Roux, fridrich, or zz

[waffle=ijm]

CH CH CHHH CHHHHH CHHCHCHCHCHCH <- Remembers this.

 

[y3k9]

CH CH CHHH CHHHHH CHHCHCHCHCHCH <- Remembers this.

and whats that?

 

[waffle=ijm]

It was one of those "you had to be there moments"

 

[y3k9]

It was one of those "you had to be there moments"

And i get it you dont wish to explain what happened to me?

 

[waffle=ijm]

yep. plus you can just ask through a PM and not ask it while being so off-topic.

 

[Dene]

FRIDRICH IS THE BEST METHOD (of these three) IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE OTHERWISE PROVE IT WITH EVIDENCE KTNXBAI THREAD CLOSED.

 

[y3k9]

yep. plus you can just ask through a PM and not ask it while being so off-topic.

You told me to ask (through pm) but said yes that you didnt want to explain what happened, bad grammar much?

 

[ElectricDoodie]

Now I've read this thread I think a little less of this community. Depressing.

I agree. Seriously anyone can be fast with any method. You just need to work at it.

really? the fact that i wanted to discuss this made you lose faith in the community? what's wrong with talking about it, even if you think i'm completely wrong? for the most part while i've been here, i haven't been rude to anyone, i've simply asserted my view of things. this is a forum, isn't it? despite kirjava's constant belittling of me, i am reading what he has to say and trying to respond to it.

my point was several things. first, i honestly don't feel like there's anything wrong with claiming cfop is the fastest method. i felt way this much stronger at the beginning of this discussion but i still think there isn't anything wrong with this statement. this is the point that has mostly been argued and that kirjava is most angry about.

another point was that it is somewhat ridiculous to say that all the methods are "equal". sure, they are all fast, that is pretty obvious, i've seen sub-10 averages from BigGreen for a while now. however, it is highly unlikely that they are "equal", especially the way kirjava was going about arguing it. different methods will have different optimal speeds and it's simply unlikely that three randomly chosen methods - zz, cfop, and roux are going to be equal in speed.

at no point did i say you can't be fast with roux, or zz, or you can't be faster than cfop with roux or zz.

Actually the thread title and OP question (i.e. which do you think is best?) is perfectly reasonable.

I was more just disappointed with the quality of posts and the number of ridiculous statements with nothing to back them up. Kirjava, Cride and qq were the only ones with clear points and arguments. I don't necessarily agree with any of them, btw.

This argument is based on both quantifiable and completely unquantifiable elements (and I'm not even including personal preference). You can make as many points as you like comparing the several main methods there are with average move counts between 35-55 and list as many dis/advantages as you want. You are still never going to solve the problem.

It makes sense to compare these method steps and overall features in order to better understand each in the context of others, but it makes little sense to claim any is categorically better than another.

Well, you see, the problem is that that was not the original post.

The OP was "Which one is best."

After everyone started saying that he was starting a flame war, and after the flame war had already started, he decided to go back, and change it to "think."

So, the problem is that the OP made an error in starting the thread, asking people which one is best, as if it were a fact. Now, he's changed it to an opinion, which is OK. But, all these posts and rants started before the OP edited his post, to make it an opinion, and not a fact of which one is "best."

WTF, it was one do you THINK is best from the beginning, kid.

You mad, kid?

Editing your OP doesn't change the fact that your true intent was to start a flame war.

 

[y3k9]

Now I've read this thread I think a little less of this community. Depressing.

I agree. Seriously anyone can be fast with any method. You just need to work at it.

really? the fact that i wanted to discuss this made you lose faith in the community? what's wrong with talking about it, even if you think i'm completely wrong? for the most part while i've been here, i haven't been rude to anyone, i've simply asserted my view of things. this is a forum, isn't it? despite kirjava's constant belittling of me, i am reading what he has to say and trying to respond to it.

my point was several things. first, i honestly don't feel like there's anything wrong with claiming cfop is the fastest method. i felt way this much stronger at the beginning of this discussion but i still think there isn't anything wrong with this statement. this is the point that has mostly been argued and that kirjava is most angry about.

another point was that it is somewhat ridiculous to say that all the methods are "equal". sure, they are all fast, that is pretty obvious, i've seen sub-10 averages from BigGreen for a while now. however, it is highly unlikely that they are "equal", especially the way kirjava was going about arguing it. different methods will have different optimal speeds and it's simply unlikely that three randomly chosen methods - zz, cfop, and roux are going to be equal in speed.

at no point did i say you can't be fast with roux, or zz, or you can't be faster than cfop with roux or zz.

Actually the thread title and OP question (i.e. which do you think is best?) is perfectly reasonable.

I was more just disappointed with the quality of posts and the number of ridiculous statements with nothing to back them up. Kirjava, Cride and qq were the only ones with clear points and arguments. I don't necessarily agree with any of them, btw.

This argument is based on both quantifiable and completely unquantifiable elements (and I'm not even including personal preference). You can make as many points as you like comparing the several main methods there are with average move counts between 35-55 and list as many dis/advantages as you want. You are still never going to solve the problem.

It makes sense to compare these method steps and overall features in order to better understand each in the context of others, but it makes little sense to claim any is categorically better than another.

Well, you see, the problem is that that was not the original post.

The OP was "Which one is best."

After everyone started saying that he was starting a flame war, and after the flame war had already started, he decided to go back, and change it to "think."

So, the problem is that the OP made an error in starting the thread, asking people which one is best, as if it were a fact. Now, he's changed it to an opinion, which is OK. But, all these posts and rants started before the OP edited his post, to make it an opinion, and not a fact of which one is "best."

WTF, it was one do you THINK is best from the beginning, kid.

You mad, kid?

Editing your OP doesn't change the fact that your true intent was to start a flame war.

Ok all i edited in was the "no flaming, kids" part cuz somebody said my intent was to start a flame (i think it was you) which it was not, and there was no flame war, me and waffle were joking around, i doubt anyone was offended.

 

[Innocence]

What's roux?

CH CH CHHH CHHHHH CHHCHCHCHCHCH

I'm so glad someone remembers that.

remembers what?

Why did you bother saying that? Obviously it's an "in" joke that you will NEVER get because you were not there at the time.

lrn2society.

Can we have less talk of hitting on Sarah and debating whether this topic is worth debating on already and start making this thread worthwhile?



In short believe that ZZ is at least equal to the other methods because it's quite good in it's raw form with fridrich style moves, I.E. not TOO much less efficient, but when you bring in blockbuilding and ZZLL, it can be quite comparable in speed. There may also be advanced improvements to EOLine and F2L that we've overlooked. This is in no way a scientific answer, but it's good enough for me, and perhaps others.

A slightly more structured answer is that, from what I've learned:
(Please note that this is assuming ZZLL as the chosen LL method.)

EOLine Pros: Orients edges, solves two edges.
EOLine Cons: Solves 2 less edges than cross, takes an extra 1 or 2 moves on average.

Verdict: Depending on how you take advantage of the oriented edges later on, this may or may not be worthwhile.

ZZF2L Pros: More ergonomic with RUL moves only, Comparable movecount to CFOP when utilizing blockbuilding.

ZZF2L Cons: In certain cases takes more moves than CFOP due to restricted moveset, lookahead can take some getting used to (but is not necessarily inferior), you have to solve 2 additional pieces.

Verdict: I think this is at least equal to CFOP when done properly, and has the potential to be very fast with few pauses.

ZZLL Pros: 1LLL, much fewer algs than ZBF2L and ZBLL. Easier recognition than pure ZBLL. Phasing recognition is also very fast.

ZZLL Cons: Over 100 algs (which isn't really that bad, but might scare some people off), extra step on insertion of the last pair, adds maybe an average of 2 moves HTM.

Verdict: I think this is at least as fast as ZB, at least at a human level. The recognition is much more reasonable, with an easy phasing step at first, then the reduced complexity of EP recognition. What's more, fewer algs.


/longwindedness

I know, this is not a very scientific article, but please take it for what it is. These are the evaluations that caused ME to stick with ZZ, and must be taken with a grain of salt. Do your own research.

I was ninja'd a couple of times while posting this, and the in joke part is now mostly redundant, but I'll leave it in anyway.

 

[ElectricDoodie]

Now I've read this thread I think a little less of this community. Depressing.

I agree. Seriously anyone can be fast with any method. You just need to work at it.

really? the fact that i wanted to discuss this made you lose faith in the community? what's wrong with talking about it, even if you think i'm completely wrong? for the most part while i've been here, i haven't been rude to anyone, i've simply asserted my view of things. this is a forum, isn't it? despite kirjava's constant belittling of me, i am reading what he has to say and trying to respond to it.

my point was several things. first, i honestly don't feel like there's anything wrong with claiming cfop is the fastest method. i felt way this much stronger at the beginning of this discussion but i still think there isn't anything wrong with this statement. this is the point that has mostly been argued and that kirjava is most angry about.

another point was that it is somewhat ridiculous to say that all the methods are "equal". sure, they are all fast, that is pretty obvious, i've seen sub-10 averages from BigGreen for a while now. however, it is highly unlikely that they are "equal", especially the way kirjava was going about arguing it. different methods will have different optimal speeds and it's simply unlikely that three randomly chosen methods - zz, cfop, and roux are going to be equal in speed.

at no point did i say you can't be fast with roux, or zz, or you can't be faster than cfop with roux or zz.

Actually the thread title and OP question (i.e. which do you think is best?) is perfectly reasonable.

I was more just disappointed with the quality of posts and the number of ridiculous statements with nothing to back them up. Kirjava, Cride and qq were the only ones with clear points and arguments. I don't necessarily agree with any of them, btw.

This argument is based on both quantifiable and completely unquantifiable elements (and I'm not even including personal preference). You can make as many points as you like comparing the several main methods there are with average move counts between 35-55 and list as many dis/advantages as you want. You are still never going to solve the problem.

It makes sense to compare these method steps and overall features in order to better understand each in the context of others, but it makes little sense to claim any is categorically better than another.

Well, you see, the problem is that that was not the original post.

The OP was "Which one is best."

After everyone started saying that he was starting a flame war, and after the flame war had already started, he decided to go back, and change it to "think."

So, the problem is that the OP made an error in starting the thread, asking people which one is best, as if it were a fact. Now, he's changed it to an opinion, which is OK. But, all these posts and rants started before the OP edited his post, to make it an opinion, and not a fact of which one is "best."

WTF, it was one do you THINK is best from the beginning, kid.

You mad, kid?

Editing your OP doesn't change the fact that your true intent was to start a flame war.

Ok all i edited in was the "no flaming, kids" part cuz somebody said my intent was to start a flame (i think it was you) which it was not, and there was no flame war, me and waffle were joking around, i doubt anyone was offended.

What? Why are you bringing Waffle into this? I ne'er mentioned him or anything about you and him talking.

 

[Innocence]

Does it matter? The point is now that we are arguing about which we THINK is the best. It's never going to get scientific enough to be fact. That is NOW the topic of this thread, the past is irrelevant.

 

[y3k9]

What's roux?

CH CH CHHH CHHHHH CHHCHCHCHCHCH

I'm so glad someone remembers that.

remembers what?

Why did you bother saying that? Obviously it's an "in" joke that you will NEVER get because you were not there at the time.

lrn2society.

Can we have less talk of hitting on Sarah and debating whether this topic is worth debating on already and start making this thread worthwhile?



In short believe that ZZ is at least equal to the other methods because it's quite good in it's raw form with fridrich style moves, I.E. not TOO much less efficient, but when you bring in blockbuilding and ZZLL, it can be quite comparable in speed. There may also be advanced improvements to EOLine and F2L that we've overlooked. This is in no way a scientific answer, but it's good enough for me, and perhaps others.

A slightly more structured answer is that, from what I've learned:
(Please note that this is assuming ZZLL as the chosen LL method.)

EOLine Pros: Orients edges, solves two edges.
EOLine Cons: Solves 2 less edges than cross, takes an extra 1 or 2 moves on average.

Verdict: Depending on how you take advantage of the oriented edges later on, this may or may not be worthwhile.

ZZF2L Pros: More ergonomic with RUL moves only, Comparable movecount to CFOP when utilizing blockbuilding.

ZZF2L Cons: In certain cases takes more moves than CFOP due to restricted moveset, lookahead can take some getting used to (but is not necessarily inferior), you have to solve 2 additional pieces.

Verdict: I think this is at least equal to CFOP when done properly, and has the potential to be very fast with few pauses.

ZZLL Pros: 1LLL, much fewer algs than ZBF2L and ZBLL. Easier recognition than pure ZBLL. Phasing recognition is also very fast.

ZZLL Cons: Over 100 algs (which isn't really that bad, but might scare some people off), extra step on insertion of the last pair, adds maybe an average of 2 moves HTM.

Verdict: I think this is at least as fast as ZB, at least at a human level. The recognition is much more reasonable, with an easy phasing step at first, then the reduced complexity of EP recognition. What's more, fewer algs.


/longwindedness

I know, this is not a very scientific article, but please take it for what it is. These are the evaluations that caused ME to stick with ZZ, and must be taken with a grain of salt. Do your own research.

I was ninja'd a couple of times while posting this, and the in joke part is now mostly redundant, but I'll leave it in anyway.

I asked "remembers what" cuz at the time i didnt know it was an inside joke, electricdooie is being stupid, and why does it seem EVERYBODY was at the place these "inside jokes" were made.

 

[Innocence]

I wasn't, I was just pointing it out. By the way he said it, it was obvious the joke was not meant for everyone. But stop posting pathetic little short posts that are irrelevant to the topic. Do you WANT to destroy your own thread?

 

[y3k9]

ok, cuz i didnt like quoting that really long quote i took it off, anyway. Me and waffle had that supposed "flame war" oh and innocence, how am i destroying my thread?

 

[ElectricDoodie]

What's roux?

CH CH CHHH CHHHHH CHHCHCHCHCHCH

I'm so glad someone remembers that.

remembers what?

Why did you bother saying that? Obviously it's an "in" joke that you will NEVER get because you were not there at the time.

lrn2society.

Can we have less talk of hitting on Sarah and debating whether this topic is worth debating on already and start making this thread worthwhile?



In short believe that ZZ is at least equal to the other methods because it's quite good in it's raw form with fridrich style moves, I.E. not TOO much less efficient, but when you bring in blockbuilding and ZZLL, it can be quite comparable in speed. There may also be advanced improvements to EOLine and F2L that we've overlooked. This is in no way a scientific answer, but it's good enough for me, and perhaps others.

A slightly more structured answer is that, from what I've learned:
(Please note that this is assuming ZZLL as the chosen LL method.)

EOLine Pros: Orients edges, solves two edges.
EOLine Cons: Solves 2 less edges than cross, takes an extra 1 or 2 moves on average.

Verdict: Depending on how you take advantage of the oriented edges later on, this may or may not be worthwhile.

ZZF2L Pros: More ergonomic with RUL moves only, Comparable movecount to CFOP when utilizing blockbuilding.

ZZF2L Cons: In certain cases takes more moves than CFOP due to restricted moveset, lookahead can take some getting used to (but is not necessarily inferior), you have to solve 2 additional pieces.

Verdict: I think this is at least equal to CFOP when done properly, and has the potential to be very fast with few pauses.

ZZLL Pros: 1LLL, much fewer algs than ZBF2L and ZBLL. Easier recognition than pure ZBLL. Phasing recognition is also very fast.

ZZLL Cons: Over 100 algs (which isn't really that bad, but might scare some people off), extra step on insertion of the last pair, adds maybe an average of 2 moves HTM.

Verdict: I think this is at least as fast as ZB, at least at a human level. The recognition is much more reasonable, with an easy phasing step at first, then the reduced complexity of EP recognition. What's more, fewer algs.


/longwindedness

I know, this is not a very scientific article, but please take it for what it is. These are the evaluations that caused ME to stick with ZZ, and must be taken with a grain of salt. Do your own research.

I was ninja'd a couple of times while posting this, and the in joke part is now mostly redundant, but I'll leave it in anyway.

I asked "remembers what" cuz at the time i didnt know it was an inside joke, electricdooie is being stupid, and why does it seem EVERYBODY was at the place these "inside jokes" were made.

i no u r but wut am i?

 

[Innocence]

ok, cuz i didnt like quoting that really long quote i took it off, anyway. Me and waffle had that supposed "flame war" oh and innocence, how am i destroying my thread?

By posting offtopic posts, and leading people like me to do the same, therefore drawing attention from the true purpose of the thread, thus inevitably getting it closed. Which is bad, because I enjoyed typing that comparison a couple of posts back.

 

[y3k9]

ok electricdooie, stop quoting such long quotes, please, stopping saying my intent was to start a flame war, and wtf? "i no u r but wut am i?"

 

[ElectricDoodie]

Does it matter? The point is now that we are arguing about which we THINK is the best. It's never going to get scientific enough to be fact. That is NOW the topic of this thread, the past is irrelevant.

It doesn't matter, but it was fun while it lasted. Stop being so serious. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Also, Fridrich owns all other methods.
There, I'm partaking in the OP question.

 

[ElectricDoodie]

ok electricdooie, stop quoting such long quotes, please, stopping saying my intent was to start a flame war, and wtf? "i no u r but wut am i?"

I only quoted long text because you did too. Don't act higher than thou.