Beginner's Guide to Choosing a Speedsolving Method

[Renslay]

I would edit your post and write "Fredrik" the correct way or you'll have troubles.

And Roux.

 

[TDM]

I would edit your post and write "Fredrik" the correct way or you'll have troubles.

And Roux.

You don't need to point out all the mistakes in his post; it's still understandable. And if you really want to do that, you forgot the spelling of beginner... Also, aboeglin, if they can't spell Fridrich you could at least tell them how to spell it instead of just pointing out that it's wrong.

 

[RubiksJake12]

You don't need to point out all the mistakes in his post; it's still understandable. And if you really want to do that, you forgot the spelling of beginner... Also, aboeglin, if they can't spell Fridrich you could at least tell them how to spell it instead of just pointing out that it's wrong.

I think correcting it would be nice. Maybe it's because I'm an english nerd, but I prefer reading "professional" looking documents (or in this case a fairly nice post) with nice grammar. I mean in a normal post, or conversation between people it obviously isn't a big deal, but when many people will be reading and referencing it, it's just nice to not get distracted by weird spellings/mistakes.

 

[tacgnol]

I've been thinking about switching to Roux recently (gotta love those sexy slice moves, nahmsayin?), and I don't know where else to ask this, so I suppose I'll put it here: Would there be much difficulty in doing full colour neutrality in Roux if i'm already cn with cfop? I don't know if it's relevant at all, but I average around like 29 atm.

Many thank :3

 

[TDM]

I've been thinking about switching to Roux recently (gotta love those sexy slice moves, nahmsayin?), and I don't know where else to ask this, so I suppose I'll put it here: Would there be much difficulty in doing full colour neutrality in Roux if i'm already cn with cfop? I don't know if it's relevant at all, but I average around like 29 atm.

Many thank :3

If you can be CN, I would be. I'm no expert in Roux, but I think that if you're CN from the start, it should be easy enough, especially if you're already CN with your current method.

 

[jeff081692]

I've been thinking about switching to Roux recently (gotta love those sexy slice moves, nahmsayin?), and I don't know where else to ask this, so I suppose I'll put it here: Would there be much difficulty in doing full colour neutrality in Roux if i'm already cn with cfop? I don't know if it's relevant at all, but I average around like 29 atm.

Many thank :3

As someone learning Roux with CN despite not being CN in fridrich. You will have an easier time than me that's for sure.

 

[RubiksJake12]

As someone learning Roux with CN despite not being CN in fridrich. You will have an easier time than me that's for sure.

I'm only color neutral with 2 colors. You might want to start like that as it's fairly easy, and then try to expand to different colors as well. I'm still learning the method though.

 

[brian724080]

I think that the OP and the wiki is basing too much things on CFOP. For example, "Transition from Fridrich" or "More difficult than forming cross" or "More efficient than CFOP" (while not comparing with others). I think these write-ups should be written from more of a neutral standpoint. Nonetheless, this helped me a lot.

 

[uvafan]

I think that the OP and the wiki is basing too much things on CFOP. For example, "Transition from Fridrich" or "More difficult than forming cross" or "More efficient than CFOP" (while not comparing with others). I think these write-ups should be written from more of a neutral standpoint. Nonetheless, this helped me a lot.

The reason that other methods are compared to CFOP often is that the purpose of this thread is to educate beginners on how other methods can be just as viable as CFOP even though CFOP is by far the most common method. It makes sense to compare other methods to CFOP because CFOP is so common and often thought to be the only method that you can get fast with.

 

[brian724080]

The reason that other methods are compared to CFOP often is that the purpose of this thread is to educate beginners on how other methods can be just as viable as CFOP even though CFOP is by far the most common method. It makes sense to compare other methods to CFOP because CFOP is so common and often thought to be the only method that you can get fast with.

I see, I'm sure the OP has benefited many in terms of choosing their favorite method.

 

[jeff081692]

I'm only color neutral with 2 colors. You might want to start like that as it's fairly easy, and then try to expand to different colors as well. I'm still learning the method though.

It hasn't been a big problem for me yet, also if I started with 2 colors I would get a bias towards those two and see noticeably faster times with them and that would likely discourage me from trying to be full CN.

 

[TDM]

You could list this and this as some other CFOP/ZZ resources.

 

[Knut]

One thing about one of the quotes on the first page.
"In Roux we have bow ties. Roux - 1, CFOP - 0" -PandaCuber
We have bowties in CFOP too.

 

[pinser]

I'd like to apologize in advance if this question causes controversy, but I need some help.

I was a sub-30 CFOP cuber (full pll and some olls) but I decided to try out Roux.
I loved the method and took it to 35ish but recently I decided to give ZZ a try, and I also like it.
So my question is, ZZ or Roux? (I like both equally)

Pros:
Roux: Already 35ish, seems like it has more potential.
ZZ: I know most of the algs, good for OH (which I am interested in).

Cons:
Roux: Not good for OH, need to learn 1 look CMLL.
ZZ: Terrible at EOline, very terrible at EOline, horrible at EOline...(I think you get the message )

Thanks!

 

[Rocky0701]

To be honest, you just have to choose your self. I am not trying to be mean, but nobody on here is going to be able to help you choose. Just weigh the pros and cons and see which one is better.

 

[TDM]

I'd like to apologize in advance if this question causes controversy, but I need some help.

I was a sub-30 CFOP cuber (full pll and some olls) but I decided to try out Roux.
I loved the method and took it to 35ish but recently I decided to give ZZ a try, and I also like it.
So my question is, ZZ or Roux? (I like both equally)

Pros:
Roux: Already 35ish, seems like it has more potential.
ZZ: I know most of the algs, good for OH (which I am interested in).

Cons:
Roux: Not good for OH, need to learn 1 look CMLL.
ZZ: Terrible at EOline, very terrible at EOline, horrible at EOline...(I think you get the message )

Thanks!

It's entirely up to you. I would say ZZ, because to improve at that you need to practise something rather than learn algs, and if you're interested in OH then ZZ is better. I'm probably a bit biased towards ZZ, but from what you've said it does look like it would be a better choice for you.

 

[ChickenWrap]

I'd like to apologize in advance if this question causes controversy, but I need some help.

I was a sub-30 CFOP cuber (full pll and some olls) but I decided to try out Roux.
I loved the method and took it to 35ish but recently I decided to give ZZ a try, and I also like it.
So my question is, ZZ or Roux? (I like both equally)

Pros:
Roux: Already 35ish, seems like it has more potential.
ZZ: I know most of the algs, good for OH (which I am interested in).

Cons:
Roux: Not good for OH, need to learn 1 look CMLL.
ZZ: Terrible at EOline, very terrible at EOline, horrible at EOline...(I think you get the message )

Thanks!

I would say ZZ...I messed around with roux for a while (averaged around 30 seconds) but it really doesn't work well on big cubes or OH. Still, if you have no interest in big cubes, then either CFOP or ZZ are good (although ZZ has the eo line inspection issue)!

 

[TDM]

I would say ZZ...I messed around with roux for a while (averaged around 30 seconds) but it really doesn't work well on big cubes or OH. Still, if you have no interest in big cubes, then either CFOP or ZZ are good (although ZZ has the eo line inspection issue)!

I think that you probably need to use CFOP for bigcubes. Roux needs a lot of slicing and ZZ requires inspection, so neither are as good as CFOP. CFOP also has the advantage that you have part of the solve done for you after reduction is finished; you don't get that with either Roux or ZZ.

 

[TheNextFeliks]

I'd like to apologize in advance if this question causes controversy, but I need some help.

I was a sub-30 CFOP cuber (full pll and some olls) but I decided to try out Roux.
I loved the method and took it to 35ish but recently I decided to give ZZ a try, and I also like it.
So my question is, ZZ or Roux? (I like both equally)

Pros:
Roux: Already 35ish, seems like it has more potential.
ZZ: I know most of the algs, good for OH (which I am interested in).

Cons:
Roux: Not good for OH, need to learn 1 look CMLL.
ZZ: Terrible at EOline, very terrible at EOline, horrible at EOline...(I think you get the message )

Thanks!

As far as your cons: You don't need to learn it all. And a lot of the algs are pretty easy. And for ZZ, eoline improves with practice. What I would do/did is do each for 1-2 weeks just that method, not the other or CFOP, and see which one you like best.

 

[CriticalCubing]

I'd like to apologize in advance if this question causes controversy, but I need some help.

I was a sub-30 CFOP cuber (full pll and some olls) but I decided to try out Roux.
I loved the method and took it to 35ish but recently I decided to give ZZ a try, and I also like it.
So my question is, ZZ or Roux? (I like both equally)

Pros:
Roux: Already 35ish, seems like it has more potential.
ZZ: I know most of the algs, good for OH (which I am interested in).

Cons:
Roux: Not good for OH, need to learn 1 look CMLL.
ZZ: Terrible at EOline, very terrible at EOline, horrible at EOline...(I think you get the message )

Thanks!

I would say ZZ as you are interested in OH solving and EoLine will be good. The case is just practice Hard work beats Talent