• 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 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Should I learn CFOP, Roux or ZZ?

CX001

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
2
YouTube
channel/UCxz4E5Oso8M
I've been messing around with beginner's method for about a month now, and I want to get faster. I've heard of 3 major speedsolving methods while doing research: CFOP, ZZ, and Roux. I would like to know what would be the easiest to learn and I don't need to memorize that many algorithms. Thank you.
 

Llewelys

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
101
Location
France
I think it's easier to transition from LBL to CFOP in terms of understanding how the method works, so it would be the easiest to learn

Beginner Roux has fewer algorithms than beginner CFOP and intuition takes a bigger part than in CFOP

ZZ is CFOP with extra steps

You can try using each method for a week or two and see which one you like best

I don't know what cube you use but if you have a Rubiks brand I'd recommend you switch to a speedcube. It's even more important if you switch to Roux because of M moves
 

Aoden Teo

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
3
WCA
2019TOSH02
I would recommend that you learn Roux.

I personally use CFOP, but I would say that Roux is at least just as good. Additionally, Roux has fewer algorithms at all stages, for example, if you were to use two-look CMLL (a step in beginner Roux) that would be 9 algorithms, while CFOP 4 look last layer would be 12 algorithms (this might not be exact, depending on how you count it). Full CMLL (a step in advanced Roux) uses 42 algorithms, while full OLL and PLL in CFOP use 78 algorithms.

Overall, Roux has fewer algorithms and relies more on intuition, which is nice in that you don't need to memorize that many algorithms but can be quite offputting since you need to learn and understand significantly more advanced concepts like edge orientation, block building etc., which I do think would have been difficult for me to grasp as a beginner. Since you want a method with as few algorithms as possible, I think that Roux would be the correct choice. This is a link to a great tutorial by Kian Mansour, who is one of the best Roux solvers in the world.

If you find that you are having difficulties understanding stuff like block-building, EO, commutators for LSE, etc. when trying to learn Roux, then you might want to give CFOP a try. Although you would have to learn more algorithms, it certainly does not require you to understand any particularly difficult concepts, and as you progress, I think you'll find that learning algorithms becomes much easier.

ZZ probably isn't the correct choice, since nobody really fast actually uses it, and it requires way, way, way more algorithms to actually make it worth-while compared to CFOP and rotationless F2L won't do you that much good as a beginner.

Also, if you are using a Rubik's Brand, as Llewelys said, you should try to switch to a speedcube if possible. You'll find that many of them are suprisingly cheap, including the YuXin Little Magic 3x3 which is only $4.99, literally cheaper than a non-speedcube Rubik's Brand which is $10 on their official website store. You'll find that the difference is astonishing.

Best of luck to you.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 8, 2017
Messages
39
If you want to get faster, I think the best way to go is to learn Roux, because no matter what method you end up using eventually, you will use the skills and algorithms you learn from Roux.

Roux is also pretty fun, and if you stick to it you can be really fast. Case in point, Kian Mansour, who went straight from the beginner's method to Roux.

I wouldn't try ZZ until after you learn CFOP because ZZ's EO is kind of confusing and block building can be difficult, IMO.

Whichever way you go, I would recommend evaluating which method to use again once you average about 30 seconds.
 

TheKravCuber

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
27
Location
South Africa
WCA
2019MARA05
YouTube
TheKravCuber
If you're going for alg count, I'd go for Roux. If you're going for the base algs for the full method;
Roux uses 42 algs(all CMLL)

CFOP uses 78 algs(2-look LL, 57 OLLs 21 PLLs)

ZZ-b(I think this is the ZZ variation you are referring to) has 61 algs(40 COLLs, 21 PLLs)

Each of these methods have their ups and downs.

Advantages:
Roux- Low movecount
- Low alg count
- Doesn't need high TPS
- No rotations

CFOP- Easy transition from LBL
- Easyish lookahead allows for high TPS
- Loads of resources and guides

ZZ- After EO, there are no rotations and the rest of the solve is mainly 3-gen
- Teaches you a higher "understanding" of the cube
- Relatively low movecount


Any of these methods are viable options however, it is really good to have your 'fingers in many pies'. Knowing how each of these methods work is extremely beneficial. For example, if you go for CFOP, blockbuilding from Roux can help in the making of xcrosses.

Or you could just use Heise :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: pjk

PetrusQuber

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
542
Location
my house, cubing.
YouTube
N/A
Personally, I agree with llweyls. All of those methods have their advantages and disadvantages. You should try each one out to see which one suits your style the best. Plus, don't give up on anything that is hard.
Also, don't forget about Petrus.

Edit:there is an entire thread about choosing a method. Look up beginner's guide to choosing a speedsolving method.
 

xyzzy

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
1,612
ZZ-b(I think this is the ZZ variation you are referring to) has 61 algs(40 COLLs, 21 PLLs)
It's more like 42 COLL + 4 EPLL. The EPLL cases can all be solved like LSE (since EPLL is just a subset of LSE), and since you're not counting LSE as requiring algs, you shouldn't count them here either. Ergo, 42 algs, same as Roux. There's also OCLL + PLL which is only 7 + 21 = 28 algs and isn't much worse than COLL + EPLL.
 

Solvador Cubi

Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Messages
164
Location
USA
I agree with just about everything in the post above by Aoden Teo. It really includes every point I would make too. :)

An interesting part of it that I've never thought of was, would have it been difficult for me to learn Roux before I understood CFOP?
Perhaps, but I also now think that if i learned Roux first then CFOP I wouldn't have spent so much time trying to get better at CFOP.
e.g. the freedom Roux has to build blocks vs making CE pairs is so much nicer.

True that Edge Orientation can be tricky to understand at first, but so can F2L.

I also think Block Building can even start with think of it as 4 substeps or so with D-edges and CE pairs, to just get going.


-= Solvador Cubi
 

PetrusQuber

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
542
Location
my house, cubing.
YouTube
N/A
I agree with just about everything in the post above by Aoden Teo. It really includes every point I would make too. :)

An interesting part of it that I've never thought of was, would have it been difficult for me to learn Roux before I understood CFOP?
Perhaps, but I also now think that if i learned Roux first then CFOP I wouldn't have spent so much time trying to get better at CFOP.
e.g. the freedom Roux has to build blocks vs making CE pairs is so much nicer.

True that Edge Orientation can be tricky to understand at first, but so can F2L.
When I was finished with LBL, I decided to try CFOP and asked my brother for tips. He said'work it out yourself. You need to be able to do it on your own.', which didn't leave me with much motivation. I decided to try Petrus, and when I try CFOP now, boom. My times are only seconds away from my Petrus. Other methods, particularly blockbuilding ones, can help you to understand how things work and get better at another method. As for the CFOP, Roux thing, it depends on how you really learnt your F2L. Understanding cases in CFOP can help with Roux, I suppose.

Plus, I agree with you on EO. Once understood, it is really no harder than F2L. If you think about it, its like flipping pieces in between layers so your CFOP first cross won't end up unoriented, except there are extra pieces in the way.
 

Electrical

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2019
Messages
31
Location
Somewhere
I'd recommend CFOP because it is more popular and easier to transition from beginner's method, but Roux is also really good.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
981
Location
Over there by the thing in the corner.
YouTube
channel/UCPpeRSd2Rkjj3_NW4yGLXOg
ZZ is not a viable speedsolving method.
This is true if you use EOLine and hate algs. If you like algs, then ZZ (with EOCross) is still really good. If you don't like the idea of learning ZBLL, don't use ZZ. ZZ is a method for people who enjoy using large alg sets. If you're looking to be world-class ASAP, then use CFOP or Roux. Otherwise, just use the method you enjoy more, imo.

Edit: If you want to get into OH, CFOP can get you pretty fast, but Roux and ZZ (with EOLine. EOCross isn't great for OH) are better with move count and ergonomics. Roux is definitely the best for OH, though.
 
Last edited:

TheKravCuber

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
27
Location
South Africa
WCA
2019MARA05
YouTube
TheKravCuber
It's more like 42 COLL + 4 EPLL. The EPLL cases can all be solved like LSE (since EPLL is just a subset of LSE), and since you're not counting LSE as requiring algs, you shouldn't count them here either. Ergo, 42 algs, same as Roux. There's also OCLL + PLL which is only 7 + 21 = 28 algs and isn't much worse than COLL + EPLL.
Clearly I don't know as much about ZZ as I should :p

I'm sorry about the misinformation I spread, I based what I said off of a quick Google search :D
 

OreKehStrah

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
134
It's more like 42 COLL + 4 EPLL. The EPLL cases can all be solved like LSE (since EPLL is just a subset of LSE), and since you're not counting LSE as requiring algs, you shouldn't count them here either. Ergo, 42 algs, same as Roux. There's also OCLL + PLL which is only 7 + 21 = 28 algs and isn't much worse than COLL + EPLL.
No all 21 PLL is required. Sometimes you get an OLL skip so you would need at minimum 6 PLL to do a 2 look in that case.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
17
I would say to pick either CFOP or Roux. I think the most potential is in those two methods, not ZZ. At this point in time I think that CFOP and ROUX are relatively equal, but both still have a lot of room for development. No matter which one you choose, I think you should learn the full basic subsets(i.e. full OLL and PLL for CFOP, and full CMLL for Roux) I feel like a lot of people learn two-look OLL or CMLL and use that until they are sub-15 or other milestones. I really think learning the full subsets right off the bat pays off in the long run. When you get to sub-15 it means you can focus on other, more advanced techniques rather than finally getting started on Full OLL or Full CMLL. In addition to that, all the time spent getting to sub-15 is practice using the subset. I know it sound daunting to learn 42 or 78 algs but once you actually jump in and get started it's not that bad. Just start on it work on it till you're done. It doesn't matter how long it takes, I don't care if you're learn an alg a month, just work on it till it's done. And with that I wish you good luck and success on your cubing journey.


P.S. If you're having trouble learning algs I recommend these videos.


 
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
1,073
Location
Utah
WCA
2016BAIR01
CFOP for sure. Neither Roux nor CFOP have been proven to be superior to the other for 3x3 or OH but CFOP is most definitely better for big cubes.
 

AbsoRuud

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
795
Location
Lelystad, Flevoland, The Netherlands
WCA
2019POLL04
YouTube
absoruud
I'm very, very partial to Roux, but I'm going to recommend you learn CFOP first, then Roux and then ZZ. And after that, see which method makes you enjoy solving the most. I tried CFOP and Roux and I went with Roux. I tried ZZ, but it just doesn't click with me. So while CFOP is obviously the most popular and most researched method with the most resources available to lear, try out some other methods.

Also look into Petrus. It's not the fastest method, but it's interesting and it will teach you a lot.
 

Milo Black

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
72
WCA
2017BLAC06
YouTube
channel/UCoRu6ubMGc6
If you want to get faster, I think the best way to go is to learn Roux, because no matter what method you end up using eventually, you will use the skills and algorithms you learn from Roux.

Roux is also pretty fun, and if you stick to it you can be really fast. Case in point, Kian Mansour, who went straight from the beginner's method to Roux.

I wouldn't try ZZ until after you learn CFOP because ZZ's EO is kind of confusing and block building can be difficult, IMO.

Whichever way you go, I would recommend evaluating which method to use again once you average about 30 seconds.
have you tried roux on bis cubes? is sounds like the M moves on 5x5 and up would be harder because the slice layers are much heavier than on a 3x3.
 
Top