Petrus Method

[ErikJ]

REASONS TO BACK UP MY OPINION:
-Petrus has a really slow last layer system.
-Roux only requires knowledge of 9 full-length algorithms, and 3 really short 4 move ones. And if you want to be really lazy, I think you can get by with only 2 full length algorithms.
-Roux has 4 simple, fast steps. Petrus has 7 longer steps.
-Roux's last step is consisted of only <M, U> moves, allowing very fast moves.

do some research. you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Swordsman Kirby]

Roux is better than Petrus! (BTW I know a fair amount about Petrus)

REASONS TO BACK UP MY OPINION:
-Petrus has a really slow last layer system.

I guess not.

 

[spdcbr]

LEaRN FRIDRIcH!

 

[JLarsen]

Hey! What about Roux!

Petrus is better than Roux! (BTW I don't know anything about Roux)

Roux is better than Petrus! (BTW I know a fair amount about Petrus)

REASONS TO BACK UP MY OPINION:
-Petrus has a really slow last layer system.
-Roux only requires knowledge of 9 full-length algorithms, and 3 really short 4 move ones. And if you want to be really lazy, I think you can get by with only 2 full length algorithms.
-Roux has 4 simple, fast steps. Petrus has 7 longer steps.
-Roux's last step is consisted of only <M, U> moves, allowing very fast moves.

-I don't get what is so slow about the ll system at all. Also as said before a method is not reliant on its last layer if it has an f2l.

-So your actually trying to tell me that COLL or CMLL is 9 algs? You can solve petrus ll with 3 if you like. Sune, A perm, U Perm.

-The steps to both methods, Roux in particular are not very simple. Roux makes noobs cry.

-You reduce the cube you M U with Roux, RU with
Petrus.

-Just another point: I bet you aren't sub 1.5 with all your olls.

 

[spdcbr]

Look's like fridrich and roux are the top speedcubing methods. Anyone want to take a poll?

 

[byu]

Look's like fridrich and roux are the top speedcubing methods. Anyone want to take a poll?

You're forgetting Petrus...

Ok, so apparantly I had no idea what I was talking about, so I'll have to find better reasons to back up Roux.

 

[soccerking813]

-Just another point: I bet you aren't sub 1.5 with all your olls.

The Roux method doesn't use OLL, so why should he be?

 

[Nukoca]

Roux is better than Petrus! (BTW I know a fair amount about Petrus)

-Petrus has a really slow last layer system.

There's the three-look last layer, which puts the corners in right permutation, then orients them, and then permutes the edges. If you want to get faster at LL, you either learn OLL and PLL or COLL. COLL is just as fast as the OLL/PLL alternative, and requires less algs. (OLL/PLL=57(?) and COLL= 40)

-Roux only requires knowledge of 9 full-length algorithms, and 3 really short 4 move ones. And if you want to be really lazy, I think you can get by with only 2 full length algorithms.

With Petrus, you can get by at a minimum of 4 algs. 2x2, 2x2x3, orienting edges, and the F2L are intuitive. The last layer requires Sune, AntiSune, Niklas, and then it's useful to know all 4 edge permutation algs, but you can get by on just knowing one, if you know what you're doing.

-Roux has 4 simple, fast steps. Petrus has 7 longer steps.

On the contrary. The 2x2 and 3x3 are lightning fast, as well as the edge orientation. The F2L is a little longer, but barely. The COLL/EPLL is just as long as any other alg, AND there's a much higher chance of getting to skip the last alg, which on OLL/PLL would be 1/57(?), but Petrus is 1/4.

-Roux's last step is consisted of only <M, U> moves, allowing very fast moves.

On average, how many moves does the last step take?

Anyway, as someone else already said, it's not like they're religions or something. It's all a matter of personal preference. YOU decide how fast the method you use is.


EDIT:

Look's like fridrich and roux are the top speedcubing methods. Anyone want to take a poll?

There's already a thread about that. http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10960

 

[soccerking813]

Neither Petrus or Roux have been mastered yet by many people, so it is impossible to say which method is better.

 

[irontwig]

Roux is better than Petrus! (BTW I know a fair amount about Petrus)

REASONS TO BACK UP MY OPINION:
-Petrus has a really slow last layer system.

I guess not.

This clever idea of his enables one to do LL stupid fast with 40 algs:

http://lar5.com/cube/270/index.html

 

[Johannes91]

Ok, so apparantly I had no idea what I was talking about, so I'll have to find better reasons to back up Roux.

So first you decide that Roux has to be the best method ever, and then you try to argue that you're right. That sounds really backwards to me. If it turns out you're not necessarily right, you could reconsider your assumptions instead of insisting that they're correct but you just don't know why.

 

[Gparker]

Id say fridrich. Yes it's boring but quite fast.

Reasons:

1) F2L solved in 2 steps, Cross(or Ex cross) then corner-edge pairs, its very fast
2)Solve last layer with in only 2 steps if you know full.


Ok, thats not many reasons but there are cons to it to:

1) lots of algorithims
2) Hard to get really good at F2L
3) BORING AND PLAIN almost same thing every time

CFOP= 4 steps

and dont forget the fact that there are multiple algorithms for each case so you can choose one that is comfertable for you

 

[JLarsen]

-Just another point: I bet you aren't sub 1.5 with all your olls.

The Roux method doesn't use OLL, so why should he be?

Because he used fridrich for a long time fanboy.

 

[JLarsen]

Id say fridrich. Yes it's boring but quite fast.

Reasons:

1) F2L solved in 2 steps, Cross(or Ex cross) then corner-edge pairs, its very fast
2)Solve last layer with in only 2 steps if you know full.


Ok, thats not many reasons but there are cons to it to:

1) lots of algorithims
2) Hard to get really good at F2L
3) BORING AND PLAIN almost same thing every time

CFOP= 4 steps

and dont forget the fact that there are multiple algorithms for each case so you can choose one that is comfertable for you

I don't agree with the second con, but I agree with everything else. I'm sub 25 with Fridrich, and I've done maybe 50 solves with it total now.

 

[soccerking813]

-Just another point: I bet you aren't sub 1.5 with all your olls.

The Roux method doesn't use OLL, so why should he be?

Because he used fridrich for a long time fanboy.

I really hope that I heard that wrong and that you are not trying to insult me.

 

[Gparker]

Id say fridrich. Yes it's boring but quite fast.

Reasons:

1) F2L solved in 2 steps, Cross(or Ex cross) then corner-edge pairs, its very fast
2)Solve last layer with in only 2 steps if you know full.


Ok, thats not many reasons but there are cons to it to:

1) lots of algorithims
2) Hard to get really good at F2L
3) BORING AND PLAIN almost same thing every time

CFOP= 4 steps

and dont forget the fact that there are multiple algorithms for each case so you can choose one that is comfertable for you

I don't agree with the second con, but I agree with everything else. I'm sub 25 with Fridrich, and I've done maybe 50 solves with it total now.

maybe, it depends if your a begginner or not, you understand the purpose of intuition and begginners don't. and yes, its not hard to get fast with fridrich, i think it is the fastest method theres going to be. until someone learns full zb.

 

[soccerking813]

Sooner or later someone is going to learn every alg for Fridrich, including OLL, PLL, F2L, and cross algs. Then everyone else is going to do the same thing, and it will be just firing off 7 algs in a row.

 

[ErikJ]

Sooner or later someone is going to learn every alg for Fridrich, including OLL, PLL, F2L, and cross algs. Then everyone else is going to do the same thing, and it will be just firing off 7 algs in a row.

you should just stop talking now. no one anywhere will use algs for cross, ever.

 

[irontwig]

Sooner or later someone is going to learn every alg for Fridrich, including OLL, PLL, F2L, and cross algs. Then everyone else is going to do the same thing, and it will be just firing off 7 algs in a row.

Cross algs are a waste. Since you already know what moves to do for the cross is already like an alg. It's better to spend time practicing xcross and/or 2x2x3, imho.

 

[JLarsen]

-Just another point: I bet you aren't sub 1.5 with all your olls.

The Roux method doesn't use OLL, so why should he be?

Because he used fridrich for a long time fanboy.

I really hope that I heard that wrong and that you are not trying to insult me.

Nope. I was blatantly insulting you. And in case you missed the point of my argument, petrus has 7 oll's, and they're very fast.