PapaSmurf
Veteran
If you really want to use ZZ-B, ZZLL is the way to go, but why learn ZZLL when learning TUL is better in the long run?
TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
is there anywhere i can go to get my zz solves critiqued?
PapaSmurf
Veteran
On speedsolving, the ZZ/ZB home thread is a good place.
sqAree
Veteran
To add to the ZZ vs CFOP discussion:
Of course ZZ has better look-ahead (for the reason that was mentioned), and the moveset itself can't be worse than CFOP, but I want to point out that non-EO F2L cases are often really great if you know what you're doing and you get a lot more freedom (cause you don't have to preserve EO), so I'd argue that CFOP F2L (from cross to LL) is better than ZZ F2L (let's say from EOcross to LL).
And yes, being a CFOP user is sufficient to make this judgement because the ZZ F2L cases are a subset of the CFOP F2L cases so I know all of them.
Of course ZZ has better look-ahead (for the reason that was mentioned), and the moveset itself can't be worse than CFOP, but I want to point out that non-EO F2L cases are often really great if you know what you're doing and you get a lot more freedom (cause you don't have to preserve EO), so I'd argue that CFOP F2L (from cross to LL) is better than ZZ F2L (let's say from EOcross to LL).
And yes, being a CFOP user is sufficient to make this judgement because the ZZ F2L cases are a subset of the CFOP F2L cases so I know all of them.
Owen Morrison
Veteran
The reason I don't think it has better lookahead is because you are solving less total pieces at the beginning than CFOP which means you have more blind spots and more places you need to look for pieces.
PetraPine
Veteran
I would put lookahead at = not worse imo,
since you inspect to less but possible cases are simplified and no rotating
From my personal experience this seems to be the case(I lookahead to cross+1((tracking not planning))) and when i lookahead to EOcross
sqAree
Veteran
I get what you're saying, in fact I find it quite difficult to compare for example an xcross done in BL to an EOcross without a slot done.
Of course an xcross gives better look-ahead than a regular cross, but an EOcross does the same thing, just a bit more subtly.
We can think of solving EO as solving "half the information" the edges hold, in a way, so a naive measure would be xcross equates to 3 stickers solved, EOcross equates to 6 stickers solved, additionally (of course not the ultimate metric).
sqAree
Veteran
I'm stupid, messed up the calculation. Of course it's meant to be 4 additional stickers for the EOcross, sorry.
PizzaCuber
Regular
I love how I made this thread a year ago and it’s still going.
PetraPine
Veteran
moveset is worse but i dont know if ZZ has more regrips,
Try this
Do R U R' L' U L, Left sexy right sexy From home grip
For both of these(and alot of others) you dont leave Homegrip
The only finger that really needs to "rigrip" in most situations is your U hand
If you were talking about R2 L2 stuff ya but that barely ever happens in EOcross.
Im not saying R U L is not bad im saying it doesnt have more regrips(or atleast not MUCH more)
Try this
Do R U R' L' U L, Left sexy right sexy From home grip
For both of these(and alot of others) you dont leave Homegrip
The only finger that really needs to "rigrip" in most situations is your U hand
If you were talking about R2 L2 stuff ya but that barely ever happens in EOcross.
Im not saying R U L is not bad im saying it doesnt have more regrips(or atleast not MUCH more)
sqAree
Veteran
That's one of the reasons EOcross is considered to be the better ZZ variant (at least for 2H) these days. It takes away a lot of the regrips you'd have with blockbuilding ZZ. There might still be some regrips, but CFOP has some regrips too because you might get 1-2 rotations in a solve.
PapaSmurf
Veteran
I agree that non EO cases can be great, but they can also be terrible. For example, edge flipped in slot, corner solved is worse than any ZZ case. So to say that because a couple of flipped edge cases are good all the cases are good isn't the best logic. Instead, we can pick the best set of cases on average (EO solved) and have them.
sqAree
Veteran
I didn't say that, we'd just have to average all the cases and compare. But there might be more great flip cases than you think.
Owen Morrison
Veteran
You have to do a significant grip shift.
PetraPine
Veteran
....no?
OreKehStrah
Veteran
Nope. If you are having to shift your grip significantly then you are just executing it improperly. Not to mention the fact that since you know the L moves are coming after the R moves you can adjust for it by doing R' L' in a similar fashion to an r move, making it very smooth.
RiceMan_
Regular
you know that EOCross is a thing right, if you use EOCross ZZ is superior, and how idk why moveset would be superior with CFOP its should be equal or maybe ZZ would be superior cuz it you dont use F or F' during F2L
Last edited:
PapaSmurf
Veteran
Let's say you do. Well guess what? You do in CFOP too. Any criticism of ZZ against CFOP can't be used in the F2L department except for maybe a couple of edge flipped cases being nice (such as sledge insert), but even then there are many not nice edge flipped cases. You have to instead prove that EOCross+pair+ZBLL is worse than XCross+OLL/PLL by a significant enough margin to make up for the faster ZZ F2L, unless you want to contend that somehow ZZ F2L is worse than CFOP's.
RiceMan_
Regular
Idk if you've ever heard of a thing called EOCross
Owen Morrison
Veteran
I have. EOCross is as hard to plan as cross+1 is. Cross+1 solves 2 more pieces and gets rid of a blind spot.