• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

[Canadian NR] Kian Mansour - 6.86 3x3 average

M

Malkom

Guest
This (the next quote):

Isn't roux more efficient then CFOP?

To be honest, if I was over 19-20 seconds or so, I would probably switch to Roux. I just dont want to switch because Ive been using CFOp for over a year and a half.

I dont even know what that is.

Also, I think I might get off this thread now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
"Uuuh Roux is like more effecient or something and speed = moves/tps so its faster" is a pretty lame and uneducted statement.
You should at least factor in some more and rather basic things like: ergonomics and how they affect tps (shocker, RUF and MURr doesn't necessarily have the exact same tps timit), how much can be planned in inspection, how easy lookahead is, awkard cases, how lucky you can get, how many things can be improved upon, algsets etc.
 

SolemnAttic

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
17
Location
Malaysia
how can you be so sure they are exactly as good in terms of speed? This seems like a great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I can be sure. I am method neutral and i turn significantly slower with roux.

But it has less TPS. The fact that it's more efficient means means that you have to think harder when you solve, so TPS is sacrificed.
You dont have to think harder, just have a good muscle memory for cases and the lookahead to go with it. F2L with more freedom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
"Uuuh Roux is like more effecient or something and speed = moves/tps so its faster" is a pretty lame and uneducted statement.
You should at least factor in some more and rather basic things like: ergonomics and how they affect tps (shocker, RUF and MURr doesn't necessarily have the exact same tps timit), how much can be planned in inspection, how easy lookahead is, awkard cases, how lucky you can get, how many things can be improved upon, algsets etc.

I have no idea about tps ceiling, but roux wins over CFOP in inspection. You can plan the first block and partial second block in 15 seconds. Lookahead? Same as F2L. Just track what pieces go into BD if your unsure. The only awkward case is a six flip. A lot can be improve on, im sure. And 42 algs is no big deal.


Think what you want. I am tired of this.
 

turtwig

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
536
You dont have to think harder, just have a good muscle memory for cases and the lookahead to go with it. F2L with more freedom.
I didn't mean that in the most literal way. Of course Roux solvers don't think noticeably harder when solving, but in general, if there are more possibilities at some point in a solve (in this case blockbuilding vs F2L), you're either gonna have to process more information during the solve or learn more cases beforehand. More freedom=more possibilities=more cases and information to process, so naturally lookahead and TPS will suffer.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
3,327
Location
Ottawa, Canada
WCA
2015MANS03
YouTube
P3NGU1N5D0NTFLY
I think what @Malkom is trying to say is that it would be completely incorrect to make the assumption that Roux CFOP and ZZ are EXACTLY equal. I agree, we can't just assume that their absolute limits are all the exact same. One has to be better than the rest by a slight margin. At this point in speedcubing, I don't really think it matters which method has the lower limit. I don't think that will matter until we have people averaging mid/low 5. That's probably when the differences will really start to matter.
 

Sajwo

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
982
Location
P(r)oland
WCA
2012SZEW01
YouTube
SajwoPL
Hi

Heise method has ~40 moves on average, so with >10tps you should easily get sub4 averages. Therefore it is the best method

Also Sergey Ryabko has sub9 average with cross on left. Isn't it enough to say that he is almost as fast as Feliks? With more practice and less stress he could easily beat him at his next comp.

And also all methods are equally fast. With enough practice you can be sub6 with all of them. CFOP, Roux, ZZ-CT, Petrus, Snyder. Just use whatever you like!
 
Top