1. Well, I've gone and become a bit addicted to speed cubing (I'm only looking to get my time under 1 minute honestly!). So I found a site that has a good step-by-step method to going faster. It just requires a bit of a re-learn from the above 3x3x3 method since you need to put your first solved "cross" on the bottom.

http://www.cubefreak.net/speedcubing.html

MB

2. Update:

I've recieved my 2x2x2 and 5x5x5 cubes (as well as higher-quality versions of the 3x3x3 and 4x4x4). I've used this method to solve the 5:
Solving the 5x5x5 (Professor) Cube

I'll probably move onto this one soon though:
solving the professor

If you can solve a 3 you can probably solve the 2

I've gone onto a totally different method for cubing, it is not as algorithm based as the previous ones.

I now use the roux method:
Introduction
except for the top corners, I'm still learning there (I use a 2 look place and then orient).

There is also another block to algorithm based method called the petrus (led me to the roux).
Rubik's Cube Solution

I've also found a page for a corners first method, but they look to be even more algorithm intense than the layer-by-layer (fridich) style solves above:
Rubik's Cube Solution Methods
go to the ortega and waterman solves.

yes I do like my 5x5x5 by the way

MB
•

3. I'm jealous, man. I still confuse the hell out of myself on the 3x3x3.

Originally Posted by ManBeast
Well, I've gone and become a bit addicted to speed cubing (I'm only looking to get my time under 1 minute honestly!). So I found a site that has a good step-by-step method to going faster. It just requires a bit of a re-learn from the above 3x3x3 method since you need to put your first solved "cross" on the bottom.

Cubefreak | Speedcubing

MB
The Petrus Method is supposed to be the fastest way to solve the cube:

Rubik's Cube Solution

4. Yes, in theory it can be due to the fewest moves, but some of the moves and algorithms are very complicated (IMHO), I personally didn't really start to figure out the 3 until I had also messed with the 4. I'm not knocking any of the methods out there, I just find the roux to work the best for me

MB

5. Do you find the roux method to be the easiest or just the "easiest fast" method? If it's the "easiest fast" method, do you know what the easiest method is? I'm not worried about times, I just wanna be able to say I can solve this thing, dammit.
•

6. For easiest (absolute least memorization):
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~leyanlo/cube_solution.pdf

is very very good.

if you want to get a bit more efficient/fast with not much more memorization go to:
Beginner Solution to the Rubik's Cube

I like her approach to last layer, but Leyan's approach has you flip the cube right after solving the cross, whereas Jasmine's has you flip the cube just for the last layer. Getting used to flipping the cube right after forming the cross is very important if you ever decide you want to go to a faster method

IMHO the Petrus and Roux methods require a bit more "thinking" whereas the corners first (not reccomended for an easy solve IMHO), and the cross first methods require a tiny bit more memorization of algorithms.

MB

7. Sweet. I'll try this later. Reps to you, bro!

8. No problem I'm now looking into yet other methods, one step of the roux method annoys the piss outta me... so I'm still searching

MB

9. Ok, I think I've found the best tutorial for someone if they are really serious about getting fast, or just "intuitive" on how to get the first two layers (F2L) done:

Part 1:

Part 2:

yes you need to know how to do the last layer as well. I'm sticking to a 4-look last layer (4LLL) for now (orient edges, permute corners, orient corners, permute edges). Once I get down to about a minute or so I'll start refining my last layer

MB

10. I have refined my 4LL to do the following:
Orient Edges
Orient Corners
Permute Corners
Permute Edges

I am using algorithms that I can use in both a 3-look and a 2-look last layer situation. If anyone is interested please let me know

MB

11. the v cube 11 looks insane!!!

12. yes it does, it is going to be "simple" in theory, just will take a long long time to finish using a reduction (to 3x3x3) method i think.

MB

13. I've finally got the tutorial I want to write figured out in my head, it has (IMHO) the most optimal balance between memorization of fewest algorithms, ease of recognition, and speed capability. I'll work on getting it available for email/download for those who are interested.

MB

•