Roux-breaker? The YruRU method

[Cuberstache]

It's not similar to Briggs, it is Briggs (in reference to the Wiki article).

1. I think you've made your point
2. The steps are very similar, but with some notable differences:

• In Briggs, CP is done with an 8-move 3-cycle, not a 3-move trigger.
• Briggs doesn't have pEO, which makes EO in YruRU much easier
• The way Briggs does EOStripe is different from YruRU. Briggs solves DB first, then EO and solve DF

Call it a Briggs variant if you want; Devagio has agreed that that's ok. But there's enough difference that's it's not exactly the same as Briggs.

 

[I'm A Cuber]

It's not similar to Briggs, it is Briggs (in reference to the Wiki article).

On this one, I think I’m going to have to go with PapaSmurf. It is the same steps as Briggs. When talking about a preexisting method vs a new method, the steps are what matter, not how you do them. If I made a 2x2x2 block in Petrus by putting in two cross edges and an f2l pair, it’s still Petrus. If someone uses CoLL and does 5-sticker recognition and solves it intuitively using coms, rather than 3-sticker recognition using a heavily optimized alg set, both are still CoLL. They are not two different methods, they are different ways of doing the same thing, which is what is happening here.

Briggs doesn't have pEO, which makes EO in YruRU much easier

From what I understand of pEO (which is not very much, so correct me if I’m wrong), it is a way of fixing several bad edges between the cp and eo steps. However, this is not a part of the “base method,” similar to partial edge control with CFOP.

But there's enough difference that's it's not exactly the same as Briggs

I don’t think so. I think that creating this wiki page is slightly discrediting the work originally done by Briggs, especially if this became really popular (Big 3 level). However, if you are going to keep this wiki page (as I figure you will), you should at least add Briggs under alternate names. I do think that the cp recognition is revolutionary for the method, but as I said earlier, the first person to come to with CoLL 3-sticker recognition did not invent a new method.

Wow my forum posts are becoming long lol
Edit: Argh my laugh Emojis aren’t working

 

[Devagio]

On this one, I think I’m going to have to go with PapaSmurf. It is the same steps as Briggs. When talking about a preexisting method vs a new method, the steps are what matter, not how you do them. If I made a 2x2x2 block in Petrus by putting in two cross edges and an f2l pair, it’s still Petrus. If someone uses CoLL and does 5-sticker recognition and solves it intuitively using coms, rather than 3-sticker recognition using a heavily optimized alg set, both are still CoLL. They are not two different methods, they are different ways of doing the same thing, which is what is happening here.

From what I understand of pEO (which is not very much, so correct me if I’m wrong), it is a way of fixing several bad edges between the cp and eo steps. However, this is not a part of the “base method,” similar to partial edge control with CFOP.

I don’t think so. I think that creating this wiki page is slightly discrediting the work originally done by Briggs, especially if this became really popular (Big 3 level). However, if you are going to keep this wiki page (as I figure you will), you should at least add Briggs under alternate names. I do think that the cp recognition is revolutionary for the method, but as I said earlier, the first person to come to with CoLL 3-sticker recognition did not invent a new method.

Wow my forum posts are becoming long lol
Edit: Argh my laugh Emojis aren’t working

I like to look at it with the analogy of 4x4 methods.

Yau is basically reduction, except there is a little bit of shuffling; 3 edges are paired and placed sometime during centres to aid lookahead, but both methods are identical otherwise.
YruRU is basically Briggs, except there is a little bit of shuffling; 2 edges are oriented and placed sometime during FB to aid lookahead [There are other differences such as CP is done completely differently both recognition and execution wise, FB is done differently, DB-DF are solved differently; but these are not required to make my point].

Yau is considered a completely different method from redux; not identical, not its variation.

 

[I'm A Cuber]

So is the pEO actually an “official” step in this method?

 

[Owen Morrison]

1. I think you've made your point
2. The steps are very similar, but with some notable differences:

• In Briggs, CP is done with an 8-move 3-cycle, not a 3-move trigger.
• Briggs doesn't have pEO, which makes EO in YruRU much easier
• The way Briggs does EOStripe is different from YruRU. Briggs solves DB first, then EO and solve DF

Call it a Briggs variant if you want; Devagio has agreed that that's ok. But there's enough difference that's it's not exactly the same as Briggs.

So pretty much YruRU is Briggs but better?

 

[NevEr_QeyX]

So pretty much YruRU is Briggs but better?

I’m Pretty sure they are identical but YruRU makes a few steps easier/different

 

[Cuberstache]

So is the pEO actually an “official” step in this method?

Yeah, the method has been in development since it was proposed. pEO, afaik, is an official step of the "complete" version of the method. It's listed on the wiki page as part of the FB step.

So pretty much YruRU is Briggs but better?

Yeah, pretty much. Briggs has the benefit of doing FB+CP in inspection, but the way it does it is worse imo.

 

[ProStar]

I’m Pretty sure they are identical but YruRU makes a few steps easier/different

You just said "I'm pretty sure they're identical, except where they're different"

 

[NevEr_QeyX]

Just want to say @CuberStache , the videos you made are very easy to understand, thanks!

You just said "I'm pretty sure they're identical, except where they're different"

They are identical “but” that but (hehe) changes the whole thing.

What you said in jest also works as a sentence, with except taking the place of but

 

[Cuberstache]

Just want to say @CuberStache , the videos you made are very easy to understand, thanks!

Thanks! I'm glad I'm helping spread knowledge of the method! It would be so cool if one day the majority of top OH solvers used this method.

 

[I'm A Cuber]

Yeah, the method has been in development since it was proposed. pEO, afaik, is an official step of the "complete" version of the method. It's listed on the wiki page as part of the FB step

Ok. I will accept that this is a different method now. This is now a closed argument (for me). I am now forced (shameless Self promotion of my awesome debating skills) to put down my incredible argument that this should not have its own wiki page, and instead go argue an incredible argument elsewhere.

 

[NevEr_QeyX]

Is there an example solve thread for this?

 

[ProStar]

Is there an example solve thread for this?

Yes. Just check Stache's posts in the example solve thread

 

[PapaSmurf]

• In Briggs, CP is done with an 8-move 3-cycle, not a 3-move trigger.
• Briggs doesn't have pEO, which makes EO in YruRU much easier
• The way Briggs does EOStripe is different from YruRU. Briggs solves DB first, then EO and solve D

Call it a Briggs variant if you want; Devagio has agreed that that's ok. But there's enough difference that's it's not exactly the same as Briggs.

In Briggs, you solve first block plus some form of CP. The 3 cycle was an inital way of solving it, but trust me, Briggs is just solving CP during FB. Briggs also has pEO if you want Briggs to have pEO, just as CFOP has edge control if you want to do edge control. They aren't separate things. And lastly, that is not true. The steps of Briggs are CPFB (in whichever way), EODFDB, RB, 2GLL. The steps of YruRU is solve CPFB in a specific way that also influences EO, EODFDB, RB, 2GLL. Pretty identical. What you're counting as a differen method would be calling CFOP where you solve each cross piece one at a time instead of several at once a different method.

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

In Briggs, you solve first block plus some form of CP. The 3 cycle was an inital way of solving it, but trust me, Briggs is just solving CP during FB. Briggs also has pEO if you want Briggs to have pEO, just as CFOP has edge control if you want to do edge control. They aren't separate things. And lastly, that is not true. The steps of Briggs are CPFB (in whichever way), EODFDB, RB, 2GLL. The steps of YruRU is solve CPFB in a specific way that also influences EO, EODFDB, RB, 2GLL. Pretty identical. What you're counting as a differen method would be calling CFOP where you solve each cross piece one at a time instead of several at once a different method.

I agree with papa if you going to call YruRU a separate method you going to have to come up with different names for a sub 8 solver with cfop and someone averaging 30 and different names for ZZ EOcross and EOline etc.

 

[I'm A Cuber]

different names for ZZ EOcross and EOline etc.

But there are different names for EOcross and EOLine...

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

But there are different names for EOcross and EOLine...

there aren't they are both called ZZ

 

[Deleted member 51471]

there aren't they are both called ZZ

ZZ with eoline is called ZZ-Vanilla

 

[AlphaCuber is awesome]

ZZ with eoline is called ZZ-Vanilla

I looked up zz vanilla and it appeared to refer to ocll pll not eoline also it definitely isn’t an official term but I may have overlooked something

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

Kian's been inactive on the forums for a while, then just comes back with Roux propaganda XD

haha someone sent me the link and I had to do it to em