• 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!

NEW Guide to Choosing a Speedcubing Method (Speedcubing.org)

Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
329
WCA
2017OWEN01
For a while now I have been working on a guide to choosing a speedsolving method for the Speedcubing.org website because I‘m very interested in methods and the only one in existence currently is the one on this forums which is very outdated. Today I have finally finished an initial version with the big 4 methods. In future I would like to expand it with more methods and more detail but for now this is the first version. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.



btw I’m doing leor next
 

ottozing

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
3,224
Location
Canberra, Australia
WCA
2012MCNE01
YouTube
Visit Channel
My version:

If you want to be generally better at Big cubes/Megaminx, do CFOP

If you want to be generally better at OH solving, do Roux

If you want to be generally better at OH solving but are politically opposed to table abuse, use CFOP

If you only care about being fast at 3x3, choose between CFOP & Roux

If you want to be generally better at other events like FMC or BLD stuff, learn those events because 3x3 stuff stops carrying over beyond 4-7 OH and Mega

If you don't care about being fast at 3x3, use whatever method you find interesting while remembering that "being an (insert method here) solver isn't a personality trait"

If people want me to go in depth on why I think recommending methods like ZZ/Petrus is irresponsible to people getting into cubing as a hobby, I can maybe do that next week or something
 

MichaelZRC

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2020
Messages
67
Location
Florida, Hell
If people want me to go in depth on why I think recommending methods like ZZ/Petrus is irresponsible to people getting into cubing as a hobby, I can maybe do that next week or something
angry petrus and zz noises
But seriously, generally for people starting out cubing as a beginner or people who are switching from a method like LBL, its usually better to recommend a method like CFOP or Roux before going into other methods.
 

PetrusQuber

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
2,790
Location
my house, cubing.
YouTube
Visit Channel
If people want me to go in depth on why I think recommending methods like ZZ/Petrus is irresponsible to people getting into cubing as a hobby, I can maybe do that next week or something
I challenge you to crush my dreams.

Eh, most methods can get faster than a lot of people ever end up when quitting cubing so at that point it’s what’s the most fun.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
329
WCA
2017OWEN01
My version:

If you want to be generally better at Big cubes/Megaminx, do CFOP

If you want to be generally better at OH solving, do Roux

If you want to be generally better at OH solving but are politically opposed to table abuse, use CFOP

If you only care about being fast at 3x3, choose between CFOP & Roux

If you want to be generally better at other events like FMC or BLD stuff, learn those events because 3x3 stuff stops carrying over beyond 4-7 OH and Mega

If you don't care about being fast at 3x3, use whatever method you find interesting while remembering that "being an (insert method here) solver isn't a personality trait"

If people want me to go in depth on why I think recommending methods like ZZ/Petrus is irresponsible to people getting into cubing as a hobby, I can maybe do that next week or something
i agree with some of this and disagree with some. I will Try to explain why but I need to rewatch your zz vids first.
 

NevEr_QeyX

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
660
Location
Alone at Target
My version:

If you want to be generally better at Big cubes/Megaminx, do CFOP

If you want to be generally better at OH solving, do Roux

If you want to be generally better at OH solving but are politically opposed to table abuse, use CFOP

If you only care about being fast at 3x3, choose between CFOP & Roux

If you want to be generally better at other events like FMC or BLD stuff, learn those events because 3x3 stuff stops carrying over beyond 4-7 OH and Mega

If you don't care about being fast at 3x3, use whatever method you find interesting while remembering that "being an (insert method here) solver isn't a personality trait"

If people want me to go in depth on why I think recommending methods like ZZ/Petrus is irresponsible to people getting into cubing as a hobby, I can maybe do that next week or something
You can always count on @WarriorCatCuber to angry emote any post with negativity towards ZZ, LOL
 

Silky

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2020
Messages
102
Simon Kalhofer is 22 in the world and uses ZZ. I think there has been a pretty significant movement for OH specific methods, especially since the YruRU proposal. Gen reduction is very promising as finger tricks are really important in OH, so methods like ZZ, Petrus, and Roux become more and more viable.
 

AlphaSheep

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
1,081
Location
Gauteng, South Africa
WCA
2014GRAY03
If you ask most top OH solvers whether they prefer RUF or RUL, I guarantee most of them are going to say RUF. That alone casts doubt on ZZ's OH potential compared to CFOP's.
Yes, ZZ technically reduces the cube to a <R,U,L> after the first step. Does that mean you solve it using RUL? HELL NO! Ask any top OH solver whether they prefer RUF or RU. I guarantee most of them are going to say RU. The first of ZZ step is admittedly awkward, but it's only 6-8 moves and not much worse than cross. You then do a short RU setup, one z rotation, more RU, a z' rotation, then RU for F2L. Compare that to the RLUFry stuff that CFOP users have to do. Last layer can be RUF, RUD, RUL, RrFU, RUFD, or whatever you like, but CFOP is the same move set, so there can be no criticism here. ZZ just makes one look every time practical, whereas CFOP usually needs two (admittedly fast) looks.

There are a few valid criticisms of ZZ, but so much of what I read are just regurgitated responses that show that the person trying to argue has no real experience with the method.
 

Spacey10

Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
601
Location
Virginia
YouTube
Visit Channel
Yes, ZZ technically reduces the cube to a <R,U,L> after the first step. Does that mean you solve it using RUL? HELL NO! Ask any top OH solver whether they prefer RUF or RU. I guarantee most of them are going to say RU. The first of ZZ step is admittedly awkward, but it's only 6-8 moves and not much worse than cross. You then do a short RU setup, one z rotation, more RU, a z' rotation, then RU for F2L. Compare that to the RLUFry stuff that CFOP users have to do. Last layer can be RUF, RUD, RUL, RrFU, RUFD, or whatever you like, but CFOP is the same move set, so there can be no criticism here. ZZ just makes one look every time practical, whereas CFOP usually needs two (admittedly fast) looks.

There are a few valid criticisms of ZZ, but so much of what I read are just regurgitated responses that show that the person trying to argue has no real experience with the method.
But you can do rotations in CFOP too, OH ZZ takes two rotations, CFOP of 2 handed takes approx 1 in sub 10 solvers, when turning that into OH, let's say only RU gen for F2L, it adds about, meh, 2 rotations. This barely slows down your time, and what about ZZ EO? It sometimes involves B moves, which adds more rotations, technically making ZZ have the same amount of rotations as ZZ. Ok, I know that a lot of CFOP OLLs and PLLs have F and D moves, but I'm talking about F2L so hear me out. When you are doing EO, the EO could have B and F moves scattered throughout, so let's say your EO looked like this: F' R' U2 R2 B' R F. Does this mean you will have to rotate ALMOST (I said almost) everytime you want to do B of F moves? Doesn't this make ZZ somehow have MORE rotations than CFOP?
ZZ is good for OH, but CFOP is better
 

ObscureCuber

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
570
Location
Somewhere i guesss
YouTube
Visit Channel
But you can do rotations in CFOP too, OH ZZ takes two rotations, CFOP of 2 handed takes approx 1 in sub 10 solvers, when turning that into OH, let's say only RU gen for F2L, it adds about, meh, 2 rotations. This barely slows down your time, and what about ZZ EO? It sometimes involves B moves, which adds more rotations, technically making ZZ have the same amount of rotations as ZZ. Ok, I know that a lot of CFOP OLLs and PLLs have F and D moves, but I'm talking about F2L so hear me out. When you are doing EO, the EO could have B and F moves scattered throughout, so let's say your EO looked like this: F' R' U2 R2 B' R F. Does this mean you will have to rotate ALMOST (I said almost) everytime you want to do B of F moves? Doesn't this make ZZ somehow have MORE rotations than CFOP?
ZZ is good for OH, but CFOP is better
?????
R U gen only f2l would be insanely inefficient comparitively to even normal cfop, but even worse if compared to ZZ.
it makes no sense plus doing extra rotations on top of that and its still less efficient and fingertrick friendly
than ZZf2l.
 
Top