Cubing Forever
Member
Oh well somebody here doesn't know that I'm a Mehta user and that I have a whole progression thread called "Quest to sub 15 Mehta".
-
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!
which method should I use?
- Thread starter hellocubers
- Start date
LukasCubes
Member
I am no where near full zbll and zbls and i still need 8 more ell to learn full ell and i do know full cll. I already learned 4 algs today planing for more.
hellocubers
Member
I guess Roux. LSE I just don't understand.
ruffleduck
Member
I suggest you watch Kian Mansour's tutorial.
hellocubers
Member
Ok.
I did but I still don't understand.
Nevermind i do.
I did but I still don't understand.
Nevermind i do.
LBr
Member
CFCE is fewer algs than cfop and is 54 moves, and although m moves are slower for ELL, it is a good method
Flow 3x3
Member
Definitivamente CFOP por que es uno de los metodos mas completos y rapidos del SpeedCubing , ten en cuenta que tambien tienes que ejecutarlo con rapidez y tambien tiene importancia tu Look Ahead
Swagrid
Member
Learn all three and use whichever you enjoy most.
OreKehStrah
Member
CFCE is really underrated. ELL is faster than PLL on average and CP recog for CLL isn’t hard
hellocubers
Member
well i'll learn roux first then maybe cfop.
abunickabhi
Member
hellocubers
Member
Alright.
LukasCubes
Member
I'm method neutral with CFOP, CFCE, Russo, ZB, and Waterman (yes Waterman)
Humble Cuber
Member
Well not necessarily, it’s one of the fastest and more developed methods, that doesn’t mean they should definitely use it as a main method, Roux is another method that is and can be very fast to use, and it is developed a good amount as well. It would be much more beneficial I believe to try out each new method and find out which one is better rather than just saying that cfop is essentially OO
Translation for; @Flow 3x3 : Bueno, no necesariamente, es uno de los métodos más rápidos y desarrollados, eso no significa que definitivamente deban usarlo como método principal, Roux es otro método que es y puede ser muy rápido de usar, y está muy desarrollado. también. Creo que sería mucho más beneficioso probar cada nuevo método y descubrir cuál es mejor en lugar de simplemente decir que cfop es esencialmente OO
Last edited:
PiKeeper
Member
I would say that cfop, roux, and zz are equally good. Nautilus is at least close if not on the same level, and mehta, petrus, hk, etc are probably a little worse but still really good. Just try them out and see what you have the most fun with.
Brouxt Force
Member
If you want to get to world record speeds, you shouldn't try to be method neutral. However, you should definitely learn more than one method, so you know which one you like best.
Waffles
Member
Agreeing with what they said, I think this would be my list on what methods are good:
CFOP
Roux
ZZ
Mehta
(Decent gap)
Nautilus
Petrus
LEOR
Waterman
I don’t have as much experience with some methods, so if you’re wondering why “MY METHOD IS SO LOW THIS GUY SUCKS HAHA” I may not have tried it to its full extent.
Roux
ZZ
Mehta
(Decent gap)
Nautilus
Petrus
LEOR
Waterman
I don’t have as much experience with some methods, so if you’re wondering why “MY METHOD IS SO LOW THIS GUY SUCKS HAHA” I may not have tried it to its full extent.
abunickabhi
Member
Yes, learning more methods is only meant for creativity, and not just gaining pure speed.
Nmile7300
Member
Try lots of methods and see which one(s) you have the most fun using. If you are like most people, you probably won't become world class. So the goal of cubing should be to have fun.
