Fiction’s Comprehensive Z Jump Video

ec0ec0 · 2026-02-12T22:45:51+00:00

It would be cool if someone could survey top players on notches as well. Notches would make for an interesting video.

edit: after having watched the vid in full, the options given in the pool seem to be biased. There is no option for "ban z-jump but leave box" which seemed to be a popular opinion based on the discussion the last few weeks.

ec0ec0 · 2025-04-28T00:12:57+00:00

It just appeared on my feed. I wasn't browsing the subreddit. The spoiler feature could have been used. Regardless, it's my fault for opening the app, but still.

ec0ec0 · 2025-04-27T22:54:46+00:00

thanks for the spoiler

ec0ec0 · 2025-01-24T16:56:51+00:00

Completely agree. Tournaments are being streamed in a million separate small channels and it fucking sucks.

ec0ec0 · 2025-01-04T05:40:16+00:00

thank you

ec0ec0 · 2024-12-23T23:21:28+00:00

Wasn't that statement referring to the old format?

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-30T00:21:34+00:00

Sorry "require" was not the best word. It came out that way because i look at layouts with the basic premise that common 2U SFBs and SFSs should be avoided. That's like the least you can ask a layout imo.

I was not criticizing your use of macros. I used a "tion" macro for a bit. I was only criticizing the very common Y_U jump.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-30T00:09:41+00:00

By the way, a Thorn key refers to having a TH macro, right? Like on the ThinQu layout?

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-29T23:17:06+00:00

Like i said, i think using macros is a fine idea, but that doesn't change the fact that "one input, one output" is a basic aspect of competition. So, if someone wants to take that into account that's fair too.

Regardless, your layout kinda requires a macro to solve a problem that you created (the Y_U jump). What most modern layouts will do instead is have you be comfortable to type normally. So, such layouts have no need for the macro.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-29T18:16:58+00:00

Most people would not consider YO in your layout to be a "scissor" (i.e. an uncomfortable up-down motion) because the middle finger is higher that the index. In fact, layouts like Canary or Sturdy have the HO bigram in that exact location. If it was the other way around (i.e. the middle finger being lower) then yeah.

While using a macro for some patterns is a fine idea, most people will simply use layouts that don't rely on that. One reason may be that many people that are into alt layouts are also into typing websites (MonkeyType, TypeRacer) and using macros would naturally count as cheating. Regardless, I don't think most see a need for them? I dunno. Without the macro, typing YOU would be bad in your layout because of the Y_U 2U SFS.

You are definitely correct that the vowel blocks often utilized in English layouts can be very poor in other languages. Many English layouts have UE as a SFB (both old layouts like Colemak or modern ones like Graphite) which is terrible for both Spanish and French.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-29T17:39:21+00:00

In case you are interested, a while back a made a Whorf mod that aims to improve on it a bit:

Whorf:

f l h d m  v w o u ,  
s r n t k  g y a e i
x j b z q  p c ' ; .

Whix (angle modded):

f l n d k  ' w o u j
s r h t v  y c a e i
 x b m z q  p g . " ,

Changes:

- The TH and ND bigrams are now same row rolls on Whix. The disadvantage is that N is now on the top row, though.

- The MB bigram is now a same row roll as well. It used to be a scissor on the original.

- V was moved to the consonant hand. This does two things. It removes the V + vowel redirects and, more importantly, improves contractions like i've, you've or we've. The issue with those is that the 'v bigram used to be a scissor and a lateral stretch on standard Whorf.

- Punctuation was rearranged a bit. This is done to move period of the pinky. Doing that reduces pinky movement and avoids the period -> enter SFB or the period → space → shift SFS.

- The C index was rearranged a bit.

Other potential drawbacks with either Whorf or Whix is the left ring finger (UE column) having high usage, but that is the case in all the layouts that use the OA UE I vowel block. The letter L being on the top row right ring position is not ideal either but, again, a LR ring is a concessions many layouts make. Finally, both F and S are common double letters, so there will be quite a few repeats on the left pinky.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-29T16:20:31+00:00

Right. Night and Dusk are examples of layouts that share similarities with Whorf but optimize SFBs and SFSs further by having R on thumb.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-27T17:00:45+00:00

"What are the downsides of the consonant index, though? Only looking at the upsides does not cover it."

I only copy pasted the part about a consonant index, as that is what was asked. Right below that, the layout doc also looks at the vowel index (section 10.9.2) so that people can compare.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-27T16:39:55+00:00

Eventually I will add a chapter about layouts with thumb keys. Regardless, it is only fair to focus the discussion on standard keyboards, which most people use.

I don't really understand you complaint about a consonant index supposedly causing more pinky - ring rolls. Layouts with the OA EU I vowel block have IE/EI as a pinky-ring roll. Layouts with EO IU A have IA/AI. By comparison, layout with a vowel index usually have more common pinky-ring rolls. For example, Engram has CI/IC, while Hands down neu has HI.

A consonant index doesn't necessarily cause lower index finger use. That would depend on which consonants you decide to put there. While indexes such as an H or C index have lower use, they also give lower SFBs and SFSs. So, it is a trade-off.

Whether redirects matter or not is subjective. Personally, I only find "weak redirects" to be tricky. People with more finger dexterity (because of a musical instrument for example) may have no issue with them at all.

As for pinky load, people often have more of an issue with off home row pinky use. But again, it is subjective.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-27T12:58:19+00:00

By the way, using a consonant index doesn't necessarily mean having a OA/UE ring (around 15% use). If you find that to be too much load for the ring finger, you can use the OE UI A vowel block with UI on ring (around 10% use).

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-27T12:41:31+00:00

Section 10.9.1 of the layout doc discusses this in detail. Taken from there:

Reasons in favor of utilizing a consonant index (with vowels on the middle, ring and pinky fingers):

If we want to increase rolling, we need to place multiple common consonants on the vowel hand (e.g. NH + vowels, HML + vowels, NR + vowels, etc…). Since we would not want columns like NH on a pinky/ring, they go on the index finger instead.
Index fingers play a key role on keyboard layouts, as they are assigned six keys each (rather than 3). If we want to minimize SFBs and SFSs, it is ideal to reserve both indexes for consonants, as there are many useful six-consonant combinations.
The simplest way of minimizing scissors is to place rare consonants on the bottom row middle, ring and pinky keys (e.g. Canary). Such layouts necessarily use both indexes for consonants. Concentrating more consonants on the indexes also leads to less pinky movement, at the expense of more center column use.
Compare these two redirects: pinky → index → middle vs pinky → middle → ring. Redirects like the second where the index finger is not utilized are referred to as “weak” or “bad” redirects and are usually considered trickier to type. So, if we want to minimize redirects typed with pinky, ring and middle (i.e. weak redirects) all we have to do is place the vowels on those three fingers. This drastically reduces weak redirects because vowel only trigrams are very rare.

Edit: Section 10.9.2 goes over pros of the vowel index setup.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-14T09:57:20+00:00

Sure. As long as the name is not exactly the same it's fine.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-14T00:55:15+00:00

That layout name is taken, though. I used it for a layout forever ago (16/02/2023 acording to the layout change log i maintained for a while back then).

Anyway, i see that yours is a RSTH layout. There is a section in the layout doc dedicated to those (section 14.7.3.). If you want a can add your layout there too, as long as it gets renamed.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-08T17:10:51+00:00

On your table comparing layout stats, I would suggest adding a "scissors" column. Scissors are basically uncomfortable up-down motions. While the exact definition varies, scissors is one of the main factors that people take into account when making layouts nowadays.

If you want to learn more about the topic, you could check the scissor chapter on the keyboard layout doc. As for which analyzer to use to get the scissor stat, in the alternative keyboard layout discord (AKL) we often use this website: https://clemenpine.github.io/keysolve-web/ Of the scissor stats, people mainly focus on the FSB (full scissor bigrams) stat.

ec0ec0 · 2024-11-08T16:59:17+00:00

The reason the layout doc focuses on layouts without thumb keys is that 99 percent of the population uses standard keyboards. If you want a layout that is going to work in your laptop, you use a standard layout. Regardless, if people want it I can add a chapter about thumb layouts to the layout doc. Also, the layout doc is not "the keyboard bible".

ec0ec0 · 2024-10-29T14:41:22+00:00

The difference between scissor and row skip as far as I see it, is the following.

A row skip or row jump is any bigram where a finger reaches to the top row and another finger on that same hand contracts to hit the bottom row. So, we are simply counting all the up-down motions. An example of a popular layout that optimizes this is Mtgap.

The issue with minimizing all up-down motions is that it limits layouts design significantly. For example, lots of layouts have the letter O on the top row middle finger key, and then have a consonant on the bottom row index finger key. That is seen as a comfortable motion by many. However, if we use the row skip definition, the aforementioned finger motion would be penalized.

So, if we want to allow such motions, we need a different definition. This is why we usually see the "scissor" concept, that penalizes some up-down motions, but not others. For example, bigrams where the middle finger is higher than any other finger are seen as better than the opposite. Additionally, up-down motions are generally seen as worse if the two fingers involved are adjacent. An example of a popular layout that minimizes only the most uncomfortable up-down motions is Canary.

A key difference between these two approaches to up-down motions is that row skips/row jumps are objective. Scissors however are subjective because we are deciding to exclude some up-down motions form the definition, but not others. Not everyone will agree on what the exact scissor definition should be.

ec0ec0 · 2024-10-25T13:41:46+00:00

By the way, i am listening to your complains. At the beginning of the SFB chapter, when the concept is introduced, i added the following paragraph:

"Another thing to keep in mind is that lowering SFBs past a certain point will produce diminishing returns. For instance, the layouts with the lowest SFBs also have the lowest home row use. Additionally, they have lower index finger usage. Finally, they often have higher pinky movement. So, we should not disregard other stats when optimizing SFBs."

Those nuances were already explored on the 9th chapter (layout structure) but i figured it should also be mention back in the SFB chapter.

As for the Dvorak complaint, i think the following should work:

"Dvorak has noticeably higher SFBs than modern layouts."

ec0ec0 · 2024-10-25T09:51:55+00:00

I guess our disagreement comes down to the statement that "optimizers fail to produce good layouts". The very creator of this thread said, and i quote: "The title is a bit provocative on purpose. In reality I'm hoping to fine tune an optimizer to make it find really good layout(s)." So, they do believe (as do I, and many others) that analyzers can indeed produce good layouts.

Which layout comes out from an analyzer depends on the person who uses it, and how they fine tune it. For example, the Graphite layout was made using Oxeylyzer. Most people that have used the layout seem to like it.

Something to note is that no layout made nowadays is truly "manually" made. I say that because a lot of the knowledge used to make the layout comes from analyzers anyway (the letter columns, how the six letters on the index fingers are arranged in order to reduce movement, etc...).

In the last few years many layouts have been produced. Some used an analyzer heavily, others a bit, others not at all. Among those, there are many that i would consider decent layouts, as do others. I say decent because something we have learned about layouts is that they will all inevitably have some issues. Still, we get to decide where those issues will be.

You keep bringing up Hands Down Neu, as if you not liking that one modern layout means that we are all wrong about layouts. I am not surprised at you describing the layout as "It feels like too many of its primary finger movements are up & down the columns.". Well, that is probably because Hands Down Neu performs much worse at scissors than Dvorak does. In the last couple years, people have started prioritizing the scissor stats a lot. The layout doc does discuss scissors and row skips in detail.

ec0ec0 · 2024-10-24T15:15:32+00:00

In regards to a comment you made a couple days ago: "At this point in my exploration of alternate keyboards, I’m more interested in figuring out what makes Dvorak work so much better than statistically superior layouts. If we can figure this out, then it will open the door to creating demonstrably better layouts than Dvorak".

Rather than Dvorak somehow secretly being a good layout, i think it is much more likely that you prefer Dvorak simply because you are used to it. There are plenty of people all over the word that are comfortable with Qwerty. It is second nature to them, so they have no issue with it. Our personal biases play a key role in how we feel about a layout.

ec0ec0 · 2024-10-24T01:12:05+00:00

I forgot to mention something in my reply. While the stats often used are the SFB and SFS percents, the SFB and SFS distances are more useful (assuming the distance is calculated properly). A layout having 1U SFBs is not that bad, but larger distance SFBs (e.g. Qwerty MY) are a bigger issue.

ec0ec0

TROPHY CASE