Status
Not open for further replies.
My bet is on ZZ.

ZZ is not exactly a "method", it just adds an extra step in the beginning.

If you do ZZ F2L like Fridrich, then you're not doing ZZ F2L. If you do it like Petrus, then you're not doing ZZ F2L. The 'ZZ method' also has its own unique LL method. It's called ZZLL.

Please do not make assertions about things you know nothing about!

i know ZZ, ive used it. but i never bothered using the algs for ZZLL
 
It will be tough for any method to become more popular the CFOP for a bunch of reasons:

1) It's really really fast.
2) It's the natural extension of the most common beginner method (LBL).
3) F2L recognition is super easy, because you only ever have to find two cubies and you don't need to see the D-face to recognize them.
4) The pre-inspection is quick and easy.
5) It is ideal for adapting to other puzzles (partially because of 4).

ZZ is a cool method, but I don't think it can be faster unless some young prodigy learns ZBLL with near perfect fluency.
 
It will be tough for any method to become more popular the CFOP for a bunch of reasons:

1) It's really really fast.
2) It's the natural extension of the most common beginner method (LBL).
3) F2L recognition is super easy, because you only ever have to find two cubies and you don't need to see the D-face to recognize them.
4) The pre-inspection is quick and easy.
5) It is ideal for adapting to other puzzles (partially because of 4).

ZZ is a cool method, but I don't think it can be faster unless some young prodigy learns ZBLL with near perfect fluency.

+1
 
ZZ is a cool method, but I don't think it can be faster unless some young prodigy learns ZBLL with near perfect fluency.
ZZ's LL will always be faster than a CFOP LL because there is simply less to do. For a direct comparison OCLL is highly likely to be faster than CFOP's OLL. And COLL+EPLL is believed by many to be faster than OCLL/PLL. So much so that some CFOP'ers regard it worth while to learn even though an EO'd LL occurs much less frequently for them.

... but, ZZ isn't just (theoretically) faster because of the LL. F2L uses a similar number of moves, but is done using 3-gen algs and no rotations ... so should (in theory) be faster.

EDIT: ... and what Kir said!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top