[Help Thread] Roux Discussion and Help

How does Roux do with the 3x3 stage of big cubes (5x5-7x7)? I love the Roux method (I'm a CFOP user currently) but I also have ambitions to solve big cubes. Are there any techniques/fingertricks that help Roux solving with this?
 
IRNjuggle28 said:
I don't believe there's nothing you can add onto CLL or L6EO other than knowing how to force the occasional skip. There has to be something more structured that can be used. There's tons of add ons and subsets of CFOP LL, (winter/summer variation, ZBLL, OLLCP, phasing) and I bet something like that could be created for Roux. And would have already been, if Roux was as widely used and as widely studied as CFOP. I have no clue what it'll be, but I can't believe there's no way that Roux LL could get more efficient without sacrificing recognition. I am aware that for the purposes of this discussion, that's pretty irrelevant, though. You have good points.
Click to expand...

There is another variant for LSE created by Josef Jelinek:
http://rubikscube.info/lastsix2look.php

Although I don't know if anyone uses that (problematic recognition?), people should know about its existence.
 
IRNjuggle28 said:
Well according to that logic, every new method being proposed would already be in practice if it was worth it. TCLL is doomed.
Click to expand...

It seems that you've failed to read the word 'likely' in my post. I'm simply saying it's highly likely that all simple extensions to popular methods have been considered already, and this particular example is an extremely trivial deviation.

IRNjuggle28 said:
Well, are L6EO and L4EP really that easy to recognize either? It seems like you'd have the exact same issues with recognition of those that you would with one look: BD being hidden and UB and DF being partially hidden.
Click to expand...

A lot easier. Your reservations are misplaced.

Are you well versed in solving CLL + LSE quickly? It seems like you aren't.

IRNjuggle28 said:
I don't believe there's nothing you can add onto CLL or L6EO other than knowing how to force the occasional skip. There has to be something more structured that can be used. There's tons of add ons and subsets of CFOP LL, (winter/summer variation, ZBLL, OLLCP, phasing) and I bet something like that could be created for Roux. And would have already been, if Roux was as widely used and as widely studied as CFOP. I have no clue what it'll be, but I can't believe there's no way that Roux LL could get more efficient without sacrificing recognition. I am aware that for the purposes of this discussion, that's pretty irrelevant, though. You have good points.
Click to expand...

Roux has a lower movecount, so maybe this doesn't lend itself to having as many variations that perform equally or better. If you're trying to improve the system though, I'd look at the first two blocks moreso than the last six edges. LSE is like, the best step in the method as far as method quality goes.

IRNjuggle28 said:
Fair enough. I was a bit put off by the 4 look LL/ML of Roux, but if the last two steps don't require a pause if you know what you're doing, I guess it's not as big a deal. The struggle over whether or not to switch to Roux continues... Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

The last /four/ steps don't require a pause - you can basically execute them as one long alg by recognising the next step in each.
 
maps600 said:
How does Roux do with the 3x3 stage of big cubes (5x5-7x7)? I love the Roux method (I'm a CFOP user currently) but I also have ambitions to solve big cubes. Are there any techniques/fingertricks that help Roux solving with this?
Click to expand...

People tend to use Meyer, K4 or something else entirely.
 
Kirjava said:
Roux has a lower movecount, so maybe this doesn't lend itself to having as many variations that perform equally or better. If you're trying to improve the system though, I'd look at the first two blocks moreso than the last six edges. LSE is like, the best step in the method as far as method quality goes.
Click to expand...

This. Most of the optimal or near-optimal L6EOP solutions are ones that follow Roux's method, albeit with many cancellations. The same fact is even stronger when it comes to L6EP. F2B has far more room for development of approaches, but they'll likely mostly be intuitive tricks to help optimisation rather than whole new substeps. CLL is just CLL and you can learn whatever/however much you want to add to it depending on your commitment to drilling alg sets to keep the payoff of recognition speed worth it.

The reason Roux is beautiful is because it reflects your abilities equally for both speed and solution elegance more than any other popular method, so tack-on systems are naturally hard to come by.
 
Are you well versed in solving CLL + LSE quickly? It seems like you aren't.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. I'm not a Roux solver. Yet. Just trying to get an idea of what the method is really like before deciding whether to switch from CFOP.
 
Bestsimple said:
Then how come there are not that many fast roux users.
Click to expand...

I've wondered that too. Roux is a more difficult method. You'll learn slower than with CFOP, but might continue improving more. And even if there aren't many, we know that the method itself can be fast. Alex Lau is faster than nearly all elite CFOPers.

It's possible that many just won't give Roux enough of a try. That is a guess, nothing more.
 
GuRoux said:
popularity is still low but growing quickly. the most problematic things is that roux is especially hard for beginners to pick up so they don't switch early and are stuck in cfop later.
Click to expand...

That would be me... but I think I'm going to switch before I get much farther. I've only been cubing for a few months, and I only average mid to high 20s. Definitely not too fast to switch. I guess I'm still going to use CFOP for big cubes though... not much choice.
 
IRNjuggle28 said:
That would be me... but I think I'm going to switch before I get much farther. I've only been cubing for a few months, and I only average mid to high 20s. Definitely not too fast to switch. I guess I'm still going to use CFOP for big cubes though... not much choice.
Click to expand...

i actually switched at the same skill level too, took me about 1-2 weeks of practice to surpass my cfop times
 
GuRoux said:
i actually switched at the same skill level too, took me about 1-2 weeks of practice to surpass my cfop times
Click to expand...

I said a couple hours ago that "maybe people just won't give Roux enough of a try," and after starting to work on it a little bit, I can easily see why. Gosh darn that was frustrating. You'd think that F2B would be OK since it's just F2L minus M layer, but noooo. It totally threw my color filter off seeing white/yellow cross pieces floating around. Since I'm opposite color neutral, my color filter tells me "LOOK FOR ANYTHING WHITE OR YELLOW." And that doesn't work now! I also don't know the color scheme well enough. Without my F/B centers, which corner/edge pairs go where is no longer something I know without having to think about it. But I'll stick with it. We all remember that day we moved from beginners method to F2L and instantly got 2 minutes slower. Hopefully Roux will get easier fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

pcwiz
[Help Thread] CFOP Discussion
144 145 146
Replies
2,918
Views
771,276
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
E
  • Poll Poll
Roux CN discussion (x2/y vs full CN)
2
Replies
22
Views
3,817
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
C
[Free App] Cube Trainer — CFOP + Roux algorithm trainer with timer
Replies
0
Views
120
cellonty
C
T
New method idea: Using Pinkie Pie roux variant with CFOP instead
Replies
4
Views
410
theail03
T
Roux
Should i become full CN with Roux?
Replies
4
Views
536
Roux
Roux
Back
Top