Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum
 It is currently Fri Jul 25, 2014 9:26 am

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

 Page 1 of 2 [ 54 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: I think i'm in lovePosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:29 am

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Statistics show that 95 percent of speed cubers out there use the Fridrich Method. I, right now, am one of those 95%. The other five percent uses other stuff, like the Petrus. But i have found something that is very fun to use, and i want to know if anyone else here uses it as a speed method:

*drum roll*

The Roux Method!!!!!

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:44 am

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
I know thom uses this method, he has a 12.36 on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7I-J9L3xZw I did look at this as one of my options, but then I decided to go with fridrich, but I do try a solve with it everynow and then.

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:30 am

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
i've got a feeling i could get this one really fast if i tried... it would be interesting because next to nobody uses it.

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:44 am

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
I know of at least 2 Roux users on this very forum.
Thom and Athefre.

1x2x3 on Left
1x2x3 on Right
CMLL
Then sort edges.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:05 pm

Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas
joey wrote:
I know thom uses this method, he has a 12.36 on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7I-J9L3xZw I did look at this as one of my options, but then I decided to go with fridrich, but I do try a solve with it everynow and then.

That's an awesome video and makes me want to learn it..

_________________
PLL 15/21
OLD NAME : Kid_with_teh_mohawk
pb 22.19
pb avg
27.61 = 26.74, 26.69, 26.98, 23.16, 26.14, 24.63, 23.71, (22.19), 30.41, (35.42), 34.97, 32.69

Top

 Post subject: Re: I think i'm in lovePosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:27 pm

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 4:07 pm
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
Statistics show that 95 percent of speed cubers out there use the Fridrich Method.

Which statistics?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:30 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
roux is better if you are a sub 30 petrus user first.then you won't struggle finding tricks.

Top

 Post subject: I think I'm in lovePosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:17 am
If you like the Roux Method you might like my method.

http://www.speedcubing.com/DavidJSalvia.html

David J

*

Top

 Post subject: Re: I think I'm in lovePosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:25 pm

Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas
David J wrote:
If you like the Roux Method you might like my method.

http://www.speedcubing.com/DavidJSalvia.html

David J

*

Your last name is cool in an interesting way.

I'm sure you've gotten comments before though.

Anyways, your method is pretty solid sounding. I'll experiment!

_________________
PLL 15/21
OLD NAME : Kid_with_teh_mohawk
pb 22.19
pb avg
27.61 = 26.74, 26.69, 26.98, 23.16, 26.14, 24.63, 23.71, (22.19), 30.41, (35.42), 34.97, 32.69

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:49 pm

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: NY, USA
Have fun with your Roux/Petrus/Heise methods. I'll stay away because I can't do intuitive stuff very well. [is sad]. I should do more blindfold cubing.

_________________
My official times
Puzzle Solving Service! - a puzzle that has never been scrambled and solved has been wasted.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:59 pm

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Capital of Culture 2010
Kyle_A wrote:
roux is better if you are a sub 30 petrus user first.then you won't struggle finding tricks.

But you will be often searching for the edges of the second block, because they "hide" themselves in the DB or DF position.

So far I'm not really fast with the Roux method, but it surely is fun.

Q

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:37 pm

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: NY, USA
Anyone know the average number of moves a good Roux solver uses?

_________________
My official times
Puzzle Solving Service! - a puzzle that has never been scrambled and solved has been wasted.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:35 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Hey, I'm here again for another roux Q&A...

For me, i find it takes around 48/50 moves. (ATM/STM)

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:03 am

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Thom wrote:
Hey, I'm here again for another roux Q&A...

Since you seem to be one of the only people here who use the roux method, any tips you can give a beginner?

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:54 am

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
sorry for the double post, but nobody has posted again and i found something that i might need help on:

the third step to Roux is COLL, or CMLL (they are the same, right?)

Anyone have a nice printable, easy to understand sheet of the algs? The table on his site it confusing, and i can't really take it with me wherever i go...

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 10:40 am

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
sorry for the double post, but nobody has posted again and i found something that i might need help on:

the third step to Roux is COLL, or CMLL (they are the same, right?)

Anyone have a nice printable, easy to understand sheet of the algs? The table on his site it confusing, and i can't really take it with me wherever i go...

COLL and CMLL are different.

here is my cmll page: snkenjoi.com/cmll

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:16 am

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
thanks Thom. by the way, what is the difference between COLL and CMLL?

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:53 am

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Capital of Culture 2010
COLL preserves the orientazion of the edges.

Q

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:52 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
CMLL is generally an easier step as you do not have to worry about the orientation edges in U.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:15 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
i see... but it still has a bundle of algs to learn, lol.

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:16 pm

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 4:07 pm
Pembo/Q talking about CLL not CMLL ?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:41 pm

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
i see... but it still has a bundle of algs to learn, lol.

Just like fridrich! Petrus is good in that respect, there aren't that many algs to learn.

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:25 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Stefan wrote:
Pembo/Q talking about CLL not CMLL ?

CMLL just means that M is free, CLL would work too.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:03 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
hmm i guess the question is, do you guys think i should give up something i already know (Fridrich F2L, PLL, some OLL) and go to something where i won't have a need for it? with petrus i would still do the LL, but with Roux i would give up everything i have already learned...

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:37 pm

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
hmm i guess the question is, do you guys think i should give up something i already know (Fridrich F2L, PLL, some OLL) and go to something where i won't have a need for it? with petrus i would still do the LL, but with Roux i would give up everything i have already learned...

You should have a go with them first, before "forgetting" about fridrich. I tried the Roux method at first, but it didn't seem to agree with me.

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:44 pm

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Marske-By-The-Sea, UK
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
hmm i guess the question is, do you guys think i should give up something i already know (Fridrich F2L, PLL, some OLL) and go to something where i won't have a need for it? with petrus i would still do the LL, but with Roux i would give up everything i have already learned...

If you use Petrus F2L, why not use Fridrich's OLL/PLL?
you only need to learn 7 OLL algorithms.

_________________
List of Speedcubing methods
Speedcubing tutorial

@.=split(//,"J huhesartc kPaeenrro,lt");do{print\$.[\$_];\$_=(\$_+3)%25;}while(\$_!=0);

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:37 pm

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Capital of Culture 2010
Speedy McFastfast wrote:
with petrus i would still do the LL

Pembo wrote:
If you use Petrus F2L, why not use Fridrich's OLL/PLL?
you only need to learn 7 OLL algorithms.

To get as fast as possible in a short time period?

When you want to learn more about the cube, are bored by your solving style or just want to have fun with the cube, then switch.

Q

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:52 pm

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
I like occasionaly like solving using petrus or roux, because for the most part it is more like solving the puzzle rather than applying algorithims.

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:44 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
too many people think petrus is about intuitive moves. after many many thousands of solves you see all of the positions and there are no tricks left and you are stuck with algorithms basically.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:46 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Pembo wrote:
Stefan wrote:
Pembo/Q talking about CLL not CMLL ?

CMLL just means that M is free, CLL would work too.

CLL would not work because sometimes it messes up the F2L/B, CMLL can messabout with the entire M-ring including orientation of centres and can flip/swap the edges in U.

COLL is orientation keeper, if you will.

So more freedom seems to be inversly proportional to length of algs, as CLL has less moves than CMLL which has less mvoes than COLL (generally).

Kyle wrote:
too many people think petrus is about intuitive moves. after many many thousands of solves you see all of the positions and there are no tricks left and you are stuck with algorithms basically.

I agree entirly in reference to the two 1x2x3 blocks.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:17 am

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 4:07 pm
Thom wrote:
CLL would not work because sometimes it messes up the F2L/B

Did the meaning change to that? I'm used to CLL meaning to solve LL corners after F2L.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:35 am

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Stefan wrote:
Thom wrote:
CLL would not work because sometimes it messes up the F2L/B

Did the meaning change to that? I'm used to CLL meaning to solve LL corners after F2L.

I always though CLL was for 2x2x2, so it didn't matter if it funked with edges.

CLL solves LL corners, but the more common approach is to use COLL so that edges are preserved.

Also, I'm sure some CLL algs I've used on speedcubing.com changed the F2L.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:00 am

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Capital of Culture 2010
I'm with Stefan at this point.
CLL ELL is a common approach for the last layer, so it should not mix up the F2L.

That's what Gilles writes about CMLL on his site:"Many other web sites teach you how to solve four corners (Waterman, CLL, COLL). In this method, there's no big difference, except that M-slice is free. Let's call it CMLL."

So only the possibility of the M-slice should be the difference between CLL and CMLL.

Q

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:52 am

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
It appears CLL on the 2x2x2 and 3x3x3 are different things.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:59 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
even though its about corners, the real difference is edges.

hey thom, do you use any setup moves to place edges while you twist corners?i found lots of tricks to finish LL in 2 algs with only two 1x2x3's done, when i was using roux.it really is an interesting method.

Last edited by Kyle Allaire on Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:03 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
wow.... i make one stupid comment, and look at the argument that breaks out!

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:26 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Kyle_A wrote:
hey thom, do you use any setup moves to place edges while you twist corners?i found lots of tricks to finish LL in 2 algs with only two 1x2x3's done, when i was using roux.it really is an interesting method.

I don't get what you mean, the last layer in roux is the M-ring. And that's always one alg or less everytime.

If you mean U, I don't really understand you I use CMLL, and each alg plays havoc with the edges so it's not worth learning how each one would effect them.

I already do three things during CMLL, I don't really wanna add more

I do a lot of tricks for the edges during the last step. Things like sacrificing centre orientation for easy edge permutation are totally worth learning.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:33 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
i mean if you need to shoot DF to DB only and twist 3 corners. you can do 1 alg to twist corners + swap edges. that is a short example.(this is the step after 1x2x3's, so you can skip M layer.)

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:44 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Ah, I see what you mean.

I don't think I'd use it as it looks like a quite temperamental approach considering how the corner algs work on roux. Interesting for FMC, though.

Have you used NMCMLL yet?

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:08 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
what is NMCMLL?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:46 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Non-matching CMLL, it's used after non-matching blocks. Where the two 1x2x3 blocks don't match each other.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:47 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
well, after much consideration i think i have finally found a method that i'm interested in learning:

Petrus. I would still be able to use the PLL stuff that i have learned on it, it is a method i can customized to be my own (shortcuts, etc) and it's Fast! Better yet, i have a whole website at my disposal to help me out (thanks Kyle!), and i've already gotten a 37 PB solve with it!

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:56 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
Thom, are you saying that the second 1x2x3 is not in it's correct place, ex: there is a 1x2x3 at LDFB and one at RUFB?or something else?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:13 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Kyle_A wrote:
Thom, are you saying that the second 1x2x3 is not in it's correct place, ex: there is a 1x2x3 at LDFB and one at RUFB?or something else?

More like LDFB and UDBR and you do an R to make them act like real blocks. it's like pseudo-building, but for speedsolving.

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:13 pm

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: FL
i rarely do, it is hard :/

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:46 pm

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
wow, and ppl just think of this on their own? you guys are crazy, waaaaaaay more time than i have on my hands

_________________
Do it.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:08 pm

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Norway
Hi

Non-matching roux blocks would (normally) mean that the positions of the 2 blocks do match but not the colors. This is the same as pseudo-roux-blocks for those who are into fewest-moves terminology. A scramle premove would turn the pseudo-roux-blocks into normal perfectly matching roux-blocks.
Maybe Gilles Roux wants the last word on this matter?

-Per

_________________
"Life is what happens to you while you are busy making other plans" -John Lennon, Beautiful Boy

Top

 Post subject: Re: I think I'm in lovePosted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:55 pm

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:17 am
Clayne H. wrote:
David J wrote:
If you like the Roux Method you might like my method.

http://www.speedcubing.com/DavidJSalvia.html

David J

*

Your last name is cool in an interesting way.

I'm sure you've gotten comments before though.

Anyways, your method is pretty solid sounding. I'll experiment!

Surprizingly, I've never gotten comments along that line before. A curious omission. Otherwise there have been only two comments: the general "sage" reference and Mickey Mouse's face at the entrance to Disneyland was partly ornamental Salvia.
I read that there's a flower named David Salvia, but I've never seen it. =8^O

Tell me later how your experiment with my method goes.

David J

*

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:24 pm

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:48 am
Yeah, I recognised your last name but didn't comment on it, as I thought you'd be sick of people asking about it all the time. Apparently not :)

_________________
#

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:38 pm

Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 pm
Heh, my last name is Gouly. I've had many a comment also!

_________________
3x3: PB 9.64
http://www.xanga.com/j_ey

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 2 [ 54 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Announcements General Puzzle Topics New Puzzles Puzzle Building and Modding Puzzle Collecting Solving Puzzles Marketplace Non-Twisty Puzzles Site Comments, Suggestions & Questions Content Moderators Off Topic