Caleb Valenzuela
Member
i agree. Roux is pretty much optimized to the max but i’m not sure why it’s improvement in results has slowed down. Maybe it’s because SPV (sean patrick villanueva) hasn’t been going to competitions lately and he was like the main pioneer of Roux. If higher level Roux users were more abundant then it would have probably broke the sub-5 barrier by now.Honestly, I think more roux-like methods are ideal; less algorithms, more cuber intuition involved.
A lot of these new methods are fancy block building, some arbitrary middle step with poor recognition, and ZBLL, and it's a little exhausting seeing that same formula come up over and over again. Most top solvers already use F2L systems that are essentially abstractions of pure Cross and F2L with advanced pseudoslotting and cleverly setting up pairs. I dont think a lot of cubers would switch to a method that slows that down for some arbitrary alg step and then get to ZBLL either way.
If we want another shocker method, we need another roux-like system out there, because if its gonna be another alg heavy method, it might as well just be transposed into the EO-F2L complex.
The closest method to Roux that comes to mind is APB. It’s efficient but heavily alg reliant to get to a high level. However, it has less algs than ZBLL and recognition times for LXS are decent. If any method has a chance at getting world-class i think it would be APB.