Hello I was just curious on how diffucult the square is. I can only solve a 3x3 and 3x3x2. Thanks. I would also like to learn the whole plus and minus system.

Well I'll give my opinion. this puzzle bamboozled me for over a year. I tried to sell or trade it. It just didn't make sense. And most of the "solutions" began with "Return to cube shape - intuitive"! As if...

Anyway, recently something clicked and it now seems like a totally different and better puzzle. I get it now. My opinion is still that it's quite a bit harder than the 3x3x3 or 3x3x2 but ironically I now use a sequence I use on the 3x3x2 to help solve the square 1. You may instantly "get it" but then again...

If you memorize a solution the Square-1 is annoying but not hard.

If you try to find a solution on your own it's very hard. There is a parity situation with the thin edges that requires you to take the puzzle out of the cubic state to solve. This is extra frustrating.

You can try the square 2 color ( black and white ) version, that is the elementary level of square 1.
http://www.hknowstore.com/locale/en-US/ ... d1e92fa94e
Enjoy !

I found the square-1 to be challenge, I really disliked it at first, due to it behaving a lot different from any other puzzle I have. After scrambling it (accidently) it just sat on my shelf since I refused to solve it with a guide (believe me, I was very close sometimes).

After a couple of weeks I got tired of it being scrambled I tried to return it to a cube. Somehow I managed to overcome that challenge and I had a cubic Sq1 again I spent some time just randomly playing with it, not trying to solve it, and suddenly I understood. I spent a couple of evenings figuring out a general way of solving it, and after a while I managed to solve it completely. I was quite proud that afternoon ^^

Sorry for this extensive text, but my tip for you would be just to play generally with it, and after a while it will hopefully come to you Good luck!

I memorized a solution once but completely forgot it after I modded my Square-1. After about a year when I got a new one, I dreaded scrambling it for a while, but when I finally did, I found that I was able to solve the whole puzzle like a 3x3x2 or 2x2x3. I also learned the mechanics behind the parity case with a hint from Jaap: "The quickest way to perform an odd permutation is to go to the scallop-scallop shape (3 twists), swap three corners from one layer with three from the other (1 twist), and return to the cube shape (3 twists) which takes 7 twists in total."

The method I use now is almost identical to method 6 on Jaap's Square-1 page.

There have been times when I have enjoyed the Square-1. And there have been times when I am annoyed by it. The annoyance for me is because everything has to line up just right to be able to move it when it is not in cube shape. Since you haven't had any other puzzles like this yet, it may be a good way to find out if you like this kind of puzzle or not. I am not sure about the simpler version Calvin mentioned. Maybe that would be a good place to start.

The Square-1 is one of my favorite puzzles.
I have a CubeTwist (I don't believe it's a KO...), put in some Lubix, restickered it with CubeSmith, and I love it.
As far as difficulty goes, it's not that hard. It is mainly intuitive, and after a bunch of solves, it will come much, much easier. It is a dihedral puzzle, so you can get away with some cuboid algorithms. The only really hard part is the parity.
I have a fantastic algorithm for it, and can give it to you if you so desire.

-Doug

It is also one of my favorite puzzles ever! At first completely blew my mind (back when they came out) but have since become easier for me to do intuitively. I'd like to see that fantastic algorithm if you don't mind though...

Sure!
Warning: This is NOT a pure algorithm. However, it is pretty close, and it is an easy fix. You'll see what I mean.
Primary objective: Swap UF and UB edges.
Secondary objective: Swap DF and DB. Swap DR and DL. (Do an H-Perm on the bottom.)

/(-3, -3), /(3,0), /(-3,-3), /(2,0), /(-4, 2), /(4,-2), /(1,0), /(-3,-3), /(-3,0)

How to fix the secondary objective:
Leave the H-Perm on the bottom, and do this algorithm:
/(-3,3), /(-3,3), /(-1,0), /(3, -3), /(3, -3), /(1,0)

-Doug

I would have to completely disagree with this!

I think the last thing the square 1 is is "intuitive". You're right that after a bunch of solves it'll come easier but that doesn't help if you can't get your head around how to solve it in the 1st place. This is what I was referring to in my 1st post above: the fact that often you hear that the puzzle is intuitive, which makes you feel like a fool if you haven't got a clue.

I'd also say, now that I can solve it, that the parity fix isn't hard. I suppose the square 1 is like most puzzles; some people will pick it up no problem but there will also be a lot who scratch their heads. The difference with it is it's strange shape changing.

In my opinion, like it's 2x2x2 relative, many of the published Square-1 solutions are geared toward speed solving and are therefore unnecessarily complicated for beginners and leisure solvers. I favour solutions that have only a few algorithms. I also think that algorithms written in an adapted WCA-style notation would make it easier to learn because familiar cuboid patterns would emerge. For example, turn the top layer (U) "1" and you can then apply the standard cuboid UFR-DFR corner swap: R U R U' R (where R is a 180° turn and U is a 90° turn). It also swaps an edge, but it is a useful algorithm.