[Help Thread] Should I switch to Roux?

[shadowslice e]

You should stick with CFOP, it's better

There is just so much wrong here.

 

[Sajwo]

There is just so much wrong here.

CFOP is suitable for OH, WF and 4x4 - NxN. Progress is fast, look ahead is easy and you can learn countless number of extension and new techniques for improving your solves.
Roux is heavily based on intuition, so when stress enter the game, times are very unstable. Look ahead is unsettled because the DF and DB edges are not visible and there is small amount of additional techniques (if there are any..)

CFOP is universal method, I think it's worth to have few more moves in a solve to gain so much in a return

 

[shadowslice e]

CFOP is suitable for OH, WF and 4x4 - NxN. Progress is fast, look ahead is easy and you can learn countless number of extension and new techniques for improving your solves.
Roux is heavily based on intuition, so when stress enter the game, times are very unstable. Look ahead is unsettled because the DF and DB edges are not visible and there is small amount of additional techniques (if there are any..)

CFOP is universal method, I think it's worth to have few more moves in a solve to gain so much in a return

Roux is suitable for OH, FM, 4x4 and leads to better 2x2. Lookahead is not restricted in so I don't really get what you are saying there.

The additional techniques are within the block building itself as well as EO CMLL. Also when you have stress, CFOP does not necessarily fair better than Roux as F2L can be with more errors or not choosing as many good solutions.

And what on earth do you mean times are unstable? It's really no worse than CFOP there. My sd for Ao100 was ~0.57 on my last set.

You also have more transferable skills for Roux to CFOP. For example X-cross is easier to do and many CMLLs are essentially COLLs.

In addition, when doing intuitive, you don't have to pause as much to recognise anything as when you do when doing CFOP LL.

This is not to say that CFOP<Roux but rather that it is not categorically true that CFOP>Roux. The only situation I can think of where that is the case is for very big cubes (ie >5x5)

 

[Sajwo]

Roux is suitable for OH, FM, 4x4 and leads to better 2x2. Lookahead is not restricted in so I don't really get what you are saying there.

Can you even prove that Roux is better for OH than CFOP? Maybe there are techniques for doing M's, but let's be honest... it's not the best way. 4x4 and Roux? Maybe it could work, if Yau<Reduction

The additional techniques are within the block building itself as well as EO CMLL.

Not too much

And what on earth do you mean times are unstable? It's really no worse than CFOP there. My sd for Ao100 was ~0.57 on my last set.

Because stress and intuition doesn't go in pair.

You also have more transferable skills for Roux to CFOP. For example X-cross is easier to do and many CMLLs are essentially COLLs.

Then it's a good choice to practise Roux and switch to CFOP



I think that for only 3x3 Roux may be a little better than CFOP. But solving only 3x3 is boring.

 

[shadowslice e]

Can you even prove that Roux is better for OH than CFOP? Maybe there are techniques for doing M's, but let's be honest... it's not the best way. 4x4 and Roux? Maybe it could work, if Yau<Reduction

Did you even read the bottom of the post? I distinctly said that ROUX=CFOP not roux>CFOP.

Also, lower movecount can somewhat balance the supposed unwieldiness of M-slices for OH. I direct you to Guroux and Alex (and maybe PDF).

Not too much

Maybe because it doesn't need it. Alex had the second fastest average in the world with what was essentially "standard Roux"

Because stress and intuition doesn't go in pair.

Doesn't mean that the time are unstable. Hence why Alex has a far better average ranking than single ranking.

Also, CFOP users seem to have more unstable times in general from what I've seen. The Cross+1 is basically equivalent to FB so that's the same intuition and reacting to other F2L pairs is no better than SB.

Lastly, if intuition is such a big problem, why is it that Feliks seems to use FreeFOP in half of his solves (especially some of the faster ones)?

Then it's a good choice to practise Roux and switch to CFOP

If you want to be boring. Also, why would want to give up efficiency if you can have spent the time getting it?

I think that for only 3x3 Roux may be a little better than CFOP. But solving only 3x3 is boring.

yes only solving 3x3 is boring. Roux can give better help for centres than CFOP as the intuitive nature of them is good for Rouxers.

The blockbuilding can also help with megaminx and and similar puzzles.

 

[GuRoux]

Can you even prove that Roux is better for OH than CFOP? Maybe there are techniques for doing M's, but let's be honest... it's not the best way.

there's definitely a case for roux OH. there are no y rotation. usually you don't need x rotations. a couple of z rotations. fewer moves. cmll is better than coll. lse is 2 gen and should be the highest tps by far. it all comes down to how bad first block and second block. first block might be comparable to cross, second block definitely is not going to be as fast as 2 gen. i'm no expert in cfop OH, so i can't take a solid stance, but from what i can see, roux should be up there with cfop in OH.

 

[adimare]

With ZZ you'll only need 28 algs for a 2-look last layer, and a lot of what you've learned from CFOP will be applicable.

Just saying.

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

CFOP is suitable for OH, WF and 4x4 - NxN. Progress is fast, look ahead is easy and you can learn countless number of extension and new techniques for improving your solves.
Roux is heavily based on intuition, so when stress enter the game, times are very unstable. Look ahead is unsettled because the DF and DB edges are not visible and there is small amount of additional techniques (if there are any..)

CFOP is universal method, I think it's worth to have few more moves in a solve to gain so much in a return

roux works for OH and 4x4.

progress is dependent on practise time and how well you practise

roux lookahead is just as easy as CFOP, you can plan first block in inspection and then plan the first few moves of second block then F2B is a piece of cake.

sure, when stress/pressure enters the scene, intuition/lookahead/efficiency may get worse but pressure affects every method. CFOP last layer can get ugly where you're nervous. U U U2 U' U U2

additional techniques: CMLL influencing EO, VHLS, VLS, CLS, pseudoblocks, non-matching centres, abstract LSE styles (pure solving it, influencing LR, doing UF-UB, non matching centres)

 

[Sajwo]

roux works for OH and 4x4.

Sexy method also works. But it kinda sucks

 

[TDM]

Sexy method also works. But it kinda sucks

Roux doesn't suck in either of those events though. I also think Roux could be better than CFOP for OH - not entirely certain, but they're definitely very close (though neither beat ZZ).

But yeah, Yau>Meyer for 4x4, definitely.

 

[Berd]

With ZZ you'll only need 28 algs for a 2-look last layer, and a lot of what you've learned from CFOP will be applicable.

Just saying.

This. Zz is a very cool method.

 

[DeeDubb]

Don't switch to Roux because you want to be faster. Check out Roux and see if it's more fun. Roux and CFOP have both been shown to be effective methods used by world-class solvers. Pick the method that's the most fun, and go with it.

Now, if you want to get into big cubes, CFOP related methods are definitely more accessible. So if you really want to be good at big cubes as well, stick to CFOP. If you don't care about big cubes (like me), then Roux is totally fine.

Don't switch to get faster though. You're going to get faster by practicing whatever method you're already doing. Switching methods will set you back for quite a while.

 

[puzzl3add1ct]

Sexy method also works. But it kinda sucks

What's sexy method?

 

[shadowslice e]

Sexy method also works. But it kinda sucks

Well, if you wish to be closed minded and not listen to reason, then I can't change that. However, I do not envy the position you place yourself in.

What's sexy method?

It's a variant of a method called 8355. In it all the pieces are solved by essentially using conjugates (set up moves), sexys (R U R' U' in the most basic form) and intuition.

For a fuller description see here: https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Sexy_method

 

[LostGent]

Don't switch to Roux because you want to be faster. Check out Roux and see if it's more fun. Roux and CFOP have both been shown to be effective methods used by world-class solvers. Pick the method that's the most fun, and go with it.

This is probably the best advice here. I speedsolve with CFOP and have tried Roux for a while. I enjoy solving with Roux but the re-learning process took me so long I'm back to solving with CFOP. That said I do love Roux, I'm just not fast with it.

 

[1001010101001]

Ok, so I have about 21 second avg on CFOP and 45 sec on Roux. Switch or no switch??

 

[FireCuber]

No...I wouldn't if you are averaging about 21 on CFOP. I could be wrong, but that is just my opinion.

 

[TipsterTrickster]

I switched to roux when I was averaging 20 seconds, it’s up to you though

 

[CarterK]

It depends. Choose the method you like better. CFOP is more alg-heavy if that matters, but it's been explored more and there are a ton of resources on it.

 

[PenguinsDontFly]

Identify the method that you think is better and stick with that one. If you put the effort in, you could get your roux times equal to your CFOP within 1 month, so that shouldn't be a factor that discourages you from switching.