The Facts:
For TH, first of all, CFOP was invented before ZZ, and the methods are very similar with the block building and LL, so ZZ is just copying CFOP. Second of all, the facts are that the current WR, and many before that were set using CFOP, so obviously the facts are that CFOP > ZZ.
As everyone has pointed out, this is flawed logic.
The point of ZZ wasn't for an improved CFOP, the point of ZZ is to reduce the cube. <RULDBF> to <RUL> to <RU>. Unfortunately, reduction to <RU> is pretty difficult to do, especially mid solve, as well as bad recog, so instead you settle with reduction to <RUL> for F2L. So it isn't copying CFOP.
Get to 2017, ZZ isn't doing great, so people start optimising blocks for TH by using EOCross, not to copy CFOP, but because it happens to be the fastest way of doing blocks normally (unless you get good blockbuilding solutions). In CFOP, people have been doing XCrosses for a while, not to copy Petrus, but because it is faster. Remember, in ZZ you orientate all the edges - that's a significant thing to do, so not very copying.
Now, let's look at the amount of improvement with each method.
CFOP has been around for ~40 years (give and take), ZZ ~15. The fastest CFOP solvers after 15 years were not sub 8. Therefore, due to the rate of improvement, ZZ is better. 'Bad logic' I hear you cry. I agree. The thing is, stats outside the method itself are pretty useless as there are so many factors outside of the method that they dominate. Instead, I would recommend you check
this post out. Read it and give good consideration to the argument, then decide what you think about ZZ properly.
