# Roux vs CFOP deathmatch



## pipkiksass (May 23, 2013)

Lately I've noticed some growing animosity on the forums between users of different methods. This seems to rear it's ugly head most frequently in the new member intro or request for advice threads... "don't use CFOP, go straight for Roux, CFOP is boring and "anyone who uses CFOP is a conformist!", says iluvRoux. "Don't listen to iluvRoux", says iCFOPpedurmom, "CFOP am the best method because Mats/Feliks/Adam (that's me, btw, I'm something of a pin-up to CFOP fanboys) uses it. Anyone who uses Roux is probably sexually ambiguous or a sociopath, or a sexually ambiguous sociopath"...

Yeah, there are pro's and con's to both methods, what's with all the hate? It's not Israel and Palestine, it's two different methods of solving a small plastic cube. Can't we all just get along?

Much love.

That is all.


----------



## Mikel (May 23, 2013)

I feel like Epic Rap Battles of History should make one on Roux vs. CFOP.


----------



## Ickathu (May 23, 2013)

^This.

I don't think that there's "hate" as you say, just healthy debate about which one is better. Think about how much it helps though, it's like competition, so it encourages more developments. Take Petrus for example: nobody argues that it's the best or fastest or anything, and how developed is Petrus? Not very. Nobody thinks it's the best so nobody tries to make it better than another.


----------



## jayefbe (May 23, 2013)

How is it that some people are seeing all this "hate" between roux and CFOP users, but I'm not? Also, didn't this thread happen just a few days ago?


----------



## Noahaha (May 23, 2013)

I think it's a pretty friendly debate. Can you link a specific time when it "reared its ugly head"?


----------



## aznanimedude (May 23, 2013)

whatever, everyone knows ZZ is where it's at :3 <____<

jk, i don't think it's really that serious, but each side has people who thoroughly love their method, with good reason


----------



## emolover (May 23, 2013)

CFOP sucks ass. Roux forever!


----------



## kcl (May 23, 2013)

Honestly I love both methods. I'm way faster with CFOP but ideally I want to be sub 20 with roux and sub 15 with CFOP so I could use both in a competition.


----------



## pipkiksass (May 24, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> I think it's a pretty friendly debate. Can you link a specific time when it "reared its ugly head"?





emolover said:


> CFOP sucks ass. Roux forever!



Case and point.

Having different methods is only constructive if people appreciate the merits of both. There will always be supporters of both methods, who favour one or the other. In an ideal world, Mats and Alex would start regularly knocking hundredths off each others' world records, which would excite the kind of competition Ickathu mentions. 

I'm all for healthy debate, but most of the anti-CFOP or anti-Roux posts I've seen aren't interested in debate, they're just interested in saying how boring/sucky/inefficient/inaccessible the other method is, there's little consideration for its merits. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of intelligent individuals on this forum who are keen to weigh up the strengths of the various methods available, but there are also a lot of short-sighted fanboys, which will always (without exception) lead to pointless bickering and pathetic personal attacks. 

Like I say, it's a small plastic cube we all enjoy messing up, then re-arranging. Some of us with our feet; others with a blindfold on, while juggling, or one-handed. Let's keep it friendly, eh?


----------



## emolover (May 24, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> I'm all for healthy debate, but most of the anti-CFOP or anti-Roux posts I've seen aren't interested in debate, they're just interested in saying how boring/sucky/inefficient/inaccessible the other method is, there's little consideration for its merits.



Or they are just being a dick like me.

I have been using CFOP for over 4 years and it is detrimental to using most other methods besides CFOP and reduction on big cubes. It really does impair your ability to think outside of the box in terms of figuring out the ways of other methods.


----------



## Noahaha (May 24, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> Case and point.



*In

Doesn't count since he said it to be funny. Pretty sure that's what it is most of the time. 

You make a lot of arguments without backing them up at all. No one here hates anyone else because of a METHOD. There is a HUGE difference between arguing vigorously and arguing out of hatred. 

Please stop blowing this out of proportion.


----------



## TheNextFeliks (May 24, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> *In
> 
> Doesn't count since he said it to be funny. Pretty sure that's what it is most of the time.
> 
> ...



This thread is ridiculous. As Noah says we don't hate people based on method. We don't hate Kirjava cause he uses Roux. We don't hate Ben cause he uses CFOP. We dislike based on personality and actions. Some rouxers are jerks. Some cfop users are jerks. Petrus people are weirdos.


----------



## Ross The Boss (May 24, 2013)

nobody gives a **** what method anyone else uses. this thread is *****ic and any one who actually participates in arguments about which method is better is even more *****ic.


----------



## jayefbe (May 24, 2013)

Seriously, where is this ridiculousness coming from? I haven't seen a single example of someone hating on roux or CFOP. Unless sarcasm somehow counts as genuine hatred.


----------



## speedcuber50 (May 24, 2013)

Ickathu said:


> Take Petrus for example: nobody argues that it's the best or fastest or anything, and how developed is Petrus? Not very. Nobody thinks it's the best so nobody tries to make it better than another.


Roux is as undeveloped as Petrus. It still relies on too much intuition in the blockbuilding to be very effective. It's slow. I know. I've tried it.

CFOP is more popular, and generally recognised, than Roux. Your average cuber would know F2L, OLL and PLL. Roux has none of those. Roux is a nonstandard, and very isolated, approach.


----------



## Noahaha (May 24, 2013)

speedcuber50 said:


> Roux is as undeveloped as Petrus. It still relies on too much intuition in the blockbuilding to be very effective. It's slow. I know.



All of these statements are false.


----------



## jayefbe (May 24, 2013)

speedcuber50 said:


> Roux is as undeveloped as Petrus. It still relies on too much intuition in the blockbuilding to be very effective. It's slow. I know. I've tried it.



So because you've tried roux a few times and you are bad at it, that means the method is slow? That's saying something about you, not roux.


----------



## Lchu613 (May 24, 2013)

Just look at 5BLD


----------



## 5BLD (May 24, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> "Anyone who uses Roux is probably sexually ambiguous or a sociopath, or a sexually ambiguous sociopath"



whats wrong with that




speedcuber50 said:


> Roux is as undeveloped as Petrus. It still relies on *too much intuition in the blockbuilding to be very effective*. It's slow. I know. I've tried it.
> 
> CFOP is more popular, and generally recognised, than Roux. Your average cuber would know F2L, OLL and PLL. Roux has none of those. Roux is a nonstandard, and very isolated, approach.



*This can't even exist*
Oh so you've tried it? You've tried CFOP too and are you fast with that?
This is the only piece of truth in your whole post. Too bad it doesn't add to the point.
Sure it's nonstandard. And? I couldn't care less how recognised the method I use is.



jayefbe said:


> Seriously, where is this ridiculousness coming from? I haven't seen a single example of someone hating on roux or CFOP. Unless sarcasm somehow counts as genuine hatred.



Thatll do ya, ^^
also theres much less of this than people think but that's only because it's what we think would happen.


----------



## chrissyD (May 25, 2013)

speedcuber50 said:


> It's slow. I know. I've tried it.



The method is not slow. You're slow.


----------



## CheesecakeCuber (May 25, 2013)

speedcuber50 said:


> Roux is as undeveloped as Petrus. It still relies on too much intuition in the blockbuilding to be very effective. It's slow. I know. I've tried it.
> 
> CFOP is more popular, and generally recognised, than Roux. Your average cuber would know F2L, OLL and PLL. Roux has none of those. Roux is a nonstandard, and very isolated, approach.



I LOVE how most of the Rouxers here are faster than you...I use Roux and I see it as very efficient, interesting, fast, and easy to understand...


----------



## ErikJ (May 25, 2013)

I think roux could be the fastest method for 3x3, but it is certainly not faster than ZZ for OH or faster than CFOP for big cubes. I use CFOP because it's a pretty good method for all cubes.


----------



## ben1996123 (May 25, 2013)

roux is the best method because the nr was set with it


----------



## KongShou (May 25, 2013)

LBL for the win.( yes I dotted that)


----------



## kunparekh18 (May 25, 2013)

ben1996123 said:


> roux is the best method because the nr was set with it



cfop is the best method because the nr was set with it


----------



## KongShou (May 25, 2013)

kunparekh18 said:


> cfop is the best method because the nr was set with it



Man U could have said wr


----------



## uniacto (May 25, 2013)

Or you could just use Petrus.


----------

