Hi all, long time reader, first time poster.

So I recently picked up a Square-1 for the first time. Been working on it for about a week but haven't solved it. The puzzle is functionally deep cut, since the one axis you have to turn to do anything useful is deep cut. And like any other deep cut puzzle, it's difficult to impossible to find commutators because so many pieces move on every turn.

What I'm asking is, is it normal for a semi-experienced puzzler to be able to solve the Square-1 on your own? Or is this thing so bizarre and fiendish that moves from more regular twisty puzzles really don't adapt? From learning the 3x3x3 beginner's method, I've solved on my own most of the common puzzles - cubes up to 7 (sans even-cube parity), Megaminx, Pyraminx, Rainbow cube (easy), Rex Cube, and face-turn octahedron. I even got the Skewb on my own eventually, figuring out a commutator for face centers that also twists a pair of corners... clunky but it eventually works.

I AM NOT looking for a solution for the Square-1 - I've found Jaap's page and others but haven't read in detail. Just wondering if the Square-1 is normal to be able to solve solo, or if everybody resorts to looking it up. I'm halfway close on it - can get it to cube shape and all the pieces to the right layers, but confounded on how to simply cycle pieces within a layer.

- Erik

I once had a square-1 and attempted to solve it on my own. I managed to consistently solve all but the last 4 edges or so, although sometimes I would get lucky and it would be solved. I approached it in a way similar to solving a domino cube.

Keep trying though,

3x3 --> help from a friend
4x4 -- NxNxN --> my own
Then I learned the Teraminx on my own
Then I learned square-1 on my own by trying to find a way to do the shape, then by finding a corner commtator and finally edge commutators. Should take you about 5 hours total to learn.

- Greg