This is easily the best Edges First Keyhole F2L tutorial currently on RU-vid. Thank you for this contribution to the cubing community. I look forward to seeing your channel grow.
I have played around and tried many methods and so far I have not come across an easier and more clear way to solve f2l. I look forward to your advanced EFK video Thanks 🤓
Bro, you saved my life from F2L, I thought I had to learn 40+ algorithms to be able to do F2L fast, but your F2L videos are so thoughtful that I had to use this, good luck with your channel growth!
Intuitive f2l has 2 algorithms. R U R' and R U' R' (plus their left-handed algs). BrodyTheCuber (I'm only 50% sure it's hin) has a really understandable intuitive f2l flowchart and tutorial.
I actually have been using this method for years but didn't call it anything and my cubing friend where calling me crazy so I am glad there are others using it now
I really like this method and your tutorial on it as a simple, fast improvement over the beginner method. But I think you should change the description to say EFK is an alternative to F2L, not an alternative to CFOP.
Interesting. I'd used similar approach for decades, by completing three corners first, leaving one key hole (borrowing your term) to fill in three of the second layer, then finish the key-hole two layers. I use CFOP now however.
You should NOT use sledgehammer to insert edges. But you can use sledgehammer to take out flipped edges, however, in EFK this is unnecessary af you can just use the flipped edge as the open slot.
@@THECUBER2023 Sorry, I meant last edge insertion, you showed a CFOP way that uses sledgehammer + insert, and begginer method with more detail. I meant the CFOP way of inserting that last edge
I've been a big fan of this method for a while. Unfortunately it gets overlooked because most people first learn LBL and then start learning CFOP, which is understandable. However, this is an easy way to achieve relatively decent times with minimal effort. Therefore people that can't practice regularly due to other commitments, like many adults, can still impress non-cubing spectators without anyone losing interest. Congratulations on your PB. Hopefully you'll achieve another PB when the advanced EFK tutorial gets posted.
I do feel a bit guilty for lening towards this. I'm a 50yo cuber coming back after a 42-year break, starting to learn advanced F2L but this seems so much easier. Aiming for a sub-30 second average, 2-look OLL and PLL are pretty quick but I think this could get me there faster.
@@kccbedwars3569 What a pointless comment. I'll be 51 in about a month, but why do you care anyway? I now know full PLL and my 42 yo wife is impressed.
I was playing with the same thing & happy I found your channel. I'd be interested in a video with you comparing and/or doing a B05 with Zeta vs Keyhole.. which do you think is better? I like messing with both (and beginner LBL.. and improving my F2L.. and some Roux on the side...) but I'm not really aiming for speed solving times. OH - do you try to hold the cube still for either/both methods, or rotate? I've been trying to keep blue/left green/right to save a bit of time for the edge insertions. For zeta I'm ok with cube rotations, and for EFK I hold it still.
@@THECUBER2023 Most welcome - but off top of head, which do you think is better? I keep flip-flopping over which feels easier between them. I'll have to do my own speed tests over the weekend.
@@polstein777 Zeta-slotting is definitely the easiest (both to learn, master, and understand), thus, Zeta-slotting will be faster when you first start learning the method. As for other F2L methods, it will take a lot of practice for you to master it, but if you do, it is faster and more efficient than Zeta-slotting.
@@THECUBER2023 When you are matching up edges (either Zeta or Keyhole) do you keep top layer still (say with orange center always front) and rotate the rest of cube.. rotate entire cube.. other?
@@polstein777 Well it doesn’t matter, you can also learn to insert an edge into the back. You just need to know edge orientation. But to keep things simple, I always did everything from the front, but it doesn’t matter how you do it, as long as you can get the edges into place.
You have to be completely honest with yourself as to what your ultimate goal is. If your ultimate goal is to be a sub 30 solver with the least amount of effort, I would say that you can easily achieve that with EFK F2L, 2 look OLL and 1 look PLL. If your ultimate goal is to be the fastest solver you can possibly be (sub 15 or faster), you may want to skip EFK and learn CFOP although it will likely take you longer and a lot more effort to start averaging sub 30. My average EFK solves are about 70-75 total turns while an efficient CFOP solve is about 60-65 total turns. Therefore, the ceiling for CFOP is likely about 10%-20% higher than EFK. The only way I see that changing is if more people adopt EFK as their preferred method of solving and start figuring out ways to make it better (more efficient).
It depends on your definition of "better". Zeta-slotting is more efficient (requires less total turns) than the traditional LBL beginner's method, but zeta-slotting is also a LBL method. This means that one must a) insert a piece, b) set up the inserted piece to be joined with its F2L pair, c) remove the inserted piece to join the F2L pair, d) insert the F2L pair into position, e) rinse and repeat until all of F2L is complete. Zeta-slotting can be "better" for beginner solvers because it can be easier for someone new to cubing to grasp the concept of. In my opinion, zeta-slotting is as equally simple to understand yet more efficient than the traditional LBL beginner's method. EFK is more efficient than both LBL methods because one doesn't have to insert a piece only to have to remove that piece later, with the exception of the final F2L pair depending on how you choose to solve that pair. However, beginner solvers may find the concept of EFK harder to grasp than zeta-slotting. Therefore, the answer to your question really depends on your definition of "better".
@@Jami231 be warned that using EFK as your main method of solving can lead to 'a gift & a curse' situation. The gift is that depending on what you average now, EFK can be the quickest and easiest way to see improvements in your averages. If you currently use the beginner's method or are just learning CFOP, EFK can quickly improve your average times with very little effort. However, sticking with EFK for too long can be a curse because it may be hard to go from being able to fairly effortlessly solve a cube in 20ish seconds to switching to a more advanced method like CFOP where your solves may take more than twice as long at first. Although CFOP has a higher ceiling, meaning that with dedication and a lot of practice it can be more efficient than EFK, EFK's ceiling has yet to be realized. I use EFK and I average just over 20 seconds. I only average about 3 TPS per solve, and I'm much older than the average cuber however. I was in my mid-30s when I first learned to solve a 3x3. Good luck and please let everyone know what you think about the EFK F2L method once you get a chance to experiment with it for a little while.
Sweet! How do you feel this method compares to CFOP? Do you think you could average within a second or two of your normal average with this method if you continued using it?
as a sub 9 cuber there is a few major problems: 1.look ahead, you have to look at the back down corner 2.move count: its about 10 moves longer than cfop so you need 5 tps+ and thats hard with bad look ahead 3.d moves: they are the third slowest moves + there is a lot of overworking @@mlbrown76
@@nivcubing I agree with your 2nd and 3rd points. However, I suck at tracking 2 pieces at a time so it actually makes look ahead a little easier for me.
![EFK F2L Method: EASY AND EFFICIENT [Edges first keyhole method]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
