• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

OH Method Debate

Best OH Method

  • CFOP

    Votes: 18 19.4%

  • ZZ

    Votes: 9 9.7%

  • Petrus

    Votes: 4 4.3%

  • Roux

    Votes: 46 49.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 2.2%

  • YruRu

    Votes: 9 9.7%

  • Hawaiian Kociemba

    Votes: 4 4.3%

  • FreeFOP

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • loer

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • Total voters
    93
mukerflap said:
give me a source that solving the cube with only j perms is a bad method
Click to expand...

I don't need a source, I objectively proved it. Now please objectively prove YruRU is bad. If you can do it without citing another source, good for you.

mukerflap said:
and i think yruru is bad because of the description of the method
Click to expand...

Key word: think. It's your opinion, so STOP STATING IT AS FACTS. And again, what about it? You've said multiple times you can tell it's bad because of the description of the method, but have not once shown an example. You're attacking an argument we didn't make

Please lookup Staw Man fallacy, and then come back.
 
This method is literally Briggs and Briggs is LEOR but you solve CP. For TH, this is pointless. ZBLL is good enough and doing CP for alg reduction is dumb. You also restrict how you can solve EO. For OH, this is also dumb for exactly the same reasons as for TH. The movecount of the method is good, the lookahead is not super great, especially as you're not gonna be inspecting EO in inspection (which is necessary for good LEOR). This means that you're gonna be doing a difficult step followed by a step with bad recog, before 2 nice steps. It's nice to see CP being explored at least, but there are definitely better ways to improve speedsolving (conjugation maybe, or writing an AI that finds good methods). If this were the Roux killer, Roux would've died 4 years ago, yet, as we can see from Sean, Kian and others, that isn't the case. From a cube theory/maybe fancy niche FMC, understanding CP is cool and I'm glad that I learnt, but it's not speedsolving useful (except maybe maybe maybe ZZ OH last slot using full CPLS [solving the pair and CP], but even then just OH ZBLL).
TL;DR solving CP early doesn't benefit anything and this isn't new (it is fun though), but keep up searching for new methods.

- papa smurf

Definitely worse than Roux.
There are too many small complicated steps, making it extremely difficult for me to believe that achieving fluid solving at high TPS is possible with this. The moveset is also quite far from ergonomic. RUru is pretty ugly for 2H due to wrist overturning and F-face thumb regrips every time a wide u is performed. It's arguably even worse for OH, for the same Uw front thumb regrip reason (as well as having to move middle finger from the E slice on the back). All of this extra work and dealing with ugly moves for a 2GLL finish is not worth it at all. If anything, this method shows how elegant and efficient Roux is as a method. The real roux-killer is more likely to be found in the hands of a young CFOP user who decides to learn how to actually build blocks properly and do giant Xcrosses every time followed by some ridiculous amount of algorithm sets solving LSLL.
-kian



Since there is no way people can plan EO in inspection ( let alone FB) within 15 seconds, the method is trash and CP is just not a good concept for speedsolving. also the movecount isnt any better than cfop

brododragon said:
I think CFOP is mathematically the worst method possible to create because of the description. Got a problem?
Click to expand...
explain why
 
mukerflap said:
This method is literally Briggs and Briggs is LEOR but you solve CP. For TH, this is pointless. ZBLL is good enough and doing CP for alg reduction is dumb. You also restrict how you can solve EO. For OH, this is also dumb for exactly the same reasons as for TH. The movecount of the method is good, the lookahead is not super great, especially as you're not gonna be inspecting EO in inspection (which is necessary for good LEOR). This means that you're gonna be doing a difficult step followed by a step with bad recog, before 2 nice steps. It's nice to see CP being explored at least, but there are definitely better ways to improve speedsolving (conjugation maybe, or writing an AI that finds good methods). If this were the Roux killer, Roux would've died 4 years ago, yet, as we can see from Sean, Kian and others, that isn't the case. From a cube theory/maybe fancy niche FMC, understanding CP is cool and I'm glad that I learnt, but it's not speedsolving useful (except maybe maybe maybe ZZ OH last slot using full CPLS [solving the pair and CP], but even then just OH ZBLL).
TL;DR solving CP early doesn't benefit anything and this isn't new (it is fun though), but keep up searching for new methods.

- papa smurf

Definitely worse than Roux.
There are too many small complicated steps, making it extremely difficult for me to believe that achieving fluid solving at high TPS is possible with this. The moveset is also quite far from ergonomic. RUru is pretty ugly for 2H due to wrist overturning and F-face thumb regrips every time a wide u is performed. It's arguably even worse for OH, for the same Uw front thumb regrip reason (as well as having to move middle finger from the E slice on the back). All of this extra work and dealing with ugly moves for a 2GLL finish is not worth it at all. If anything, this method shows how elegant and efficient Roux is as a method. The real roux-killer is more likely to be found in the hands of a young CFOP user who decides to learn how to actually build blocks properly and do giant Xcrosses every time followed by some ridiculous amount of algorithm sets solving LSLL.
-kian



Since there is no way people can plan EO in inspection ( let alone FB) within 15 seconds, the method is trash and CP is just not a good concept for speedsolving. also the movecount isnt any better than cfop
Click to expand...

These are well-based opinions, but no facts that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that YruRU sucks for OH are presented

mukerflap said:
explain why
Click to expand...

He's mocking you :P
 
mukerflap said:
This method is literally Briggs and Briggs is LEOR but you solve CP. For TH, this is pointless. ZBLL is good enough and doing CP for alg reduction is dumb. You also restrict how you can solve EO. For OH, this is also dumb for exactly the same reasons as for TH. The movecount of the method is good, the lookahead is not super great, especially as you're not gonna be inspecting EO in inspection (which is necessary for good LEOR). This means that you're gonna be doing a difficult step followed by a step with bad recog, before 2 nice steps. It's nice to see CP being explored at least, but there are definitely better ways to improve speedsolving (conjugation maybe, or writing an AI that finds good methods). If this were the Roux killer, Roux would've died 4 years ago, yet, as we can see from Sean, Kian and others, that isn't the case. From a cube theory/maybe fancy niche FMC, understanding CP is cool and I'm glad that I learnt, but it's not speedsolving useful (except maybe maybe maybe ZZ OH last slot using full CPLS [solving the pair and CP], but even then just OH ZBLL).
TL;DR solving CP early doesn't benefit anything and this isn't new (it is fun though), but keep up searching for new methods.

- papa smurf

Definitely worse than Roux.
There are too many small complicated steps, making it extremely difficult for me to believe that achieving fluid solving at high TPS is possible with this. The moveset is also quite far from ergonomic. RUru is pretty ugly for 2H due to wrist overturning and F-face thumb regrips every time a wide u is performed. It's arguably even worse for OH, for the same Uw front thumb regrip reason (as well as having to move middle finger from the E slice on the back). All of this extra work and dealing with ugly moves for a 2GLL finish is not worth it at all. If anything, this method shows how elegant and efficient Roux is as a method. The real roux-killer is more likely to be found in the hands of a young CFOP user who decides to learn how to actually build blocks properly and do giant Xcrosses every time followed by some ridiculous amount of algorithm sets solving LSLL.
-kian



Since there is no way people can plan EO in inspection ( let alone FB) within 15 seconds, the method is trash and CP is just not a good concept for speedsolving. also the movecount isnt any better than cfop
Click to expand...
Now, can you explain why its bad with your own words instead of just giving us quotes? This sounds like someone trying to BS a book report. "Would you recommend this Book?" "Yes, 5 stars would read again" "Why exactly would you recommend it?" 'The Plot" "What makes the plot so good?" "Because I like it" "What about the plot do you like?" "Here are some quotes from people who read the book."
mukerflap said:
explain why
Click to expand...
He is trying to get to you realize how ridiculous your argument is with YruRU
 
Sub1Hour said:
Now, can you explain why its bad with your own words instead of just giving us quotes? This sounds like someone trying to BS a book report. "Would you recommend this Book?" "Yes, 5 stars would read again" "Why exactly would you recommend it?" 'The Plot" "What makes the plot so good?" "Because I like it" "What about the plot do you like?" "Here are some quotes from people who read the book."

He is trying to get to you realize how ridiculous your argument is with YruRU
Click to expand...
the quotes sum it up better than i can. and i did give my own words

yruru sucks because you cant plan EO in inspection, the movecount isnt much better than cfop, wide u moves arent good
 
mukerflap said:
the quotes sum it up better than i can. and i did give my own words
Click to expand...

Your own words: "I can tell it's bad from the description"

mukerflap said:
yruru sucks because you cant plan EO in inspection, the movecount isnt much better than cfop, wide u moves arent good
Click to expand...

RUru can be done fast, as long as they don't alternate that much. EO isn't as hard as ZZ EO, similar to how doing EO in Roux isn't bad because of how much easier is.
 
Why is it important to say that a method you don't use isn't as good as one you do use? With speed cubing, there's two objectives, improve your own time and/or be faster than others. Getting people to use the method you believe is faster, which they don't agree with, seems counter productive. If people want to spend time on other methods, just let them. The only reason I think someone might argue against it, is if they're afraid it might end up being faster and they'll have wasted time themselves on an inferior method.
 
mukerflap said:
the quotes sum it up better than i can. and i did give my own words

yruru sucks because you cant plan EO in inspection, the movecount isnt much better than cfop, wide u moves arent good
Click to expand...
I dont care if quotes can sum it up better then you can. Why write an essay when you can just plagarise one from someone with the same viewpoint as you? I mean they can sum it up better than you can. The 1 line you gave does not hold enough evidence to disprove the method. You are totally ignoring that 2GLL is excellent along with ergonomics being much better then roux because it does not require table abuse to achieve excellent TPS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Roux
  • Poll Poll
Cubing method debate.
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2,886
KubikPanda
KubikPanda
S
Quantitative Method Analysis
Replies
16
Views
3,518
Silky
S
Christopher Mowla
Is the "Yau Method" Actually the "Jameson Method"? (Debate)
2
Replies
39
Views
6,758
mookiemu
M
S
  • Poll Poll
3 Blind Method Debate Thread
2 3
Replies
46
Views
8,776
Silky
S
D
The method debate thread
34 35 36
Replies
718
Views
83,815
Cubingmadness123
C
Back
Top