• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

ZZ-CT Thread

I never really understood how TSLE could be done intuitively. Could someone help to clear my doubts?
You learn how each trigger effects the pieces on the cube, and learn/figure out which triggers you need to do to reduce the cases. Like you learn all the 1 trigger cases, then figure out/learn how to turn all the 2 trigger cases into 1 trigger cases. Then 3 to 2.
 
Do you think that if someone learned and could execute all of the algorithms very fast, that this method could easily beat Roux, or Petrus, or it's succesor ZZ?
Yes. 100% The movecount is is similar to roux but turning faster = gangster :)

Also, I think you mean predecessor. :)
 
Last edited:
We know that ZZ-CT is objectively worse than ZZ-A, and then there's a proper debate to be had whether ZZ-A or Roux are better (or equal). So no, ZZ-CT couldn't beat the big 3 (or Petrus maybe).
 
We know that ZZ-CT is objectively worse than ZZ-A, and then there's a proper debate to be had whether ZZ-A or Roux are better (or equal). So no, ZZ-CT couldn't beat the big 3 (or Petrus maybe).
Is it because of the alg count? Or something else? (I want to learn CT because I like the luck and I want something spicier than boring OCLL and PLL.)
 
Is it because of the alg count? Or something else? (I want to learn CT because I like the luck and I want something spicier than boring OCLL and PLL.)
Nope, it's the movecount mainly, also the fact that you can be (should be) slot neutral. The luck isn't a great factor to learn it and it's overhyped how useful it is.
 
Nope, it's the movecount mainly, also the fact that you can be (should be) slot neutral. The luck isn't a great factor to learn it and it's overhyped how useful it is.
Isnt the movecount similar to Roux? (idk i just watched the seminar and the colorfulpockets vid)
 
Back
Top