Methods for all WCA events

[Thom S.]

the best method is the one used by the current world record holder

So in 2017 the best Method for Sq1 changed to Lin for 3 Months and then back to Vandenbergh just like that?

 

[cuberswoop]

2x2: Every single alg on the face of the planet and turning like a madman
3x3: Roux
4x4: Yau
5x5: Yau
6x6: Redux
7x7: Redux
Pyraminx: Intuitive L4E
FMC: Aha this is a trick question because you have to use EVERY method.

 

[NigelTheCuber]

2x2: Every single alg on the face of the planet and turning like a madman

As a 2x2er I confirm this.

 

[PiKeeper]

Movecount:
Average movecount for CFOP is 60.
It's 48 for Roux.
And it's 45 for ZB.
ZB wins in movecount.

TPS:
CFOP: Top solvers average around 9.5.
Roux: Top solvers average around < 8.
ZB: Tymon averages 10. (I know he does not know full ZB but he knows most of it and he is the only top cuber I could find that does.)

I don't see how CFOP and Roux are better than ZB.
CFOP has a much higher movecount with a similar TPS, and Roux has a similar movecount but lower TPS.

A couple errors here:
CFOP movecount is about 58
Roux is 47-48
ZB is much harder to pin down, but 52 is probably a good movecount estimate.

Using Tymon's tps which is about 9 still doesn't give the most accurate picture of zb tps since he still uses oll+pll a decent amount of the time.

With CFOP you have a higher movecount with faster TPS (and you can be slot neutral which saves a rotation), and Roux has a lower movecount with lower TPS. There is no proof right now that ZB is objectively better than either of those two methods, especially Roux.

 

[OreKehStrah]

2x2: EG
3x3: Roux, CFOP, debatablly ZZ
4x4: Yau
5x5: Yau/Hoya
6x6: Redux
7x7: Redux
Megaminx: Westlund
Pyraminx: L4E
Square 1: Vandenbergh
Clock: 1 Flip/Pochman
Skewb: Sarah's advanced
Idk about the blind events

Uhhh in case you missed it, the clock wr avg is with no flip lol. It’s objectively better since no time is being wasted not turning. Just a lot harder for minimal benefit.

 

[Eli Apperson]

Uhhh in case you missed it, the clock wr avg is with no flip lol. It’s objectively better since no time is being wasted not turning. Just a lot harder for minimal benefit.

Ahh, I guess that shows how much I care about clock. I meant no flip, I guess I just didn't remember the name at the time

 

[Swagrid]

And it's 45 for ZB.
ZB wins in movecount.

Are you serious?
5 moves for cross, and about 15 odd for ZBLL. F2L pair average should be somewhere 7-8 so I'll use 7.5. This gives us 41. Do you mean to tell me that ZBLS averages 4 moves?

the best method is the one used by the current world record holder

Thank god the current wr conforms to all of Petrus, ZZ and even CFOP. Good news for three methods, that they happen to be equally tied. Shame for Roux though, although maybe it still has hope. We have proven it to still be ergonomically efficient, after all. And you did help prove that It's better in a worst-case scenario. So maybe our WR methods are all perfectly tied and Roux is still better.

I wonder.

 

[Eli Apperson]

Would add PBL and Lin for Square-1

Isn't PBL a part of Vanderbergh?

 

[Silky]

Isn't PBL a part of Vanderbergh?

It's described as a different method by it's creator It has overlap but is distinct enough I would say. Kinda a CFOP to ZB comparison

 

[mencarikebenaran]

for 3x3, of course cfop, there is nothing faster than CFOP, because u build 2 layers at once, that is what make it fasts.

 

[Silky]

for 3x3, of course cfop, there is nothing faster than CFOP, because u build 2 layers at once, that is what make it fasts.

Fun fact: CFOP is the only method to build 2 layers simultaneously

 

[IsThatA4x4]

for 3x3, of course cfop, there is nothing faster than CFOP, because u build 2 layers at once, that is what make it fasts.

Spoiler: satire warning

for 3x3, of course mehta, there is nothing faster than mehta, because you solve 6 corners at once (yes i know that's not the only variant, but this is satire), that is what makes it fast.

The fact that you "build 2 layers at once" isn't really what makes CFOP fast; what makes it fast is its great lookahead, not much of a reliance on inspection time, and its good recognition for last layer algs (and you could probably say other things but that's not my point here).
Roux is fast because of its efficiency, ZZ (debatably as Eli said) is fast mainly because of the case reduction that EO creates, allowing for stuff like ZBLL, and I could go on with each method.
The point is, CFOP has had a ton of use over the years, and is far more popular, which means we get to see less top level solvers using other methods that certainly have the same potential (like Roux for example).
If more people try these other methods and try to push them to their limits (as has been happening with CFOP with stuff like pseudo-slotting, and incorporating ZBLS and ZBLL); they can definitely end up just as fast imo.

 

[Thom S.]

Fun fact: CFOP is the only method to build 2 layers simultaneously

Roux?
Petrus?
ZZ?
ZB?
VH?
CFCE?
Salvia?(ok, that one doesn't count).

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

2x2: Full EG, 1LLSLL
3x3: Roux, Nautilus-L5E, CFOP, FreeFOP
4x4: Yau
5x5: Yau, Hoya
6x6: Yau, Redux
7x7: Yau, Redux

OH: Roux
All BLD: 3-Style
FMC: DR with many advanced techniques, Heise

Clock: No-Flip
Pyraminx: L4E and everything else
Square-1: OBL/PBL, PBL, Lin PLL+1
Megaminx: Westlund, Yu Da-Hyun
Skewb: NS

 

[Thom S.]

2x2: Full EG, 1LLSLL
3x3: Roux, Nautilus-L5E, CFOP, FreeFOP
4x4: Yau
5x5: Yau, Hoya
6x6: Yau, Redux
7x7: Yau, Redux

OH: Roux
All BLD: 3-Style
FMC: DR with many advanced techniques, Heise

Clock: No-Flip
Pyraminx: L4E and everything else
Square-1: OBL/PBL, PBL, Lin PLL+1
Megaminx: Westlund, Yu Da-Hyun
Skewb: NS

Why is Sq1 only Subsets?

 

[IsThatA4x4]

Why is Sq1 only Subsets?

I think he means "Vandenburgh" (if we can call it the same method) using OBL/PBL, or just PBL; or Lin using PLL+1

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

Why is Sq1 only Subsets?

Is not every method a subset? EG is a subset of 1LLSLL which is a sub-step of L6C. CFOP is a subset of F1 which is a subset of F3L. Yau is a subset of Redux.

I think he means "Vandenburgh" (if we can call it the same method) using OBL/PBL, or just PBL; or Lin using PLL+1

Your assumption is incorrect. I do not consider OBL/PBL (3-look) to be Vandenburgh. If anything Vandenburgh is a subset of 3-Look. PBL is objectively faster than doing it Vandenbergh style and while some are hesitant on accepting the superiority of OBL I think it is far better to be more efficient and solve OBL in on average less than five slices rather than do two slices into a high chance of having a six-slicer.

 

[IsThatA4x4]

Is not every method a subset? EG is a subset of 1LLSLL which is a sub-step of L6C. CFOP is a subset of F1 which is a subset of F3L. Yau is a subset of Redux.

Your assumption is incorrect. I do not consider OBL/PBL (3-look) to be Vandenburgh. If anything Vandenburgh is a subset of 3-Look. PBL is objectively faster than doing it Vandenbergh style and while some are hesitant on accepting the superiority of OBL I think it is far better to be more efficient and solve OBL in on average less than five slices rather than do two slices into a high chance of having a six-slicer.

That's what i meant, I just forgot the term for CSP/OBL/PBL as a method, thanks for reminding me.

 

[Eli Apperson]

Nutilus-L5E

I know nautilus certainly has a lot of potential, but doesn't a method need some proof of world class times before you say it's one of the best?

 

[ruffleduck]

Nautilus-L5E

A less flexible version of Roux. Maybe situationally good, but there is no good reason to main this method.