Should I Learn The Standard Method(Finger Placement)?

[abdulla]

I've been typing my whole(short) life with my index/middle/ring fingers and I type around 75-85 wpm.
I recently bought a Cherry MX blue keyboard for $60 and I really like the feel. Much better than browns IMO.
Anyways, I wonder if I should learn to use the correct fingers for the correct letters.
I think I've avoided using my pinky fingers because a couple of keyboards ago the actuation force was really high so my pinkies maybe were to weak but IDK.

I want to learn to type 100+ WPM

[Connly33]

I think it is deffinitly worth it, if anything else for the sake of avoiding any kind of wrist issues later down the line, and i dont see many 100+ wpm typists that dont use correct typing posture. I have some nerve issues from an earlier wrist injury and typing was getting to the point where it would almost be painful for me , but its been getting better after using all of my fingers and and using correct posture after i got my MX blue keyboard.

Though im not very fast i've been getting better, i could do 70 wpm just using my index/middle/ ring fingers, and my speed went down when i started typing correctly, but im back up to 60 wpm after a month, i dont think ill ever be very fast though

[davkol]

The standard keyboard layout (straight, offset *rows*, no hand separation, some kind of QWERTY symbol arrangement) was not designed for touch typing, that was put into practice by completely different people about a decade after that keyboard design entered the market. The new technique eventually took off among professional typists though, because it allowed shifting focus elsewhere from hunting for keys.

The problem is that the standard technique isn't particularly natural on standard keyboards. Wrists tend to be awkwardly bent, pinkies are overloaded, you name it. The hardware ought to be split for neutral wrist posture, and it'd better be designed for human hands (hardware) and a corpus representative of what's actually typed (symbol arrangement)—then the standard fingering technique comes handy. It's easier to learn from scratch too.

[SamirD]

The problem is that the standard technique isn't particularly natural on standard keyboards. Wrists tend to be awkwardly bent, pinkies are overloaded, you name it. The hardware ought to be split for neutral wrist posture, and it'd better be designed for human hands (hardware) and a corpus representative of what's actually typed (symbol arrangement)—then the standard fingering technique comes handy.

While I agree that this may be true for most people, I think it really does vary from person to person.  My brother and I are perfect examples.  I can type 14hrs a day on a Model M without fatigue.  My brother can do the same on a touchscreen keyboard.  Swap the two keyboards and both of us are in severe pain within an hour.

Good ergonomics is about finding what works for your body.  Sometimes you've got things that work for you that don't for others or vice-versa--always keep that in mind.

As far as finger placement, I'd learn.  It was one of the most useful things I've ever picked up in my life.  And you can always move to alternative layouts later if you want to tweak your touch typing.

[davkol]

Physiology aside, "standard" touch typing on QWERTY is hard to learn, and the asymmetrical layout doesn't help. At all.

Learning the home row consists of "fjfjfj…" gibberish, that's entirely counterintuitive. Corner punctuation (such as [, ], -, =) and some numbers are completely out of place. Fingers have to go in the opposite direction than natural to hit ZXC. And so on.

[SamirD]

Physiology aside, "standard" touch typing on QWERTY is hard to learn, and the asymmetrical layout doesn't help. At all.

Learning the home row consists of "fjfjfj…" gibberish, that's entirely counterintuitive. Corner punctuation (such as [, ], -, =) and some numbers are completely out of place. Fingers have to go in the opposite direction than natural to hit ZXC. And so on.

Yes, but it can be learned.  The first level of efficiency (and the most imo) comes from not having to think about the letters anymore.  Having the words just appear on the screen as your hands type brings BIG efficiencies.  Then the layout can be tweaked to bring some more gains, even going so far as a completely custom layout for your hands if you want.

[davkol]

You're focusing on the part after the training, but it takes months or even years to achieve competency.

[SamirD]

You're focusing on the part after the training, but it takes months or even years to achieve competency.

Are you talking about just touch typing qwerty?  Because most people can start seeing efficiencies within weeks.

[tigersharkdude]

You're focusing on the part after the training, but it takes months or even years to achieve competency.

Are you talking about just touch typing qwerty?  Because most people can start seeing efficiencies within weeks.

What he said, I learned touch typing in 9 weeks in 7th grade

[davkol]

Because most people can start seeing efficiencies within weeks.

"Can" is the key word. The rest of the statement is hardly quantified.

What he said, I learned touch typing in 9 weeks in 7th grade

Neuroplasticity is generally very different in 7th grade. Another concern is motivation, which may not be at its peak in the 7th grade, but in the OP's context, it's something to consider, because 80 wpm is already twice the speed of an average typist.

[SamirD]

Because most people can start seeing efficiencies within weeks.

"Can" is the key word. The rest of the statement is hardly quantified.

What he said, I learned touch typing in 9 weeks in 7th grade

Neuroplasticity is generally very different in 7th grade. Another concern is motivation, which may not be at its peak in the 7th grade, but in the OP's context, it's something to consider, because 80 wpm is already twice the speed of an average typist.

While there may not be a tremendous amount of scientific data to support my statement (and I'm actually surprised that so much foot noting and evidence is required for such a post), one thing is for certain--the individual matters more than any amount of statistical data that defines the bell curve in which the 'average' person would learn the skill. 

As always YMMV.  Never, ever underestimate an individual's determination and how far that can take someone.

[davkol]

The same goes the other way around though.

Besides, my point is similar to what Oobly has stated in some similar threads, i.e., it might be easier and more efficient to learn touch typing on something optimized (for example, his custom 40% ergo board w/ AdnW-like symbol arrangement), while keeping relatively fast non-touch typing as a backup.

[Hypersphere]

You might as well let all of your fingers join in the mechanical keyboard experience!

[SamirD]

The same goes the other way around though.

Besides, my point is similar to what Oobly has stated in some similar threads, i.e., it might be easier and more efficient to learn touch typing on something optimized (for example, his custom 40% ergo board w/ AdnW-like symbol arrangement), while keeping relatively fast non-touch typing as a backup.

I disagree.  An individual's motivation, amount of dedication to practice, ability to learn, etc make a much bigger impact on the time to learn than generic stats--stats which really haven't been compiled in any scientific way in the last few decades.

Learning touch typing on a new layout while using non-touch typing on the same layout or another one will confused the hands for most.  It takes a tremendous amount of discipline to keep two distinctive muscle memories when doing essentially the same task.

[davkol]

An individual's motivation, amount of dedication to practice, ability to learn, etc make a much bigger impact on the time to learn than generic stats

• Normal distribution.
• You probably wouldn't want to learn to drive a car (in order to get from point A to point B) with all the obsolete stuff, such as the usage of a hand-crank.

stats which really haven't been compiled in any scientific way in the last few decades.

What's "last few decades"? I haven't managed to get hold of Marsan's studies in 70's and 80's, but I've found some remarks, that they were quite decisive and done on a large sample.

And there's actually quite a lot of recent research in cognitive aspects of computer use, including typing, with software like ScriptLog.

Learning touch typing on a new layout while using non-touch typing on the same layout or another one will confused the hands for most.  It takes a tremendous amount of discipline to keep two distinctive muscle memories when doing essentially the same task.

The more similar the skills are, the higher is the risk of confusing them. That's the same in music, dancing, martial arts, languages and plenty of other fields.

There are plenty of people fluent in both QWERTY and DSK, for example; sometimes there are triggers involved (environment, tasks, physical keyboards), sometimes there aren't any anymore.

[SamirD]

An individual's motivation, amount of dedication to practice, ability to learn, etc make a much bigger impact on the time to learn than generic stats

• Normal distribution.
• You probably wouldn't want to learn to drive a car (in order to get from point A to point B) with all the obsolete stuff, such as the usage of a hand-crank.

stats which really haven't been compiled in any scientific way in the last few decades.

What's "last few decades"? I haven't managed to get hold of Marsan's studies in 70's and 80's, but I've found some remarks, that they were quite decisive and done on a large sample.

And there's actually quite a lot of recent research in cognitive aspects of computer use, including typing, with software like ScriptLog.

Learning touch typing on a new layout while using non-touch typing on the same layout or another one will confused the hands for most.  It takes a tremendous amount of discipline to keep two distinctive muscle memories when doing essentially the same task.

The more similar the skills are, the higher is the risk of confusing them. That's the same in music, dancing, martial arts, languages and plenty of other fields.

There are plenty of people fluent in both QWERTY and DSK, for example; sometimes there are triggers involved (environment, tasks, physical keyboards), sometimes there aren't any anymore.

I'm on several automotive forums.  The analogy of the hand-crank is definitely off the mark.  Most adult owners would like their kids to learn on less fancy cars to get the basics down.  It's why touch typing on a mech or non-mech doesn't really matter.

To me, typing on the same keyboard using two different methods will confuse my hands--especially when trying to have a singular end-goal--touch typing.  I understand that your suggestion is trying to make the transition 'loss-less' in terms of speed, but from what I've seen on GH from those that have went from one method of typing to another, there will be an inevitable period of loss before there's gain.  I've also seen that this period can be quite short depending on the amount of practice and motivation of the individual.

[Connly33]

You're focusing on the part after the training, but it takes months or even years to achieve competency.

Are you talking about just touch typing qwerty?  Because most people can start seeing efficiencies within weeks.

It's taken me a few years to become moderately efficient, granted that's off and on acctually trying to improve.

[Fiery]

Im just gonna throw this in here. have you thought about trying a new layout like Dvorak? I am now starting to get used to it and I find it more ergonomic and comfortable. and since I learned to touch type properly on it from the start, it feels more natural too. its up to you what you want to do.