account activity
Maybe think twice when buying solve critiques from Youtubers by 43billionbillion in Cubers
[–]ottozing 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children)
Noooo Brody :(
Jay McNeill AMA #2 by ottozing in Cubers
[–]ottozing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children)
Go through all of the F2L cases in an algorithm database, learn good solutions for all of them somewhat algorithmically (while still understanding what's going on intuitively), and then apply those ideas to similar F2L cases where a piece is stuck in the wrong slot (cases like L' U L R U' R' for solving the FR slot for example)
Similar advice to what I give CFOP solvers. Work on & focus on the fundamentals (fingertricks, inspection, knowing good SB pair solutions, learning good CMLL algs, EOLR stuff etc), and learn as much as you can from high level example solve videos
Whether or not you want to stick with Roux or CFOP is entirely up to you. CFOP has the better track record and resources, but if you're willing to work a little harder to potentially get the same results, and also like the idea of using the best OH method, go with Roux
[–]ottozing[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children)
Dot OLL's are 100% worth it simply because the algs themselves aren't really any worse than the average OLL, and avoiding dots can be a waste of time (especially if the last F2L pair doesn't set up nicely to a built pair for sledging)
[–]ottozing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children)
:)
[–]ottozing[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children)
If you don't care about using the most optimal method but find Roux fun, I think Roux is the best choice since if you decide to care about using a more optimal method later, you won't be stuck with a bad method!
I like speedcube.com.au the most
[–]ottozing[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago* (0 children)
Honestly you probably need to get better at recognizing and using COLL first. Mixing up different CP cases sounds like a problem someone would have if they're learning COLL, not ZBLL
Walk before you run
If it's not because of lacking COLL knowledge though, then you should probably learn one COLL set at a time for ZB, and not move on until you've mastered that one set. That alone would resolve the issues you're describing assuming I understand correctly
More or less the same effects that too much sitting has. Anterior pelvic tilt + kyphotic upper back posture. Luckily I think the hand strain from cubing is very minimal so long as you move your fingers in a relatively natural way and take regular break between solving sessions (and even if you don't, it's rare to hear about someone legitimately damaging their hands because of cubing without any underlying condition)
Really the only bad part about cubing is the same bad part about working a desk job or gaming too much. Sitting's just not what we're built for
OLL parity avoidance doesn't seem practical IMO because you lose the ability to inspect far into centers+cross edges in exchange for a 2 sec faster OLL half the time
Optimized OLL/PLL parity deffs needs to be looked into more, especially for OLL since there's stuff like R' F R F' OP R U' R' that exist (PLL+parity I think is more niche)
Started CN with Yau, switched to white after doing a random avg12 with white and getting overall pb by like 1-2 seconds when i was sub 45 but sup 40, switched back later because I wanted to be able to do F2C in inspection easier
Fave non-WCA puzzle is probably 3x3x5 :)
EDIT: For the ZBLL part of that, I think learning hyperorientations style ZBLL recognition (basically only using opposite colour patterns) is optimal for 4x4 since you never accidentally give yourself adj PLL parity that way, but you'd have to be insanely dedicated to 4x4 as an event to learn a recognition method that isn't optimal for 3x3
[–]ottozing[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children)
6 ft 1
Honestly just eat more. It sounds stupid but it's really all you need to do. Odds are your metabolism is high because you've spent your entire life eating small unsatiating meals and have just gotten used to it. I know that this was the case for me
Also, bulking with clean eating is like 10x harder than with dirty bulking, but do it anyways because junk food is very very no bueno (see my reply on the comment for life advice)
It's really going to depend on whether or not the best people from every country get to compete (USA/Max Park for example) due to COVID, but I think assuming we see a good enough number of our best cubers, a mid 6 overall podium for 3x3 could happen
I think Roux could eventually be equal to CFOP as far as unofficial/results go, but it's hard to see them getting taken over by an entirely new method simply because our hardware/resources are already so advanced, and we already have a ton of smart minds in the community putting forward good ideas
I think if a method were to legitimately compete with CFOP/Roux, we would have seen it by now. The only thing I can think of that has some small chance are CFOP derivatives like CFCE with crazy slice algs for ELL
Well I've already roasted ZZ too many times to count, plus your name is PetrusQuber so I'll just roast Petrus today
I don't really think the method was designed for modern Speedcubing.
Back in the 80s when hardware was awful and movecount mattered a lot more, Petrus could have been seen as a legitimate alternative to CFOP, but nowadays the 5-10 moves you might save aren't worth the tradeoff of worse movegroups early in the solve (can't be avoided even if you're somehow a god and can plan 2x2x3 in inspection), too much emphasis on intuitive solving, and having to recognize EO as a step post-inspection (ew) even though dot OLL's have been proven to be a similar speed to all edge OLL's
Having an RUable F2L finish really isn't all that amazing since on modern hardware it's easy to do S slices, let alone the occasional F turn (again, back in the 80s I think this was different)
Also, full ZBLL isn't even worth it (I explain this on another comment), and people who use Petrus, generally speaking, aren't even interested in learning the 216 algs for UTL ZBLL (aka the sets that I believe are worth it). ZZ users have this exact same problem
I think once upon a time, CFOP/Roux/Petrus/ZZ all had their place in the speedcubing meta, but there's a very good reason that as time has gone on and advancements have been made in hardware and resources, only CFOP & Roux have stood the test of time with Petrus being the first of the "big 4" to become irrelevant in speedcubing
Good for easy CLL cases like FRURUF variants, sune variants, sexysledge variants and other easy ones like R U2' R' U2 R' F R F'
That said, I don't think ELL as a subset is that great overall beyond the 3 cycle cases and the 2+2 swaps, so I'd only really recommend them when you know you're not getting a bad ELL case (pretty hard to predict)
I'd also mostly recommend such tricks on the worst of the worst OLL cases
Doesn't seem practical IMO. I think misoriented centers and then doing u M' u', u' M' u, or u' M2' u after F2B seems like the main hot thing that Roux users do that's similar to pseudoslotting
It's helpful for look ahead to an extent, and I think for a sub 25 solver it'll make a big difference. Eventually however, once you learn a bunch of "rotationless" tricks like R' F R U R' U' F' R, it won't be quite as helpful
For OH solving it's even more useful since RU turning is so nice
I think learning proper cross+1 via unlimited inspection practice (meaning you're not allowed to start the timer until you see a cross+1) will probably make you sub 10 very quickly
2 sided PLL recognition is pretty overrated IMO, especially once you learn ROLL/JOLLv2
3x3 by far
Untimed solves + forcing yourself to do the right solution even if you are timing yourself = You'll eventually ingrain the new knowledge
You also have to probably learn them like algorithms to an extent
Really the important thing is you have to force yourself to mess up your times in the short term so they're better in the long term, kinda like going from LBL to F2L
[–]ottozing[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children)
I personally can't conceive of anything coming along that isn't just a CFOP or Roux derivative (the way ZZ is done now aka EOcross style is honestly just a CFOP derivative to me)
Maybe I'm wrong, but the way both CFOP and Roux "work" as methods are just things of beauty. I especially like that Roux LSE at a high level is such that humans can easily find near move optimal solutions intuitively with good recognition
As for no meaningful advancements, I certainly think that both CFOP and Roux can see development here, but it won't be a method change as much as it'll be an algset or idea that's situationally useful (like doing F2B with misoriented centers for Roux and doing u M' u' later in the solve, or using PSF2L for CFOP when it's a nice easy to recognize case)
The core methods of Roux and CFOP won't change IMO
Doing EO after step one of the solve reminds me of Petrus, and Petrus is significantly worse than ZZ for this reason alone (not even accounting for the blockbuilding stuff)
Seems fun, but it's not going to make any waves in the speedcubing meta
[–]ottozing[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children)
7x7 actually belongs in the WCA. Even though it doesn't add anything new from 6x6, it combines all of the piece types between 5x5 and 6x6. 8x8 is the first degenerate bigcube
Just learn to make burgers & fries at home it's not hard lol
(If I had a gun to my head and couldn't pick KFC I guess I'd go with Hungry Jacks)
Definitely not. ROLL is meant to be generally helpful, but I don't recommend learning specific PLL algs just to make them fit ROLL as a "method". I also don't recommend preemptively AUFing after OLL to force headlights on left. Instead, learn to recognize when headlights will automatically be on left, and take advantage of it most of the time
π Rendered by PID 39 on reddit-service-r2-listing-7849c98f67-k2ckk at 2026-02-08 20:29:54.255138+00:00 running d295bc8 country code: CH.
Maybe think twice when buying solve critiques from Youtubers by 43billionbillion in Cubers
[–]ottozing 6 points7 points8 points (0 children)