• 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 40,000+ 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 for OH if I use CFOP for 2H?

zzoomer

Member
Joined
May 9, 2021
Messages
674
Location
migrating
YouTube
Visit Channel
Would it be worth it to learn roux for OH if I main CFOP for 3x3?
Would it be "worth it"? It purely depends on how much you care about OH. If you are serious about OH then Roux is definitely the way to go. Roux is the future of OH, and the only reason it doesn't have all the official WR's right now is because Fahmi hasn't been able to go to comps.
I would actually suggest switching to Roux for both two handed solving and OH, but that's up to you. Just bear in mind that keeping up with two methods is a lot harder.
 

GenTheThief

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
2,146
Location
Illinois, USA
WCA
2016GEEN01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Carter Kucala has a 7.03 in 3x3 with cfop and 12.00 in oh using roux, both top 80 in the world.
It's definitely possible to be successful while using two different methods. It's also going to take a lot of work, especially since they don't have overlapping algorithm sets (CMLL and OLL/PLL), as opposed to CFOP and ZZ (which both use PLL).
 

carcass

Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2020
Messages
396
Location
Eating some delicious pineapple pizza
WCA
2018HANC03
Algorithm wise, it would require similar amounts of practice from both because they don't overlap, but measuring by only quantity, it's definitely doable, take people that have learned full ZBLL. CFOP and Roux total is 120 algorithms, which should be manageable. I, however, am too lazy to learn another method just for OH lol
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
1,116
Location
In the park feeding Ducks
No need to use F or B moves during solutions.
That isn't true. FB can have those moves as well as several CMLL algorithms. Roux does have very good ergonomics if you can do M moves but so does ZZ. Roux is very efficient, doesn't require a lot of algs (unless you want to explore ACMLL or whatever it's called) and in something like OH where you aren't turning as fast its slightly worse lookahead isn't as big of a factor.

I think the three biggest things are, low movecount, good ergonomics for most of the solve, and fluidity.
 
Top