• 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!

[Member Intro] ZZ is the future

Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
952
Likes
462
Location
Over there by the thing in the corner.
YouTube
channel/UCPpeRSd2Rkjj3_NW4yGLXOg
#2
I currently average 14s with zz but i aim to be sub ten be end of year. Cfop has had it's due time, it's time for a superior method.
I use ZZ too, but you might want to provide an actual argument in a statement like this. All this post is going to do is create a pointless debate, tbh.
Welcome to the forum, though!
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
4
Likes
5
Thread starter #4
I use ZZ too, but you might want to provide an actual argument in a statement like this. All this post is going to do is create a pointless debate, tbh.
Welcome to the forum, though!
You are right sorry! Zz has the pros of high tps due to no f turns, effecient solves utilizing block building and the ability to have crazy skips or fast last layers because of alg sets like coll, winter variation, and ct algs. Roux is another excellent method that shares the lake of f turns and block building effeciency.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
952
Likes
462
Location
Over there by the thing in the corner.
YouTube
channel/UCPpeRSd2Rkjj3_NW4yGLXOg
#5
You are right sorry! Zz has the pros of high tps due to no f turns, effecient solves utilizing block building and the ability to have crazy skips or fast last layers because of alg sets like coll, winter variation, and ct algs. Roux is another excellent method that shares the lake of f turns and block building effeciency.
I agree that it has great TPS and LL, but if you're using EOLine and block building, you're not getting that TPS. EOCross has been found to be significantly better. It is harder to plan, but gives better TPS and look ahead for F2L. It's a few moves more, but the benefits out weigh that. Also, CT sucks. The best LL you can use is ZBLL, which should be assumed when talking about how good ZZ is.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
274
Likes
157
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
PapaSmurf Cubes
#7
Here is a comprehensive list of advantages and disadvantages (I am talking about EOCross with ZBLL, as it is probably the best for TH solving):
1. RULD is very ergnomic, with the only double turns being U2s or in specific cases when L2s and R2s are clearly better, just as in CFOP.
2. Rotationless.
3. 1LLL every time.
4. Great lookahead due to EO being solved and non changing blind spots.
5. A lot of tricks during F2L.
6. The average solve is around 52 moves, which is 7 less than CFOP for someone who is good at XCross.
7. High tps due to the great ergonomics.
8. Half the F2L cases and a highly algorithmic/automatic F2L in general.
9. Fewer looks than CFOP: 1 for EOCross, 0.5 for each F2L pair, 1 for ZBLL which is 4 in total, compared to 1 for XCross, 0.5 for each pair, 1 for OLL, one for PLL which is 4.5.
1. 6 blind spots that never change (until you solve them).
2. A 493 algorithm set is difficult to maintain with good tps.
3. Harder recognition for ZBLL than for OLL and PLL and CMLL.
1. More tricks than CFOP (it's about the same in F2L and less for LL).
2. As efficient as Roux (doesn't apply to EOCross).
3. Luckier than CFOP and Roux (while true, it's still the exception and shouldn't be used).
1. Lots of regrips (solved with EOCross).
2. L moves are slow (just get better).
3. 493 algorithms is just too much for any viable method (Jabari and others).

So, I hope that helps. In comparison to CFOP, it seems to be more efficient with equal (maybe better) ergonomics, and the recog time for ZBLL is less than or equal to that of OLL+PLL. Just maintain those ZBLLs and get good F2L efficiency and TPS. Then you're good.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 4, 2019
Messages
70
Likes
14
#9
I currently average 14s with zz but i aim to be sub ten be end of year. Cfop has had it's due time, it's time for a superior method.
I agree but it is not going to be pure zz. Maybe a variation. Eo line is a somewhat bad step, and causes weird f2l step. Maybe if someone used zz concepts mixed with others, it could create a good method.(ZZ cross into zz-ct)
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2019
Messages
70
Likes
14
#12
Agree with cross, but highly disagree with CT. CT was overhyped. It's not terrible, but it's nowhere near as good as ZBLL. It may be slightly better than COLL/EPLL, but it's not worth learning.
I can agree with that. But zbll with zz is not necessarily better than cfop for a few reasons:
  • With zz cross the method gets better but zbll takes approximately 2.2 seconds with recognition(For someone who is incredibly fast) which is hardly better than coll(which is not necessarily better than ocll+pll) and epll(which is somewhat but only slightly better than pll). ocll+epll is ok.
  • Also not all the cases are very good. Jayden McNeill knows almost a thousand algs says that full coll is not worth keeping in your. Same goes for ollcp and zbll. Not to mention that sune cases are generally crap
Because of all this, to become fast as zz, you sould spend more time learning winter variation, coll, useful zbll, and other algs.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
952
Likes
462
Location
Over there by the thing in the corner.
YouTube
channel/UCPpeRSd2Rkjj3_NW4yGLXOg
#13
I can agree with that. But zbll with zz is not necessarily better than cfop for a few reasons:
  • With zz cross the method gets better but zbll takes approximately 2.2 seconds with recognition(For someone who is incredibly fast) which is hardly better than coll(which is not necessarily better than ocll+pll) and epll(which is somewhat but only slightly better than pll). ocll+epll is ok.
  • Also not all the cases are very good. Jayden McNeill knows almost a thousand algs says that full coll is not worth keeping in your. Same goes for ollcp and zbll. Not to mention that sune cases are generally crap
Because of all this, to become fast as zz, you sould spend more time learning winter variation, coll, useful zbll, and other algs.
Those points work... For CFOP. With ZZ, since you'll be using ZBLL in virtually every solve, TPS and recog can become a lot better than for a CFOP user. Jay's option select thing is great for CFOP, not as much for ZZ. I agree that sometimes WV+PLL is better, but only every once in a while if you get a good WV and PLL. This is a discussion that should probably continue in a different thread, btw. Also, if you want an invite to the ZZ Discord to talk more, I can DM you.
 
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
790
Likes
48
Location
Germany
WCA
2012KALH01
#14
I can agree with that. But zbll with zz is not necessarily better than cfop for a few reasons:
  • With zz cross the method gets better but zbll takes approximately 2.2 seconds with recognition(For someone who is incredibly fast) which is hardly better than coll(which is not necessarily better than ocll+pll) and epll(which is somewhat but only slightly better than pll). ocll+epll is ok.
  • Also not all the cases are very good. Jayden McNeill knows almost a thousand algs says that full coll is not worth keeping in your. Same goes for ollcp and zbll. Not to mention that sune cases are generally crap
Because of all this, to become fast as zz, you sould spend more time learning winter variation, coll, useful zbll, and other algs.
There is so much wrong with this.
Sune Cases are not crap at all. They have some of the best algorithms within ZBLL. The only problem is the somewhat harder recognition, which is a bad excuse, because it is in fact not harder than any other COLL subset if you learn it 2-sided and early enough.

Also Winter Variation is very useless in comparison. All of the cases are just cancels in simple OCLLs that a) dont save a lot of moves b) have harder recognition because LS c) restrict you in your last block solution and your last layer options
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
274
Likes
157
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
PapaSmurf Cubes
#15
I can agree with that. But zbll with zz is not necessarily better than cfop for a few reasons:
  • With zz cross the method gets better but zbll takes approximately 2.2 seconds with recognition(For someone who is incredibly fast) which is hardly better than coll(which is not necessarily better than ocll+pll) and epll(which is somewhat but only slightly better than pll). ocll+epll is ok.
  • Also not all the cases are very good. Jayden McNeill knows almost a thousand algs says that full coll is not worth keeping in your. Same goes for ollcp and zbll. Not to mention that sune cases are generally crap
Because of all this, to become fast as zz, you sould spend more time learning winter variation, coll, useful zbll, and other algs.
Basically what Petro Leum said, plus it's called EOCross (just letting you know), it is possible for ZBLL to be faster (sub 2), and not all PLL cases are good. V perms or N perms for example. And if you look at PLL as a ZBLL subset, you'll realise that you can force a ZBLL subset with WV or OCLL then do a ZBLL alg, or just do a ZBLL alg. Also, Jay McNiel isn't correct all the time, just saying. Tao Yu knows full ZB (and more algs), he uses sune cases. Just because someone knows a lot of algs doesn't mean that they're correct. Yeah, he has some good ideas (JOLL for example), but not everyone has always correct ones, me included.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2018
Messages
12
Likes
4
Location
Salty Springs
#16
Basically what Petro Leum said, plus it's called EOCross (just letting you know), it is possible for ZBLL to be faster (sub 2), and not all PLL cases are good. V perms or N perms for example. And if you look at PLL as a ZBLL subset, you'll realise that you can force a ZBLL subset with WV or OCLL then do a ZBLL alg, or just do a ZBLL alg. Also, Jay McNiel isn't correct all the time, just saying. Tao Yu knows full ZB (and more algs), he uses sune cases. Just because someone knows a lot of algs doesn't mean that they're correct. Yeah, he has some good ideas (JOLL for example), but not everyone has always correct ones, me included.
The thing is that CFOP is fairly easy to learn and transfer from beginners method or lbl. The thing is and please correct me if I’m wrong that roux has less algs and rotations yet zz seems as if it has more algs and is harder to learn than both. So people will go to the best of both worlds CFOP. I’m not against learning and developing new and current methods. (Personally I found roux easier to learn than zz )
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
107
Likes
33
#17
The thing is that CFOP is fairly easy to learn and transfer from beginners method or lbl. The thing is and please correct me if I’m wrong that roux has less algs and rotations yet zz seems as if it has more algs and is harder to learn than both. So people will go to the best of both worlds CFOP. I’m not against learning and developing new and current methods. (Personally I found roux easier to learn than zz )
ZZ and Roux are both rotationless, whereas CFOP at advanced levels have an average of 1-2, and most people aren't exactly at that level.

Learning F2L for CFOP was hard. Does it mean F2L is bad? No. The benefits are obvious (lower movecount) EOLine/Cross also as advantages over regular cross, such as ergonomics, and most have been mentioned anyway.

OLL/PLL has more algs than 4LLL. Is it bad? No. It is far more efficient. "ZBLL has too many algs!" COLL/EPLL exists. 40 COLL algs with 7 algs from OLL. (42 cases, but 2 are CO skips meaning PLL)
Also it gives EPLL, which is just Ua, Ub, Z and H perms, which are superior to other algs such as N/V/F perm, as it can be done 2 gen, which is very good for OH.

(I'm not qualified to talk about roux)
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
274
Likes
157
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
PapaSmurf Cubes
#18
The thing is that CFOP is fairly easy to learn and transfer from beginners method or lbl. The thing is and please correct me if I’m wrong that roux has less algs and rotations yet zz seems as if it has more algs and is harder to learn than both. So people will go to the best of both worlds CFOP. I’m not against learning and developing new and current methods. (Personally I found roux easier to learn than zz )
As said in the post above, everything is relative. "EO is hard". Have you ever looked at floating CP? And the number of algs doesn't determine how good a method is when it's easily in human viablity. It just shows how motivated you are or otherwise. And CFOP is more like the worst of both worlds. It's got rotations and a higher movecount. Yeah, it has great ergonomics, but they aren't better than those of ZZ.
 
Top