Roux Variations

[deco122392]

Why not just practice in general? youll pick up things on your own. the standard roux method is already proven to be fast. and once you think youv reached a plateau with the standard version then look for addons and such.

 

[waffle=ijm]

blocks is most time consuming. if you and I were fridrich users, blocks would be the cross and F2L(most time consuming) and you should practice more of that instead of OLL and PLL.

bottom line, we're not fridrich users and you should practice blocks since I can get sub-20 avgs using only 2 look corners. and i'm sure you can too

 

[deco122392]

blocks is most time consuming. if you and I were fridrich users, blocks would be the cross and F2L(most time consuming) and you should practice more of that instead of OLL and PLL.

bottom line, we're not fridrich users and you should practice blocks since I can get sub-20 avgs using only 2 look corners. and i'm sure you can too

I was going to say that lol

 

[miniGOINGS]

blocks is most time consuming. if you and I were fridrich users, blocks would be the cross and F2L(most time consuming) and you should practice more of that instead of OLL and PLL.

bottom line, we're not fridrich users and you should practice blocks since I can get sub-20 avgs using only 2 look corners. and i'm sure you can too

ok, thanks for your help, but im just thinking, shouldnt i get my corners and edges as fast as i can first, before working on blocks? like wouldnt the last half show the most time improvement?

 

[waffle=ijm]

Let me use this again, if you and I were fridrich users, and you can do the LL in 4 seconds and I can do the LL in say, 7 seconds would that make you instantly faster despite your f2l times? If your cross and f2l takes, 20-21 (like your current blocks) and my cross and f2l took 10 (like my current blocks), you would still be slower. again, in fridrich, f2l takes the most time and the LL is just a fraction of that.

and once more, we are not fridrich users, and blocks take longer to make and take the most time and should be given more attention to

also. it took a year to get sub-20 with roux and it all because of my blocks. I knew a lot of CMLLs and the rest was a breeze but my blocks killed my solves

 

[miniGOINGS]

sorry, im not being very clear. let me reiterate; wouldnt it be easier for me to lose 3 seconds on the corners and edges than losing 3 seconds on the blocks?

 

[deco122392]

sorry, im not being very clear. let me reiterate; wouldnt it be easier for me to lose 3 seconds on the corners and edges than losing 3 seconds on the blocks?

nope (= youd think that tho wouldnt you? (it becomes true after a while but your at a place were you can improve with the rite mindset.)

 

[waffle=ijm]

sorry, im not being very clear. let me reiderate; wouldnt it be easier for me to lose 3 seconds on the corners and edges than losing 3 seconds on the blocks?

using that logic, learn all the CMLLs and you're guaranteed to get sub-20

of course, its easier to lose 3 on corners instead of 3 on blocks. but you're not aiming for losing 3 on blocks. you're looking at losing about 12 for blocks. say you're averaging 35. wouldn't it be nice to have 23 because you worked on the blocks instead of having 32 because you worked on the corners.

I'm saying that it is easier but if you put more time into blocks its a better investment of your time.

 

[miniGOINGS]

hey waffle, look at my new times im almost completely sub 40, my last 2 solves in my average of 12 was 51.03 and 55.06, if it wasnt for those 2 i would be sub 40

EDIT: yay, sub 30 at last!!!

 

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

This may not be contributing to the topic to much. But in roux, if you haven't noticed, after you finish building the 2 blocks , if you correct the centers and fill the bottom 2 edges you finish the first 2 layers and could solve the final 4 edges [and corners] with a Fridrich algorithm and permutate them also with a Fridrich algorithm. So in that sense you could use the Roux block building and then finish the cube with Fridrich.

 

[miniGOINGS]

This may not be contributing to the topic to much. But in roux, if you haven't noticed, after you finish building the 2 blocks , if you correct the centers and fill the bottom 2 edges you finish the first 2 layers and could solve the final 4 edges [and corners] with a Fridrich algorithm and permutate them also with a Fridrich algorithm. So in that sense you could use the Roux block building and then finish the cube with Fridrich.

ok well lets say they are oriented you could solve DF and DB the use pll.but this seems pretty move count inefficient and would ruin the feel that the roux last step offers.
IF we assume that the l6e are not oriented then you could solve DF and DB and use ell and some on the fly commutators to finish that.
theres two ideas. but i like the aproach that roux usually has orient solve UL and UR then solve m slice

it looks like we have noticed...

 

[xXdaveXsuperstarXx]

Hehe.......










(too short)

 

[deco122392]

This may not be contributing to the topic to much. But in roux, if you haven't noticed, after you finish building the 2 blocks , if you correct the centers and fill the bottom 2 edges you finish the first 2 layers and could solve the final 4 edges [and corners] with a Fridrich algorithm and permutate them also with a Fridrich algorithm. So in that sense you could use the Roux block building and then finish the cube with Fridrich.

ok well lets say they are oriented you could solve DF and DB the use pll.but this seems pretty move count inefficient and would ruin the feel that the roux last step offers.
IF we assume that the l6e are not oriented then you could solve DF and DB and use ell and some on the fly commutators to finish that.
theres two ideas. but i like the aproach that roux usually has orient solve UL and UR then solve m slice

it looks like we have noticed...

Scence im in a good mood ,due to the fact that my V-Cubes a scheduled to arrive tomorrow, let me show a critical flaw in the variant i mentioned by comparison.

Noticed how i didn't mention to correct the centers?

 

[waffle=ijm]

This may not be contributing to the topic to much. But in roux, if you haven't noticed, after you finish building the 2 blocks , if you correct the centers and fill the bottom 2 edges you finish the first 2 layers and could solve the final 4 edges [and corners] with a Fridrich algorithm and permutate them also with a Fridrich algorithm. So in that sense you could use the Roux block building and then finish the cube with Fridrich.

ok well lets say they are oriented you could solve DF and DB the use pll.but this seems pretty move count inefficient and would ruin the feel that the roux last step offers.
IF we assume that the l6e are not oriented then you could solve DF and DB and use ell and some on the fly commutators to finish that.
theres two ideas. but i like the aproach that roux usually has orient solve UL and UR then solve m slice

it looks like we have noticed...

Scence im in a good mood ,due to the fact that my V-Cubes a scheduled to arrive tomorrow, let me show a critical flaw in the variant i mentioned by comparison.

Noticed how i didn't mention to correct the centers?

unfortunately, there has been a thread that discusses this variant if you can dig it up from the grave.

Most, including me, think it's a horrible idea that defeats the purpose of Roux.

 

[miniGOINGS]

unfortunately, there has been a thread that discusses this variant if you can dig it up from the grave.

Most, including me, think it's a horrible idea that defeats the purpose of Roux.

correct me if im wrong but in a typical roux solve it goes as follows:

1. First Block
2. Second Block
3. Corner Orientation
4. Corner Permutation
5. Edge Orientation
6. Double Edge Permutation
7. Quadruple Edge Permution

most fast roux solvers combine steps 3 and 4, combining steps 1 and 2 would be almost pointless because theyre intuitive steps (i just used the words double and quadruple cause the sound better than 2 and 4)

what if we found algs to combine:
4 + 5
5 + 6
6 + 7
4 + 5 + 6
5 + 6 + 7
4 + 5 + 6 + 7

what do you think?

 

[brunson]

Using ZB as an example for why it won't work: You can derive the algs, it's the recognition that's the killer.

 

[miniGOINGS]

Using ZB as an example for why it won't work: You can derive the algs, it's the recognition that's the killer.

yea, i guess the memo and recongnition of all of those algs isnt going to work..

EDIT: with 6 edges, and 2 of them giving its 6*5*4*3=360
if we put one edge in place, at DB, recognition wouldnt be that bad and it would only be 5*4*3=60, thats not to many algs right?

 

[miniGOINGS]

Bump. After timing myself doing various stages of a Roux solve I have broken it down into:

First Block........5-10
Second Block....10
Corners...........5-10
Edges..............5-10

Total..............25-40