TheSlykrCubr
Veteran
damn thats not a lot of viable cases. thought there'd be more
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Those are the ones that are 100% worth learning thus OO(Objectively Optimal)damn thats not a lot of viable cases. thought there'd be more
The thing I find when using that combo is, when I can find a good square, but the last edge for the 2x2x2 is in a bad position, I can just go into a Roux solve, and if I get a good first square, but bad finish for FB, I can just go into a 2x2x2.I dont really think so,
Both methods have similar "good" scambles which means there's less of an advantage,
also the methods are not as similar as you think because the way of blockbuilding is completely different,and petrus LL v. L10P
i personally think the best combo
is petrus-ZZ
because if you don;t see an obvious block you can just do a ZZ solve instead, which isn't dependent on the same factors.
CFOP should still belong in the big 4 (you forgot Petrus D:<) because of how bad EOCross is and how simple CFOP is to pick up, it doesn't require much experience or much advanced stuff to get fast.I think that ZZ and Roux are the big 2 and CFOP is just bad heres why:
Move Count: ZZ > CFOP
Ergonomics
- Moveset: ZZ = CFOP
- Cube Rotations: ZZ > CFOP
- Regrips: ZZ = CFOP
Look Ahead: ZZ > CFOP
yes petrus and CFOP is still in the big 4 but i think ZZ and roux are better than CFOP and petrus.CFOP should still belong in the big 4 (you forgot Petrus D:<) because of how bad EOCross is and how simple CFOP is to pick up, it doesn't require much experience or much advanced stuff to get fast.
Honestly, Petrus should be equal to ZZ and Roux. Petrus is mostly RUF for 223, then EO is algorithmic RULFyM then RU for RB and LL. Also very efficient.yes petrus and CFOP is still in the big 4 but i think ZZ and roux are better than CFOP and petrus.
yeah maybe cuz it has a low move count and also used EO.Honestly, Petrus should be equal to ZZ and Roux. Petrus is mostly RUF for 223, then EO is algorithmic RULFyM then RU for RB and LL. Also very efficient.
CFOP is worse than the other 3, but not enough to matter. All 4 of the big 4 methods are good, and while one might be better than the other, the difference is quite insignificant.yeah maybe cuz it has a low move count and also used EO.
btw what do you think about CFOP
We all know the best method is Rouxduced.people talking about big 4 not realizing that the big 1 with only roux is OO
-Moveset: ZZ < CFOPI think that ZZ and Roux are the big 2 and CFOP is just bad heres why:
Move Count: ZZ > CFOP
Ergonomics
- Moveset: ZZ = CFOP
- Cube Rotations: ZZ > CFOP
- Regrips: ZZ = CFOP
Look Ahead: ZZ > CFOP
which would you recommendThey're pretty much equal.
Learn TUL ZBLL instead then do OCLL/PLL or COLL/EPLL for the rest of them.
Ideally you'd learn H and Pi 2GLL and diag too, but TUL is a relatively low alg option.