with 2x2, 5x5 or square 1 .


You don't have to learn new algs for the Old Pochmann method if you already know T, Y and R perms. And the setup moves are very short and intuitive.



Mischiiii said:


> Would you guys recommend setting up a cube with the letters on it to learn?


I guess I wouldn't do that. Although it makes things easier in the beginning, it doesn't force you to learn the sticker/piece to letter translation. This will probably take the most time during your memo when you start blindsolving but it will get much better after a couple of days.


----------



## Mischiiii (Jan 8, 2020)

Habsen said:


> You don't have to learn new algs for the Old Pochmann method if you already know T, Y and R perms. And the setup moves are very short and intuitive.
> 
> 
> I guess I wouldn't do that. Although it makes things easier in the beginning, it doesn't force you to learn the sticker/piece to letter translation. This will probably take the most time during your memo when you start blindsolving but it will get much better after a couple of days.



Ah okay. I knew you have to know those but i thought you needed a bunch more. Since i know full PLL I’m pretty much set. 

What recourses do you recommend to learn BLD ?


----------



## Habsen (Jan 8, 2020)

Mischiiii said:


> What recourses do you recommend to learn BLD ?



I think JPerms video is a good start. It also has a lot of important stuff written down in the description.

I recommend to learn the method and then do sighted solves with it until you feel comfortable. Afterwards, partial solves (edges/corners only) are very useful to incrementally work your way up to full blind solves. Writing your memo down can also help in the beginning in case you are struggling with that.


----------



## jdh3000 (Jan 9, 2020)

Mischiiii said:


> Ah okay. I knew you have to know those but i thought you needed a bunch more. Since i know full PLL I’m pretty much set.
> 
> What recourses do you recommend to learn BLD ?


Just 3 algs, one for sides, one for corners and one rarely used for parity, which only comes if the the number of sides and corners aren't an ecen number. 

Tge algorithms aren't too difficult, lining up the pieces aren't too difficult, it just takes getting used to it.

I'm no expert, I've done 2 successful blind solves, but go through these all on a regular basis. I feel like I could do it again, it just takes me a while to write down all the pieces and come up with a mnemonic device to remember it. 
If you are good at that ypu shouldn't have any trouble.

It's not AS difficult to do as someone who's never done it thinks it is. It is something that can actually be easier in a lot if ways than tge beginner's method.

I learned what I did from Jperm on youtube, he has some clear explanations on there.


----------



## PetrusQuber (Jan 9, 2020)

If you already know full PLL, you can use the T Perm, Y Perm, R Perm, AND the J Perms too. It’s not too hard, and it’s easier to setup. Why waste setup moves and time when you already know a better way to do that? Take if you were solving C, with B as the buffer. J Perm, done. However, without them, you get l2 D L2 T Perm L2 D’ l2.


----------



## AbsoRuud (Jan 9, 2020)

PetrusQuber said:


> If you already know full PLL, you can use the T Perm, Y Perm, R Perm, AND the J Perms too. It’s not too hard, and it’s easier to setup. Why waste setup moves and time when you already know a better way to do that? Take if you were solving C, with B as the buffer. J Perm, done. However, without them, you get l2 D L2 T Perm L2 D’ l2.


C is relatively easy. I got stuck on bottom left, top left and bottom right. (For me, Q, T and K, because I don't use speffz.) So that made me decide to learn the J Perm, and then I realised it's one of the CMLL I already knew. XD


----------



## Nilsibert (Jan 10, 2020)

Would it be a bad idea to learn 3-style without having experience with OP/M2?
I tried to learn BLD with OP/M2 before and got tired of it because the constant setup into Y perm just felt boring and slow


----------



## Habsen (Jan 10, 2020)

Nilsibert said:


> Would it be a bad idea to learn 3-style without having experience with OP/M2?



I don't think so. I also didn't like OP for corners and switched to 3-style quite early. You don't have to learn full 3-style to use it in your solves. Just learn the parity algs and use them as a replacement until you know the commutators. They can be learned in one or two days as they are mostly setups to Ja, Jb and Y perms. Afterwards, you can learn the commutators for a new sticker whenever you like to. Right now, I only know the algs for all the A, B and D stickers. Although this is only 14% of full 3-style for corners, I use more than one commutator per solve on average, because you can chose one of these targets whenever you break into a new cycle.

M2 on the other hand is quite fast, especially when you learn some commutators for the bad cases. I highly recommend looking at Josh Weimers Advanced M2 Tutorials on Youtube.


----------



## 2b2f117bdd (Jan 25, 2020)

You can learn BLD at any point, dont let your speed affect you.
The best tutorial is Noah's. I'm on mobile right now so i cant link, but it would be the top result for 'Noah 3bld tutorial'. He teaches OP for corners and M2 for edges.





Lucky Patcher Kodi nox


----------



## 1cubealot (May 4, 2020)

The only thing stopping me from doing it is the memo i can do corners (i do 2bld) but i cant do the edges


----------

