• 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 40,000+ people from around the world today!

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

few example solves using my version of roux4beginners.


Mar 18, 2016
Illinois, USA
Visit Channel
Notes: I only watched 1 minute of the video and I skimmed the written tutorial.

These comments will be about the written tutorial.
When you're showing the notation, you use an asterisk (not an astric) instead of an apostrophe to denote the inverse of a move. This is unconventional, but not exactly wrong, I guess.

On page 2, paragraph two, you spell "Rubik's" "rubics". This is incorrect in spelling and in punctuation. Rubik is a name and therefore should be capitalized. The "s" is a possessive "s" and therefore has an apostrophe, as it is Erno Rubik's cube.

ZZ and Petrus both have 493 (472 ZBLL + 21 "PLL") algorithms; CFOP only has 78 (57 OLL + 21 PLL) algorithms.
ZZ and Petrus can also just have 29 (9 OLL (actually OCLL) + 21 PLL) algorithms.

Okay, I'm not going to pick apart all of the grammar mistakes that you made, as there are a lot of them. Run it through a spell checker, don't use ellipses, and double check your capitalization (CFOP vs cfop).

I would also suggest that you increase the spacing. It looks and feels pretty cramped. Diagrams are usually a good thing to include, but you might want to consider cutting back a bit and cleaning them up. They're kinda very MS paint looking, and that's not good. If it's all you can manage, try spacing them out a little bit and using them only when necessary.

It's also pretty long, and there is definitely a lot of material that you can cut out. People know what clockwise is, cut out the five right-hand-rule finger-curling sentences. Get a good proofread and cut at least 30% of everything here. I don't know if you intended to write it in a conversational tone, but even if you did, I would suggest toning it back a bit.

There are a lot of fragmented and dangling sentences. If you can't get Grammarly or have access to your english teacher, slowly read it out loud, and that might able to help.

I'm all for teaching people how to solve with roux, but I don't think your execution was great.


Sep 8, 2017
Hopefully this isn't too deep of a necro.

I came across this while trying to figure out if there was a way for me to better teach Roux to beginners.

FWIW in case somebody gets directed to this thread by the OP, here is the OP's first solve on alg.cubing.net with my own annotations.

There was an effort here to take the R Wides and L Wides out of the equation and when I teach beginners I leave those in because of how useful/important they are to Roux. Because those are taken out, there is much more reliance on inefficient B (and F) moves.

I would hesitate to get beginners reliant on, most particularly, D and B moves if it were me. There's really no reason to use D or B in Roux, and it's an advantage not to use them.

I also wouldn't use corner swap alg from beginners for this reason, it's too dependent on D/B moves and too slow/inefficient and generally not in the spirit of Roux.

I teach beginners (AUF to same color facing L) R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' instead to do the same thing.

This method seems to be as close to teaching beginners/CFOP as possible while still being technically Roux. I don't see any good reason for beginners to be reliant on so many sledgehammers/hedgeslammers (and D/B moves) when the M slice is free.

Also, FWIW, I strongly encourage using example solves on alg.cubing.net to let beginners see what's going on. When I am teaching beginners, I give them a lot of annotated alg.cubing.net solves to follow along with general mentorship.
Last edited: