• 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!

Does method neutral on 3x3 worth it?

KM the cuber

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
50
Location
Canberra,Australia,Earth,Cubing Universe
so I think I’m going to become a method neutral 3x3 solver like Tao Yu and Andrew Nathenson. depends on the scrambles if its good for CFOP,Roux,ZZ,Petrus,Freefop,NMP. So I want to know if this would be a good idea and what people’s opinions are.Thanks!
“I don't think method neutrality should be considered for 3x3 speedsolving. each method takes a long much time to master and I don't think you can gain much from choosing an easy cross over a hard 2x2x2. Color neutrality almost eliminates the need for method neutrality because you can just choose the easiest part of the cube to work with. “ - Erik Johnson
“It's a silly idea that requires way too much practice and you don't gain anything worthwhile.” - Alexander Lau
“I think that for someone that practices very much, this can be a big advantage since it allows you to have a very good start, depending on the case. However, you'd need to be good and practice very much every method.” - Antoine Cantin
 
Last edited:

KAINOS

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
39
Location
Somewhere in Earth
freefop is when you do cross-1 cross edge then you do normal F2L and take advantage of the free M slice then you do COLL then you do EO while inserting the last cross edge then you just do EPLL
Not the best description: although that can be considered one of the ways to do FreeFOP. I would say it is 'CFOP but with F2L phase done with blockbuilding rather than cross+pairs, and with more freedom in general.'
 
Last edited:

Llewelys

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
91
Location
France
I don't think it's worth it.
Let's say you have a 2x2x1 square on a scramble: you can either do FB (Roux) or XCross (CFOP). Now you're wondering if it's best to go with Roux or CFOP, so you try to plan FB+SB and an XCross, to see what's best.
But like. You only have 15s inspection. It's hard enough planning FB+SB or cross+1 in inspection, let alone both. You won't have enough time.

Obviously you do you and if you try to go down that path then good luck, but you asked for opinions so here's mine ^_^
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
235
So here are my thoughts on the matter.

I believe very similar to @Llewelys that it would be very hard to see which method works best within that amount of inspection time.

but Tao Yu is SUPER fast like sub 9 being method neutral which would take a really long time to do (he has been cubing for at least 10 years i believe).

So should you become method neutral? I would say probably not because if you are method neutral you will probably have to learn over 600 algs to be fast with each method which may be daunting ( this includes ZBLL which you will use in Petrus, your version of FreeFOP, And ZZ.) and practice a ton. You are like sub 18 with CFOP (correct if wrong) and you will have to get sub 9 from here, then move on to other methods and get sub 9 with them. But if you really want to do this, then do it. You can be really fast being method neutral so you do you.
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
125
I think learning all the methods and getting somewhat good at all of them will make you faster because you learn new concepts you can apply in your main method, but it’s not really worth being method neutral among CFOP,Roux,ZZ, Petrus etc. The only thing I could see being worth doing method neutrality is 3-style for blind solving, because scrambles that are good for say Roux are generally still good scrambles for CFOP, but scrambled for 3-style are usually trash for the big four methods since they usually have a lot of random solved pieces.
 

Aerma

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2017
Messages
1,221
Location
Galar Region
WCA
2015MANN01
YouTube
Aerma
Here are my thoughts, from 6+ years of cubing:
The time spent getting good at 2+ methods, if put into just one method, could make you great at that method.
For example, let's say I was method neutral between CFOP and Roux. By the time I'm sub-9 with both, I likely could have been sub-8 or faster with just one or the other, since all of my focus would have been put into optimizing one method instead of spreading myself between two.
However, if you have more fun maining multiple methods, and that's more important to you than getting as fast as possible, then you should absolutely do it! As a crazy genius man once said, "Cubing is fun, let's just have fun."
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
428
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
PapaSmurf Cubes
3 options: be fast with one method and don't touch the rest, be fast with 1 method and be able to do the other ones kinda fast, be fast with all the methods but not as fast as you would be otherwise. I've chosen the second option and it's probably the best for speedsolving, as you learn tricks from other methods.
 

VIBE_ZT

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2019
Messages
48
Location
Massachusetts
WCA
2018TRUD02
so I think I’m going to become a method neutral 3x3 solver like Tao Yu and Andrew Nathenson. depends on the scrambles if its good for CFOP,Roux,ZZ,Petrus,Freefop,NMP. So I want to know if this would be a good idea and what people’s opinions are.Thanks!
“I don't think method neutrality should be considered for 3x3 speedsolving. each method takes a long much time to master and I don't think you can gain much from choosing an easy cross over a hard 2x2x2. Color neutrality almost eliminates the need for method neutrality because you can just choose the easiest part of the cube to work with. “ - Erik Johnson
“It's a silly idea that requires way too much practice and you don't gain anything worthwhile.” - Alexander Lau
“I think that for someone that practices very much, this can be a big advantage since it allows you to have a very good start, depending on the case. However, you'd need to be good and practice very much every method.” - Antoine Cantin
To be fair, I use both CFOP and FreeFOP pretty regularly. I average about 17 on both, but that's not important. There is also the problem that those two methods are very similar, and it is not like there is a large difference like Roux and CFOP together.

But still, I think that it could be done. But... I don't think that it would be worth it.
 

parkertrager

Member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
5
I’ve been working on switching to zz so rn I’m currently practicing method neutral zz on solves with bad eo that I can’t one look cross on I think this can be done since zz has some pretty nasty cases but I don’t think method neutrality would work for most methods CFOP and Roux would be hard but CFOP and zz would be easy
 

KM the cuber

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
50
Location
Canberra,Australia,Earth,Cubing Universe
So here are my thoughts on the matter.

I believe very similar to @Llewelys that it would be very hard to see which method works best within that amount of inspection time.

but Tao Yu is SUPER fast like sub 9 being method neutral which would take a really long time to do (he has been cubing for at least 10 years i believe).

So should you become method neutral? I would say probably not because if you are method neutral you will probably have to learn over 600 algs to be fast with each method which may be daunting ( this includes ZBLL which you will use in Petrus, your version of FreeFOP, And ZZ.) and practice a ton. You are like sub 18 with CFOP (correct if wrong) and you will have to get sub 9 from here, then move on to other methods and get sub 9 with them. But if you really want to do this, then do it. You can be really fast being method neutral so you do you.
I am not sub 18 I'm sub 20
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,050
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
ZZ and CFOP method neutrality works the best out of all of them I guess, but just focus on one.
that would probably be the worst out of all of them seeing how different the things you are looking for in inspection are. Methods where you build blocks (cfop, roux, Petrus etc) will have more similar inspection, for example If you see a pre-made pair you could check how it would work with a roux block or if you could make an Xcross or preserve it when you make a cross.
 

Sue Doenim

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
446
I don't think the drain on your inspection would be work it. With a fixed method, your efficiency will be (marginally) better, but you won't be able to plan as much of the solve in inspection, so your solve won't go as smoothly. I think you would benefit more from an average FB+DR than from an easy cross.
 

ottozing

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
3,206
Location
Canberra, Australia
WCA
2012MCNE01
YouTube
ottozing
If you're going to attempt method neutrality, I would suggest no longer practicing non 3x3 events (so only doing OH/Feet/maybe FMC & BLD)

Also like others have said, choose methods that work well for different types of scrambles (for example, a scramble that's easy for Roux is going to be easy for CFOP as well)

I would also start with only 2 methods (CFOP & ZZ w/ EOcross would be my blanket recommendation), since trying to balance more than that is going to lead to diminishing ROI

Honestly though, if what you *really* care about is just getting faster, one method alone is always going to be optimal in my opinion, since scrambles that are good for ZZ are still going to be good for CFOP (if you don't believe me, post scrambles that you think are great for x method that isn't CFOP, and I'll show you a great CFOP solution that's realistic to see in a solve)
 

KM the cuber

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
50
Location
Canberra,Australia,Earth,Cubing Universe
If you're going to attempt method neutrality, I would suggest no longer practicing non 3x3 events (so only doing OH/Feet/maybe FMC & BLD)

Also like others have said, choose methods that work well for different types of scrambles (for example, a scramble that's easy for Roux is going to be easy for CFOP as well)

I would also start with only 2 methods (CFOP & ZZ w/ EOcross would be my blanket recommendation), since trying to balance more than that is going to lead to diminishing ROI

Honestly though, if what you *really* care about is just getting faster, one method alone is always going to be optimal in my opinion, since scrambles that are good for ZZ are still going to be good for CFOP (if you don't believe me, post scrambles that you think are great for x method that isn't CFOP, and I'll show you a great CFOP solution that's realistic to see in a solve)
F' D' B2 U' D' R2 L' U B' L2 U' B2 U2 R2 D L2 F2 L2 D2 L2 is a really good scramble for ZZ
 
Top