• 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!

Roux-breaker? The YruRU method

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
So, regarding the issue of minimizing these sub-optimal move sets for OH, can you actually eliminate or reduce them by doing CP first, or do you just move them to the beginning of the solve?
 

ProStar

Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
4,248
Location
An uncolonized sector of the planet Mars
WCA
2020MAHO01
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's been inactive on the forums for a while, then just comes back with Roux propaganda XD
 

mukerflap

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
253
Just like ZZ is just CFOP EO lol.

x z2
F2 U2 f’ u f// CP-line
u’ U R’ u2 // 123
r U2 r U2 r U’ r // EO
U2 r’ U2 r // 2-gen reduction
That was 20 moves ETM, 19 STM.
Kinda average scramble, got lucky during 1x2x3.
Ok how fast can you execute all of that
 

CuberStache

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
720
Location
Washington State, USA
WCA
2016DAVI02
YouTube
Visit Channel

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
14.97 OH single with YruRU!!

D' R B2 D R' B L' F' D2 F2 L U2 L2 U2 B2 R F2 L2 D'

U2' S' // CPLine
U2' u' R r U' R u2' // FB
U2' R' r U' r' r' R U R' U' r // EO
U' R U' r2 // Stripe
U2' R' U R // Square
U2' R U R' U2' R U' R' // F2L
U' R2 U R U R' U' R' U' R' U R' U2' // 2GLL


49 moves/14.97s = 3.27 TPS

Been practicing a lot lately but it looks like I might have been practicing the wrong method rip. I probably didn't even overinspect this time considering how easy the CPLine was.
Congratulations, that is impressive! What are the advantages you see to this method, after trying it?
 

CuberStache

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
720
Location
Washington State, USA
WCA
2016DAVI02
YouTube
Visit Channel
Congratulations, that is impressive! What are the advantages you see to this method, after trying it?
The obvious advantage is ergonomic turning for pretty much the entire solve. I personally don't have a problem doing Uw/Uw' moves with one hand like others have expressed, but Rw' moves are a bit difficult. Not having rotations is nice but plenty of other methods have that. A 2GLL finish is more worth it than it sounds at first, especially for OH. Other ZBLL vs. 2GLL might not be a big enough difference for 2H to put effort into forcing a 2GLL, but I think the difference is considerably larger for OH since you have to rotate to do RUL algs and RUF algs are kinda awkward. If all algs are slower, the difference between a fast alg and a slow alg is larger - and all 2GLLs are fast! Plus, the main thing that would make 2GLL algs bad for 2H is regrips/R2 moves. Not a problem for OH! I know roughly 1/4 of 2GLL and I'll probably learn the rest. About half the cases I know so far (and many I don't know) are two sune variants with an AUF in between, so super good for OH. 88 algs to one-look the last layer is pretty awesome. The biggest problem with the method (As the OP has already identified) is EO recognition in the middle of the solve with 9 edges. I'm doing better at looking ahead to EO during the 1x2x3 step but it can't be done perfectly. Another problem I have is inspection time. I struggle to plan CPLine sub-15 when there aren't two corners already solved. I'm confident this will change with practice though. This is probably more than you wanted to know, lol.
 

mukerflap

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
253
The obvious advantage is ergonomic turning for pretty much the entire solve. I personally don't have a problem doing Uw/Uw' moves with one hand like others have expressed, but Rw' moves are a bit difficult. Not having rotations is nice but plenty of other methods have that. A 2GLL finish is more worth it than it sounds at first, especially for OH. Other ZBLL vs. 2GLL might not be a big enough difference for 2H to put effort into forcing a 2GLL, but I think the difference is considerably larger for OH since you have to rotate to do RUL algs and RUF algs are kinda awkward. If all algs are slower, the difference between a fast alg and a slow alg is larger - and all 2GLLs are fast! Plus, the main thing that would make 2GLL algs bad for 2H is regrips/R2 moves. Not a problem for OH! I know roughly 1/4 of 2GLL and I'll probably learn the rest. About half the cases I know so far (and many I don't know) are two sune variants with an AUF in between, so super good for OH. 88 algs to one-look the last layer is pretty awesome. The biggest problem with the method (As the OP has already identified) is EO recognition in the middle of the solve with 9 edges. I'm doing better at looking ahead to EO during the 1x2x3 step but it can't be done perfectly. Another problem I have is inspection time. I struggle to plan CPLine sub-15 when there aren't two corners already solved. I'm confident this will change with practice though. This is probably more than you wanted to know, lol.
RUF algs are good
 

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
The obvious advantage is ergonomic turning for pretty much the entire solve. I personally don't have a problem doing Uw/Uw' moves with one hand like others have expressed, but Rw' moves are a bit difficult. Not having rotations is nice but plenty of other methods have that. A 2GLL finish is more worth it than it sounds at first, especially for OH. Other ZBLL vs. 2GLL might not be a big enough difference for 2H to put effort into forcing a 2GLL, but I think the difference is considerably larger for OH since you have to rotate to do RUL algs and RUF algs are kinda awkward. If all algs are slower, the difference between a fast alg and a slow alg is larger - and all 2GLLs are fast! Plus, the main thing that would make 2GLL algs bad for 2H is regrips/R2 moves. Not a problem for OH! I know roughly 1/4 of 2GLL and I'll probably learn the rest. About half the cases I know so far (and many I don't know) are two sune variants with an AUF in between, so super good for OH. 88 algs to one-look the last layer is pretty awesome. The biggest problem with the method (As the OP has already identified) is EO recognition in the middle of the solve with 9 edges. I'm doing better at looking ahead to EO during the 1x2x3 step but it can't be done perfectly. Another problem I have is inspection time. I struggle to plan CPLine sub-15 when there aren't two corners already solved. I'm confident this will change with practice though. This is probably more than you wanted to know, lol.
On the contrary, that's exactly what I wanted to know - thank you! You brought up the issue of doing EO in the middle of the solve instead of during inspection, which I think is part of a larger issue: what is the most effective use of inspection time? We have to do all of these parts of the solve at some point, so doing something during inspection means that we have to do something else during the solve. Getting a one-look last layer is obviously good, but if you have to do another look elsewhere in the solve to achieve the single look later on, then the question becomes whether it is more efficient to do that extra look during the last layer, or elsewhere in the solve.
 

CuberStache

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
720
Location
Washington State, USA
WCA
2016DAVI02
YouTube
Visit Channel
On the contrary, that's exactly what I wanted to know - thank you! You brought up the issue of doing EO in the middle of the solve instead of during inspection, which I think is part of a larger issue: what is the most effective use of inspection time? We have to do all of these parts of the solve at some point, so doing something during inspection means that we have to do something else during the solve. Getting a one-look last layer is obviously good, but if you have to do another look elsewhere in the solve to achieve the single look later on, then the question becomes whether it is more efficient to do that extra look during the last layer, or elsewhere in the solve.
Do you mean this in general or specific to this method? With this method, you basically have to do EO for the CP to actually have a benefit and there's no way we're going to be able to do both in inspection. I did a couple dozen solves today timing inspection and nearly all of them were DNFs so we're not going to be able to cram more stuff in.
 

dudefaceguy

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
240
Do you mean this in general or specific to this method? With this method, you basically have to do EO for the CP to actually have a benefit and there's no way we're going to be able to do both in inspection. I did a couple dozen solves today timing inspection and nearly all of them were DNFs so we're not going to be able to cram more stuff in.
It's true in general, but this is a particularly illustrative case. As you point out, you need the whole inspection time for CP so you will have to do EO during the solve. You also start with a small amount of pieces solved, similar to ZZ. This is a disadvantage compared to other methods that focus on solving pieces during inspection, like Roux and CFOP. Many cubers have pointed this out regarding ZZ. This seems to me to be another version of the same debate. But rather than debating whether we should spend inspection solving pieces versus reducing our moveset, we are discussing whether we should do EO during inspection and CP during the solve, or CP during inspection and EO during the solve. I think it's an interesting question, even though I'm obviously not knowledgeable enough to answer it.
 
Top