Roux on 4x4x4

[Jaysammey777]

This can also be aplied to bigger cubes!

Scrambled

1x2x3 block- 1x3x4 block

other side

CLL

Edges paired

E15

finally centers solved

 

[Jaysammey777]

After 3 months of trying to figer out what to do after CLL! After this I did a timed solve and 3 min. because I suck at Roux!

 

[Owen]

I did this once.

 

[Kirjava]

People doing this generally use columns and ELL after CLL.

Maybe Eidolon can give you some tips.

 

[Jaysammey777]

Im gonna stick with Reduction. This was all for the fun a Theory!

 

[rachmaninovian]

this is mizzle's roux-by-four.

 

[Rook]

I did a handful of solves trying to use Roux, except I did F2B, CLL, centers and then edges. It took me forever to solve the edges :fp

Basically, if the edges didn't get paired up by themselves while doing the centers, I would randomly cycle around the centers while trying to manipulating the edges.

I need to start learning big cube commutators...

 

[blade740]

My method is: blocks, CLL, D center, columns, ELL. There's also Richard Meyer's Rouxduction variant where you solve the first block, then finish centers, then edges all in RrU, then finish with a normal roux solve reduction-style.

 

[Cride5]

I'm a bit of a 4x4 n00b so take this with a pinch of salt.

Anyway, I've been playing with this, and it seems like a Roux-style start is quite a sensible way to solve the 4x4, possibly better than using pure reduction. Using Roux for the the finish obviously isn't suitable for speedsolving bigcubes because of the reliance on double M-slice moves. Instead the n00b Roux-Fridrich hybrid can be used for the finish. The steps would be:

(note: M-slice moves here really means stuff like rR' or lL')

Step 1: Solve LH + RH Centres

Step 2: Solve LH 1x3x4, and RH 1x3x3, and any pair in FR slot (normally a lucky pair)

Step 3: Finish Centres, using M/U

Step 4: Pair final 6 dedges, using M/U and FR slot where necessary.

Step 5: Finish F3L (solve the FR slot and place DF/DB)

Step 6: OLL/PLL

... milking the VC

Using this approach seems to have some pretty nice ergonomics and lookahead advantages because:

* There are no rotations.

* All dedges are paired in the M-slice, using M/U moves.

* Last four centres are solved in the M-slice, using M/U moves.

* The maximum possible number of dedges are solved at the beginning (before centres), when full freedom is available to pair them - good for efficiency and lookahead.

* Leaving the FR slot free gives an easily visible location for finding pairs, and allows enough freedom for easy edge pairing. The only hidden dedge locations are in the M-slice - good for lookahead.

Does anyone else use this kind of approach to solve 4x4, and/or what do you think about it?

 

[blade740]

Richard Meyer uses something like that, minus the pre-built 1x3x3 on the right hand side. He does the first block and centers like K4, then finishes reduction with rRU and ends with roux.

 

[irontwig]

You could try Akimoto's approach after F2B: D-centers, one D-dedge, centers, solve one D-edge, complete F3L while pairing one dedge on U, CLL, ELL.

 

[Cride5]

@irontwig, 4x4 ELL sounds like an interesting approach but I don't think I have the time/enthusiasm for 4x4 to learn 4x4 ELL algs - even if I did learn them I would probably end up forgetting them (as I have with some ZBLL's ).

@blade, a Roux finish is probably more move-efficient, can it be viable ergonomically. These double slice turns do put me off a little.

I had a look at the move counts involved in the method proposed above, and unfortunately it looks about 15 moves worse than Redux (pairing 6x edges at a time). I think the main reason for this is the edge pairing ... using Redux is really efficient in this phase because all edges can be paired with a few setup moves and ~6 centre slice turns. The main problem with Redux in my opinion is the lookahead. During the early stages a lot of time is spent rotating the cube around and searching for edge pieces all around the cube. I guess being more systematic with placement of completed edges could probably relieve this a bit though. The main question in my mind is whether better lookahead is worth 15 moves ...

... I tested the move counts of both redux and the method above myself .. up to F3L, I was getting ~95 with Redux and ~110 with the method above. Thread is also helpful as a point of reference for 4x4 move counts:
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3177

 

[vcuber13]

@irontwig, 4x4 ELL sounds like an interesting approach but I don't think I have the time/enthusiasm for 4x4 to learn 4x4 ELL algs - even if I did learn them I would probably end up forgetting them (as I have with some ZBLL's ).

4x4 ell isnt that hard once you get used to it, and most of it can be dont fast with comms

 

[somerandomkidmike]

People that want to use Roux with the 4x4 might as well just use Standler.

 

[Zaterlord]

Is there any tutorials on what to do after CLL?


Edit: and how can I do that on the 5x5x5?

 

[Cheese11]

I solve the first two centres, then do a 1x3x4 block on the left side. I then solve all the centres, and pair the remaining edges. After that, solve with roux.

 

[ben1996123]

lolbump

I do 1x3x4 block on L, x' z', U centre, z' x 1x3x4 block on L, CmLL, L4C, D edges, K4LL

 

[Benjamins]

People that want to use Roux with the 4x4 might as well just use Standler.

you mean Stadler ?

 

[mariano.aquino]

nice! commutators reduction ftw!

 

[danfresh666]

Rouxduction(meyer) edge pairing method help.

Hi, i average 2minutes using the Rouxduction method, i am fast in the centers and 1st block and 3x3x3 but i'm really slow on the edge pairing stage because i don't have any method for that or anything i just solve the edges 1 by 1. Anyone can post a video or a written tutorial or anything that can help me for the Rouxduction edge pairing? thanks in advance.

PS: i use Rw's to pair edges.

my breakdowns are:

1st 2 centers: 6 seconds
1st block: 18 sec
last 4 centers: 8 seconds
edge pairing: 1min 06 seconds
3x3x3: 21 seconds

Total: 1min 59sec.