Best OH methods?

[the dnf master]

Mehta is just a scam belt method and ZZ is a CFOP scam. Roux is just CFOP but fancy and CFOP is just the absolute legandary method and will never be overtaken. CFOP is the only way to go for OH and TH, and three handed as well.

No, learn from CFOPBOT#123. Their tutorial is amazing, and will bias you towards CFOP, which is the only way to enjoy life

crap. That kind of sounded legitimate. Btw CFOPBOT#123 doesn’t actually exist, I assume.

nope cfopbot exists i can confirm that

 

[ruffleduck]

zzoomer secretly uses CFOP

for me CFOP is mind-numbingly boring, I'd sooner quit cubing than use it o_O
we don't talk about how i use CFOP for big cubes (and megaminx if you consider westlund/yu da-hyun as CFOP)

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

for me CFOP is mind-numbingly boring, I'd sooner quit cubing than use it o_O
we don't talk about how i use CFOP for big cubes (and megaminx if you consider westlund/yu da-hyun as CFOP)

Well than how about we all use ZZ. CFOP is just a stupid version of ZZ where you don't do EO.

 

[the dnf master]

Well than how about we all use ZZ. CFOP is just a stupid version of ZZ where you don't do EO.

No ZZ is a stupid version of CFOP where you do EO

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

No ZZ is a stupid version of CFOP where you do EO

zzoomer said he didn't do CFOP because it's boring. Stop being a CFOPbot#31415 bro. The cruZZade has taken over.

 

[EvanCuber]

No ZZ is a stupid version of CFOP where you do EO

I absolutely agree. ZZ is just CFOP except somebody said: "Hmm... I think I'll take CFOP and throw in a few random and totally useless moves at the beginning so I can call it my own method"

 

[the dnf master]

The cruZZade has taken over.

No it hasn't. The cruZZaders are only a handful of misguided rebels who dare oppose CFOP.

 

[ruffleduck]

throw in a few random and totally useless moves at the beginning

Guess what? Those "few random moves" actually make the entire solve as a whole better! Lower movecount, improved ergonomics, easier lookahead, what more can you ask for?

 

[ruffleduck]

(Sorry for double post)

No it hasn't.

I agree with this. ZZ hasn't overtaken CFOP, yet. Most people are still oblivious to the obvious advantages ZZ offers, or are simply too lazy to learn it at all.

The cruZZaders are only a handful of misguided rebels who dare oppose CFOP.

The CFOPers are the unfortunate majority of cubers, who are brainwashed into thinking that ZZ is bad by Dylan Wang (who only knows about EOline, apparently) and Jayden Mcneill (who now is supportive of ZZ, ironically)

 

[the dnf master]

I agree with this. ZZ hasn't overtaken CFOP, yet. Most people are still oblivious to the obvious advantages ZZ offers, or are simply too lazy to learn it at all

I highly disagree. Don't just assume those are the two reasons people continue to use CFOP. EOLine is objectively worse than cross, and with EOCross, followed by f2l is less efficient than block building. Additionally it's even harder to inspect since you have to plan EO, and 4 cross pieces. Also, there are many more optimizations with CFOP such as rotationless inserts and more efficient solutions which leads to an average of 1-2 rotations per solve. Lookahead is already great with CFOP, and ZZ isn't much better, if it even is in this regard.
btw Dylan Wang knows about EOCross.

I'd be happy to continue this discussion but preferably in a different thread, since this one is getting way too off-topic.

 

[ruffleduck]

EOLine is objectively worse than cross,

I agree

and with EOCross, followed by f2l is less efficient than block building.

EOcross + ZZ F2L is still more efficient than CFOP cross + F2L. Also easier lookahead and better ergonomics.

Additionally it's even harder to inspect since you have to plan EO, and 4 cross pieces.

It is in theory humanly possible to average sub 7 HTM with EOcross. This was shown by my program, which gives humanlike solutions. (Feel free to check out my thread.) This is with color neutrality--which isn't as hard as many think! But even with x2y--which is relatively easy--you can average sub 8 HTM. Planning EOcross is not challenging once you get the hang of it. Once you master EOcross, you can plan EOcross+1 (which Radmac can consistently do). And beyond that, planning further is pretty much pointless. The reason is because after EOcross+1, you have a perfect view of every single piece, which means you can have perfect, flawless, pauseless lookahead. No need to plan! Compared to CFOP, where after cross+1 you still have to worry about EO which means you don't have a perfect view of the cube just by looking at one angle.

Also, there are many more optimizations with CFOP such as rotationless inserts

ZZ is so perfect you don't even need to optimize it. Just kidding. There are optimizations in ZZ too. You just don't know about them
(feel free to join ZZ discord if you'd like to learn more!)

and more efficient solutions

"more efficient"?! You're wrong definitely about that, buddy.

which leads to an average of 1-2 rotations per solve.

*Laughs in 0 rotations*

Lookahead is already great with CFOP, and ZZ isn't much better, if it even is in this regard.

ZZ has considerably better lookahead. I say this from experience. After EOcross+1, you have perfect lookahead and the solutions are super easy. With CFOP even at cross+2 stage you are still struggling on figuring out which pieces are where and how they are oriented.

btw Dylan Wang knows about EOCross.

Yeah, but he conveniently doesn't mention it much (if at all) in his videos.

 

[Brouxt Force]

Why compare ZZ to CFOP when you know that Roux is better than CFOP? Roux's ergonomics are fantastic for one-handed solving.

 

[the dnf master]

Why compare ZZ to CFOP when you know that Roux is better than CFOP? Roux's ergonomics are fantastic for one-handed solving.

Agreed, but the discussion was about 2H

 

[Waffles]

Agreed, but the discussion was about 2H

You may want to read the thread title

 

[Cubing Forever]

No ZZ is a stupid version of CFOP where you do EO

Let's say that CFOP is a stupid version of ZZ where you don't do EO

 

[voidrx]

You have mentally hurt me by calling YruRU YRUru

 

[the dnf master]

You may want to read the thread title

Exactly. Why else do you think I stated "I'd be happy to continue this discussion but preferably in a different thread, since this one is getting way too off-topic."?

 

[Sub1Hour]

Squall might be a pretty nice method for OH, especially if you are proficient in zz, cfop, and roux since it takes a bit from each of these methods. Some extra algs are used but it actually seems very viable for OH as long as your S moves are good with table abuse

 

[UNO_FASY]

EOcross + ZZ F2L is still more efficient than CFOP cross + F2L. Also easier lookahead and better ergonomics.

Eocross+F2L is not more efficient than CFOP cross+F2L, Papa himself said this

 

[hellocubers]

(Sorry for double post)

I agree with this. ZZ hasn't overtaken CFOP, yet. Most people are still oblivious to the obvious advantages ZZ offers, or are simply too lazy to learn it at all.

The CFOPers are the unfortunate majority of cubers, who are brainwashed into thinking that ZZ is bad by Dylan Wang (who only knows about EOline, apparently) and Jayden Mcneill (who now is supportive of ZZ, ironically

CFOPers and ZZers here: *fighting*
Other method users: