[Help Thread] Roux Discussion and Help

[GuRoux]

Well, I use red and orange on L and R sides. (not respectively though) And White and yellow on D and U respectively. Should I become colour neutral?

And also my friend says that Roux takes a long time to get sub 20 with (he uses CFOP, so he might be biased) and he says that one of his friends took almost 2 years of practice to get to sub 10 from sub 20. Is this true? Is improving in Roux harder than CFOP.But this doesn't concern me much as I've decided to stick to Roux and I just want to know how much of a grind there is.



Thanks for all these tips. I guess I'll stop timing my solves for a couple of days, and also when should I start learning CMLL? Sub 40? or Sub 30?

I'm the same way with having only two starting blocks and i don't think it is a significant disadvantage. I started learning full CMLL at sub 25. Anytime earlier should be more focused on things like block building, tps, and recognition.

 

[Renslay]

I started to learn CMLL when I was around sub-50. Learn them whenever you think they worth to be learned (oh, I feel myself so wise now. ) Think of that you eventually will learn them after all, so you can get familiar with them in an early stage. For example, look at just the 1 and the 6 ones (B1, C1, ..., H1, A6, B6, ..., H6). That's a good start, and I guess you already know the 1-s.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

Apologies in advance if this is a dumb question, or if it's already been asked and/or answered. Is there really no L6E 1 look permutation? It seems kind of ridiculous to have a step based on permutation of only the UL and UR pieces. I don't know how many cases 1 look L6E would be, but I can't imagine it'd be that incredibly many, would it? It's permutation of 6 pieces at once, and permutation of 8 pieces at once (PLL) is only 21 algs. I mean, people learn stuff like EG which is way more algorithm intensive than 1 look L6E permutation would ever be.

I've looked around a bunch and can't find any info on 1 looking it. Does this substep exist? If so, somebody please point me toward info about it, cause I sure as hell can't find any. If not... why not? I can't imagine recognition or execution being that tough.

 

[GuRoux]

Apologies in advance if this is a dumb question, or if it's already been asked and/or answered. Is there really no L6E 1 look permutation? It seems kind of ridiculous to have a step based on permutation of only the UL and UR pieces. I don't know how many cases 1 look L6E would be, but I can't imagine it'd be that incredibly many, would it? It's permutation of 6 pieces at once, and permutation of 8 pieces at once (PLL) is only 21 algs. I mean, people learn stuff like EG which is way more algorithm intensive than 1 look L6E permutation would ever be.

I've looked around a bunch and can't find any info on 1 looking it. Does this substep exist? If so, somebody please point me toward info about it, cause I sure as hell can't find any. If not... why not? I can't imagine recognition or execution being that tough.

the problem with one looking LSE is that it will take a long pause to look around the m-slice area for recognition. At the top level, LSE is easy to recognized (often predicted in CMLL) and doesn't really have any pauses in it so it is almost algorithm speed. Also, there might be way too many cases (i think around 200 with one center orientation, probably wrong, not good at probability) and recognition will definitely be hard; you'll need to know that orientation and place of all six pieces.

 

[TheLizardWizard]

That and LSE can be optamized, and probably wouldnt be much less efficient than an alg.

 

[Phillip1847]

Huh. I was always under the impression that Moo was M' U M'. Which flips FU FL FR FD.
I'm interested in practicing roux on the side. I love the idea that sometimes you can just do a rotation instead of a move.

 

[GuRoux]

Huh. I was always under the impression that Moo was M' U M'. Which flips FU FL FR FD.
I'm interested in practicing roux on the side. I love the idea that sometimes you can just do a rotation instead of a move.

i don't think doing a rotation instead of a move is ever good.

 

[Renslay]

I love the idea that sometimes you can just do a rotation instead of a move.

i don't think doing a rotation instead of a move is ever good.

Quite the opposite: I think in many cases a move is faster than a cube rotation.

 

[pijok]

I'm averaging 13 seconds now, but I always have a long break before CMLL.
Is there any advice to avoid this break?
Do you fast guys recognize the CMLL case during SB?

 

[Kirjava]

Well, I use red and orange on L and R sides. (not respectively though) And White and yellow on D and U respectively. Should I become colour neutral?

If you want to do it, do it sooner rather than later. Please read; http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?34587-Colour-Neutral-Deliberation

And also my friend says that Roux takes a long time to get sub 20 with (he uses CFOP, so he might be biased) and he says that one of his friends took almost 2 years of practice to get to sub 10 from sub 20. Is this true? Is improving in Roux harder than CFOP.But this doesn't concern me much as I've decided to stick to Roux and I just want to know how much of a grind there is.

People improve at different rates - that single statistic does not give an insight about ease of improvement with different systems.

 

[TDM]

Apologies in advance if this is a dumb question, or if it's already been asked and/or answered. Is there really no L6E 1 look permutation? It seems kind of ridiculous to have a step based on permutation of only the UL and UR pieces. I don't know how many cases 1 look L6E would be, but I can't imagine it'd be that incredibly many, would it? It's permutation of 6 pieces at once, and permutation of 8 pieces at once (PLL) is only 21 algs. I mean, people learn stuff like EG which is way more algorithm intensive than 1 look L6E permutation would ever be.

I've looked around a bunch and can't find any info on 1 looking it. Does this substep exist? If so, somebody please point me toward info about it, cause I sure as hell can't find any. If not... why not? I can't imagine recognition or execution being that tough.

Edge permutation: 6!
Centre permutation: 2
Parity: 2
Total number of cases is (6!*2)/2=6!=720.

I mean, people learn stuff like EG which is way more algorithm intensive than 1 look L6E permutation would ever be.

Unless I've miscalculated, there are only six more algs to learn using EG.

 

[GuRoux]

Edge permutation: 6!
Centre permutation: 2
Parity: 2
Total number of cases is (6!*2)/2=6!=120.

what about edge orientation?

 

[pijok]

Total number of cases is (6!*2)/2=6!=120.
[...]
Unless I've miscalculated

You miscalculated: 6!=720

Also shouldn't it be 4 possible center permutations?

 

[Athefre]

It seems kind of ridiculous to have a step based on permutation of only the UL and UR pieces.

Well good thing the step isn't alone. It gets a lot of support from 4a and in turn helps out 4c.

 

[TDM]

what about edge orientation?

He said 1-looking permutation, not the whole LSE. Including EO, that'd be 720*2^5, or 7200... that's definitely too many.

You miscalculated: 6!=720

Also shouldn't it be 4 possible center permutations?

Yep sorry; I was thinking of 5!. That's what happens if you don't use a calculator As the centres are solved or an M2 from being solved after EO, it's only 2 possible centre permutations.

 

[pijok]

As the centres are solved or an M2 from being solved after EO, it's only 2 possible centre permutations.

Most Roux users often misorient centers to shorten EO

 

[TDM]

Most Roux users often misorient centers to shorten EO

Oh... I didn't know that. Then the number of cases doubles.
How do they then fix the centres afterwards without misorienting all M-slice edges?

 

[GuRoux]

As far as I know this is how misorientated centers work: have the misorientated centers on the top and bottom. to tell whether an edge is orientated correctly is the same as before but with the misorientated center color with one exception. the UL and UR edges use the same good and bad edge criteria for color as if you were doing regular orientated centers. Then you do the rest regularly.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

the problem with one looking LSE is that it will take a long pause to look around the m-slice area for recognition. At the top level, LSE is easy to recognized (often predicted in CMLL) and doesn't really have any pauses in it so it is almost algorithm speed. Also, there might be way too many cases (i think around 200 with one center orientation, probably wrong, not good at probability) and recognition will definitely be hard; you'll need to know that orientation and place of all six pieces.

I can't imagine recognition being that insanely hard... BD is hidden, but the other 5 are at least partially in view. If PLL can be recognized by looking at 2 sides, I can't imagine that some method for 1 looking LSE when 5 out of the 6 pieces are visible isn't doable. And 200 sounds like way too many to me. Permuting 6 pieces that are already oriented? 200? Really? Well, I don't know either. Can somebody calculate the number of algorithms it takes to permute L6E all at once?

Even if they're not used by anyone now, do the algorithms for one looking exist?

On a complete sidenote, can I just say that you have the most amazing username ever?

 

[pijok]

Can somebody calculate the number of algorithms it takes to permute L6E all at once?

We already did. With solved centers there are 360 cases.