-
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!
Waffle's Roux Tutorial
- Thread starter waffle=ijm
- Start date
qqwref
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 7,834
- Location
- a <script> tag near you
- WCA
- 2006GOTT01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Ah, they changed how videos are linked in this forum a while back and these links still use the old format. Those are all youtube videos and you can see the links if you click the "reply with quote" button below the first post.
mafergut
Member
Excelent tutorial, at least for what I was looking for, which is CMLL, EO & LSE.
I am a CFOP solver but after reading many people talk about Roux (and ZZ, and Petrus...) I decided to take a look at the method. I watched the beginners videos by DeeDubb and I got interested but, of course, once you go past beginner stage, even a more intuitive method (comparing to CFOP) like Roux involves some hard alg learning.
As a CFOP solver I just know the 57 OLL cases and 21 PLLs (well, some additional algs for other PLL orientations, as well, but only a handful). What has turned me away from getting into more advanced stuff like ZBLL, etc is the sheer amount of algs needed.
And now, I see that, even for Roux I would need at least like 48 new algs (or 24 depending if you count mirrors or inverses or ...?) for CMLL and some others (okay, easy ones) for OE & LSE. So, yeah, this is what I was looking for but now I'm not sure I can hold another set of 48 algs without losing the other 80
So, is this what it takes to get within the 20-30 second realm with Roux? Or should I just start with a sort of 2-look CMLL using normal OLLs + J/L/T-perm + Y-perm even if not as efficient?
Sorry if the question does not belong here, take it as a rethorical question if it doesn't and I'll go to the Q&A forum to post it but I just wanted also to state my opinion about the tutorial in this thread and ended up asking a question without even knowing
I am a CFOP solver but after reading many people talk about Roux (and ZZ, and Petrus...) I decided to take a look at the method. I watched the beginners videos by DeeDubb and I got interested but, of course, once you go past beginner stage, even a more intuitive method (comparing to CFOP) like Roux involves some hard alg learning.
As a CFOP solver I just know the 57 OLL cases and 21 PLLs (well, some additional algs for other PLL orientations, as well, but only a handful). What has turned me away from getting into more advanced stuff like ZBLL, etc is the sheer amount of algs needed.
And now, I see that, even for Roux I would need at least like 48 new algs (or 24 depending if you count mirrors or inverses or ...?) for CMLL and some others (okay, easy ones) for OE & LSE. So, yeah, this is what I was looking for but now I'm not sure I can hold another set of 48 algs without losing the other 80
So, is this what it takes to get within the 20-30 second realm with Roux? Or should I just start with a sort of 2-look CMLL using normal OLLs + J/L/T-perm + Y-perm even if not as efficient?
Sorry if the question does not belong here, take it as a rethorical question if it doesn't and I'll go to the Q&A forum to post it but I just wanted also to state my opinion about the tutorial in this thread and ended up asking a question without even knowing
GuRoux
Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 1,712
- Location
- San Diego, California
- WCA
- 2014TANG03
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
Excelent tutorial, at least for what I was looking for, which is CMLL, EO & LSE.
I am a CFOP solver but after reading many people talk about Roux (and ZZ, and Petrus...) I decided to take a look at the method. I watched the beginners videos by DeeDubb and I got interested but, of course, once you go past beginner stage, even a more intuitive method (comparing to CFOP) like Roux involves some hard alg learning.
As a CFOP solver I just know the 57 OLL cases and 21 PLLs (well, some additional algs for other PLL orientations, as well, but only a handful). What has turned me away from getting into more advanced stuff like ZBLL, etc is the sheer amount of algs needed.
And now, I see that, even for Roux I would need at least like 48 new algs (or 24 depending if you count mirrors or inverses or ...?) for CMLL and some others (okay, easy ones) for OE & LSE. So, yeah, this is what I was looking for but now I'm not sure I can hold another set of 48 algs without losing the other 80
So, is this what it takes to get within the 20-30 second realm with Roux? Or should I just start with a sort of 2-look CMLL using normal OLLs + J/L/T-perm + Y-perm even if not as efficient?
Sorry if the question does not belong here, take it as a rethorical question if it doesn't and I'll go to the Q&A forum to post it but I just wanted also to state my opinion about the tutorial in this thread and ended up asking a question without even knowing
2 look is the norm for 20-30 second solvers. most of algs for two look are the same as the ones you mentioned but a few are easier. i'd just search up two look cmll and you will notice about 2 algs are completely different and other algs have minor difference. your choice if you want to change algs.
mafergut
Member
Yeah, I've seen that the algs in Waffle's tutorial for permutation in 2-look CMLL are not really J-perm or Y-perm but a bit shorter and don't care about M-slice but, as I already know them, even if they are a bit longer, I don't think I will be any slower with my already know T or J-perm and Y-perm so I think I'll start using those and let's see what happens next. Thanks for the answer. I have taken the question to the appropriate forum and I will ask more things there later if needed.
