Beginner's Guide to Choosing a Speedsolving Method

[ProStar]

Because pretty much every other method requires that you have inspection before 3x3 stage which you can't get on those cubes. But also, because most big cube methods involve solving a white cross which is also not good if you use other methods.

I agree. You could say that methods like Petrus and Roux work for 5x5+ if you use redux, but for 4x4 with Yau you automatically make a cross. And don't even talk about ZZ without inspection...

 

[brododragon]

I agree. You could say that methods like Petrus and Roux work for 5x5+ if you use redux, but for 4x4 with Yau you automatically make a cross. And don't even talk about ZZ without inspection...

For you, you would just be planning EO for 10 minutes in the middle of a solve.

 

[ProStar]

For you, you would just be planning EO for 10 minutes in the middle of a solve.

I know, it'd be a travesty if my times on 4x4 went from sub-hour to 1:10.000!

 

[Cubingcubecuber]

It really needs to be understood that if you want to be good at big cubes you need to use CFOP.

Once I get good enough at Hawaiian Kociemba, I plan on switching to it for at least 4x4

 

[ketchupcuber]

i really think the quotes from the best needs changing on cfop it literally says cfops worse than roux if you want a good quote promoting cfop just ask feliks or max. i think this thread is biased i’m not saying cfop is better just that this thread should have an equal representation of each method this is very misleading for beginners

 

[Hazel]

i really think the quotes from the best needs changing on cfop it literally says cfops worse than roux if you want a good quote promoting cfop just ask feliks or max. i think this thread is biased i’m not saying cfop is better just that this thread should have an equal representation of each method this is very misleading for beginners

The creator of this thread hasn't been on the forum in 4 years, so it probably won't happen.
(Also this is my 1,400th post, yay)

 

[ketchupcuber]

congrats people should make a new thread then

The creator of this thread hasn't been on the forum in 4 years, so it probably won't happen.
(Also this is my 1,400th post, yay)

 

[Etotheipi]

I agree. You could say that methods like Petrus and Roux work for 5x5+ if you use redux, but for 4x4 with Yau you automatically make a cross. And don't even talk about ZZ without inspection...

You could just use meyer then, there are alternatives.

 

[Owen Morrison]

CFOP doesn't have a ton of algorithms I don't get why everyone says it does. Also, why does the original post say that you should only use CFOP if you like learning algorithms and you like to use the most popular method. I think this whole place is extremely biased against CFOP, no one takes into account that other methods are slow for 4x4 and up.

 

[ProStar]

CFOP doesn't have a ton of algorithms I don't get why everyone says it does. Also, why does the original post say that you should only use CFOP if you like learning algorithms and you like to use the most popular method. I think this whole place is extremely biased against CFOP, no one takes into account that other methods are slow for 4x4 and up.

I mean, full CFOP has around 80 algs, which is a lot more than Roux and COLL-EPLL Petrus needs. But like advanced Petrus and ZZ use ZBLL....


Would people like a new one to be written, keeping the majority of the things the same just with some small changes to stuff?

 

[fun at the joy]

which is a lot more than COLL-EPLL Petrus needs. But like advanced Petrus and ZZ use ZBLL....

COLL-EPLL isn't FULL ZZ or Petrus, ZBLL is full ZZ/Petrus which means full ZZ/Petrus has a LOT more algs than full CFOP.
Only Roux has less algs.

 

[ProStar]

COLL-EPLL isn't FULL ZZ or Petrus, ZBLL is full ZZ/Petrus which means full ZZ/Petrus has a LOT more algs than full CFOP.
Only Roux has less algs.

Full Petrus is CP->CO->EP according to Lars. It is true that full ZZ technically requires ZBLL, but the majority of elite ZZ solvers don't use it fully

 

[fun at the joy]

Full Petrus is CP->CO->EP according to Lars. It is true that full ZZ technically requires ZBLL, but the majority of elite ZZ solvers don't use it fully

ZBLL wasn't a thing when he made his website

 

[Hazel]

COLL-EPLL isn't FULL ZZ or Petrus, ZBLL is full ZZ/Petrus which means full ZZ/Petrus has a LOT more algs than full CFOP.
Only Roux has less algs.

Petrus with full ZBLL is Petrus-a, which is technically a variant of Petrus.

 

[fun at the joy]

how is the variant with Coll-epll called?

 

[ketchupcuber]

I mean, full CFOP has around 80 algs, which is a lot more than Roux and COLL-EPLL Petrus needs. But like advanced Petrus and ZZ use ZBLL....


Would people like a new one to be written, keeping the majority of the things the same just with some small changes to stuff?

that would be great but please give an equal representation of each method to limit arguments
thanks

 

[PetrusQuber]

The creator of this thread hasn't been on the forum in 4 years, so it probably won't happen.
(Also this is my 1,400th post, yay)

Worth a try lol. @Ickathu
Wait... What is this madness. It’s not working!

 

[Deleted member 51471]

If I find time somewhere, I'll make a thread that doesn't promote any method and that also includes waterman and PCMS (or corners first and columns.).

 

[ketchupcuber]

that would be great

 

[ProStar]

I'll start working on an updated version of this guide if no one is opposed. The majority of it will be taken from this one, just with some stuff added and hopefully made unbiased. Any specific requests?

(Also I will make sure to let everyone know that Ickathu made the original and did most of the work)