• 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?

efattah

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2016
Messages
519
I agree with most on this thread that getting really good at one method is more effective. BUT, if you like the idea of learning 2 methods, then you need to have 'separable' methods for inspection. I believe you would need to be looking for totally different things. For CFOP it is extremely easy to spot 1/2, 3/4 or a full cross ready made; for Roux it is extremely fast to spot most of a first block ready made, and for corners first methods it is extremely easy to spot 3/4 or a full EG1 face. You could twist the cube around and in 1 second you could instantly identify if any of these three exist and pick the method that you found the easy start. If *none* of those cases exist, things get way harder, and at that point I think the only way forward is to arbitrarily pick your 'best' method and just assume you are using that. There wouldn't be enough time to do detailed inspection on all the methods.
 

KM the cuber

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
50
Location
Canberra,Australia,Earth,Cubing Universe
I agree with most on this thread that getting really good at one method is more effective. BUT, if you like the idea of learning 2 methods, then you need to have 'separable' methods for inspection. I believe you would need to be looking for totally different things. For CFOP it is extremely easy to spot 1/2, 3/4 or a full cross ready made; for Roux it is extremely fast to spot most of a first block ready made, and for corners first methods it is extremely easy to spot 3/4 or a full EG1 face. You could twist the cube around and in 1 second you could instantly identify if any of these three exist and pick the method that you found the easy start. If *none* of those cases exist, things get way harder, and at that point I think the only way forward is to arbitrarily pick your 'best' method and just assume you are using that. There wouldn't be enough time to do detailed inspection on all the methods.
I think I will be using CFOP and ZZ because they are similar
 
Last edited:

Izaden

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2019
Messages
39
Location
Kitchener, Ontario
If the goal is learning different methods in order to have variety and you enjoy the act of solving with different methods then sure, become method neutral.
If the goal is to learn different methods to use for different cube states (Improving efficiency by using a method better suited to that state) then I would start with 2 methods. Probably CFOP and Roux or ZZ.
Going for more than 2 methods without years of experience IMO would ultimately hurt your times.
Something else you should consider when it comes to choosing methods that I do not see discussed very often is (What I call) Turn Bias.
Cfop often has many different algs to accomplish the same result (For example there are 8 different Sune algs listed on the speedsolving wiki) so Turn Bias doesn't really matter much here as you can just learn algs that suit you. But there are often more cube rotations and that can annoy some solvers.
Roux mostly favours R, r, M, and U moves (as well as the primes of each of those) and therefore is good for right handed solvers who like M turns.
ZZ sets you up to solve most of the cube with L, U, and R moves which may be preferable to some solvers but not for others.
anyway, just my opinion on the matter. I hope that whatever you decide to do works out well and more importantly is fun for you!
 

KujaCube

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2018
Messages
10
Maybe you can be neutral between CFOP, FreeFOP and ZZ, maybe some pseudoslotting, because they have similar algorithm sets,
but learning CMLL, LSE, the Petrus stuff and the CFOP subsets would be too much efford in my opinion.
But idk...
 

CubeBlazer

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
20
Location
USA
WCA
2018SHUM02
YouTube
channel/UCJaST2h93-j
I'm planning to switch to ZZ, but also not because of the method that I'm genning with Manchot. Also Manchot uses FreeFOP

CMLL and LSE is super easy, and Petrus EO is intuitive. Pseudoslotting is a technique(which is basically keyhole but not keyhole.
 
Top