[Help Thread] Should I switch to Roux?

[CuBeOrDiE]

yes.

well, i guess this thread is settled then.

 

[crazymanjimbo46]

Well I've seen Waffles averages and his are beast, that's pretty motivational.

 

[cincyaviation]

big green is beastier

 

[jms_gears1]

Noper-dee-doo-da

Roux does have potential to be a sub 10 average right?

wtf.... Have you never seen BigGreen?

Well Roux is block building so personally I would say get sub 25 at fridrich before attempting it...

but that's just me.

... why?

 

[crazymanjimbo46]

Sorry I didn't research, I was busy being a cube noob.

 

[jms_gears1]

and what waffle said...
Dont be stupid (notice im not calling you stupid dont be tooooo insulted...)
Try out the method, experiences are different from everybody, im much better with roux than with fridrich. But there are plenty of people that suck with roux. Its about practice.

Play with it for a while and then see if you liek it

 

[Edward]

If you are going to switch, remember that EO can be a b**** to learn, and that blockbulding isnt something you're going to pick up overnight.

 

[Litz]

no. if you're going to ask people instead of just trying it and seeing if you REALLY like like then don't bother with it.

unrelated: you are a roux user, aren't you?

yes.

well, i guess this thread is settled then.

Well I've seen Waffles averages and his are beast, that's pretty motivational.

Lol, see what happened here?

 

[BigGreen]

Roux does have potential to be a sub 10 average right?

This and This

Well I've seen Waffles averages and his are beast, that's pretty motivational.

I find this very offensive

 

[kunz]

its not about how fast you are, its about having fun.
If you like the Roux method better switch
if you dont then dont.

this

 

[jiggy]

its not about how fast you are, its about having fun.

this

What are you two talking about? Solving the Rubik's cube is not fun. It's an arduous and grueling (yes, I know those two words mean the same thing, that's how un-fun it is, goshdarnit) task, which we must ritualistically repeat with an extremely serious expression on our face.

If I find out anyone here is having fun, I shall be most unhappy.

Even more unhappy than when I'm solving my cube.

 

[jms_gears1]

its not about how fast you are, its about having fun.

this

What are you two talking about? Solving the Rubik's cube is not fun. It's an arduous and grueling (yes, I know those two words mean the same thing, that's how un-fun it is, goshdarnit) task, which we must ritualistically repeat with an extremely serious expression on our face.

If I find out anyone here is having fun, I shall be most unhappy.

Even more unhappy than when I'm solving my cube.

Im having fun ^^

 

[BigGreen]

What are you two talking about? Solving the Rubik's cube is not fun. It's an arduous and grueling (yes, I know those two words mean the same thing, that's how un-fun it is, goshdarnit) task, which we must ritualistically repeat with an extremely serious expression on our face.

If I find out anyone here is having fun, I shall be most unhappy.

Even more unhappy than when I'm solving my cube.

so when you get a new pb youre not happy?

 

[jiggy]

What are you two talking about? Solving the Rubik's cube is not fun. It's an arduous and grueling (yes, I know those two words mean the same thing, that's how un-fun it is, goshdarnit) task, which we must ritualistically repeat with an extremely serious expression on our face.

If I find out anyone here is having fun, I shall be most unhappy.

Even more unhappy than when I'm solving my cube.

so when you get a new pb youre not happy?

Ugh! I hate personal bests. Getting a new personal best is like getting my teeth drilled without anaesthetic. It's like "ahh, man I just made that personal best and now I've broken it? Of all the darnist luck!"

Don't even get me started on good averages!

 

[Athefre]

Yeah, it means you have to work even harder to improve upon it.

 

[riffz]

Personally I wouldn't because Fridrich has been demonstrated again and again to have a LOT of potential and is the leading method. Plus, you'll be taking a big step backward learning block building and different LL algorithms.

But as others have said, you may find it more fun to solve with.

 

[Edward]

Personally I wouldn't because Fridrich has been demonstrated again and again to have a LOT of potential and is the leading method. Plus, you'll be taking a big step backward learning block building and different LL algorithms.

But as others have said, you may find it more fun to solve with.

Roux has been demonstrated to be very fast.
Just because it's leading doesn't mean its the best for him/her.
Who cares? If its fun, just practice harder.

 

[jms_gears1]

Personally I wouldn't because Fridrich has been demonstrated again and again to have a LOT of potential and is the leading method. Plus, you'll be taking a big step backward learning block building and different LL algorithms.

But as others have said, you may find it more fun to solve with.

... if the majority opinion means they are right there would be no more jews.

 

[jiggy]

Personally I wouldn't because Fridrich has been demonstrated again and again to have a LOT of potential and is the leading method. Plus, you'll be taking a big step backward learning block building and different LL algorithms.

But as others have said, you may find it more fun to solve with.

... if the majority opinion means they are right there would be no more jews.

Godwin's law?

 

[miniGOINGS]

Roux does have potential to be a sub 10 average right?

No. It's impossible.

You should switch to L2L4.

I still have yet to find out what this is.