• 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!

The ZZVolution.

What do you think is the superior method?


  • Total voters
    131

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
858
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
To add to the ZZ vs CFOP discussion:

Of course ZZ has better look-ahead (for the reason that was mentioned), and the moveset itself can't be worse than CFOP, but I want to point out that non-EO F2L cases are often really great if you know what you're doing and you get a lot more freedom (cause you don't have to preserve EO), so I'd argue that CFOP F2L (from cross to LL) is better than ZZ F2L (let's say from EOcross to LL).
And yes, being a CFOP user is sufficient to make this judgement because the ZZ F2L cases are a subset of the CFOP F2L cases so I know all of them.
 

ObscureCuber

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
661
Location
Somewhere i guesss
YouTube
Visit Channel
The reason I don't think it has better lookahead is because you are solving less total pieces at the beginning than CFOP which means you have more blind spots and more places you need to look for pieces.
I would put lookahead at = not worse imo,
since you inspect to less but possible cases are simplified and no rotating
From my personal experience this seems to be the case(I lookahead to cross+1((tracking not planning))) and when i lookahead to EOcross
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
858
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
The reason I don't think it has better lookahead is because you are solving less total pieces at the beginning than CFOP which means you have more blind spots and more places you need to look for pieces.
I get what you're saying, in fact I find it quite difficult to compare for example an xcross done in BL to an EOcross without a slot done.
Of course an xcross gives better look-ahead than a regular cross, but an EOcross does the same thing, just a bit more subtly.
We can think of solving EO as solving "half the information" the edges hold, in a way, so a naive measure would be xcross equates to 3 stickers solved, EOcross equates to 6 stickers solved, additionally (of course not the ultimate metric).
 

ObscureCuber

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
661
Location
Somewhere i guesss
YouTube
Visit Channel
moveset is worse but i dont know if ZZ has more regrips,
Try this
Do R U R' L' U L, Left sexy right sexy From home grip
For both of these(and alot of others) you dont leave Homegrip
The only finger that really needs to "rigrip" in most situations is your U hand
If you were talking about R2 L2 stuff ya but that barely ever happens in EOcross.
Im not saying R U L is not bad im saying it doesnt have more regrips(or atleast not MUCH more)
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
858
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
moveset is worse but i dont know if ZZ has more regrips,
Try this
Do R U R' L' U L, Left sexy right sexy From home grip
For both of these(and alot of others) you dont leave Homegrip
The only finger that really needs to "rigrip" in most situations is your U hand
If you were talking about R2 L2 stuff ya but that barely ever happens in EOcross.
Im not saying R U L is not bad im saying it doesnt have more regrips(or atleast not MUCH more)
That's one of the reasons EOcross is considered to be the better ZZ variant (at least for 2H) these days. It takes away a lot of the regrips you'd have with blockbuilding ZZ. There might still be some regrips, but CFOP has some regrips too because you might get 1-2 rotations in a solve.
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
896
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
To add to the ZZ vs CFOP discussion:

Of course ZZ has better look-ahead (for the reason that was mentioned), and the moveset itself can't be worse than CFOP, but I want to point out that non-EO F2L cases are often really great if you know what you're doing and you get a lot more freedom (cause you don't have to preserve EO), so I'd argue that CFOP F2L (from cross to LL) is better than ZZ F2L (let's say from EOcross to LL).
And yes, being a CFOP user is sufficient to make this judgement because the ZZ F2L cases are a subset of the CFOP F2L cases so I know all of them.
I agree that non EO cases can be great, but they can also be terrible. For example, edge flipped in slot, corner solved is worse than any ZZ case. So to say that because a couple of flipped edge cases are good all the cases are good isn't the best logic. Instead, we can pick the best set of cases on average (EO solved) and have them.
 

sqAree

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
858
Location
Berlin
WCA
2015JAEH01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I agree that non EO cases can be great, but they can also be terrible. For example, edge flipped in slot, corner solved is worse than any ZZ case. So to say that because a couple of flipped edge cases are good all the cases are good isn't the best logic. Instead, we can pick the best set of cases on average (EO solved) and have them.
I didn't say that, we'd just have to average all the cases and compare. But there might be more great flip cases than you think.
 

RiceMan_

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
213
Location
paddy field
-Moveset: ZZ < CFOP
-Movecount: ZZ > CFOP (with full ZBLL)
-Cube rotations: ZZ > CFOP
-Regrips: ZZ < CFOP
-Lookahead: ZZ < CFOP
you know that EOCross is a thing right, if you use EOCross ZZ is superior, and how idk why moveset would be superior with CFOP its should be equal or maybe ZZ would be superior cuz it you dont use F or F' during F2L
 
Last edited:

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
896
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
You have to do a significant grip shift.
Let's say you do. Well guess what? You do in CFOP too. Any criticism of ZZ against CFOP can't be used in the F2L department except for maybe a couple of edge flipped cases being nice (such as sledge insert), but even then there are many not nice edge flipped cases. You have to instead prove that EOCross+pair+ZBLL is worse than XCross+OLL/PLL by a significant enough margin to make up for the faster ZZ F2L, unless you want to contend that somehow ZZ F2L is worse than CFOP's.
 

RiceMan_

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
213
Location
paddy field
you know that EOCross is a thing right, if you use EOCross ZZ is superior, and how idk why moveset would be superior with CFOP its should be equal.
The reason I don't think it has better lookahead is because you are solving less total pieces at the beginning than CFOP which means you have more blind spots and more places you need to look for pieces.
Idk if you've ever heard of a thing called EOCross
 
Top