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

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

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because I‘m very interested in methods and the only one in existence currently is the one on this forums which is very outdated.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.

Guide to Choosing a Speedsolving Method

Choosing a Speedcubing Method This guide will continue to be updated with more methods and in future hopefully link through to pages with more detailed explanations and analysis of the methods, if you have any questions or suggestions message Alpha Cuber (me) on our discord server. You can also...

speedcubing.org

btw I’m doing leor next

 

[HaHaHaHeeHeeHee]

yes very much critique

the its in the second last line of the zz thing shouldn't have an apostrophe.
otherwise good job

 

[ottozing]

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'm A Cuber]

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

Me

 

[MichaelZRC]

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]

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.

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

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]

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

 

[PetraPine]

I think zz should also be there for oh, it's statistically insane for oh, and comparitively to it's popularity there have been a multitude of fast zz oh solvers.

 

[Owen Morrison]

I think zz should also be there for oh, it's statistically insane for oh, and comparitively to it's popularity there have been a multitude of fast zz oh solvers.

ZZ is bad for OH.

 

[Sub1Hour]

ZZ is bad for OH.

But its not?

 

[Alex Shih]

But its not?

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.

 

[MichaelZRC]

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.

ZZ OH is <RU> z <RU>

 

[Silky]

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]

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.

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

Anyone who is criticising ZZ for OH should look up ZZ-z

 

[Spacey10]

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

 

[PetraPine]

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.

 

[Spacey10]

?????
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.

I was talking about OH

 

[PetraPine]

I was talking about OH

I know