Future of CFOP?

From the posts I've seen from ZZ users, and from averaging my own move count many times, ZZ has a higher move count than CFOP.

Whaaaat?

All of the ZZ solvers I have met seem to average a lower movecount than most CFOP solvers.
Although, not quite as efficient as Roux (or, at least, me).
They average 50-55 whilst many CFOP users I meet avg ~60

Personally, I think CFOP will remain the most popular, but there'll eventually come a fairly large number of Roux and ZZ users to become sub-10 and shtuff.
 
Maybe the CFOP claims of 56 move average aren't accurate for most people. Long, fast sequences are popular.

People do tend to overestimate their efficiency... I thought I had a 45 movecount average (which I do when casual solving) until Brest reconstructed my solves and the truth was revealed.
 
It's because then you do movecounts you don't test on speedsolves, the solves where you count moves are much slower, making you more efficient.

It's like how OH solves usually take less moves - you have more time to think.
 
I think that (for the most part), most methods can be equally fast. However, CFOP has been the most "developed" and documented, so at the moment, I guess it could be considered the best method to use. Roux is getting more popular and more people are using it though, so it could easily be just as "good" as CFOP.
 
I'd say ZZ (+ZBLL).
~200 algs (without counting mirror and inverse cases) are not that much.
If ZZ's movecount is close to CFOP's one, I think solving with < R, U, L > makes it potentially better (and way much cooler).
 
it depend from the cuber...some people like CFOP , the other Roux, and another Petrus..but all of them have their strong point also weakness..so which one is the best.."depend from the cuber"
 
Back
Top