People seem to believe that learning a fast method will automatically make them faster. This is not true! I have encountered many cubers who use full F2L and three-step last layer or even full Fridrich and still cannot average under 40 seconds or even a minute. So what are they doing wrong?
Learning more last layer algorithms (at least up until full Fridrich) will certainly speed up your last layer. As I have written elsewhere on this site, however, the most important part of layer-by-layer speedcubing is the first two layers, which, because of the flexibility it allows, turns out to be much more complicated than the last layer. Mastering the first two layers is the fastest way to improve.
The trouble is that most people start to master the first two layers only after they become comfortable with F2L, which can take a while. I don't think this is the right approach. Rather, I argue that you should start practicing the right approaches and the correct mindset for the first two layers as soon as you know a simple layer-by-layer method.
This page addresses some key techniques necessary to speed up the first two layers using only a simple layer-by-layer method (cross, corners, then edges). With a lot of practice, sub-30 average is possible even with no F2L and 4-step last layer (Step 2 of my Learning Fridrich).
Solving the cross edges one at a time, as most beginner's method decribes, takes many more moves than necessary. Read the cross page for examples of ways to take solve two edges in advantageous positions. 7 or 8 is a good number of moves to aim for.
Of course, until you know full F2L, there is no need to worry about things like extended cross.
Most layer-by-layer beginner's guides teach how to solve the first two layers by placing the corners and then the edges, all with the target slot at FR. Below are three "algorithms" typically found on such guides, one algorithm for each direction in which the corner can point.
| RUR' | URU'R' | RU2'R'U'RUR' |
Notice that the third "algorithm" is significantly longer than the other two. Since we can solve the first-layer corners in any order, to minimize the number of turns, we should choose a corner on top not pointing up whenever possible.
Also notice that we do not need to solve all the corners before moving on to the edges; we can solve an edge as long as the corner in the same slot has already been solved. This gives us more flexibility in our solve and sometimes allows us to avoid the bad corner case by first solving an edge.
The next technique, which takes some amount of practice, is to use different target slots. The algorithms given in the beginner's guide are only for FR target slot. By performing the algorithms from a different angle, we can solve pieces with target slots at the back without having to bring them to front first using whole cube turns. Carefully examine the examples below, keeping in mind that you already know all of these algorithms from one angle. Once you understand how the algorithms work, it will be much easier to apply them from different directions.
| UBL corner to BL slot ULU'L' | UFR corner to BR slot U2'R'UR |
||
| UFR corner to BL slot DwL'UL | UB edge to BR slot U'R'URDwLU'L' |
We illustrate the points above, along with more advanced insights that can nevertheless be done with this method, with a few example solves for the first two layers. Apply each scramble to a solved cube with your cross color on bottom.
To change the applets' color scheme (only for the two example solves), enter the colors in the order UDFBLR. E.g. the default setting is wbgyor. American color scheme with U yellow and F red would be ywrobg. You need to refresh the page to make a second change. List of color codes.
If none of the corners points up and we have a piece on U at every step, as in Example 1, we can expect to complete the first two layers in under 50 moves and very few cube turns. Even when we are forced to deal with multiple corner pointing up, the techniques above will allow us to complete the first two layers within 60 moves for most solves. The average number of moves is perhaps 55.
We often hear of looking ahead applied to F2L, but this is an important concept even for the first two layers of a beginner's method.
I wrote in the preceding section that the average number of moves for the first two layers with a beginner's method can be as low as 55. Play the applet above showing the full first-two-layer solution for the second scramble from above, which takes 54 moves and 4 cube turns. It shouldn't feel all that fast. This speed is about 2.1 tps (turn per second), where a turn here can be either a face turn (quarter or half) or a cube turn. Even at this speed, if you never pause in between algorithms, you can solve the first two layers in less than 30 seconds.
This is the basis of looking ahead. Execute each algorithm very quickly is meaningless if you then have to stop in between steps to look for the next piece. Looking ahead means that instead you slow down enough and look for the piece while solving one, solve the entire first two layers in one smooth motion, not unlike in this applet.
Solve the first two layers as you normally do now, counting the number of turns (including cube turns) and measuring the time, to calculate your current tps. Now, use a clock to figure out how fast this is if you make everything smooth. If this is a lot slower than how you normally turn the cube, which is often the case, your solve has too many pauses. Learn to look ahead, first keeping the same tps, and then going up to 2 tps or even higher. Metronomes is very useful for this. Gradually work your way up to 120 BPM, which corresponds to 2 tps, making one turn per beat.
Say you can't average under 1 minute. If 4-look last layer takes you 15 seconds, which is a fairly slow pace, you need a 45 second first two layers, which, calculating with 55 moves and 4 cube turns on average, comes out to 1.3 tps, or 78 BPM. Listen to that on a metronome. That's how slow you need to go to average under a minute. Try repeating similar calculations with your goal.
Perhaps you have already started working on F2L. This is not a problem; I encourage you to keep learning F2L, but revert to this simpler corners-then-edge approach once in a while. With only one piece to look for at each step, this will greatly simplify looking ahead. Once you extract all the experience you can from this simpler method, having fully understood looking ahead, applying the same concept to full F2L should not be very difficult.