Beginner's Guide to Choosing a Speedsolving Method

[WondrousMoose]

Eh, I'd say just stick with CFOP. It's what the best cubers use, and trying to learn more than one will likely result in not being very good with any of them for a very long time.

 

[shadowslice e]

Eh, I'd say just stick with CFOP. It's what the best cubers use, and trying to learn more than one will likely result in not being very good with any of them for a very long time.

I beg to differ. I improved on 3x3 reasonably quickly and I have known how to do more than 5 methods for all but the first month of solving.

 

[efattah]

Well CFOP and Roux are currently the fastest methods but require vast amounts of training. If you are looking for the fastest method with the fewest algorithms, the LMCF beginner's method can get you to 12-15 second averages with just 25 algorithms.

 

[Luke8]

Dabble a bit in every method, see which one is your favorite, and practice! If you choose CFOP, learn 2-Look OLL and 2-Look PLL before full OLL and PLL. Also, just because the world record is with CFOP, doesn't mean it's the best. Roux is great option, and so is Petrus. Once you've mastered a method, learn another! It is fun, and then you can truly see what method best fits you. And for the broken cube, get a new one. Go to http://thecubicle.us/ or https://speedcubeshop.com/ for a new cube. Happy cubing!

 

[AlphaSheep]

Eh, I'd say just stick with CFOP. It's what the best cubers use, and trying to learn more than one will likely result in not being very good with any of them for a very long time.

Only if you don't do dedicated practice with one method. Like @shadowslice e, I learned lots of methods right from the beginning (everything except for CFOP for some reason, ha ha). I had no problem getting faster when I chose to go with ZZ, and at least I know that I chose the right method for me. Sure, CFOP may be good for most people, but how will you know if you are different from most people if you just copy what everyone else does.

 

[phreaker]

I enjoy ZZ, mainly because RUL and OH. (I don't always have a table around or I might do more Roux which is also OH friendly once you learn the table abuse based finger tricks.)

I learned Beginners -> Beginners + 4LLL -> CFOP 4LLL -> ZZ 3LLL -> ZZ 2LLL. (OCLL + PLL at the moment. I've heard COLL + EPLL is better, and leads to ZBLL, but I have limited time. So I'd rather spend it on getting PLL down solid, which I need for every single alg set, pretty much.)

The biggest thing: Get a cube you like, find events you like. And do them. The rest is all immaterial. You will get faster over time as you practice... but you only practice if you enjoy practicing . (Thus why I stick to OH mainly. Though I'll admit, I've been adding some 2H and BLD recently.)

Try different things... enjoy the hobby... that's my biggest advice above methods, and the rest... enjoy yourself, and if it isn't fun... figure out why, and make it fun again . Maybe a 4x4, or a 5x5... Maybe a 2x2? Maybe a megaminx? Who knows... (I have a weak spot in my heart for 4x4 despite totally sucking at it. You don't have to be good at an event to enjoy it. )

 

[jam66150]

What should i use i'm pretty new to speed cubeing and just got my first sub one minute with the layer by layer method and i want to use a more effective way and i don,t like cfop already gave it a try to many algorithms so what should i use roux or zz i don't know what one i should use

 

[puffyswims]

I use ZZ for one handed bc it's so ergonomic and roux for regular 3x3 [emoji106] they're both great in my opinion but I use roux for regular bc it can have a much lower move count when used right. The form of ZZ that I use is zz-ct Wich is statistically better for singles however it has alot of algorithms ( theyre mostly 2 gen r and u moves). I would try them both out with some 2 look algs and maybe look at some other forms of ZZ then go with whichever one you enjoy the most! Hope I helped [emoji106]

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

 

[Cubed Cuber]

Hello everybody!
I need help choosing a fast speedsolving method and my average is about 45 secs
But I don't want to memorize too many algs.

 

[TheBlazingAce]

Roux or petrus.

 

[DGCubes]

I'd go with Roux, personally. Petrus generally isn't considered as good as CFOP, Roux, and ZZ these days.

 

[Sue Doenim]

My advice: learn at least CFOP, Roux, and ZZ. Play around with each for a while, then choose the one you like best. If you are too lazy to do that, I would learn ZZ, specifically ZZ-reduction. EOline is kind of hard, but worth it. For the last layer, there are only 16 algorithms to solve it in 2 steps. In contrast, for CFOP there are 16 algs to solve the last layer in 4 steps.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

what about ZZ-CT?
All I know is that it is a ZZ variation from Chris Tran

 

[efattah]

2-look Roux will be around 27 algorithms, 2-look LMCF will be around 26 algorithms and both can get you sub-12 or sub-13 for sure. I would avoid CFOP if you don't like memorizing algorithms.

 

[obelisk477]

what about ZZ-CT?
All I know is that it is a ZZ variation from Chris Tran

ZZ-CT also falls in the 'too many algs' category i'd say

 

[GenTheSnail]

what about ZZ-CT?
All I know is that it is a ZZ variation from Chris Tran

ZZ-CT is 2-Look Last Slot Last Layer method with around ~<200 algorithms, although about of those half are a combination of 1-3 4-move triggers.


ZZ with OCLL and PLL would be less than 30 algorithms and can get pretty fast.
I just did 30 solves with ZZ, OCLL and PLL: avg of 30: 14.96

Time List:
13.67, 17.57, 16.17, 11.87, 14.57, 16.88, (19.17), 17.42, 15.16, 14.06, 13.15, 15.10, 15.62, 13.45, 18.38, 12.95, 15.95, 15.33, 16.69, 12.58, 13.12, 13.40, 17.55, 14.56, 15.68, (18.82), (9.85), 14.92, (10.64), 13.08

Normally, I average around 14 flat with COLL/EPLL or ZBLL. But my lookahead is sucking right now, and I could probably get this faster. And in general, my F2L isn't that great.

But, I don't think learning a method based on algorithm count is a very good idea.
Most methods can get really fast without learning a lot (50+) of algorithms, and focusing on intuitive portions.
Iirc, Feliks can sub-5 his F2L most of the time, and OCLL+PLL can get sub-3 easily, leading to theoretical sub-8 average with less than 30 algorithms.

 

[efattah]

Most methods can get really fast without learning a lot (50+) of algorithms, and focusing on intuitive portions.
Iirc, Feliks can sub-5 his F2L most of the time, and OCLL+PLL can get sub-3 easily, leading to theoretical sub-8 average with less than 30 algorithms.

You're neglecting the 42+ algorithms used in F2L itself. Even though some good solvers do intuitive F2L when many slots are open, most still occasionally draw upon algorithmic F2L and I don't think sub-5 F2L is going to happen without a lot of memorization of various cases.

 

[tx789]

Roux has 42 alga for CMLL.
ZZ has 29 for 2 look last layer.
CFOP has 78 for OLL PLL.

Choosing your method based on algs isn't the best idea. Pick the one you like most. CFOPs spg count isn't huge. It seems taughting at first. ZBLL has 493 and people learn that.

 

[TheBlazingAce]

I'd go with Roux, personally. Petrus generally isn't considered as good as CFOP, Roux, and ZZ these days.

Petrus is definitely viable, even if not used often

 

[TheBlazingAce]

use Heise XD