[Help Thread] Roux Discussion and Help

[IRNjuggle28]

Alex lau is not faster than feliks zemdegs.

Nobody is. Why even bother saying that? The point of what I said was showing that Roux is a world class method. Alex is #3 in the world, and that's plenty fast enough to convince me that Roux has potential to be fast.

 

[Bestsimple]

Oh sorry i misunderstood you. You're right alex is very fast and i think if he were color neutral he might be able to compete with feliks.

 

[JasonK]

He said Alex lau is faster than all top cfop users.

No-one said that. He is faster than nearly all of them.

 

[Tim Major]

I think the fact that Alex is 3rd in the world, whilst probably 95%+ are CFOP solvers is either a statistical anomaly, or perhaps proof of Roux's potential. Regardless of whether he is faster than Feliks (unofficially he is...)

 

[Bestsimple]

Alex lau is one person. I mean how many other fast roux solvers have achieved sub 10 other than biggreen.

 

[Kirjava]

Alex lau is one person. I mean how many other fast roux solvers have achieved sub 10 other than biggreen.

You can use stats to say anything.

Roux has a higher percentage of sub10 solvers than CFOP does.

 

[Bestsimple]

Then why does my teacher ask me to use statistics to prove my point?

 

[Kirjava]

Because your teacher is a moron since correlation doesn't prove causation.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

You can use stats to say anything.

Roux has a higher percentage of sub10 solvers than CFOP does.

I'm aware that this was just for the purpose of showing the problem with out of context stats. But even so, I'm not so sure about that. Want to name some people who are sub 10 with Roux? 5BLD and biggreen are the only ones I know of. And you're close. But... three people?

If you are right about Roux having a higher percentage, it's because Roux is a more difficult method with a much shallower learning curve than CFOP, and anybody who is willing to take on that difficult a method is probably willing to take on being sub 10. CFOP is suitable for casual cubers. I've never heard of a "casual" Roux solver, unless you count the people who use CFOP as their main method and learned Roux just for fun. Point is, if Roux does have a higher percentage of sub 10 solvers, (which I sort of doubt, since I can only think of a few) it's not because the method has more potential. It's because the solvers who would take on Roux are the ones who would become sub 10 regardless of what method they were using. What happened to many of the Roux solvers who are not sub 10? They quit Roux and switched back to CFOP.

 

[GuRoux]

I'm aware that this was just for the purpose of showing the problem with out of context stats. But even so, I'm not so sure about that. Want to name some people who are sub 10 with Roux? 5BLD and biggreen are the only ones I know of. And you're close. But... three people?

If you are right about Roux having a higher percentage, it's because Roux is a more difficult method with a much shallower learning curve than CFOP, and anybody who is willing to take on that difficult a method is probably willing to take on being sub 10. CFOP is suitable for casual cubers. I've never heard of a "casual" Roux solver, unless you count the people who use CFOP as their main method and learned Roux just for fun. Point is, if Roux does have a higher percentage of sub 10 solvers, (which I sort of doubt, since I can only think of a few) it's not because the method has more potential. It's because the solvers who would take on Roux are the ones who would become sub 10 regardless of what method they were using. What happened to many of the Roux solvers who are not sub 10? They quit Roux and switched back to CFOP.

I think you make some good points. There are far too many factors to statistically "prove" any method over another. I also feel like there must be some other sub 10 solver but i can't think of any.

 

[Renslay]

I'm aware that this was just for the purpose of showing the problem with out of context stats. But even so, I'm not so sure about that. Want to name some people who are sub 10 with Roux? 5BLD and biggreen are the only ones I know of. And you're close. But... three people?

If you are right about Roux having a higher percentage, it's because Roux is a more difficult method with a much shallower learning curve than CFOP, and anybody who is willing to take on that difficult a method is probably willing to take on being sub 10. CFOP is suitable for casual cubers. I've never heard of a "casual" Roux solver, unless you count the people who use CFOP as their main method and learned Roux just for fun.

Well, count me. I never practiced a lot (hence you can say I'm a casual solver), and I've heard "Roux" and "Fridrich" at the same time. I chose the first one to learn, and I didn't regret it.

Just for the record, I learned CFOP as well (with 2 look OLL and 1 look PLL), and it became my second method. As a casual CFOP-er, my average is about 23 seconds. I know both methods for years now, and for me I found Roux easier (note that this is a highly subjective opinion; CFOP is just not suitable for me - but I can imagine the reverse for someone).

Point is, if Roux does have a higher percentage of sub 10 solvers, (which I sort of doubt, since I can only think of a few) it's not because the method has more potential. It's because the solvers who would take on Roux are the ones who would become sub 10 regardless of what method they were using. What happened to many of the Roux solvers who are not sub 10? They quit Roux and switched back to CFOP.

Why everyone assumes that someone learn Roux after CFOP? Is it so hard to imagine that a beginner picks up a block building method?

 

[GuRoux]

Why everyone assumes that someone learn Roux after CFOP? Is it so hard to imagine that a beginner picks up a block building method?

In fact, I'm teaching starting off somebody with their first method to be roux.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

Why everyone assumes that someone learn Roux after CFOP? Is it so hard to imagine that a beginner picks up a block building method?

Yes, it is. Here's why. Nobody learns a speedsolving method as their first method. There may be a few exceptions, but the vast majority learn what is called "the beginners' method" first. That is not blockbuilding, and it's basically a watered down version of CFOP. You solve a cross, then what's more or less an 8 look F2L, then OLL and PLL, broken down into smaller steps. The reason beginners never start with blockbuilding is because the beginners' method is not blockbuilding, and IS an F2L variant. That's why the natural progression is CFOP to Roux and not vice versa.

 

[Bestsimple]

Yeah that's pretty much all it is. I mean I first learnt from dan brown's youtube tutorials so.

 

[Renslay]

Yes, it is. Here's why. Nobody learns a speedsolving method as their first method.

I meant picking up a block building method as their first speed method.

There may be a few exceptions, but the vast majority learn what is called "the beginners' method" first. That is not blockbuilding, and it's basically a watered down version of CFOP. You solve a cross, then what's more or less an 8 look F2L, then OLL and PLL, broken down into smaller steps. The reason beginners never start with blockbuilding is because the beginners' method is not blockbuilding, and IS an F2L variant. That's why the natural progression is CFOP to Roux and not vice versa.

I know that this seems the general case, yet somehow many assumes that this is the only way.

Here is another thing. There was a guy who I talked to on a competition. After a while, he asked what method do I use. I replied I'm using Roux. His reaction was "Aha. Don't you want to learn a fast method, like CFOP?" This narrowminded question pissed me off so much I couldn't even answer.

 

[Kirjava]

I'm aware that this was just for the purpose of showing the problem with out of context stats. But even so, I'm not so sure about that. Want to name some people who are sub 10 with Roux? 5BLD and biggreen are the only ones I know of. And you're close. But... three people?

If you are right about Roux having a higher percentage, it's because Roux is a more difficult method with a much shallower learning curve than CFOP, and anybody who is willing to take on that difficult a method is probably willing to take on being sub 10. CFOP is suitable for casual cubers. I've never heard of a "casual" Roux solver, unless you count the people who use CFOP as their main method and learned Roux just for fun. Point is, if Roux does have a higher percentage of sub 10 solvers, (which I sort of doubt, since I can only think of a few) it's not because the method has more potential. It's because the solvers who would take on Roux are the ones who would become sub 10 regardless of what method they were using. What happened to many of the Roux solvers who are not sub 10? They quit Roux and switched back to CFOP.

I know five people that have sub10 avg12.

As for the stats, you're forgetting about the thousands and thousands of CFOP solvers that are not sub10 that skew the average.

 

[IRNjuggle28]

I know that this seems the general case, yet somehow many assumes that this is the only way.

Fair enough. OK. I have a ton of respect for anybody who does in fact do it that way, as your probably guessed from my signature.

Here is another thing. There was a guy who I talked to on a competition. After a while, he asked what method do I use. I replied I'm using Roux. His reaction was "Aha. Don't you want to learn a fast method, like CFOP?" This narrowminded question pissed me off so much I couldn't even answer.

Yeah, that's pretty annoying. Lol. I wonder what his idea of a fast method that's not CFOP is.

 

[GuRoux]

Here is another thing. There was a guy who I talked to on a competition. After a while, he asked what method do I use. I replied I'm using Roux. His reaction was "Aha. Don't you want to learn a fast method, like CFOP?" This narrowminded question pissed me off so much I couldn't even answer.

I've never had this experience. It is usually that they have no idea what roux is.

 

[pijok]

I learned most of Roux today.

I don't believe you. It takes months to learn Roux.;P

I don't have the L6E algorithms memorized yet

Don't memorize them. Understand them. It is possible to solve L6E completely intuitive.

It's weird not solving all the cross pieces.

Cross pieces???

Despite knowing that the 4 L4E algorithms are basically the same thing as CPLL or EPLL,

There is nothing in common?

I'm having a terrible time differentiating the two FUUUUU algs that are essentially A or U perms. I'm doing OK with the H (dots) and E/Z perms (half dots), though.

I don't know CFOP and i don't understand what LL algorithms have to do with 4 intuitive moves but it seems you have problems to recognize the 3-cycles. Maybe look at this recognition system: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?35350-Roux-4b-to-4c-Transition
or just try to track one of the not visible stickers during 4b.

 

[Renslay]

I learned most of Roux today. It's very different. I don't have the L6E algorithms memorized yet, so I'm basically solving while looking at a cheat sheet. It's not at all automatic. When I'm doing blocks, I have to think about what *not* to solve. It's weird not solving all the cross pieces. Despite knowing that the 4 L4E algorithms are basically the same thing as CPLL or EPLL, I'm having a terrible time differentiating the two FUUUUU algs that are essentially A or U perms. I'm doing OK with the H (dots) and E/Z perms (half dots), though.

I was at mid 20s and improving fast with CFOP. With Roux, I'm at 1:00 to 1:30 right now. But I'll stick with it. It is pretty much my first full day with Roux.

Keep up with the good work.