• 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 40,000+ people from around the world today!

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

The method debate thread

yes, in eo you make additional moves to solve 0 additional pieces, but instead don't have to rotate. you could invest that time into extending to xcross.
You can solve pieces at the same time...it's not just about the rotations. It halves the cases. Improves look ahead and deduction. It also can let you spam tps like crazy. No you don't understand lol
 
You can solve pieces at the same time...it's not just about the rotations. It halves the cases. Improves look ahead and deduction. It also can let you spam tps like crazy. No you don't understand lol

you don't understand.what else should i expect from person whose nickname starts with zz. do you have better look ahead than max park? or do you spam tps like ruihang? eoline, eocross etc take extra moves to orient the edges. those moves could be used to solve additional pieces at the cost of rotations.
 
you don't understand.what else should i expect from person whose nickname starts with zz. do you have better look ahead than max park? or do you spam tps like ruihang? eoline, eocross etc take extra moves to orient the edges. those moves could be used to solve additional pieces at the cost of rotations.
Do you have to be the best in the world for a method to work well for you? No, of course not. It's stupid to say because Max uses CFOP and has better look ahead then you, zz must be not worth it for lookahead. Sure, EOcross takes 3-4 more moves, but there is no reason to say those extra few moves can't be beneficial and made up during rotationless F2L and LL.
 
Do you have to be the best in the world for a method to work well for you? No, of course not. It's stupid to say because Max uses CFOP and has better look ahead then you, zz must be not worth it for lookahead. Sure, EOcross takes 3-4 more moves, but there is no reason to say those extra few moves can't be beneficial and made up during rotationless F2L and LL.

i agree. but 3x3 is short event where 3-4 moves is already a lot. in 4x4 and 5x5 you can make such sacrifices with yau and it will be beneficial every time.
 
you don't understand.what else should i expect from person whose nickname starts with zz. do you have better look ahead than max park? or do you spam tps like ruihang? eoline, eocross etc take extra moves to orient the edges. those moves could be used to solve additional pieces at the cost of rotations.
And in CFOP you use those same moves to Orient the Edges during OLL. Or you really use ZB and use those moves to orient edges during ZBLS. Or you use Roux and Orient Edges during 4a. Or you could orient Edges during EO in Petrus.
Face it, you orient Edges in every popular method. If you want an objective view on it, doing it at the beginning of the solve it actually more efficient because of the freedom you can get 2-3 move EO Cases pretty often. The shortest OLL is 6 moves and you get that rarely. Or Sledge, the shortest ZBLS at 4 moves, you can force it MOST of the time, if you do Edge Control during 3rd slot, again adding moves.
So 70% of CFOP development that I've seen the last 10 years is about reducing rotations during F2L. But now you come along and tell us that no, rotations are good, as long as you don't do a little move at the start of your solve.
If you ask if I'm as fast as Ruihang, no. Not since the accident I have not been able to regain fast fingers. Doesn't stop me from knowing that a baseless claim is just stupid and you made one.

On another note, I've looked at your profile yesterday and every post except maybe two is completely idiotic. Why are you actively trying to troll?
 
And in CFOP you use those same moves to Orient the Edges during OLL. Or you really use ZB and use those moves to orient edges during ZBLS. Or you use Roux and Orient Edges during 4a. Or you could orient Edges during EO in Petrus.
Face it, you orient Edges in every popular method. If you want an objective view on it, doing it at the beginning of the solve it actually more efficient because of the freedom you can get 2-3 move EO Cases pretty often. The shortest OLL is 6 moves and you get that rarely. Or Sledge, the shortest ZBLS at 4 moves, you can force it MOST of the time, if you do Edge Control during 3rd slot, again adding moves.
So 70% of CFOP development that I've seen the last 10 years is about reducing rotations during F2L. But now you come along and tell us that no, rotations are good, as long as you don't do a little move at the start of your solve.
If you ask if I'm as fast as Ruihang, no. Not since the accident I have not been able to regain fast fingers. Doesn't stop me from knowing that a baseless claim is just stupid and you made one.

On another note, I've looked at your profile yesterday and every post except maybe two is completely idiotic. Why are you actively trying to troll?

funny how you think I am the troll here, when it's you trying to convince the whole world that zz is equally as fast as cfop. just watch the video of almighty Jayden McNeill.
 
funny how you think I am the troll here, when it's you trying to convince the whole world that zz is equally as fast as cfop. just watch the video of almighty Jayden McNeill.
Go get your own opinion not someone else's

roux also has low movecount but is equally bad as zz. the strenght of cfop is not within movecount but other aspects
Roux is great 👍
 
Just a little tip, short closed ended messages like this leave no room to continue or to run more circles so if you want to continue trolling on the forums then avoid these.

my point is zz is bad no matter the circumstances. as a method enthusiast and theoretist you should be aware of that. i don't know why we are arguing here about the obvious. it was well agreed inside community a few years ago that zz must exit big3
 
my point is zz is bad no matter the circumstances. as a method enthusiast and theoretist you should be aware of that. i don't know why we are arguing here about the obvious. it was well agreed inside community a few years ago that zz must exit big3
Tell me more about what happened in the cubing community a few years ago 1 week member.
 
Back
Top