# Waffle's Roux Tutorial



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

Providing cubers with a good Roux tutorial was once my goal since the ones I learned from were taken down. Since 2009 my old tutorials have served many people well and I'm happy to announce that I have remade my videos with better more updated content. I promise you that they are not only clearer, sexier, more up to date, but they are the also the most recent tutorials that I have done. :3

*Waffles Cube Thing - Teh Website​*




Visit My Roux Site Now!​
*Main Tutorials​*Okay. So the spoiler below contains the main tutorial videos. Auxiliary tutorials can be found in the descriptions of these videos on YouTube. 


Spoiler















































Old Videos - These were my first tutorial videos. They were popular but very outdated and were made when I didn't have good content and quality. Still I feel proud of these and keep them up as an option. These videos are unlisted and can only be found here on Speedsolving.com


Spoiler



*Main Tutorial Videos*​































*CMLL*​Here are my CMLL videos. Also pretty outdated but still contains 90% of the algs I still use to date. 


Spoiler








































*The Abridged Version on How to Be Sub-20 with Roux*
Just Follow 4 easy steps, and you'll be sub-20 in no time (about 2-3 months) You can also visit my Sub-15 Guide to Roux, for tips and tricks based on your current times and own progress.​
*Step 1* - *Don't Be Stupid* - Instead do the following
Search for answers before asking.
Stop asking questions that have already been answered.
Stop wasting time asking questions that have been answered and actually do work to be faster.
 
With a simple Private Message to your forum-friendly Waffleand you might find what you're looking for.

_*Step 2*_ - *Order of Importance* - When practicing, always know what's important. This list is from most important to least important.

*B*locks - Half of the entire solve and needs the most attention.
*L*ook for pieces and track - This is so you spend less time looking for pieces and more time making moves.
*O*rientation for Edges - This step should take less than 1.5 seconds. Practice the above. Most people don't get EO very well. Practicing this step will help you so that you don't miss any Bad Edges.
*C*MLL - You can sub-20 using 2 look corners (I know I can). So CMLL comes in last in importance. It's just algs and muscle memory. Easy Peasy.
*K*eep Track of above - DO IT!
*S*olve times - Once you get the hang of it, then be concerned about your complete solve

To Remember this just work on *B.L.O.C.K.S.* seriously. (See what I did there :3)

_*Step 3*_ - Drilling yourself for different steps. - Here is what I do to practice each step.

*First Block*
Scramble and solve for the first block only. Take as much time as you need to optimize your solution for it. The best you can do for speedsolves for the first block is about 10 STM

*Second Block*
Scramble using only Rw,R, U, M moves. This will preserve the first Block. Again use as much time as needed to find an optimal solution. 

*CMLL*
Just practice each case.
qqTimer has an option for scrambling just the Last Layer which means the corners as well. 

*LSE *
qqTimer again has a great scrambler for <M,U> solving. Go to it and practice away!

_*Step 4*_ - Other stuff worth mentioning. - General Tips and Tricks, Thanks to Other Forum Members
Practice Optimization for Last Step Edges
If you're not improving, this is what you do
If you think Roux can't compete with Fridrich
Really nice summary for all steps
Tricks for step 4b
If you're going to ask about color neutrality and when to learn CMLL 
Some First Block Examples
Don't Make any Hybrids of Roux...EVER(Highlighting shows the way)
Some More First Block Examples


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

wow, im really looking farward to spending like 20 mins watching this lol
seriously,, thanks for the vids now i can work on somthing than stupid waterman als


----------



## ThatGuy (Apr 20, 2009)

finally. i can't find any.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> wow, im really looking farward to spending like 20 mins watching this lol
> seriously,, thanks for the vids now i can work on somthing than stupid waterman als



LOL!

It's easy to learn just takes a while to get used to the idea


----------



## JustinJ (Apr 20, 2009)

Wow, just today I was thinking I wanted to learn Roux. Awesome, I'll be sure to watch these later.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > wow, im really looking farward to spending like 20 mins watching this lol
> ...



yea,, i just havnt seen any good tutorials on it lately,, and i find that Gilles site doesnt help me much for the last step


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



oh yeah... that took me a while to understand too  I hope I explained it ok


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

wow, you said "Alright" at the beginning of every video


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> wow, you said "Alright" at the beginning of every video



haha, I just realized that...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

wow,, the part i wasnt getting was 4a edge orientation,, i was using M U M U M U2 M' U M' U M' U2 for every pair of bad edges  lol thanks this helps sooo much !!


----------



## ThatGuy (Apr 20, 2009)

whoa. i just stumbled upon a 3 cycle edge PLL using M and U, but i didn't notice what the moves were.
wow. i just understood step 4 stuff. yay.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

ThatGuy said:


> whoa. i just stumbled upon a 3 cycle edge PLL using M and U, but i didn't notice what the moves were.



was it M2 U M U2 M' U M2? cause thats the one i figured out a few days ago when i was bored (really bored)


----------



## byu (Apr 20, 2009)

M2 U' M U2 M' U' M2?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

byu said:


> M2 U' M U2 M' U' M2?



i prefer U over U' as too i am right fingered,, but whatever floats your boat


----------



## ThatGuy (Apr 20, 2009)

i guess it was. w/e


----------



## byu (Apr 20, 2009)

Mine is just the inverse of yours. One does a clockwise 3-cycle, one does counter-clockwise


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

ThatGuy said:


> whoa. i just stumbled upon a 3 cycle edge PLL using M and U, but i didn't notice what the moves were.
> wow. i just understood step 4 stuff. yay.



YAY someone who actually learned something from the stuff I made


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

i love your use of the M slice for the second block,, its really interesting,, ill experiment with that


----------



## skwishy (Apr 20, 2009)

Wow Roux is kinda strange. Half of the time i had no idea what you were saying but I caught enough to understand the roux concept and I think i will be able to play around with the cube and figure it out on my own.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 20, 2009)

skwishy said:


> Wow Roux is kinda strange. Half of the time i had no idea what you were saying but I caught enough to understand the roux concept and I think i will be able to play around with the cube and figure it out on my own.



good luck at that 
if you have any questions I'll be glad to answer them


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 20, 2009)

wow,, i think im officially going to use roux,, FOR EVER!!! i like the freedom during the whole solve,,


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2009)

YAY!  another roux user


----------



## holypasta (Apr 21, 2009)

this is the first roux tutorial i've seen other than the one on its official website (grrroux or something?)

i prefer video tutorials to written tutorials, so i never got around to learning roux.

i'll be sure to try this.

why so many videos? you couldn't have edited them together?

haha... you said "fridritch."


----------



## EmersonHerrmann (Apr 21, 2009)

There was another Roux tutorial by a youtube guy named Qhorin, but he took it down.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2009)

EmersonHerrmann said:


> There was another Roux tutorial by a youtube guy named Qhorin, but he took it down.



i think it was because he got lots of comments on how he was pronouncing Roux in all his vids


----------



## EmersonHerrmann (Apr 21, 2009)

and probably too many questions about clearing up stuff in the video...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2009)

EmersonHerrmann said:


> and probably too many questions about clearing up stuff in the video...



yah, I hope I explained everything that needs to be explained...just to keep questions at a minimum but I don't mind answering


----------



## Lord Voldemort (Apr 21, 2009)

How fast are you with Roux?
I don't think I'll use it, as I'm already trying to master ZZ and Fridrich, but it seems nice.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2009)

Lord Voldemort said:


> How fast are you with Roux?
> I don't think I'll use it, as I'm already trying to master ZZ and Fridrich, but it seems nice.



my best is 16.33 but i tend to land between 17-18.5 



(roux>ZZ)


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 21, 2009)

LIES!!!!

since when do you avg. 18.5!!!!!
I'm still stuck at 22!!

EDIT:
I've actually been practicing Roux, and there is a chance of me switching...
Waffles; having about a 43s avg. on Roux, with 1 month, what do you think I could get down to?

Yes. I'm serious. I've quit ZZ.


----------



## deco122392 (Apr 21, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> LIES!!!!
> 
> since when do you avg. 18.5!!!!!
> I'm still stuck at 22!!
> ...



well thats no funn, zz has so much to offer (roux does aswell) whyd you quit?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 21, 2009)

deco122392 said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > LIES!!!!
> ...


I actually started learning the WV, and got about half of the cases, and just didn't feel that I could improve anything in ZZ, so it was kinda a let-down. I still feel as though I can improve in Fridrich, though, and with much less effort.

BTW, I actually just found out that I'm about 40sec. avg. for Roux.
I'm usually done the 2 (1x2x3) blocks at 23s


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2009)

oh, I'm uploading a video on youtube right now of me doing a 17.30 average

it was a roux vs roux challenge
my break down
10sec> for both blocks
3sec>CMLL
5sec>the rest

I was stuck at 20s for a year...so @ stachu you'd be able to get it sub 30 in another month or two. from what I recall, I was doing sub 28 avg doing the permutations and orientation on the corners separate. I still do for the CMLL cases that I don't know and still get sub 20 times.

It was the second block that killed my solves so I improved that a lot with more look aheads


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> oh, I'm uploading a video on youtube right now of me doing a 17.30 average
> 
> it was a roux vs roux challenge



Alright...Jules (and others), what is your advice for me?
First 2 blocks: 8s ea.
top corners-8 seconds
Edge-orientation-10 seconds (I think that this (and blocks) is/are my main problem)
Permutation-6s at most


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > oh, I'm uploading a video on youtube right now of me doing a 17.30 average
> ...



corners should take less than 8,, it takes me 5 and i do 2 look
umm edge orientation could use work
you should look at getting about 3 seconds for

this is what i think,, but feel free to corect me waffle


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > oh, I'm uploading a video on youtube right now of me doing a 17.30 average
> ...



Improve the edge orientation. that takes at most 5 seconds with the worse case if you cycle through them fast enough and once you get the hang of it you will instantly know which case comes next. and you can probably sub-2 permutation after that since there's only 3 cases.

for the blocks, use less moves. I know that doesn't sound very fast but you need to keep track of the pieces eliminate pauses. 

corners I'm sure you can use the orientation you probably already know from ZZ and there's optimum algs for permutation. You need a total of 9 algs here. and can easily get sub-5


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

alright, so I just figured out a way that I can do edges (orientation + permutation) at the same time, and average about 9 seconds with that right now, so I don't think that that is my problem...

So, pretty much, I've got blocks and corners left...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> alright, so I just figured out a way that I can do edges (orientation + permutation) at the same time



How'd you do that?? 

anyway, keep practicing 2 look corners and when you're good with your blocks, do CMLL/COLL. fast corner algs are worthless if your blocks aren't fast enough since corners take 2-3 sec with CMLL. and if your blocks take 8 sec each then fast corners aren't gonna help much


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > alright, so I just figured out a way that I can do edges (orientation + permutation) at the same time
> ...



Haha...Um...it's really intuitive...want me to make a tutorial?
I kinda take a quick second to get the bottom 2 edges, and work from there.
Right now, it takes me like 8 seconds, though 
Not great, but getting better


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Stachuk1992 said:
> ...



oh...i think i get what you mean


----------



## Rawn (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Stachuk1992 said:
> ...



Are you saying that you place the bottom edge for each block first? 
If you do that would restrict you a little, when you should build your first block.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

Rawn said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



Well, I did, but now I switched; haha.
Please see this for more information


----------



## Lord Voldemort (Apr 22, 2009)

Aww....
Really? ZZ is amazing


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

Ha...I still do a good 25% of my solves with ZZ, just because it's fun, but I'm really liking Roux right now, and am doing that about 50% of the time.
for the last 25%...petrus OH or CFOP OH

Maybe I should just pick one method, and stick with it for everything...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> Ha...I still do a good 25% of my solves with ZZ, just because it's fun, but I'm really liking Roux right now, and am doing that about 50% of the time.
> for the last 25%...petrus OH or CFOP OH
> 
> Maybe I should just pick one method, and stick with it for everything...



Picking one method would help 
you can focus on just improving one method


----------



## Lord Voldemort (Apr 22, 2009)

I'm considering trying Roux seriously for a a while.
I'm sub 30 with ZZ and alsmot sub 20 with CFOP, so I suppose.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 22, 2009)

Alright. Here's my plan.
1-Solve the cube with nothing else but Roux until May 15'th.
2-Continue some Roux, but mainly focus on Fridrich until May 30'th, as to get my avg. back down for a certain competition.
3-Decide from there.

This is my speedsolve plan, but I'll probably be focusing more and more on BLD soon.


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 22, 2009)

You did a great job on the tutorial, and I would really consider switching to Roux, but I just can't understand the EO. Is there maybe some way to orient just the M layer using M and U turns? If there is, I would very strongly consider switching.[/bribe]


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> Alright. Here's my plan.
> 1-Solve the cube with nothing else but Roux until May 15'th.
> 2-Continue some Roux, but mainly focus on Fridrich until May 30'th, as to get my avg. back down for a certain competition.
> 3-Decide from there.
> ...



Take your time with roux 
you won't see extreme improvement in 4 weeks



soccerking813 said:


> You did a great job on the tutorial, and I would really consider switching to Roux, but I just can't understand the EO. Is there maybe some way to orient just the M layer using M and U turns? If there is, I would very strongly consider switching.[/bribe]



yes step 4a


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 22, 2009)

I'll look at it again, but the first tim eI watched it I got lost I think.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> You did a great job on the tutorial, and I would really consider switching to Roux, but I just can't understand the EO. Is there maybe some way to orient just the M layer using M and U turns? If there is, I would very strongly consider switching.[/bribe]





soccerking813 said:


> I'll look at it again, but the first tim eI watched it I got lost I think.



its a bunch of move cycles... so you might have to rewind and watch again


----------



## Vulosity (Apr 22, 2009)

This tutorial is great! I just got my first Roux solve: 1:11.43

I have been a long time CFOP user, but Roux seems like a lot of fun. I just have to get better at building blocks...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Vulosity said:


> This tutorial is great! I just got my first Roux solve: 1:11.43
> 
> I have been a long time CFOP user, but Roux seems like a lot of fun. I just have to get better at building blocks...



THANKS! I really appreciate people saying that my tutorial is actually helping them. I personally thought it would be a complete fail. 

For blocks try more M-slice paring. If you have a CFOP mindset, people tend to use the same stuff for F2L situations. Less moves=faster


----------



## Odin (Apr 22, 2009)

Get tutorial! ( I subbed ). But I’m going to stick with CFOP, just because I’m lazy .
Any way is the "x" in Roux silent?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 22, 2009)

Odin said:


> Any way is the "x" in Roux silent?



Gilles Roux is french so yeah


----------



## Chuberchuckee (Apr 22, 2009)

It's pronounced "Roo."

Like Kangaroo. Without the "kanga-."


----------



## Odin (Apr 22, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Odin said:
> 
> 
> > Any way is the "x" in Roux silent?
> ...





Chuberchuckee said:


> It's pronounced "Roo."
> 
> Like Kangaroo. Without the "kanga-."



I feel like such a noob . 
Lol, Thanks


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 22, 2009)

*Facepalm* I thought it was like Roos. And I'm taking French classes.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 23, 2009)

hah we should pronounce it Ruks for no reason whatsoever


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 23, 2009)

ZOMG!!!11!1!!one!!! I understand the EO now.  So simple.
I went ahead and made out the full algs for each of them, because I will be much better at it if I approach it like that. Thanks for the awesome tutorial.

I'm calling it rukes.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 23, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> ZOMG!!!11!1!!one!!! I understand the EO now.  So simple.
> I went ahead and made out the full algs for each of them, because I will be much better at it if I approach it like that. Thanks for the awesome tutorial.
> 
> I'm calling it rukes.



lol @ rukes
glad my tutorials are helping you


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 23, 2009)

I would never have figured out how you could use the M slice and stuff. And only using R U and M is very helpful.


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (Apr 24, 2009)

Hmm...I'm still using fridrich, but for Siamese cube Roux pwns


----------



## Poke (Apr 25, 2009)

I originally wanted to do Roux... but I did Fridrich, so I may switched back.


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 25, 2009)

I now have a sub-40 single using Roux, and a sub-50 average of 12 using Roux.
It is very nice.


----------



## Poke (Apr 25, 2009)

How has learning roux compared to fridrich? I can't watch the vids yet.... Hughesnet.


----------



## Chuberchuckee (Apr 25, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> I now have a sub-40 single using Roux, and a sub-50 average of 12 using Roux.
> It is very nice.



Do you know full COLL/CMLL?


----------



## Vulosity (Apr 25, 2009)

Poke said:


> How has learning roux compared to fridrich? I can't watch the vids yet.... Hughesnet.


Roux is more easier to understand than Fridrich. The steps look as if they are intuitive.


----------



## Poke (Apr 25, 2009)

Vulosity said:


> Poke said:
> 
> 
> > How has learning roux compared to fridrich? I can't watch the vids yet.... Hughesnet.
> ...



At least I do not have to remember a near infinite amount of algorithms.  I want to be able to do Roux, and Petrus... and fridrich, ortega, waterman, ZZ, and heisse... and possibly some minor variations. I want to have a great understanding of the cube, and have expert knowledge. Plus, I get bored easily so it is something to do.

I say roo, because I think of the food type of roux.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 28, 2009)

umm i need some help with the first block,, i always seem to build a 1x1x3 (2 corners 1 edge),, build another 1x1x3 block (2 edges 1 center) and put them together but its very ineffiecient,, any help?


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 28, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> umm i need some help with the first block,, i always seem to build a 1x1x3 (2 corners 1 edge),, build another 1x1x3 block (2 edges 1 center) and put them together but its very ineffiecient,, any help?



I first build a 1x1x2 block, just an edge and a center, then I build one of the c/e pairs that matched the other block, and put them together. Then I do the last c/e pair. I can always see the first c/e pair and the edge and center, and sometimes the whole first block.



Poke said:


> How has learning roux compared to fridrich? I can't watch the vids yet.... Hughesnet.



I found it much easier, but it may have been easier because I already had some knowledge of the cube. But switching from an F2L method to a kind of Blockbuilding method was not as hard as I thought it would be.



Chuberchuckee said:


> soccerking813 said:
> 
> 
> > I now have a sub-40 single using Roux, and a sub-50 average of 12 using Roux.
> ...



No, I just use the corners OLL algs and a T or Y perm.

And my times are lower than then. About 10 seconds lower.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 28, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > umm i need some help with the first block,, i always seem to build a 1x1x3 (2 corners 1 edge),, build another 1x1x3 block (2 edges 1 center) and put them together but its very ineffiecient,, any help?
> ...



mmm ok thanks  umm do you use the M slice for the first block a lot?


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 28, 2009)

If I am putting the last c/e pair in, and the corner is on the top, but the edge is on the bottom, next to the other pieces I have solved, then I use the M slice, but other than that not too much.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 28, 2009)

Just a question so that I know this method is dependable...what is your average for solving the cube and how long have you been using this method?


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 28, 2009)

I started less than a week ago, and my average after warming up for a couple of solves is ~ 40-45 seconds. I think Gilles Roux, the guy who made the method, averaged sub-20.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 29, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Just a question so that I know this method is dependable...what is your average for solving the cube and how long have you been using this method?



1 year and 2 months. I like to take breaks and those add up to about 10 months worth of breaks

I'm usually 17-18 but my pb is 16.33 and I don't even know all the CMLLs



soccerking813 said:


> I started less than a week ago, and my average after warming up for a couple of solves is ~ 40-45 seconds. I think Gilles Roux, the guy who made the method, averaged sub-20.



EDIT 13-15


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Just a question so that I know this method is dependable...what is your average for solving the cube and how long have you been using this method?
> ...



Roux is sub-12? I always thought he was in the 13-14 range.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 29, 2009)

Roux made an amazing method too...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> Roux is sub-12? I always thought he was in the 13-14 range.



Whoops nevermind, I double checked he is in the 13-15 zone

big green has been doing roux for a year and does sub 12.


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > Roux is sub-12? I always thought he was in the 13-14 range.
> ...



Yeah, that sounds more like what I had been thinking.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

wow,, so there is amazing potential if i stick with it?


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> wow,, so there is amazing potential if i stick with it?



Yes. (message too short)


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > wow,, so there is amazing potential if i stick with it?
> ...



ok then,, i think soon we will have an army of non-fridrich users,, look at how many people here are considering roux!! not to mention all of the petrus users,, i really hope that soon people will start realizing that blockbuilding and intuitivness can be just as fast,, and easier to learn,, then algs


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



Go Roux! May Roux be the successor to Fridrich!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > byu said:
> ...



can i use that in my signature? lol


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



Sure. I will too. But quote my name!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> Sure. I will too. But quote my name!



hows that?


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > Sure. I will too. But quote my name!
> ...



Nice! My turn.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > byu said:
> ...



wow, i never thought of using quotes  lol are ~~s ok?


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



Those are good. The more people that have this quote in their signatures, the more people that will switch to Roux.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 29, 2009)

No offense, but these conversations are what PM-ing was created for.
There's no reason to have everyone else see your thread, and enter it, only to realize that nothing of value has been added, but instead that people were doing something off-topic on and on-topic thread
</rant>

I can now get sub-40 roux.
Not great, but still getting better!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> I can now get sub-40 roux.
> Not great, but still getting better!



how long have you been working on roux? what is your typical breakdown?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 29, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> No offense, but these conversations are what PM-ing was created for.
> There's no reason to have everyone else see your thread, and enter it, only to realize that nothing of value has been added, but instead that people were doing something off-topic on and on-topic thread
> </rant>
> 
> ...



YEAH!! 
when I started timing myself with roux i was already sub35


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> YEAH!!
> when I started timing myself with roux i was already sub35



WOW all of these roux users are sooo much better than me,, maybe its my cube thats stoping me from gettin a sub 50 average... what is your typical breakdown


----------



## byu (Apr 29, 2009)

My typical breakdown.

1x2x3: 5 seconds
1x2x3: 7 seconds
Corners: 8 seconds
Edges: 7 seconds

I average about 27. My final edges are really weird, I don't use the normal Roux method.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Apr 29, 2009)

I just got a 37.17 avg of 5

Goals:
I'll get sub-33.33 tomm 
Then sub 31 the next
Then sub-30
Then sub-29
Then sub 28
etc. by days down to 25, then HUGE stop

I actually think that I could get sub-25 with Roux by the end of next week, at the very longest. I've honestly only done like 30 Roux solves, and get 37~ avg., so...you do the math


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

byu said:


> My typical breakdown.
> 
> 1x2x3: 5 seconds
> 1x2x3: 7 seconds
> ...



is that during an actual solve, or just 1 thing at a time?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > YEAH!!
> ...



Now its

first block - 4 sec
second - 5 sec
Corners - 4 sec
the rest - 3-5 sec

total - 16-18 sec

the rest is the determining factor in my solves now. it used to be the second block because i still suck at it but not as much.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Now its
> 
> first block - 4 sec
> second - 5 sec
> ...



wow,, is there an easier,, less intuitive way to build the first block? im really having trouble with that one,, my corners and edges take me about 20 seconds together but the blocks are killing me


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 29, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Now its
> ...



umm not really
I do what i show in the tutorial video. 1x1x2 to a 1x2x2 then goes into a 1x2x3

play with m-slice and you'll get faster.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> umm not really
> I do what i show in the tutorial video. 1x1x2 to a 1x2x2 then goes into a 1x2x3
> 
> play with m-slice and you'll get faster.



its just,, after the first block i like the fact that you _know_ what pieces are right there and you only hold the cube one way,, to me it makes it easier to build the second block than the first  i think im going to try putting together 2 corners with the center and adding the 3 edges

by the way,, i officially solve from now on with the yellow on top thanks to you  lol and red in front cause most oranges are a dull colour


----------



## Rawn (Apr 29, 2009)

My breakdown is:

1st block:3-5 secs
2nd block:5-6 secs
Corners: 3 secs
Rest: 3-5 secs

I solve with white or yellow on left and orange on top.



miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > umm not really
> ...



You have to plan at least your first 2x2x1 block is your inspection. It makes it easier to track the pieces.


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 29, 2009)

After I Orient the last 6 edges, I use a slightly different method to solve them. I first put the two white edges in the bottom, (I solve with white on bottom) and then, if needed, I switch them, using M2 U2 M2. But I can avoid having to do that most of the time. Then I permute the last layer edges, usign either an a, z, or h perm, all of which I can do in 3-4 seconds, which is pretty good for me.


----------



## Poke (Apr 29, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> play with m-slice and you'll get faster.


 
I watched the video, and the ony thing I took out was the pairs and the M slice, and I am really improving at doing it alone.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> by the way,, i officially solve from now on with the yellow on top thanks to you  lol and red in front cause most oranges are a dull colour



YAY! lol I'm neutral when it comes to the colors in front. That's the only thing that stuck with me when I switched from fridrich to roux.


----------



## Poke (Apr 30, 2009)

Quick question, is color neutral and advantage? I thought I heard something, but could not find it in your video.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

Poke said:


> Quick question, is color neutral and advantage? I thought I heard something, but could not find it in your video.



well I am partially neutral and it does help when you can see and execute an easy case almost instantly without hesitation.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 30, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Poke said:
> 
> 
> > Quick question, is color neutral and advantage? I thought I heard something, but could not find it in your video.
> ...



i find that using a difinitive colour scheme helps inspection,, like,, i find it a lot easier to locate the BOW-BW-BRW pieces than being colour neutral though


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Poke said:
> ...



sometimes certain pieces are shorter to get to
so that's why i'm neutral


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 30, 2009)

Roux is a pretty good method...but still... has anyone managed to get sub 10 with that method?


----------



## Vulosity (Apr 30, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Roux is a pretty good method...but still... has anyone managed to get sub 10 with that method?


BigGreen got a sub 10 single, but not average. He's possibly the fastest Roux user.


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 30, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Poke said:
> ...



I always solve with yellow on top, but I don't try to always solve the same first block. But sometimes I get stuck between two different colors, because I see an easy 1x2x2 block for both of them, and then that messes my whole solve up.



waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > by the way,, i officially solve from now on with the yellow on top thanks to you  lol and red in front cause most oranges are a dull colour
> ...



Wait... Some people always solve with one color in front? I have never even tried that.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Roux is a pretty good method...but still... has anyone managed to get sub 10 with that method?



8.96 with skip
9.45 no skip


----------



## Mr Cubism (Apr 30, 2009)

Anybody knows the difference between Fridrich and Roux in the avarage number of turns for a solve?!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

Mr Cubism said:


> Anybody knows the difference between Fridrich and Roux in the avarage number of turns for a solve?!



about 50 moves for roux since M-slice counts at 2 turns
60 for fridrich
during normal speedsolving


----------



## byu (Apr 30, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Mr Cubism said:
> 
> 
> > Anybody knows the difference between Fridrich and Roux in the avarage number of turns for a solve?!
> ...



I just got an 85 move count for Roux, I really need to improve.
I think it's my 1x2x3's that take a long time, does anyone have any tips for easy blockbuilding?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

byu said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Cubism said:
> ...


 I use about 10 moves STM for each block. So I guess reduce move count and slow down so you can look ahead more


----------



## byu (Apr 30, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



Going very slow and trying to reduce move count, I got a 78, with about 25 being in both 1x2x3 blocks. I do 2-look for the corners, so I do more moves there, and I use a really weird edge method, so adding moves there.

So 25 for 2 1x2x3 blocks? What about the rest of you? (STM by the way)


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 30, 2009)

I have never counted moves. Do you just count them as you go along or something?


----------



## byu (Apr 30, 2009)

Yeah I just count as I go along. I average around 80 now, going slow. Going fast, over 100.


----------



## soccerking813 (Apr 30, 2009)

My move count:

First block: 7 HTM Lol, so easy, it is not funny.
Second Block: 17 HTM More of a usual one.
AUF: 1
Corners: 21 T-perm is pretty long.
EO: 8
The Rest: 21
Total: 75

Wow, that is way more moves than I thought it would be.


----------



## byu (Apr 30, 2009)

Another try:

First 1x2x3: 7
Second 1x2x3: 12
Corners: 20
EO: 7
Rest of Edges: 20
TOTAL: 66

This is a new PB for me with Roux (for fewest moves)

And if I could do the same amount of moves while speedsolving, and went at 3.5 turns per second, I would be sub-20.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 30, 2009)

first block 9
second 12
corners 10
the rest 20
total 41


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

Can someone explain to me how they do the final 6 edges after EO? I didn't really understand the video, and Roux's webiste doesn't make sense?

And Waffle, do you use CLL for the corners?


----------



## soccerking813 (May 1, 2009)

I will post one more. Some people would think of this stuff as spam and/or something that should be kept in PMs.

First Block: 9
Second Block: 14 Not bad for the blocks.
Corners: 21 Sune + Y-Perm
EO: 11
The Rest: 15
Total: 70.

Meh, not bad. The corners kill me in move count. In time it is not too bad though.



Edit:

To permute all the edge after orienting them, I solve the bottom two edge, by first putting them both in the bottom with the center, then switching them if necessary. That leaves a U, H, or Z perm, all of which are pretty fast.


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

Thanks soccerking813.

I'm going to try a solve using that right now.

EDIT:
30.71
I'm new to this kind of edges, I'm not used to it. With practice hopefully I'll get sub-30.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 1, 2009)

yup CMLL/COLL mix
only 7 algs left to learn.


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

WHOA!

22.61 using soccerking's final edges method. That's my new Roux PB. I'm hoping to get a sub-20 single and a sub-25 average by the end of next month (31 days from now)

Thanks soccerking!

EDIT:
Continuing the average,

22.61, 24.58, 23.58


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 1, 2009)

byu said:


> WHOA!
> 
> 22.61 using soccerking's final edges method. That's my new Roux PB. I'm hoping to get a sub-20 single and a sub-25 average by the end of next month (31 days from now)
> 
> ...



:confused: its just not roux...it feels too much like a fridrich solve. you get fast enough with roux by itself NOT RESORTING TO FRIDRICH permutations


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

OK then, can you explain your version? Maybe I'll get faster then.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 1, 2009)

I feel the same way.
I'm currently getting algs for all edge-orientation/-permutation cases, just because.
Once I've done this, I plan to add them to the wiki.

Note: Don't give me algs; that will make it so I get bored faster...


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

You use Roux? I thought you used ZZ.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 1, 2009)

Ugh...
I use, when trying to go fast:
Fridrich 60% of the time
ZZ 30% of the time
Petrus 10% of the time

I practice, while not trying to go fast:
ZZ-40%
Frid-30%
Roux:30%

I use, for OH:
ZZ-60%
Frid-10%
Pet-30%


----------



## soccerking813 (May 1, 2009)

Lol, I was about to post my EO algs, but I guess I'll just wait.

@waffle

In your video you said that you solve the UR and UL edges after you do the orientation, right? I am too lazy to check back.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 1, 2009)

Oh...if you have them already, then go ahead.
I'll edit/add to them later.


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

A very off-topic question, how do all of you Roux users do M? I can do M' very fast without regripping, but for M I have to do r' R and that takes much longer.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 1, 2009)

If you insist.

Edges disoriented

2:
UF/UB M' U M U' M' U M'
DF/DB M U M U' M' U M'
UF/DB M' U M' U' D2 M' U M' D2
UF/UR N/A

4:
Top Layer: M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UR/UL/DF/DB M U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UL/UF/UR.DF M' U M'

6:
All of 'em: M' U M' D2 M' U M' U' D2 M' U M'

For the UF/UR I just use the OLL alg.



Edit:

I also use r' R, but I try to stay away from it as much as possible.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 1, 2009)

For an M move, I use my right pointer finger, at the BU sticker, and move it to UF sticker

btw, there's gotta be a shorter alg for the 6non-oriented case


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

Since soccerking posted, I'll do the same for the same algs.

2:
UF/UB R U R' U' M' U R U' r'
DF/DB M2 R U R' U' M' U R U' r'
UF/DB U M U M U2 M' U M' U M' U2 M
UF/UR M U M' U2 M U M'

Top Layer M U M U M U M U M' U' M' U' M' U' M' U'
UR/UL/DF/DB M U2 M' U2 M' U M' (soccerking's just switched)
UL/UF/UR/DF M' U M

6.
I do a top layer and then the bottom two

Yeah, my algs are terrible.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 1, 2009)

wow,, im officially sub 60 with pure roux.. in my inspection i plan the BOW-BW-BRW pieces,, then add the other 2 edges with my center,, then i make another 1x1x3 on the other side and use the M slice to put in the other 2 edges,,


----------



## soccerking813 (May 1, 2009)

I got my algs by just going through each case and how you would do it using the regular orientation.

And that UF/UR alg is nice. Thanks for posting it.

Edit: Just found a better one for UF/UR. Hold the two in UL and UB, and do M' U M' U2 M' U M'.


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

It's actually a TuRBo alg that I use in blindsolving, and it just happened to work perfectly with that Roux case.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 1, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> Lol, I was about to post my EO algs, but I guess I'll just wait.
> 
> @waffle
> 
> In your video you said that you solve the UR and UL edges after you do the orientation, right? I am too lazy to check back.



yes i do
\ step 4b



byu said:


> A very off-topic question, how do all of you Roux users do M? I can do M' very fast without regripping, but for M I have to do r' R and that takes much longer.



sometimes I do R r'
or just push on BU with my index finger on the hand that i don't use for M'


----------



## spdcbr (May 1, 2009)

Saying the last name "Roux" has become a habit for me.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 1, 2009)

mine are probably the same but ill post them anyway

0 bad edges

2 bad edges
(UU)
M’ U M U’ M’ U M’ 
M’ U M’ U2 M’ U M’ 
(DD)
M U M U’ M’ U M’ 
(U)(D)
M' U M' U M U M' 
4 bad edges
(UUUU)
M’ U2 M‘ U2 M’ U M’ 
(UUU)(D)
M’ U M’ 
(UU)(DD)
M U2 M‘ U2 M’ U M’ 
M2 U’ M’ U M’ 
6 bad edges
(UUUU)(DD)
M' U M' U M U M' U2 M' U M'


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 1, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



yea,, i always do the same pieces,, maybe its just faster for me,, or maybe its slower and im stuborn but thats what i do,, on most cubes though orange is the dullest colour


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

I always do Yellow top Blue front, and sometimes Yellow Top Green Front. It's easier to recognize.

Another thing, could it be faster to make a 1x2x3 on the right side first if you see one that's significantly easier? On Roux's website it says to always solve left first if you're right handed.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 1, 2009)

I can see how it could be faster to always start with the same block. You wouldn't waste your time trying to figure out what pieces to solve, then how to solve them. Just straight to how to solve them.

And I just solve one block, then put it on the left side, using either d, d2, or d'.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 1, 2009)

i actually make the first block on my front the do d'


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

36.36 using what soccerking suggested, I'm not used to the new colors and positioning I'm supposed to recognize. I think I'll stick with what I've been doing.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 1, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> And I just solve one block, then put it on the left side, using either d, d2, or d'.



yea,, that seems to be easier than making the block on the left every time


----------



## byu (May 1, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> soccerking813 said:
> 
> 
> > And I just solve one block, then put it on the left side, using either d, d2, or d'.
> ...



Strange, I find it easier to build one on the left and then on the right, d2 takes a long time for me to do (well, not a long time, but it wastes at least half a second)


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 1, 2009)

UL-UB and DF-DB
MU*4

new single....23.48


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 2, 2009)

yay!! new single (38.37) and new average (48.72) ,, today i broke the 40's barrier on singles about 5 or 6 times,, but for some reason i still have a 60+ solve every once and a while,, could you guys help me with my consistancy with roux or is this normal.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 2, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> yay!! new single (38.37) and new average (48.72) ,, today i broke the 40's barrier on singles about 5 or 6 times,, but for some reason i still have a 60+ solve every once and a while,, could you guys help me with my consistancy with roux or is this normal.



normal. roux can get plenty of easy cases on blocks. I still get 20+ solves when my blocks aren't that good. you'll eventually find ways to avoid these cases


----------



## byu (May 2, 2009)

I think inconsistency is normal when starting to learn any kind of blockbuilding method


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 2, 2009)

im soo happy though  out of 26 solves,, 6 sub40s, and only 3 plus60s


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

I got a new pb average of 12 with roux today: 39.72.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

Uh oh!
It looks like a Roux race between soccerking813 and I!
I avg about 36 now


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

DUN DUN DUN

You Pb is almost 10 seconds better than mine, and I really average around 45. I get lots of good solve streaks.

[off-topic]Is it possible to change your display name? I'm too lazy to search and find out.[/off-topic]


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

pjk talked about that a few days ago actually, you have to send him a PM and he'll change it.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> DUN DUN DUN
> 
> You Pb is almost 10 seconds better than mine, and I really average around 45. I get lots of good solve streaks.
> 
> [off-topic]Is it possible to change your display name? I'm too lazy to search and find out.[/off-topic]



Alright, then.

Really, my average average is more or less 39, and I had a lot of practice one day...

So, once you average about 40 seconds, PM me.
Until then, I will not be doing a single roux solve!


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

I'll try to remember. 

I pm'ed pjk, asking if it was possible for him to change it. I'll wait and see.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

[OFF-TOPIC]What are you going to change it to?[/OFF-TOPIC]


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

LZeller. My first initial and last name.

To make this a little more on topic, I will say that I have become MUCH better at M and M' turns since I began Roux. The Z-perm used to be one of my worst PLLs, now I am very fast at it.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

I'm good at M', but my M is almost twice as slow.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 3, 2009)

wow, i feel so left out,, my best average is in the 40s, and my average solve time is about 51 seconds


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

But how long have you been cubing for? I had been cubing for almost a year when I was "converted".


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 3, 2009)

well, i used my own method 10 months ago,, switched to beginner method 4 months ago,, and have been using roux for 2 weeks


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 3, 2009)

byu said:


> I'm good at M', but my M is almost twice as slow.



i use rR' and r'R for M' and M respectivly,, and i find M faster than M',, but my M2 is insanely fast!! i have problems with my A perm though,, for doing the corners i lock up like 3 times in that one alg alone,, is there a more roux friendly one?


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 3, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> But how long have you been cubing for? I had been cubing for almost a year when I was *"converted"*.



lol , you make me smile


----------



## Gparker (May 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> soccerking813 said:
> 
> 
> > But how long have you been cubing for? I had been cubing for almost a year when I was *"converted"*.
> ...



don't double post please, or even triple post. use the multi quote in the bottem right., not the first time youve done it etheir


@soccerking

you mean like my name? G is the first initial in my first name and parker is my last name


----------



## Rawn (May 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> byu said:
> 
> 
> > I'm good at M', but my M is almost twice as slow.
> ...



Use your left ring finger to do M' moves.

R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 R2 x': It swaps the two corners at the back of the cube.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

Gparker said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > soccerking813 said:
> ...



Same for me too. B for my first name (Brian) and Yu for my last name.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Yea, the same thing.

I have a feeling I am going to break ym single and average of 12 record today.


----------



## spdcbr (May 3, 2009)

I'm not going to do this method until I acutually master fridrich. See you in a few years Roux.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Why though? Why don't you just skip mastering Fridrich like I did, and try to master Roux instead?


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 3, 2009)

Gparker said:


> don't double post please, or even triple post. use the multi quote in the bottem right., not the first time youve done it etheir



sorry, i didnt realize that there was a multi quote button, i thought i had to make another post to quote someone else


----------



## spdcbr (May 3, 2009)

Well, I don't see people cracking sub 10 with that method every day...and I'm trying to master the PLL's in fridrich but more stuff with roux? It's just too much for me.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

That is just what is so good about using Roux. It is like entering unexplored territory.

Mastering the PLLs are pretty important. They can be used in a lot of different methods, but OLL is not very important, unless you get down to 12 second averages with Fridrich.


----------



## spdcbr (May 3, 2009)

By the way, your new avatar is freaky.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Well, I don't see people cracking sub 10 with that method every day...and I'm trying to master the PLL's in fridrich but more stuff with roux? It's just too much for me.



i don't see people cracking sub 10 with *ANY* method everyday. Its all about practice and patience.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I don't see people cracking sub 10 with that method every day...and I'm trying to master the PLL's in fridrich but more stuff with roux? It's just too much for me.
> ...



Practice, patience, persistence, preparation, and performance makes perfection.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

no perspiration?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> no perspiration?



I do tend to sweat from the hands a lot when cubing


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

Practice + Patience + Persistence + Preparation + Performance + Perspiration = Perfection

(Try saying THAT ten times fast...)


----------



## slncuber21 (May 3, 2009)

WAFFLE! you are like a genius. i finally understood Roux with your help!
before i never got the concept but now i can use full Roux to solve the cube =]

thanks a bunch


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

slncuber21 said:


> WAFFLE! you are like a genius. i finally understood Roux with your help!
> before i never got the concept but now i can use full Roux to solve the cube =]
> 
> thanks a bunch



YOU'RE WELCOME


----------



## spdcbr (May 3, 2009)

Hey waffle, is it okay if I put your roux tutorial on my site?


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Well, I broke my average of 12 record today, with an average of 38.66, but didn't quite break my single record. Got more sub-35s though.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Hey waffle, is it okay if I put your roux tutorial on my site?



Go for it! Just remember to mention my name somewhere. Give people the right credit for their work.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

I was just thinking about how it would be possible to make the Roux method better, but could not think of any. Just wondering if anyone could possibly think of any.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> I was just thinking about how it would be possible to make the Roux method better, but could not think of any. Just wondering if anyone could possibly think of any.



Step 4a and step 4b combined. I can sub-2 4a and 4b total but it would be more satisfying to sub-1 those steps

I've actually tried making a list of cases but got bored and took a nap and forgot until you brought it up again.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> soccerking813 said:
> 
> 
> > I was just thinking about how it would be possible to make the Roux method better, but could not think of any. Just wondering if anyone could possibly think of any.
> ...


What about b and c combined?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

byu said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > soccerking813 said:
> ...



how about overall 1 look step 4


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

That would be a lot of algs...


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Hmm, I might try to get all the algs for 4a and 4b if I can figure out how to use acube. Lets see, there would be how many case for the permutation? The cubie for the left position could be in any one of 6, and the other could be in any of 5. So 30 for permutation, and 10 for orientation. Minus some for when they are already correct and stuff.

Nvm.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

could anyone get me algs purely for step 4b, 4c, and/or 4b+c?
This would greatly be appreciated


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

Steps 4c:

E2 M E2 M'
U2 M' U2 M'
M U2 M U2

I think there are more...


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

wait...no...nvm...just for 4b, then


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

How many algs would it be for 4b+4c? If it is a low number I would consider trying to get them. 

And for anyone who would like to use it, I found a scrambler that gives you M/U scrambles for Roux. I plan on practicing this a lot.
http://mzrg.com/miniSites/scrambler...scramble=roux&num=5&len=25&subbutton=Scramble!

I have a feeling that everyone already knows about this.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

It's always one of these:

M' U2 M AUF M2 AUF

or 

M U2 M' AUF M2 AUF


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> How many algs would it be for 4b+4c? If it is a low number I would consider trying to get them.
> 
> And for anyone who would like to use it, I found a scrambler that gives you M/U scrambles for Roux. I plan on practicing this a lot.
> http://mzrg.com/miniSites/scrambler...scramble=roux&num=5&len=25&subbutton=Scramble!
> ...



I knew about this


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> soccerking813 said:
> 
> 
> > How many algs would it be for 4b+4c? If it is a low number I would consider trying to get them.
> ...



Haha, yeah, waffle gave me this website yesterday I think.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

I dunno if someone has already posted this, but I found a nice alg for when the 4 edges on top are disoriented. M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'

I don't think it would really be worth it to have algs for ther permutation of edges. I always just get on in the D layer like waffle, then join them using M' U2 M', move to down layer, and then AUF, and M2. I think this is what Byu was saying.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

Yeah that's what I was saying. For 4 edges on U, I do:

M' U2 M U2 M' U2 M'


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 3, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> I dunno if someone has already posted this, but I found a nice alg for when the 4 edges on top are disoriented. M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'
> 
> I don't think it would really be worth it to have algs for ther permutation of edges. I always just get on in the D layer like waffle, then join them using M' U2 M', move to down layer, and then AUF, and M2. I think this is what Byu was saying.



that orientation is what i use. 
if you follow the repetitive process of cycling the misoriented edges like in the 4a video it just ends up the same thing


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Oh, sorry about reposting it then.

And I was thinking, would it be possible to have partial corner control when making the second 1x2x3 block?


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

You could do a 1x2x2 instead of a 1x2x3 in DBR, and then use WV to add the last two pieces in, giving you a OCLL skip.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Yea, that would take quite a few algs though. I guess it wouldn't exactly be easy to add on to Roux.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

It's actually a pretty good idea. It requires 27 algorithms, if I remember correctly, which isn't bad compared to OLL at all. Winter Variation might actually be a good idea with Roux.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

Umm, yea, I though it was more than 27 algs. 

I might actually look into this. I will search google and the forums before I ask for any links.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 3, 2009)

Actually, we don't need WV.
Some "algs" can be shortened...we don't have to keep EO in state, like WV does


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

So, this is like a Non-EO preservation and non DF DB preservation WV. That makes things a bit easier, but where are we going to get all the algs? Anyone here know how to use ACube?


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

I don't know how to, but it is easier to just take those algs instead of making specific algs.

And I was looking at MLGS, and was wondering why it had 104 cases for corners, while WV has only 27 for basically the same thing.


----------



## byu (May 3, 2009)

MGLS includes EO...


----------



## soccerking813 (May 3, 2009)

But, I mean, just the corner part takes more...
Wait, is it because he included the mirrors for MLGS, but the mirrors are not included in WV?


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 4, 2009)

I really don't think that WV or anything like that will help us here. Considering that we'll still have to do CPLL, it's just not worth it, imo.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> I really don't think that WV or anything like that will help us here. Considering that we'll still have to do CPLL, it's just not worth it, imo.



agreed when you master CMLL you can do sub 3 corners. and when you consider WV and recognition time and then the recognition for CPLL. its pretty much pointless IMO


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 4, 2009)

Waffles...I know that I just started Roux, but I'd be interested in learning CMLL.
What sites do you suggest?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> Waffles...I know that I just started Roux, but I'd be interested in learning CMLL.
> What sites do you suggest?



http://www.nytelyte.com/cmll/

and

http://jmbaum.110mb.com/coll.htm

I'll be making my CMLL video set this summer


----------



## spdcbr (May 4, 2009)

Hey waffle, check out your part of the site, I just started making it today.
www.completecubing.webs.com


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Hey waffle, check out your part of the site, I just started making it today.
> www.completecubing.webs.com



nice thanks for including it on your site


----------



## spdcbr (May 4, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Hey waffle, check out your part of the site, I just started making it today.
> ...



Thanks for letting me include it on my site. You're famous now.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 4, 2009)

wow, just look at the recent spike in roux users  its crazy how much it has grown over the past few weeks


----------



## soccerking813 (May 4, 2009)

Yea, it's pretty crazy.

I guess that it would be better to just learn full CMLL or COLL to solve the corners than WV. I think I will probably learn COLL or CMLL, maybe over the summer, after I get pretty good with EO and the blocks.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> Yea, it's pretty crazy.
> 
> I guess that it would be better to just learn full CMLL or COLL to solve the corners than WV. I think I will probably learn COLL or CMLL, maybe over the summer, after I get pretty good with EO and the blocks.



I still don't know full CMLL 

but sub-20 avg is possible without knowing all the corner cases...once you get good at blocks


----------



## soccerking813 (May 4, 2009)

Yea, I guess it is the same with every single method. The intuitive part is the part that really matters. You can get sub-20 on Fridrich with 4-look last layer.

How easy is recognition for you? And what do you look for when you recognize what case you have for the corners?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> Yea, I guess it is the same with every single method. The intuitive part is the part that really matters. You can get sub-20 on Fridrich with 4-look last layer.
> 
> How easy is recognition for you? And what do you look for when you recognize what case you have for the corners?



I look for sticker patterns. Its easy when you get used to it. Recognition for me is a little lagged but its not too bad.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 4, 2009)

But like, do you first look at orientation, or everything at the same time?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2009)

it used to be orientation then sticker pattern but now its everything at the same time.
Personally I just look for 6 stickers (the 4 on U and the 2 on F) from those I can differentiate all the cases. but takes a lot of experience with corners


----------



## soccerking813 (May 4, 2009)

Yea, I figured it would be pretty hard. I don't need to worry about that right now though.


----------



## spdcbr (May 4, 2009)

I love playing all of the videos at the same time and hear waffle x7.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 5, 2009)

Just got new pb single and average of 12 using the Roux method.

Average: 36.23 sec.

Fastest Time: 28.10
Slowest Time: 40.93
Standard Deviation: 02.86

Individual Times:
34) 32.03 B' D F U' D2 R2 L' D2 B2 R' F2 B' U B' U D2 B2 U' F L F2 R' F' L B
35) 34.14 R U' B2 U2 F U' L' F' U' D F2 L2 B' R' F2 D R2 B2 U' B' R' D2 B' D' L'
36) 38.10 L2 B R B L' D2 R D2 R2 B' L2 B2 U F' D' L F2 R2 F' L2 D' L' D L R2
37) 40.71 D' F U' D B2 D2 L B2 R U' B' F' U R D L' U2 F D B' U D R B F2
38) 32.12 U D' F B D F2 U D B2 D B' R F' U L' D2 F2 L' R' F' R' L B F D'
39) 38.39 F' D F' U L U2 R B L' R' F2 L2 B D2 U R2 U' B2 R L' F2 U' F' U R
40) 36.56 R F2 L2 F D2 L F' L2 D B' L' U B R2 F2 R2 U' L' U' R' D' U' R' D2 F
41) (28.10) R D L' B' D2 R F2 U L' D U B' L' D U R U B' F2 D' B U R2 D' F
42) 37.19 F' U' R' F B D2 L D2 B2 F2 L2 D' F2 D2 L' F L R' U2 D2 L2 F2 U F' R'
43) (40.93) B' R L B' L' R' B L2 D' U B2 D2 F' D2 B2 U2 R2 L B' R U F' D' F R'
44) 38.19 L R U' R2 B2 R2 D' R2 L' B' R2 F2 U2 R U2 B2 L2 B2 U2 D2 R L2 B L B
45) 34.91 U2 R' B' D' R U' D' F2 B L R U2 D' L B2 D2 R U2 D' L' D L' D' F2 R'

The 28.10 is my new pb.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 5, 2009)

soccerking...looks like I should start up Roux again?


----------



## soccerking813 (May 5, 2009)

Yep, in that whole average only 2 times were above 40. I think the session average was around 41. It felt really good to get that average.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 6, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> soccerking...looks like I should start up Roux again?



your just being lazy about roux...


----------



## soccerking813 (May 6, 2009)

Just got yet other pb average of 12.

Average: 35.88 sec.

Fastest Time: 30.13
Slowest Time: 46.58
Standard Deviation: 02.46

Individual Times:
39) 34.55 R' L D2 L2 U L' R2 D2 R2 L' U2 B' R U D' L2 D' L2 U D R' L' U2 L F2
40) (30.13) B F2 U2 L' F2 U' B2 U2 L R' B' F' U2 B L D R L D2 L U' R' U' F2 R'
41) 35.23 F D2 B' R D B2 R2 U L2 R B' U' D B2 D2 U2 L2 R2 B R B' R' L D U
42) 33.21 R' F L' F' D' U' L' F D2 U B F2 U2 F R2 B2 R U L' U' L D' R' U2 R
43) 34.62 D2 U2 R D2 B2 L' U2 R U B' U2 D' L' B2 R D' F2 R2 U2 F2 R' F L D L'
44) 35.39 B2 L' U2 L D2 U' F' R' D' F U2 B2 L2 U F D' F2 D2 F2 D2 B U2 B F L
45) (46.58) R2 F' D' U2 F' L2 D2 B F' L2 D L' R U2 D B2 U2 L2 F D2 L U B L2 F2
46) 37.70 F' L B2 U2 F R' B' U2 F' D' U R' D' L2 U2 F D' R' U L' F' R D' B' U2
47) 39.38 R' U2 D' R2 U D L' D2 B2 D R F2 R' F' L' R F' B U L' B2 U F R' F
48) 34.87 L D2 R' U' B F L2 F' U2 R' F B R L' U2 B2 R2 L D2 B F2 R2 D F' D2
49) 33.40 R2 F2 D' F R U2 F2 L2 D B R' F2 R D' L' B2 D2 U B2 F L' F D B2 D
50) 40.41 L B' D2 U' L R2 B2 D' F2 R2 B' D F2 D' L2 R' F U' F B U L2 U' L2 R'

Wasn't really expecting another today.

And my session average was quite nice.

otal Solves: 53
Total DNFs: 0
Average: 39.55 sec.

Fastest Time: 30.13
Slowest Time: 52.90
Standard Deviation: 05.45


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 7, 2009)

i really think that all your records should be posted in the achievement thread


----------



## soccerking813 (May 9, 2009)

I found that I can get pretty good times using using Roux f2l and then OLL/PLL. I do not usually do this, but I did once, because I finished the two blocks, and saw that all of the F2L was solved other than one edge. So I inserted that edge, and did OLL and PLL. My time was 26.xx, which is better than my average was for Fridrich. I am not going to use this, but I thought it was pretty interesting.


----------



## bonhomme (May 9, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> wow, just look at the recent spike in roux users  its crazy how much it has grown over the past few weeks


 
I use Roux since last summer. It's cool to see more and more post about it.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Seems like Roux is a method that gets you fast, unlike fridrich which takes a LOT of pracitce. Too bad Roux has a limit in how fast it can go. Too many steps...


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Seems like Roux is a method that gets you fast, unlike fridrich which takes a LOT of pracitce. Too bad Roux has a limit in how fast it can go. Too many steps...



what limits?

roux gets skips and lucky cases just like in fridrich so thats not a limitation. 

blocks takes less moves than F2L. not a limitation either.

CMLL takes sub-2.5 sec for me and final step takes sub-3.5. I know Big Green is so much faster than that and he uses COLLs for ZB...*not optimized* for Roux and he can sub 1.5 the final step. I think that OLL/PLL is just equivalent to Roux's CMLL+final step.


the only limitation would be physical limitation and it doesn't even have to do with the method. Just how fast you can recognize and execute changes everything. Its just practice and is not about the method.

and Petrus has a lot more steps than fridrich or roux. but that's not stopping good petrus solvers from being extremely fast.

so I wouldn't argue that roux or ANY method has any limitations.


----------



## Ellis (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Seems like Roux is a method that gets you fast, unlike fridrich which takes a LOT of pracitce. Too bad Roux has a limit in how fast it can go. Too many steps...



fail


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Seems like Roux is a method that gets you fast, unlike fridrich which takes a LOT of pracitce. Too bad Roux has a limit in how fast it can go. Too many steps...



hahah wow,, cause its not like _fridrich_ has limits on how fast it can go.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 10, 2009)

Roux has limitations, just like any other method, but not more than any others. It is possible that it has fewer limitations than Fridrich, because of the block building/corners first style.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Sure, fine, I'll try the method out. Only part that I don't understand is the blockbuilding. You didn't explain it clearly, but then again, the official one doesn't make sense either.


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

Blockbuilding is mostly intuition, see what is fastest. I usually make a 1x2x2 block and then build off of that (waffle's suggestion)


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Wow, it seems so that the Roux method has much more potential.

Roux:
http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Miscellaneous.html
Frdirich:
http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/system.html#unique


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Wow, it seems so that the Roux method has much more potential.
> 
> Roux:
> http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Miscellaneous.html
> ...



every method has a potential 
the only thing stopping people from getting faster on any method is ignorance


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, it seems so that the Roux method has much more potential.
> ...



And Practice
And Persistence
And Passion
etc.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, it seems so that the Roux method has much more potential.
> ...



I have a question on the orientation part. Step 4b is hard.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

byu said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > spdcbr said:
> ...



You're not on vacation yet?

EDIT: Sorry, I should have multi quoted.


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > spdcbr said:
> ...



M' U M' orients the following edges

UF UL UR DF

Because M' makes the U face become F, and it puts DF onto the U face. Turning U is the equivalent of turning F, therefore orienting all of those pieces, and M' puts the centers back.

Oh, and also, my bus for my vacation leaves in about 2 hours.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

byu said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



Ih, i get it now, I guess we better talk some more before you leave, also, I don't get the UL and UR edge permutation. It's really hard.


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

If you go back a few pages, you'll find EO algs


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

byu said:


> If you go back a few pages, you'll find EO algs



UHhhh...EO? Oh well, take a look at this:
http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_4.html
What does the white and yellow mean?


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

EO is edge orientation. The algs are a few pages back.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

I wish you would specify the page number...


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr- go to post 137 in this thread


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> If you insist.
> 
> Edges disoriented
> 
> ...



This? I don't know how to read it.

EDIT:And when you're making the blocks, do you use fridrich style to make pairs? SO confused.


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

First you look at which edges need to be oriented, then apply the corresponding alg.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Well, that's pretty weird cause it's either UR, UL, or both.

EDIT: byu must be on the bus...


----------



## byu (May 10, 2009)

No, but I'm leaving very soon. If you have UR UL, do a U turn and now you have UF UB


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr
if you are still uncertain of how to do something, e-mail me at [email protected], saying what you don't understand, and I will try and make a short-ish video helping you, and put in on YouTUbe


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> spdcbr
> if you are still uncertain of how to do something, e-mail me at [email protected], saying what you don't understand, and I will try and make a short-ish video helping you, and put in on YouTUbe



Wow, you would do that for me? A lot of people are using the roux method thanks to waffle.


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Hi, and thanks for asking to help. Here are some thing i don't understand:

-Block building; I'm new to this since I used fridrich before this, but I don't and how to make the blocks. First you just make a pair fridrich style then, you postition the edge, you make another pair and attach it. What the heck is that all about?
-CMLL; how do you read the diagrams on the wiki!??!
-UR/UL edge Permuation; I still don't get this in every way


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 10, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Hi, and thanks for asking to help. Here are some thing i don't understand:
> 
> -Block building; I'm new to this since I used fridrich before this, but I don't and how to make the blocks. First you just make a pair fridrich style then, you postition the edge, you make another pair and attach it. What the heck is that all about?
> -CMLL; how do you read the diagrams on the wiki!??!
> -UR/UL edge Permuation; I still don't get this in every way



alright. I'll have some time to work on this later, but I can give you a start now:

blockbuilding
-as far as this goes, I'll do some example solves, although I am also somewhat new to this method, and am not as good as others would be.
Nonetheless, I'll do my best

CMLL
-because I haven't any experience with CMLL, I can't supply you with the best algs or anything like that, but I can teach you how to understand these diagrams, and I'll explain it with a screenshot and some other stuff

UL/UR Edge perm
-This will be very easy to explain.

In total, I'm estimating a 5min video, and it should be done by like 6ish


----------



## spdcbr (May 10, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, and thanks for asking to help. Here are some thing i don't understand:
> ...



Thanks soo much. I need a lot of help on the block building. Right now it's
2ish. I can't wait.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2009)

if you need help, PM me or email me ([email protected]) I will make it clearer if I have to


----------



## soccerking813 (May 10, 2009)

I can try to explain it right now, but it will be difficult without doing a video.

*The Blocks:*

Personally, when I make the blocks I first start be positioning one edge in the correct place, and then putting that in the front-down position. After I do this, I do two corner/edge pairs Fridrich style, and put them in. For the second block, I put the one that I just solve on the left, and solve the second one the same way on the right. First put the bottom edge in, and then the two corner/edge pairs.

*CMLL:*

I can't really help you here either, because I do not use CMLL. I first orient the corners, then permute them. I think it would be best for you to start out with this, so that you get used to the other steps.

*UL/UR Edge Permutation (EP):*

Again, I don't use this, because I can not recognize it very well, but I understand how it works. There are a few basic steps. The first thing you try to do is get the two edges opposite each other in the same layer, while keeping correct edge orientation. There are two cases where this is not already done. The first case is where you have one of the edges in the U layer, and one in the D layer. If you have this, look to see if the edge that if on the bottom layer is in the front or back. If it is in the front, position the edge that is in the U layer in the UB position. If the edge which is on the bottom is in the back, position the edge that is in the U layer in the UF position. When you have one of these, do the alg: M' U2 M', and the two edges will be opposite each other, in either the U or D layer, and edge orientation will be preserved.
The second case is where they are in the UL/UF position, or any other two adjacent positions in the top layer. If you have this, simply do M2 and one will be in the bottom layer. You will then be able to do the step from the first case to get them into position.

Once you have the two edges opposite each other, get the two into the bottom layer. If they are on the U layer, put them in the UF and UB positions and do M2. Once they are in the bottom, you have to position the corners in the U layer so that it is easy to line them up with the two edges. To do this, you look first at what color the FD sticker is. You then look for which two corners in the U layer have the same color stick on them. Once you find these two corners, put both of them in the UBL and UBR position using U/U'/U2 turns. Once you have this, simply do M2, and the cornoers will match up with the edges. Then put the UL/UR edges and corners in their places using U turns.

Here is an example of how you would put the UL/UR edges in their positions after you have oriented the edges.

Do the scramble: M' U2 M2 U2 M U M' U2 M' U M' U2 M'

I will provide the moves to do each step I described above.

*Get the UL/UR piece opposite each other:* U' M' U2 M'

*Connect the edges with their corresponding corners:* It happens that this has already been done.

*Adjust U face so that UL/UR edges are all solved:* U


*Edge Orientation:*

You didn't ask for this, but you can have it anyway. I went through all of the algs previously posted for EO, and picked out the shortest ones. The UL/DB stuff is what pieces are disoriented.

2:
UF/UB M' U M U' M' U M'
DF/DB M U M U' M' U M'
UF/DB M' U M' U M U M'
UL/UB M' U M' U2 M' U M'

4:
All Top Layer: M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UR/UL/DF/DB M U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UL/UF/UR/DF M' U M'
UL/UB/DF/DB M2 U' M' U M'

6:
All of 'em: M' U M' U M U M' U2 M' U M'

I have only really memorized 4 or 5 of them, because you can turn them into other cases pretty easily.

Lol, took me a long time to type all of that, so I hope you might use at least some of it.

Good luck!


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2009)

if you can wait...say...1 1/2 months, I'll have my CMLL video set ready. I'll show how I recognize them and how I would execute them as well


----------



## deco122392 (May 10, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> if you can wait...say...1 1/2 months, I'll have my CMLL video set ready. I'll show how I recognize them and how I would execute them as well



ahhh ok (= This i want to see. I am using coll for the cmll step but I am still interest (and still lethargic)


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2009)

deco122392 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > if you can wait...say...1 1/2 months, I'll have my CMLL video set ready. I'll show how I recognize them and how I would execute them as well
> ...



I use a lot of COLL adapted CMLLs and some of my algs are a little bad


----------



## deco122392 (May 10, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> deco122392 said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



still looking forward to it  and mah mum just got a new camera, maby ill be able to help


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

Learning Roux is not off to an easy start...I'll practice fridrich for 1 1/2 months until you have the video up. So much for starting Roux, only if I could under stand better. Thanks to soccerking, I finally get how to do block building and UL/UR permutation. All because of that darn CMLL.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 11, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Learning Roux is not off to an easy start...I'll practice fridrich for 1 1/2 months until you have the video up. So much for starting Roux, only if I could under stand better. Thanks to soccerking, I finally get how to do block building and UL/UR permutation. All because of that darn CMLL.



Why don't you just do 2-look corners> you need 9 algs total. and you should already know them from 4 look last layer.


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> I can try to explain it right now, but it will be difficult without doing a video.
> 
> *The Blocks:*
> 
> ...


I guess you meant to say sticker, but thought about this a lot and came to the conclusion thats it's the opposite color sticker instead of the same color "stick."Haha I make myself laugh.

I also believe that it should be M U2 M. You messed me up on that part too. I fould it very useful. Now I get the whole thing.
I also believe that...huh?...what?...you're telling me to shut up?...oh..okay....


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

I need a LOT of help with block building. Sorry for double posting, but i figured this had to have it's on post since the last one was too big.


----------



## irontwig (May 11, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> I need a LOT of help with block building. Sorry for double posting, but i figured this had to have it's on post since the last one was too big.



I'm no master of Roux, and it isn't even my main method, but here's some stuff:

3x2x1a: If you can't plan the entire block during inspection, plan a 2x2x1 and track the other pieces. Knowing your colour scheme helps quite a bit, I would say.

3x2x1b: Keep in mind that you can use the M-slice for pairing up and splitting and LOCK AHEAD


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

Wow, I'm bad at planning. I can just barely make the cross with fridrich.


----------



## deco122392 (May 11, 2009)

ok im uploading a video with a few examples of blockbuilding with the roux method.

edit: it didnt upload.....


----------



## spdcbr (May 11, 2009)

Thanks a lot waffle I'm a rebel now. 
..................l................................
..................l................................
..................l................................
..................V..............................


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 11, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Thanks a lot waffle I'm a rebel now.
> ..................l................................
> ..................l................................
> ..................l................................
> ..................V..............................



LOLOL Nice! I love that propaganda banner


----------



## soccerking813 (May 11, 2009)

Just noticed that. It is really nice. Well done making it. I am attempting to make a Roux avatar for myself.

And a little more on topic. I have recently, like in the past 48 hours, seen my times drop... alot. Day before yesterday I was averaging around 40 for a session of around 50. Today my average of 60 was 34.90 I think.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 11, 2009)

isn't that a bad thing
from 40->45 is bad, right?


----------



## soccerking813 (May 11, 2009)

Sorry, that was a typo. I went from 40 to 35.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 11, 2009)

ah
btw, you made your avatar with Gimp.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 11, 2009)

NICE avatar and I made the banner out of boredom using paint for like the first time in 5 years 

On topic - I am dedicated into creating my CMLL video set. Once I finish learning anti-sune cases, I'll begin the editing and uploading.


----------



## Rawn (May 12, 2009)

I'm looking forward to see which CMLLs you use. I still got the Pi and T cases to learn.

I made a banner as well.


----------



## JLarsen (May 13, 2009)

lmao kanga roux


----------



## *LukeMayn* (May 17, 2009)

seems like roux is the rebel method now... NICE


----------



## soccerking813 (May 20, 2009)

Yep, Roux is a rebel.

And since I haven't really seen my times going down at all in the past week, I am going to look at a new approach to Roux after the 1x2x3 blocks.

So, first you make the 1x2x3 blocks just like normal, but then, instead of doing the corners, Eo, etc... I am going to try out how well doing the following works:

1.) After making the blocks, insert the BD edges into it's correct position with correct edge positioning.

2.) Insert the FD edge, while orienting the U edges.

3.) Solve the LL using Corner OLL and full PLL. Would be better to use ZBLL, but I don't know those algs yet. 

I know, the use of Fridrich algs is not pretty, but I think that the F2L strategy and orienting the edges makes up for it a little, maybe. I am gonna generate the algs for EO tonight/tomorrow.

Just wondering what you people think about this.


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 20, 2009)

bad idea. It just doesn't feel right.


----------



## soccerking813 (May 20, 2009)

Hmm, when I tried it at first it felt pretty good. I will have to wait 'til tomorrow to see if it works during times solves.

And when doing this I sometimes do random F2L. Like, I will do the first bottom edge, then insert 2 opposite c/e pairs, then another edge, etc...


----------



## EmersonHerrmann (May 21, 2009)

Hmph...PB average of 5 with Roux is now sub-19....next its adapting to red on the D face.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 21, 2009)

EmersonHerrmann said:


> Hmph...PB average of 5 with Roux is now sub-19....next its adapting to red on the D face.



wow emerson! you're catching up to my times...well I haven't been practicing and i'm still stuck at sub-17


----------



## JTW2007 (Jun 1, 2009)

Great vids. Does anyone think I can get sub 17 in time for nationals using Roux? I really like the method, it's just a matter of whether or not I can learn it in time.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 1, 2009)

JTW2007 said:


> Great vids. Does anyone think I can get sub 17 in time for nationals using Roux? I really like the method, it's just a matter of whether or not I can learn it in time.



Learning is easy... mastering is hard...depending on how much you will devote yourself to roux will affect your times. it took me a while (a year) to get sub-20 because I didn't give my roux solves enough effort. But if practice roux non-stop like bigGreen you'll get sub-17 easy. BigGreen does sub-12 roux and he's only been using roux for 1 1/2 years.


----------



## JTW2007 (Jun 13, 2009)

Sorry for the small bump, but I want to re-ask my question now that I have more information. I finally managed to understand Roux last night, and I now have a PB of 30.71 using Roux with 2-Step Corners. If I were to learn CxLL, do you think I'd be able to qualify for nationals using Roux?


----------



## Richard (Jun 14, 2009)

Alright, if anyone would like, i'm going to nationals, i've been solving with roux for over 2 years now, i'm avg'ing like low 15's, i can help anyone who needs it there...Richard Meyer...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 14, 2009)

JTW2007 said:


> Sorry for the small bump, but I want to re-ask my question now that I have more information. I finally managed to understand Roux last night, and I now have a PB of 30.71 using Roux with 2-Step Corners. If I were to learn CxLL, do you think I'd be able to qualify for nationals using Roux?



no. blocks are more important. with 2 look corners you should still manage sub 5



Richard said:


> Alright, if anyone would like, i'm going to nationals, i've been solving with roux for over 2 years now, i'm avg'ing like low 15's, i can help anyone who needs it there...Richard Meyer...



HI! I learned a lot from your tutorials. why'd you remove them? Also low 15s isn't bad but have you heard about big green? He's avg sub-13


----------



## Richard (Jun 14, 2009)

Yea, I knew some guys have gotten pretty quick with it. I just don't have time to practice anymore. I was receiving a lot of complaints about my videos, and they had been up over 2 years and were kind of outdated so I took them down. I figured someone else would make a tutorial who had more free time than me, so i thank you for that.


----------



## pjk (Jun 14, 2009)

JTW2007 said:


> Sorry for the small bump, but I want to re-ask my question now that I have more information. I finally managed to understand Roux last night, and I now have a PB of 30.71 using Roux with 2-Step Corners. If I were to learn CxLL, do you think I'd be able to qualify for nationals using Roux?


Jackson, it depends on how much you practice. Do worry what others think. All you can do is try to practice and try the best you can.

Aren't you averaging like 19 seconds with Fridrich? If so, I'd suggest trying to go sub-17 with Fridrich instead so you can for sure qualify, and then work with Roux after Nationals.


----------



## JTW2007 (Jun 15, 2009)

pjk said:


> Jackson, it depends on how much you practice. Do worry what others think. All you can do is try to practice and try the best you can.
> 
> Aren't you averaging like 19 seconds with Fridrich? If so, I'd suggest trying to go sub-17 with Fridrich instead so you can for sure qualify, and then work with Roux after Nationals.



Yeah, I may just do that. I may be able to do both in time. I don't think it'd take me long to get sub-17 with Fridrich, as I'm averaging at 17.61 now. Maybe just get that out of the way and then learn to be cool...


----------



## Waacm (Jun 23, 2009)

While i cannot see the videos because my computer no longer loads youtube, i am sure they are excellent. I just found a text instruction for it, and it is an interesting idea, though i am not going to learn the algorithms for it, i might use it a little, but all I would do is orient the top four corners as if all i wanted to do was get the yellow on top, and then i'd finish the F2L and continue OLL and PLLs as needed


----------



## Waffle's Minion (Jul 19, 2009)

Waffle, this is just what i needed! I just learned 4lll and intuitive f2l from Badmephisto's videos. I am finding this to be very boring and i think this method actually looks like fun!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jul 19, 2009)

Waffle's Minion said:


> Waffle, this is just what i needed! I just learned 4lll and intuitive f2l from Badmephisto's videos. I am finding this to be very boring and i think this method actually looks like fun!



Only one step in roux is boring...step 3 corners 

YES I have a minion


----------



## Waffle's Minion (Jul 19, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Waffle's Minion said:
> 
> 
> > Waffle, this is just what i needed! I just learned 4lll and intuitive f2l from Badmephisto's videos. I am finding this to be very boring and i think this method actually looks like fun!
> ...



That is right you do have a minion..


----------



## gan_ws (Aug 1, 2009)

nice one dude, i hope this method is much faster than Algorithms'


----------



## elcarc (Aug 1, 2009)

thanks these are like the only roux methods tuts on youtube


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 1, 2009)

Waffle's Minion said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Waffle's Minion said:
> ...



Then I'm guessing you already had an account on these forums to know waffle.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 1, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Waffle's Minion said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...


ummm...school/youtube?


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 3, 2009)

When will the anti-sune algorithms be up?


----------



## Zaxef (Aug 3, 2009)

I will definitely watch these when I can (when my girlfriend is at work.. since she's glaring at me right now LOL )


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> When will the anti-sune algorithms be up?



once I get nicer algs.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> once I get nicer algs.



I have really nice anti-sun algs with great recognition pattern, do you want me to show you?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

Please post. I'll make the video If I like them  unless you have a video


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Sorry, no video's but I'll post them up soon.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Sorry, no video's but I'll post them up soon.



Great! btw, are they optimum for Roux?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

AUF so that the oriented corner is at FL, then look for the colours that match.



waffle=ijm said:


> Great! btw, are they optimum for Roux?



I believe so, but I can't be sure, Anti-Sune is the only orientation that I know all of the algs for, I also know half of Sune and Half of H, as well as easy recognition for them.

EDIT: What do you think Waffle?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> AUF so that the oriented corner is at FL, then look for the colours that match.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I haven't looked at them yet. But I will later.

EDIT - WOW the recognition is easy.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> EDIT - WOW the recognition is easy.



Mhhmm, wait a sec, please.

EDIT: It was from here. I just made new algs and pictures, took a few minutes, I have it done for Sune too, do you want to see those?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > EDIT - WOW the recognition is easy.
> ...



not really I have finished sune. but please post for to others to see


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Here we go, same type of recognition.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGoings...do you have moar?


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 3, 2009)

http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Miscellaneous.html
It says here that your goal for step four should be 3 seconds? Is it possible to orient, do L and R edges, AND do the last step?]

edit: Here are the last words for step 4:

_*Using this simple technique (and a good cube), you can solve the last 6 edges and 4 centers in about 3 seconds on average (inspection and U adjustement included). No need to learn highly engineered last-layer sequences, and the few fingertricks based on <M, U> come quick.

- When centers are oriented (orange/red on top), the orientation pattern is very easy to recognize. Solving the last corner-edge pair of Step 2 almost always ends with an R/R' move. This means that you can choose to use r/r' if needed and orient centers early. Most of Step 3 sequences leave this orientation unchanged. It's often possible to recognize the orientation pattern of edges before the end of Step 3.
- The orientation step can be very fast, especially when there are exactly three bad edges in U-side. In 13 cases out of 32, it requires five moves or less. If you orient centers early, you can immediately detect a lucky case for this method.- Orientation sequences always end with M', and before this move, you have the choice between U and U'. Note that 4b sequences frequently begin with an inner slice move. In fact, 4a and 4b can be one only step. It's easy to locate L/R-edges during the orientation step (white and yellow facelets - bright colors - help in tracking them), even when going almost full speed. With practice, you'll see that merging 4a and 4b is a kind of natural auto-optimization.
- Step 4c sometimes begin with a U2 move, so don't put U-corners in place too fast at the end of 4b. Such an optimization is automatic when 4c is U2M2U2, and more difficult with a 3-cycle.*_

That's it, but how to you detect and what is a lucky case?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> miniGoings...do you have moar?



Yes, I'm making them for all of the cases, but I don't think I'll post them yet.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

@spdcbr - Yes. If I can see the case immediately I can sub-3 all of step 4


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> @spdcbr - Yes. If I can see the case immediately I can sub-3 all of step 4



I can do each sub-step sub-2, but It feels like I should be doing 4b faster, how do you do it?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > @spdcbr - Yes. If I can see the case immediately I can sub-3 all of step 4
> ...



while orienting, track the UL/UR piece. 

*after orientation*

if one piece is already on DF or DB, you know to put the other piece on UB or UF and then do M'U2M', adjust the U face and insert.


if both pieces are on DB/DF, adjust the U face and insert.

if one (or both) piece(s) is(are) on the M slice but on UB/UF, you know to do M2 adjust the U face and insert.

if no piece is on the M slice there are 2 possibilities
-both are correctly oriented and positioned on UL/UR
- both are correctly oriented but no positioned. adjust the U face and M2. adjust the U face and insert.

eventually you know what piece will go where with one glance and then you can just let that experience guide you.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> while orienting, track the UL/UR piece.
> 
> *after orientation*
> 
> ...



Wow, thanks, do you AUF after orientation?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

no I move directly into UL/UR. also after UL/UR if you see a chance to AUF incorrectly but make the case easier go for it


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> no I move directly into UL/UR. also after UL/UR if you see a chance to AUF incorrectly but make the case easier go for it



Usually I put the edges into the bottom using (M U2 M') or (M' U2 M) if they aren't already together. Then I AUF, M2 and AUF again.

Do you think the steps on Waterman's site is worth learning?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > no I move directly into UL/UR. also after UL/UR if you see a chance to AUF incorrectly but make the case easier go for it
> ...



...that's why I do...I though you meant right after the orientation.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Do you think that this has any potential?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Do you think that this has any potential?



yes. if you can recognize the case quickly.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 3, 2009)

Thanks a lot for that link.
I'm going to use that page for crap cases only.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> yes. if you can recognize the case quickly.



I'm thinking that I might learn the last 24 algs first, because my M ring 3 cycles take forever to recognize.




Stachuk1992 said:


> Thanks a lot for that link.
> I'm going to use that page for crap cases only.



How are you going to tell if it's a crap case or not?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > yes. if you can recognize the case quickly.
> ...


hmm...it seems that I misinterpreted the method a tad, but I meant learning algs for cases that I usually suck at for regular Roux solves.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> hmm...it seems that I misinterpreted the method a tad, but I meant learning algs for cases that I usually suck at for regular Roux solves.



Would that be for orientation, L+R placement, or the M-ring? I think I might switch to using this for all of my solves, seems pretty fast, I'm calculating the average move counts right now.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 3, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > hmm...it seems that I misinterpreted the method a tad, but I meant learning algs for cases that I usually suck at for regular Roux solves.
> ...


umm...bad cases for all of those.
Spread throughout.
I'll dedicate an hour to getting 'algs' that I'll use tomm.
avg of 50: 36.52
sub35 tomm.

request:
What's NMCMLL all about?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Stachuk1992 said:
> ...


non matching blocks.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 3, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> request:
> What's NMCMLL all about?



I suggest that you don't worry about it untill after you have learned full CMLL, and have waaay to much time on your hands.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2009)

No. I hate that approach of 'one step at a time.'
I learned F2L, OLL, and PLL simultaneously. It's the way I work.
Over the next week or so, I'll be working on blocks, CMLL, NMCMLL (I get the main concept, and I've even applied it to 2x2FMC because I was bored), and some 'algs' for the last 6 edges.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 4, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> No. I hate that approach of 'one step at a time.'
> I learned F2L, OLL, and PLL simultaneously. It's the way I work.
> Over the next week or so, I'll be working on blocks, CMLL, NMCMLL (I get the main concept, and I've even applied it to 2x2FMC because I was bored), and some 'algs' for the last 6 edges.



The time you save by doing NMCLL you will lose on recognition. I can guarentee it.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > No. I hate that approach of 'one step at a time.'
> ...


ugh...how many times must I say this?
The only 'times' that I actually care about are OH BLD Magic ItA. 

I like this concept, and plan to get good at it eventually.
It's like learning F2L rather than keyhole. Harder to recog, but will be worth it in the long run.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 4, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> I like this concept, and plan to get good at it eventually.
> It's like learning F2L rather than keyhole. Harder to recog, but will be worth it in the long run.



Are you planning on being fully colour neutral as well?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > I like this concept, and plan to get good at it eventually.
> ...


Hmm...not now. Too much of an inconvenience. hmm...I'll give it a try.
Eventually, I'll end up staying with just one color 'sheme,' probably, so I don't go too crazy 


Basically, I don't think it'll be worth it in the long run.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 4, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> but will be worth it in the long run



So you think that after your first block, scanning the entire cube, determining which of the 4 blocks is better to make, putting it together and trying to make up your recognition for an NMCMLL case is faster than starting the next block as soon as you finish the first and doing CMLL with lightning fast reaction?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > but will be worth it in the long run
> ...


let me put this shortly.
I'm beginning to like FMC.


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 7, 2009)

Hmmm? Where's the ZOMG everything is oriented CMLL set?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 7, 2009)

spdcbr said:


> Hmmm? Where's the ZOMG everything is oriented CMLL set?



I'll post it up right now 
EDIT: DONE! See first page


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 7, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm? Where's the ZOMG everything is oriented CMLL set?
> ...



Thanks!


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 7, 2009)

I think I'm going to leave fridrich and stick with roux now, I like the freedom on the blockbuilding! Only a week in and I already cut off 20 seconds!


----------



## piemaster (Aug 7, 2009)

Interesting, I wonder why I never came across this on youtube, I watched the whole tutorial, I'm still in the process of learning full CMLL, I hope the anti-sune comes up soon.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 7, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Interesting, I wonder why I never came across this on youtube, I watched the whole tutorial, I'm still in the process of learning full CMLL, I hope the anit-sune comes up soon.



They're relatively new. About 3 months old. I've only been doing the CMLL cases this month


----------



## piemaster (Aug 7, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting, I wonder why I never came across this on youtube, I watched the whole tutorial, I'm still in the process of learning full CMLL, I hope the anit-sune comes up soon.
> ...



How would you organize the cases like on the site made by Gilles Roux?
http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_3.html


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 7, 2009)

piemaster said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > piemaster said:
> ...



What do you mean. Roux's charts were hard for me. I recognized them as CxLLs. The chart here shows which pieces move and how to recognize. Then you can apply the Roux CMLL algorithms for that case.


----------



## Pancake's girl (Aug 7, 2009)

This is an excellent tutorial thank you.


----------



## darthyody (Aug 7, 2009)

Hello, I've been messing with Roux for the past week now.(best solve is 31 seconds, avg is 55 seconds) I like since it feels completely different than Fridrich unlike how Petrus seem so similar. 
Anyway, I have a few questions for Roux users.
1. Should I be color neutral for blockbuilding? (In fridrich, there are mixed answers)
2. For the EO step, when the 4 edges on the top layer are misoriented, I do this:M U2 M' U2 M U M'. It seems really slow but it's the best I have figured out. Is there a better way to orient these edges?
3. How fast should my averages be before I learn CLL?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 7, 2009)

darthyody said:


> Hello, I've been messing with Roux for the past week now.(best solve is 31 seconds, avg is 55 seconds) I like since it feels completely different than Fridrich unlike how Petrus seem so similar.
> Anyway, I have a few questions for Roux users.
> 1. Should I be color neutral for blockbuilding? (In fridrich, there are mixed answers)
> 2. For the EO step, when the 4 edges on the top layer are misoriented, I do this:M U2 M' U2 M U M'. It seems really slow but it's the best I have figured out. Is there a better way to orient these edges?
> 3. How fast should my averages be before I learn CLL?



1. Don't go neutral until you are confident in your block building
2. M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'. M' is faster than M
3. I averaged 20-23 before learning CMLL...I can still do sub-20 with two look corners.


----------



## darthyody (Aug 8, 2009)

Thanks waffle. That M' really makes it better.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 8, 2009)

Hey Waffle, I need some help with making my first block.

I use 1 of 2 different ways of building the first block:

*First Approach*
1. Solve the DBL + DFL corners and the DL edge (easy to see during inspection).
2. Pair up the FL + BL edges and the L center (on any face).
3. Connect the 1x1x3 blocks on L (quite easy and fast).

*Pros*:
-easy to find pieces in inspection
-very easy pair up steps
-good fingertricks
*Cons*:
-only 3 pieces to find in inpsection
-high move count

_~or~_

*Second Approach*
1. Connect the DBL corner with the BL edge, as well as the DFL corner with the FL (sometimes I can see it in inspection).
2. Place the "F2L pairs" together (extremely easy and fast).
3. Pair up the DL edge with the L center (usually 1 or 2 turns).
4. Place the 1x1x2 between the other 1x1x2s (only a few moves).

*Pros*:
-looks for 4 pieces during inspection
-pretty good finger tricks for first 2 steps
*Cons*:
-can be difficult at first to find a solution for the first step in inspection
-a lot of slice moves, especially for the last 2 steps

So basically, should I switch to making a 1x2x2 block first?
I really don't like this approach to the first block, but if it is more effective I might switch.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 8, 2009)

I always do 1x2x2 to 1x2x3 if I can't do 1x2x3 during inspection.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 8, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> I always do 1x2x2 to 1x2x3 if I can't do 1x2x3 during inspection.



...so I should scrap my other ideas and just learn how to make a 1x2x2?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 8, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > I always do 1x2x2 to 1x2x3 if I can't do 1x2x3 during inspection.
> ...



don't. I only like 1x2x2 to 1x2x3. but if you think that you can get fast with your ideas then stick to it and see what happens


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 8, 2009)

I'm going to do a few example solves using all 3 approaches and I'll see what that tells me.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 8, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> darthyody said:
> 
> 
> > Hello, I've been messing with Roux for the past week now.(best solve is 31 seconds, avg is 55 seconds) I like since it feels completely different than Fridrich unlike how Petrus seem so similar.
> ...



2 look corners? you mean OLL and PLL?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 8, 2009)

soccerking813 said:


> I can try to explain it right now, but it will be difficult without doing a video.
> 
> *The Blocks:*
> 
> ...



What's the EO algorithms? I thought it was M' U2 M', M2, and M' U' M' depending on the category?



waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



I thought you had to follow up with U2 while doing UR and UL?


----------



## Thomas09 (Aug 9, 2009)

There's just one thing that I find difficult about this method: How to you do M/ M' on big cubes. I have an Eastsheen and all the slices get out of alignment with each other resulting in a lock up. What's your way around this?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 9, 2009)

Thomas09 said:


> There's just one thing that I find difficult about this method: How to you do M/ M' on big cubes. I have an Eastsheen and all the slices get out of alignment with each other resulting in a lock up. What's your way around this?



Umm you try not to do M moves on big cubes.


----------



## Thomas09 (Aug 9, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Thomas09 said:
> 
> 
> > There's just one thing that I find difficult about this method: How to you do M/ M' on big cubes. I have an Eastsheen and all the slices get out of alignment with each other resulting in a lock up. What's your way around this?
> ...


But Roux requires a lot of M movement.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 9, 2009)

*update on my first block approach*

*Scrambles*

*1.* D L D' U2 F2 D2 U2 B D2 U2 R' F D2 R F2 D L R' D' B2 D' B F' R D2 R' D2 U' B2 L2

*2.* B' D2 L2 R F2 D F U F' D F' L' R' F2 L D U' L2 R D U' L B' F2 D2 B' U L F D

*3.* D B R' F D L D U2 L U R' U B U2 L2 U R2 B2 D2 L2 R F D' U2 L2 U' L' R' F' R2

*4.* B F2 D' U2 R2 D2 F D2 U' L2 R2 D' U L2 R' B2 F2 L R F' L' D2 U L F D2 U F D L

*5.* B' U2 R' B U B' D' B R' F' D2 U2 B' F L R B' L2 R D' U2 B2 U B' F D2 U2 F' D2 R2

*6.* L R' B F2 D' B F L2 R2 B F' D U2 R U' B2 U' B F' D2 U' B2 D B F2 D U L R' F2

*7.* B2 F R2 D2 U2 L' R2 B2 D' L2 D2 R' D F2 U2 B L B' D2 U L U' B' U' R B2 R' B L2 R2

*8.* F2 D' B' L2 D' U L2 R2 B2 L' B2 F' L2 B2 F U2 B' L' B F2 U B2 D2 U F U R2 D2 L' R

*9.* U R2 B F' D' R2 U2 F' L' R F D F' D2 L U' L R' B' F' L B D' U2 F D U2 B2 D2 L2

*10.* D2 B2 F U2 R B2 L' R D2 F' U R' F' L' R2 D2 B2 F2 D' U2 R F2 L R F' L2 U L R U2


*Solutions*

*1.*
_Inspection_ - x z2
_1x1x3_ - U2 l2 L U’ L y
_1x1x3_ - R u r’
_Pair up_ - u R2 u2
_Total_ - 11 STM

*2.*
_Inspection_ - x’ y’
_1x1x3_ - L2 U L U M2 y
_1x1x3_ - r’ U’ R
_Pair up_ - u R2 u2
_Total_ - 11 STM

*3.*
_Inspection_ - y2 x’
_1x1x3_ - u2 R U’ R2 U’ M2 y
_1x1x3_ - u’ M’ u’ r’ U2 u R
_Pair up_ - u’
_Total_ - 14 STM

*4.*
_Inspection_ - z’ y2
_1x1x3_ - R2 U’ r2 R’ U’ R2 y
_1x1x3_ – u’ r2 u R E R’
_Pair up_ - u
_Total_ - 13 STM

*5.*
_Inspection_ - x’ z
_1x1x3_ - U r’ U’ R U R’ y
_1x1x3_ - R u r2 u R
_Pair up_ - u R2 u2
_Total_ - 14 STM

*6.*
_Inspection_ - z
_1x1x3_ - U L R2 y
_1x1x3_ - R’ u’ R’ u’ r’ U2 u R
_Pair up_ - u’
_Total_ - 12 STM

*7.*
_Inspection_ - 
_1x1x3_ - U’ R U r’ y
_1x1x3_ - u r’ U R’
_Pair up_ - u
_Total_ - 9 STM

*8.*
_Inspection_ - x’
_1x1x3_ - R U’ R2 U2 M2 y
_1x1x3_ - R E R2 r’
_Pair up_ - u’
_Total_ - 10 STM

*9.*
_Inspection_ - z
_1x1x3_ - U’ R’ U r U’ y’ r2 y
_1x1x3_ - R’ u’ R’ r’
_Pair up_ - u’ R2 u2
_Total_ – 13 STM

*10.*
_Inspection_ - y
_1x1x3_ - r2 U y’ M U’ R2 y
_1x1x3_ - r U’ M E r’
_Pair up_ - u
Total - 11 STM


*Average*

11 + 11 + 14 + 13 + 14 + 12 + 9 + 10 + 13 + 11 = 11.8 STM


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

Thomas09 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Thomas09 said:
> ...



I can Rw' R/Rw R' or you can use your entire finger like I do.

@minigoings - I'll take a look at them tomorrow.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 9, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> @minigoings - I'll take a look at them tomorrow.



Cool, I'm just so pumped about this, I thought that they would all be +15 move count. My highest was 14 and lowest was 9, with an average of 11.8. I'm going to improve this approach so I can create either one of the 1x1x3s first, depending on which one is faster.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Thomas09 said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



uhh...who in the world uses roux to solve big cubes?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

piemaster said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > Thomas09 said:
> ...


you can use k4. I use redux with roux.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

Could you answer my questions on page 37?


----------



## soccerking813 (Aug 9, 2009)

About your first question. What I was talking about it using just a one look, one algorithm for orienting all the edges. You can use what you mentioned too, and it does the exact same thing. Not sure if it is faster or slower though.


----------



## JTW2007 (Aug 9, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



Or you could solve directly using Stadler, and trigger a single r or l slice with the standard Roux triggers. I think that would work the best in combination with Roux on 3x3.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 9, 2009)

piemaster said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



Um, yes, I think Waffle meant M' U2 M'.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



Well, that clears things up. What times to you average in roux?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

piemaster said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > piemaster said:
> ...



Whoops yes U2, and I avg sub-17.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

i was asking miniGOINGS


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

piemaster said:


> i was asking miniGOINGS



LOL it's in his sig


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > i was asking miniGOINGS
> ...



But that's his PB averages  got you there.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

piemaster said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > piemaster said:
> ...



Indeed you did.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 9, 2009)

I have a question on inspection for the first 1x3x3. How do you do find all the pieces and use them? When I'm doing them, and I match up the first pair I lose the other pair except for the edge because I put it on L or R and do M and U to match up the pairs, so as far as I can go I can only see the 1x2x2, how to you find and use the pieces for the first step?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 9, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Scrambles
> 
> 1. D L D' U2 F2 D2 U2 B D2 U2 R' F D2 R F2 D L R' D' B2 D' B F' R D2 R' D2 U' B2 L2
> 
> ...


_*
My Solutions*_
1. y' F D' M' U M2 U2 B - 7 STM
Easy pairing. You can see this often during inspections

2. x' M' U R2 x2 y Rw U M' U2 Rw' U - 9 STM
A "pair" can be a DR and DRF piece. as long as they are connected...it's a pair

3 U' R' F R2 y R2 U' R U2 - 8 STM
The 1x2x2 was easy to find and the 1x2x3 was easy to track

4. x2 U2 Rw' U x' R' U' M' B - 7 STM
There was a free pair for an easy 1x2x3

5. z y M' U' M2 F' - 4 STM
Being partial neutral never hurts

6. y2 D U' M U2 M2 L U' - 7 STM
Easy 1x2x2 block.

7. z U' L D y R' U2 F Rw' F - 8 STM
Another easy 1x2x2

8. x2 F U' M2 U L' B2 - 6 STM
Partial neutrality NEVER hurts

9. y U Lw2 U M2 U' R B2 U M F2 R2 L' U - 13 (LOL) STM
I didn't think this through too much

10. y' R' F D2 U2 M2 Rw' U - 7 STM
I thought this one through

7 9 8 7 4 7 8 6 13 7
Avg 7.6 moves 

This isn't saying your approach is bad. These sets had easy 1x2x2s and I'm partial neutral. Practice both so you know which to use on certain situations.

@piemaster - TRACKING PIECES. you have to know where the pieces go if they end up on the DB area, that's your blind spot. at least you know that they are at the blind spot. You should be able to fix pieces even if they are in your blind spot. that's what tracking pieces is about. I just know where they are which helps since you don't have to waste 3 seconds looking of that last pair


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 10, 2009)

piemaster said:


> What times to you average in roux?



An hour ago I got:

1. 29.86
2. 27.68
3. 28.94
4. (34.06) 
5. 26.04
_*6. 27.84
7. 24.25
8. 30.36
9. 28.32
10. (22.40)*_
11. 28.28
12. 26.67

Best: 22.40
Worst: 34.05
Average: 27.82
_*RA of 5: 26.80*_

No lucky cases, pops, or DNF's. On the 34.06 I screwed up on the CMLL case (I'm in the process of learning full).


----------



## piemaster (Aug 10, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > What times to you average in roux?
> ...



When did you start?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 10, 2009)

piemaster said:


> When did you start?



What do you mean?


----------



## Nghia (Aug 10, 2009)

Woah, I'm finally in the process of switching from Fridrich to Roux, and just like many of you guys have said, this method is so much fun ! (and I find the M moves very sexy to end a solve ) 
Thanks Waffle for your videos, they did help me, even though I found Roux' site very clear 
I've been practicing for 2 days now, and my best average of 12 is 34.87s with a PB of 23.xx ! I think this is positive, I'll keep practicing until the end of summer 

Switching from Fridrich to Roux is pretty hard I think, I've been doing Fridrich for more than a year, and naturally have gotten a restricted view of the cube, and this Roux' blockbuilding forces me to think outside the box, which is a great thing in cubing. I've actually been lucky enough to have met Gilles Roux himself, but never realized it, until now 

I've filmed him solving the cube here





Allright then, later guys !


----------



## Truncator (Aug 12, 2009)

I've done a few solves with your tutorials and I'm really impressed so far. I printed out some CMLL algorithms and I'll learn those (nine or so) and if I like it enough, I'll switch from Fridrich. I'm kind of torn between the two because I spent all that time learning PLLs and random tricks, though.

Thank you very much, Waffle.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 12, 2009)

I better start out by changing that signature of yours.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

I am sorry for misleading everyone by saying that I started using Roux in May. Upon review, the starting time is April 19th, 2009, at 7:14 PM. My bad.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> I am sorry for misleading everyone by saying that I started using Roux in May. Upon review, the starting time is April 19th, 2009, at 7:14 PM. My bad.



You're pretty fast, can I see a breakdown of your roux times?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > I am sorry for misleading everyone by saying that I started using Roux in May. Upon review, the starting time is April 19th, 2009, at 7:14 PM. My bad.
> ...



Lol, I'm not that fast, Big Green and Waffle own me.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



Well, I'm at the bottom of the food chain. SO you can still help .


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Well, I'm at the bottom of the food chain. SO you can still help .



I would love to help you! But I don't know how my breakdown would help... anyway, it's about 6-8-6-5.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

So I'll aim for those times .


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> So I'll aim for those times .



Nononono, aim for 1-1-1-1. It is more efficient.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

lol


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> lol (too short)



...or go through ever WCA scramble possible untill you find 1st block skips...

EDIT: And I don't think that your message was too short.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > lol (too short)
> ...



Was that a joke?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Was that a joke?



Kind of, but not really, it would be very easy to do on CubeExplorer. Just keep hitting "Create WCA Scramble" untill you see a 1st Block skip.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

To get a PB you mean?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> To get a PB you mean?



I guess, but if you found enough of them you could get averages with great times.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

That's a cheap way  then that avg./single PB would be Lucky, I like non-lucky better.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

Are the times in you sig singles, luckies, or averages of 5 or 12?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 13, 2009)

I personally don't take averages.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 13, 2009)

piemaster said:


> I personally don't take averages.



Oh, okey dokey then.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 14, 2009)

@waffle=ijm
Where did you keep the camera when you filmed the tutorials?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 14, 2009)

piemaster said:


> @waffle=ijm
> Where did you keep the camera when you filmed the tutorials?



On a tripod


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

what? did your hand go around it? were you in a hugging postion?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 16, 2009)

piemaster said:


> what? did your hand go around it? were you in a hugging postion?



I had to wrap my arms around. So this caused a lot of failing angles.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

Is it okay if you post a breakdown of your times?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

Ok, Waffle, do you have any tips for the learning order of CMLL?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

Waffle, how do you read the COLL algs on bob burtons page?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

...and Waffle is offline.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

Darn it, and I just started dribbling him with questions!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

I could answer them for you.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

That would be great, what about starting with the questions on page 42?

edit: only question is how to read bob burtons COLL algs.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

Ok, but what does waffle=ijm mean anyway?



piemaster said:


> Is it okay if you post a breakdown of your times?



Um, now I'm about 5-7-5-5. I think Waffle is 4-5-3-3, or something like that.



piemaster said:


> Waffle, how do you read the COLL algs on bob burtons page?



I recognize them as shown here.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

waffle is ijm?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Ok, but what does waffle=ijm mean anyway?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Waffle said he was sub 17 though...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Waffle said he was sub 17 though...



Umm 4 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 15.



piemaster said:


> waffle is ijm?



And what is ijm?

EDIT: I updated the link in my previous post.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

a jam. lol


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

piemaster said:


> a jam. lol



Actually?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

Well, waffle and jam doesn't go well together, does it?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

Did you see the link I gave you? Did you figure out that 15 < 17?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

Yeah to both. And how did you practice blockbuilding?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

I divided it into sub-steps. That way I didn't have to build as much in one try. Now I'm slowly increasing the number of pieces in each sub-step, therefor reducing the number of sub-steps needed, and reducing how many looks I'm using.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 16, 2009)

Ok
breakdown
3
5
3
4 
total - 15 +/- recognition

i j m is a secret code. anyone who figures it out gets a nickle. seriously I'll mail to you

also you can probably these for recognition I sure did.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

I jammed me?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Ok
> breakdown
> 3
> 5
> ...



I'm thinking...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 16, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Ok, Waffle, do you have any tips for the learning order of CMLL?



I did
T
U
L
Pi
H
S
-S

you'll never get the meaning of i j m so don't even try
I have announced that it means "i'm just memorizing" but this is wrong as well


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14009
Somebody should make a guide for roux lsomething like this...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 16, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, Waffle, do you have any tips for the learning order of CMLL?
> ...



You did Sune and AntiSune last? Is it a bad idea that I'm doing them first?

http://www.ijm.nl/ ?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 16, 2009)

piemaster said:


> http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14009
> Somebody should make a guide for roux lsomething like this...


I will. In about 2 hours 

and then post it here


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

yeah, and make sure you include how to practice step 4 without solving it again and again. ;p


----------



## piemaster (Aug 16, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14009
> ...



no, no! Make a thread about it!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > piemaster said:
> ...



I don't want anymore Roux threads that aren't needed. This thread is like Roux central.



miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



it's good you're doing them first. they are a pain to learn. I did them in order of easiest to hardest...

and no. that's not what i j m is.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> I don't want anymore Roux threads that aren't needed. This thread is like Roux central.



Yea, there are _way_ too many Roux threads, I guess this place is officially dubbed "Roux Central".



waffle=ijm said:


> it's good you're doing them first. they are a pain to learn. I did them in order of easiest to hardest...



That way, it gets easier as it goes on.



waffle=ijm said:


> and no. that's not what i j m is.



That's all I got.

EDIT: _International Justice Mission_ is all that goolge gets.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > I don't want anymore Roux threads that aren't needed. This thread is like Roux central.
> ...


my bad


you should change the name to Roux central xP


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> EDIT: _International Justice Mission_ is all that goolge gets.



sounds cool, but nope


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

Hey gears, when did you start Roux again?



waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > EDIT: _International Justice Mission_ is all that goolge gets.
> ...



Does it have anything to do with anything that I would know about? Or is it an inside joke?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Hey gears, when did you start Roux again?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not sure. I J M are the 3 words that I use for internet stuff


----------



## dannyz0r (Aug 17, 2009)

I'm Jules Manalang?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

dannyz0r said:


> I'm Jules Manalang?



:fp it's more complex than that


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

For the internet...


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

where's the guide you promised waffle?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> where's the guide you promised waffle?



my computer crashed and now I have to redo it :fp sorry


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> where's the guide you promised waffle?



He said in _about_ 2 hours. Chill.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > where's the guide you promised waffle?
> ...



Sure, I will, but it's been over 2 hours. I'm just soo eager to see it.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

But his computer crashed, so it's going to be another 2 hours.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

It'll be okay, just a night's sleep.  And by the way waffle, if you're going to not make a new thread, then you should make a table of contents thing. On the front page, linking it to your post.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> It'll be okay, just a night's sleep.  And by the way waffle, if you're going to not make a new thread, then you should make a table of contents thing. On the front page, linking it to your post.



i will


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> It'll be okay, just a night's sleep.  And by the way waffle, if you're going to not make a new thread, then you should make a table of contents thing. On the front page, linking it to your post.



pie uzagenius

yea im eager too actually im back to my sub40 - sub 35 stuck area

but oh well its still much fun to solve it the roux way.

a side note anyone here ever heard of french cajun food?
theres a restraunt down the street called: papa rouxs cajun food 0.0


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

So Waffle, you're 3-5-3-4? Cool, I just did an average of 10 for each step, and I'm 6-7-6-5. I'm getting closer to you!


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

lol, miniGOINGS is creeping up on waffle.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

And full CMLL is only a little while away.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> So Waffle, you're 3-5-3-4? Cool, I just did an average of 10 for each step, and I'm 6-7-6-5. I'm getting closer to you!



Your blocks...need work 
Your LSE is good.
2 look corners? aside from sune and anti-sune. you should aim for sub-4 corners with that.

_SEE FIRST POST FOR THE ROUX SUB-20 GUIDE_


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

w00t! awesome waffle!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > So Waffle, you're 3-5-3-4? Cool, I just did an average of 10 for each step, and I'm 6-7-6-5. I'm getting closer to you!
> ...



Yea, they are so inconsistant. My edges are pretty awesome, if I get a good EO, and I can see the L+R pieces, it's usually sub-4. I'll work on my corners a lot.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

Fixed


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

Other than that it looks good. Now, I have like 10 hours a day to spend so I can get better than you .


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Other than that it looks good. Now, I have like 10 hours a day to spend so I can get better than you .



I never practice 3x3 anymore. so you'll catch up in no time at all.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Other than that it looks good. Now, I have like 10 hours a day to spend so I can get better than you .
> ...



You don't practice anymore? I hope! But then, who will I ask for help with Roux?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



as in I practice other cubes. mainly 2x2, 4x4, and 6x6. That's where 3x3 practice come from


----------



## bwatkins (Aug 17, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Other than that it looks good. Now, I have like 10 hours a day to spend so I can get better than you .



WOW must be nice...im lucky if i can sit down for an hour (usually about 20 mins)...but more power to ya!


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 17, 2009)

maybe you should include http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14204&page=2 as a link?

its my f2b solutions thread


----------



## piemaster (Aug 17, 2009)

waffle isn't online right now


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 17, 2009)

i know but this way he can read it when he gets online


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 17, 2009)

bwatkins said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Other than that it looks good. Now, I have like 10 hours a day to spend so I can get better than you .
> ...



Sorry, I meant "Now I *need* 10 hours a day to spend..." I'm sure that I don't _have_ that much time, but I _need_ it.

Hey Waffle, I'm changing the way I build the blocks. Thanks for all of your help!


----------



## piemaster (Aug 18, 2009)

My blocks suck. Any tips on how to get faster without just sovling the blocks over and over again?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Nope.

EDIT: Oh yea, take as much time as you need, like hours.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 18, 2009)

for all of the Rouxers:
http://rouxdiscussion.forummotion.com/forum.htm

I didn't feel it necessary to make yet another thread here about this.
If someone sees BigGreen somewhere, tell him about it.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 18, 2009)

We better tell gears too.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 18, 2009)

he'll find out. on this thread. plus, I see that there are 2 guests online right now, so he may be one of them.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

He regularly checks this thread, so as soon as he's online he should see it.



Stachuk1992 said:


> he'll find out. on this thread. plus, I see that there are 2 guests online right now, so he may be one of them.



Thats what I was thinking. Do you know who "iwaffle" is?


----------



## piemaster (Aug 18, 2009)

piemaster?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

piemaster said:


> piemaster?



Howdy! How did you change your name?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 18, 2009)

He didn't. I did.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 18, 2009)

I asked shachuk aka admin. to change it for me.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 18, 2009)

piemaster said:


> We better tell gears too.



woot im important xD

cool thanks for the forum info stach...err whatever the rest of your name is xP


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Coool, so is that officially going to be Roux Central as well?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Coool, so is that officially going to be Roux Central as well?


yes.


but the reason I made this site was so people didn't have to post on SpeedSolving. Go talk on RouxDiscussion. I'll re-name it later, maybe.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Coool, so is that officially going to be Roux Central as well?
> ...



...you could rename it Roux Central. Just a thought.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...




i second this motion

hint: say motion passed


----------



## Escher (Aug 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > i second this motion
> ...



whoop de doo, it was me.
Maybe if you stop spamming this thread pointlessly (I'm looking at piemaster too) and doing it in your new forum that would be nice.
Plus stachuk created the site, I think he gets the final word about what it's called. I.e, it aint a democracy.


----------



## piemaster (Aug 18, 2009)

We weren't spamming


----------



## Rubiks_Lizard (Aug 18, 2009)

this thread was created on my birthday


----------



## Escher (Aug 18, 2009)

piemaster said:


> We weren't spamming





> Rubiks_Lizard said:
> 
> 
> > this thread was created on my birthday
> ...



Hmm, really?
You know full well that there is a thread dedicated to F2B solutions.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Escher said:


> Hmm, really?
> You know full well that there is a thread dedicated to F2B solutions.



I thought this thread was dedicated to helping people learn the Roux method...


----------



## Escher (Aug 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Escher said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm, really?
> ...



Yup, it is. Seeing as he wanted tips on his F2Bs, I thought it best to direct him to somewhere with plenty of F2B examples. All that most people ever give when asked for blockbuilding tips is just 'practice' anyway.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Escher said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Escher said:
> ...



Oh, ok. I'm sorry for being such a jerk. I didn't mean to spam, just thought about chatting with people. Should speedsolving.com have a little chat room that can be in the corner of the screen?


----------



## Escher (Aug 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Oh, ok. I'm sorry for being such a jerk. I didn't mean to spam, just thought about chatting with people. Should speedsolving.com have a little chat room that can be in the corner of the screen?


Don't worry, I love being a jerk 
Well, it does have the link to the IRC chat room. Perhaps you should suggest setting up a 'shoutbox' in the Roux forum.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

Escher; said:


> Don't worry, I love being a jerk
> Well, it does have the link to the IRC chat room. Perhaps you should suggest setting up a 'shoutbox' in the Roux forum.



Haha, you might, but I don't .
Yea, I saw the link, but I think that if it was embeded in the page itself, people would be able to use it better.
That's a good idea, when we settle into the forum, and get everything else straightened out, we might just do that!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 18, 2009)

don't worry about spamming on this thread. I review each one and it seems useful I'll have link to it on the first post.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Aug 18, 2009)

HAHA!!! Totally forgot that I got the 500th post on this thread!! YEEE-HAAAW!!

EDIT: And I had 3 waffles for dinner .


----------



## Haste_cube (Aug 18, 2009)

It's been a loo0ng time for not cubing


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 19, 2009)

ermm what happend to the rouxdiscussion forum 0.0


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 19, 2009)

refresh the homepage (of SpeedSolving.)
It's been re-named.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 19, 2009)

lol i saw that GAH WHY I HATE YOUR SIG


----------



## TEGTaylor (Sep 29, 2009)

new roux pb 21.67, cmll skip!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 29, 2009)

Arg, I want to cube so badly.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 10, 2009)

Can anyone tell how i can build the second block EASY and efficient?
Last corner-edge pair is not the problem, but I'm bad at 1x2x2... always about 10 moves...
Is there a good way to do it, except building a pair and then attach the edge?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 10, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Can anyone tell how i can build the second block EASY and efficient?
> Last corner-edge pair is not the problem, but I'm bad at 1x2x2... always about 10 moves...
> Is there a good way to do it, except building a pair and then attach the edge?



That's how I would do it, but I suggest you look into "Matt's Block". If you don't like it, then don't use it, but if you do you can try it out.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 10, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Can anyone tell how i can build the second block EASY and efficient?
> Last corner-edge pair is not the problem, but I'm bad at 1x2x2... always about 10 moves...
> Is there a good way to do it, except building a pair and then attach the edge?



go color neutral with 1x2x2 with the pieces that make up the 1x2x3 when not color neutral. Then insert the last pair so it goes back into your color scheme...

EDIT - you can't do it efficiently if you do it easily.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 10, 2009)

I think to be color neutral on speedcubing isn't a good idea for me.
Do you use the "algorithms" from gilles roux's site for building the 1x2x2 block on the right site? And whst is your move count for the second block when you go fast?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 10, 2009)

I do use the algorithms from Roux's site but most of them are just intuitive.

12-13 is my average move count...I think...


----------



## Tiw (Oct 10, 2009)

Wow!
You're pretty efficient!^^
Could you make a more detailed tutorial for the second block that shows all of your tricks?
I'm sure it would help me a lot!
And could you tell me which cases of Gilles Roux's endless tables are not that intuitive?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 10, 2009)

I'd be glad to make a video, if I have the time.

er, you might want to learn some on the tables on roux's site. You can choose which you want. As I said, most of them are intuitive. when you get the hang of doing the second block using the tables on roux's site, then the rest will just be intuition so I can't tell you which is or isn't intuitive.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 10, 2009)

I already wait for the video 
But for now I will just have a closer look to the tables, I hope I become a little bit better!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 11, 2009)

I just found a faster way of doing the M-slice case where all corners are diagonally switched: U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U2, it's soooo fast.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> I just found a faster way of doing the M-slice case where all corners are diagonally switched: U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U2, it's soooo fast.



corners?

you mean edges.

there are several cases to that case but I like the E2 M' E2 since it's quicker for me. whatever works for you...

:fp


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 11, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > I just found a faster way of doing the M-slice case where all corners are diagonally switched: U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U2, it's soooo fast.
> ...



Sorry, yes I meant edges. How do you do E2 quickly?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

hold U layer with right thumb on FRU and index on BRU
hold D layer with left thumb on FLD and middle on BLD

perform Dw and while doing that push on BL with the left index and then D'

this way you still have the left ring for the M trigger.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 11, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> hold U layer with right thumb on FRU and index on BRU
> hold D layer with left thumb on FLD and middle on BLD
> 
> perform Dw and while doing that push on BL with the left index and then D'
> ...



Ok, I'll look into using that.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

wait wait

better yet do what I posted but hold BRU with you middle right finger.

This way you can do regular M trigger too.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 11, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> wait wait
> 
> better yet do what I posted but hold BRU with you middle right finger.
> 
> This way you can do regular M trigger too.



You do M by reaching over top of your middle finger? Wouldn't that restrict U movement?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

no no
with the way I described
You can M - with right index
You can M' - with left Ring

since when do you use E except in LSE with E2 M(') E2


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 11, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> no no
> with the way I described
> You can M - with right index
> You can M' - with left Ring
> ...



I'm just thinking, wouldn't it take a while to switch to that position though?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

no...I do it quickly enough,....


----------



## jms_gears1 (Oct 11, 2009)

i like doing for the dot case:
M2 z E M2 E
it works rather well if you have your R index finger on URB and your ring finger on DRB then move the E slice with your thumb,

its how i naturally hold the cubew anyway so it works for me.

and @waffle, i think you should make a seperate roux tutorial for the people who need to get better at roux not just for ppl who are trying to learn it


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 11, 2009)

Tiw said:


> And whst is your move count for the second block when you go fast?





waffle=ijm said:


> 12-13 is my average move count...I think...





Tiw said:


> Wow!
> You're pretty efficient!^^
> Could you make a more detailed tutorial for the second block that shows all of your tricks?


Optimal solvers average ~10 moves and can show you as many tricks as you want... What's so special about youtube videos?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

Johannes91 said:


> Tiw said:
> 
> 
> > And whst is your move count for the second block when you go fast?
> ...



worst case is 14 if I remember correctly..


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 11, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> worst case is 14 if I remember correctly..


That's correct, but what about it? My point is that I don't understand why so many beginners want to learn from youtube videos and only from youtube videos. If they want to get better at cubing, that's definitely not the only or best way to learn.

Maybe they just want to imitate <insert cool cuber here>, I don't know.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 11, 2009)

sorry, I misread your post. 

It is best that everyone should learn some parts for themselves, I guess.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Oct 12, 2009)

i think you misunderstand what i meant, 

for one i dont only learn from vids, for the most part i like watching other roux solvers solve and how they do it. 

as well as diffrent ways to build the blocks such as matts blocks, a lot of the times,explaining something through text followed by an acompanying video, is the best way of explaining something

i think the best way to learn, tricks, is to go over FMC roux solves and see how the blocks are built, then theres my thread for f2b

so as for the vids i wanted waffle to make i was talking more about the guide for sub 20 for noobs
here:
http://rouxcentral.forummotion.com/things-about-roux-f1/getting-sub-20-for-noobs-using-roux-t11.htm


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 12, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> What I said in my last post



I don't see the point in making new videos about more advanced steps...what I say in my tutorial is all I ever do in my solves. I just look ahead more than you and probably turn faster. That's all. And all of that can be improved by yourself.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 14, 2009)

After 3 or 2 days studying of these nice tables, I noticed that all "algs" are VERY intuitive, I can do the R block in about 16-17 moves.
But now I have the same Problem with step 4, I'm about 18-19 moves and I don't know how I can improve. I think optimization of 4a isn't a good idea for speedcubing.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 14, 2009)

Tiw said:


> After 3 or 2 days studying of these nice tables, I noticed that all "algs" are VERY intuitive, I can do the R block in about 16-17 moves.
> But now I have the same Problem with step 4, I'm about 18-19 moves and I don't know how I can improve. I think optimization of 4a isn't a good idea for speedcubing.



Optimize. Recognition will come with time.
4a is easy when you get the hang of it. Optimize it to make it faster.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 14, 2009)

Can you tell me the move count for 4a,b,c?
At the moment I have 7 ; 7 ; 4 in Stm.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 14, 2009)

I don't have the move count for those.

please PM Johannes91 about move counts


----------



## Tiw (Oct 14, 2009)

Okay, I do.
Do you use Gilles' table of optimization of step 4a?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 14, 2009)

My average movecount for step 4 is 14.8 moves I believe.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 14, 2009)

Not bad! And how many moves do you need for the sub-steps?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 14, 2009)

Average of 5 Step 4:

A: 5.66
B: 4.33
C: 4
Total: 14

Don't have time for a 12 right now, going to football soon. I took out the best and worst times and averaged the middle three.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 14, 2009)

you're amazing! 
If you have time, you can tell me how you do that!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 15, 2009)

Tiw said:


> you're amazing!
> If you have time, you can tell me how you do that!



EO while setting up L&R. L&R while setting up M-slice. M-slice while putting down cube. Average ~4 seconds I think (I haven't timed for about a month).


----------



## Tiw (Oct 16, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Tiw said:
> 
> 
> > you're amazing!
> ...



Interesting...And how you do that?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Oct 17, 2009)

roux central is dead?
the page doesnt render past the ad...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

Tiw said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Tiw said:
> ...



I'll do a couple solutions for you.

Let's try M' U2 M2 U M U' M2 U2 M' U' M U' M2 as a scramble. For EO, I do U2 M' U M' U2 M'. Now I see that the L&R edges will be placed beside each other by doing U. Because the corners don't match I would do a M' to put them on D. U moves the corners into there correct places and M2 inserts the edges. Then U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' solves it. Total solution is U2 M' U M' U2 M' U M' U M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' which is 16 moves long and has no M moves.

How about U2 M U2 M' U M U' M2 U2 M U M' U M U2 M U' M' U' M2 U M' U M. EO is U' M'. Doing a U would put the L&R edges apart from each other so we do U'. M' because the corners don't match. Then U M2 U' for L&R. M2 U2 M' U2 M to solve it. Total solution is U' M' U' M' U M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M which is 12 moves long.

Please feel free to ask questions or provide me with scrambles you want me to show you.


----------



## piemaster (Oct 17, 2009)

Mwahahah! I am naow a petrus user.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Mwahahah! I am naow a petrus user.



Okey dokey then. I think I should time one of my petrus solves.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 17, 2009)

Your example solves helps a lot!
I give you more srambles 
1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2 
2.) U' M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U M U2 M2 U M' U' M' U' M U M2 U2 
3.) M' U M' U M U2 M' U' M2 U M2 U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M U2 M2 U M


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

Tiw said:


> 1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2



EO is U M2 U M' U2 M'. U M' puts the L&R edges on D. U' M2 places them. Now we see that it is a double switch as I like to call it. So we do U M2 U2 M2. Total is U M2 U M' U2 M' U M' U' M2 U M2 U2 M2 which is 14 moves and has no M.



Tiw said:


> 2.) U' M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U M U2 M2 U M' U' M' U' M U M2 U2



EO is U2 M' U2 M'. U M solves the L&R edges. U D2 M' E2 M' solves the rest. Total is U2 M' U2 M' U M U D2 M' E2 M' which is 11 moves.



Tiw said:


> 3.) M' U M' U M U2 M' U' M2 U M2 U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M U2 M2 U M



EO is U M U' M' U M'. L&R is U M' U2 M. U solves it. Total is U M U' M' U M' U M' U2 M U which is 11 moves.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 17, 2009)

Okay, thank you!
I have to say that I don't understand your solution completely.
You're definitely right, you orient and permute simultaneously...
Do you use for that Roux's optimization table for step 4a?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Okay, thank you!
> I have to say that I don't understand your solution completely.
> You're definitely right, you orient and permute simultaneously...
> Do you use for that Roux's optimization table for step 4a?



No, I don't use the table. What I try to do is change the last 2 moves of EO so that I get a very fast L&R. While I'm inserting the L&R I try to solve the M-slice. It takes a lot of practice (at least it did for me ) but it's very easy to do once you get used to it.


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Oct 17, 2009)

Well I've been using roux for the last.....hour? and i'm really liking it, a lot more than fridrich although it feels more complicated.

Fridrich seems to be so much more stiff after I started learning roux...its weird ><


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

ArcticxWolf said:


> Well I've been using roux for the last.....hour? and i'm really liking it, a lot more than fridrich although it feels more complicated.
> 
> Fridrich seems to be so much more stiff after I started learning roux...its weird ><



Wow, after an hour you're approaching sub-1!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 17, 2009)

ArcticxWolf said:


> Well I've been using roux for the last.....hour? and i'm really liking it, a lot more than fridrich although it feels more complicated.
> 
> Fridrich seems to be so much more stiff after I started learning roux...its weird ><



Roux is not complicated...


----------



## Tiw (Oct 17, 2009)

Your EO looks very strange, when I have given you scrambles where the centers aren't oriented, you don't make an M-move first.
What are you doing here?

1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2 
EO is U M2 U M' U2 M'. U M' puts the L&R edges on D. U' M2 places them. Now we see that it is a double switch as I like to call it. So we do U M2 U2 M.
Total is U M2 U M' U2 M' U M' U' M2 U M2 U2 M2 which is 14 moves and has no M.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Your EO looks very strange, when I have given you scrambles where the centers aren't oriented, you don't make an M-move first.
> What are you doing here?
> 
> 1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2
> ...



Ok, so first thing I notice about this scramble is that centers are mixed up, and the bottom is a line. Then I see that the top is a triangle thing. If I were to do M I would have to AUF and then start my EO alg. Same with M'. By doing a U first, I can do M' to fix the centers, and then start my EO alg. But because my EO alg starts with M', I just combine them into M2. (If I did fix the centers first, my solution would have been M U M' U M' U2 M' U M' U M' U2 M U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' which is 5 moves longer.) So my EO is U M2 U M' U2 M'. Then I see the L edge at DB and the R edge at UL. By doing a U I can match up the edges. Then I do a M so that the edges are on the bottom. U' matches the corners, M2 places the L&R edges between the corners. Now before we do U' to finish the L&R sides, we see the M-slice edges that have to be switched. We do U M2 U2 M2 to solve it. I hope this made sense, any more questions?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS is starting to confuse me...and I thought I was a roux solver.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS is starting to confuse me...and I thought I was a roux solver.



Maybe you should post your solves.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS is starting to confuse me...and I thought I was a roux solver.
> ...



i'd need scrambles for that.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...





Tiw said:


> Your example solves helps a lot!
> I give you more srambles
> 1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2
> 2.) U' M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U M U2 M2 U M' U' M' U' M U M2 U2
> 3.) M' U M' U M U2 M' U' M2 U M2 U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M U2 M2 U M


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Oct 18, 2009)

10 hours later, I have finally broken sub 50 T_T.

By complicated, i meant the block building part. It's so...uncomfortable, haha.

usually, i'll line up green with white (like in the tutorial), then create the 2 f2l pairs, insert them, then line up blue with white and repeat. 
It seems incredibly slow compared to the block building techniques in your sample solves, but I can't seem to find similar cases in my own solves ><

I think it's the block building which is really slowing me down. step 4 takes me about 10-15 seconds, which means i spend something like, 30 seconds block building...:fp


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Your example solves helps a lot!
> I give you more srambles
> 1.) U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M U M2 U2 M' U2
> 2.) U' M2 U' M2 U2 M' U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U M U2 M2 U M' U' M' U' M U M2 U2
> 3.) M' U M' U M U2 M' U' M2 U M2 U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U M U2 M2 U M


1) First Solution
2)Second solution
3)last one.


----------



## JLarsen (Oct 18, 2009)

I think someone here might need to be a little more independent =x


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Tiw said:
> 
> 
> > Your example solves helps a lot!
> ...



Is my step 4 starting to be better than yours?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Is my step 4 starting to be better than yours?



Meh, I don't know. Move Count vs. Speed...I think you can win move count. And you're starting catch up on speed.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Is my step 4 starting to be better than yours?
> ...



Yea, but my broken finger means that I'm wristing all M moves now.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 18, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



we'll see soon enough.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 18, 2009)

Just did an average of 50 for step 4 (with inspection) and got: 4.3439583333333333333333333333333.


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Oct 18, 2009)

How can you possibly have the patience to do an average of 50...


----------



## Muesli (Oct 18, 2009)

What is this "Rowcks" method?


----------



## JLarsen (Oct 18, 2009)

Musli4brekkies said:


> What is this "Rowcks" method?



Hahahaha I can't tell if this is a serious question or not. I'll just assume it is, and say someone thinks Roux is pronounced like Rocks. Most likely a youtube video, from someone who barely has experience with the method.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

ArcticxWolf said:


> How can you possibly have the patience to do an average of 50...



Well, for one, it's physio for my finger. While I was doing them, I noticed that my times kept getting faster and faster. I continued because it was practice, and now my Step 4 is faster than it used to be. I was also using it as a way to regain recognition. You should try it.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 19, 2009)

Musli4brekkies said:


> What is this "Rowcks" method?



actually Rewks.

anyway I'm still doing like 3.2 on step 4.


----------



## piemaster (Oct 19, 2009)

Petrus for pwnage.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> Musli4brekkies said:
> 
> 
> > What is this "Rowcks" method?
> ...



3.2? Are you kidding? I'm at like 4.3 and you're at 3.2? That is fast. I give up.


----------



## piemaster (Oct 19, 2009)

If you give up, then join me.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

piemaster said:


> If you give up, then join me.



Well, I am considering learning more about Petrus and ZZ. For ZZ, the EOline scares me, for Petrus, it's the inspection and recognition. I'll give them a try though.


----------



## cardsNcubes (Oct 19, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> For ZZ, the EOline scares me,



EOLine really isn't that bad one you get the hang of recognition. As a tip, you may want to look into Step 4 (I believe, it's the 'bad edges' step) of Petrus. That helped me get the hang of the EO part. 

Also, I know it's long overdue, but Waffle, your Roux tutorial rocks.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

cardsNcubes said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > For ZZ, the EOline scares me,
> ...



Here are my thoughts on ZZ:

1. EOline looks intimidating
2. Very good blockbuilding
3. Multiple ways of finishing the cube allowing freedom of choice

Petrus:

1. EO doesn't look that hard, but virtually no inspection for recognition
2. Blockbuilding isn't that fun on Petrus
3. Multiple ways of finishing the cube allowing freedom of choice

So overall, ZZ has the edge for me.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 19, 2009)

cardsNcubes said:


> Also, I know it's long overdue, but Waffle, your Roux tutorial rocks.



THANKS! and now I feel all warm inside


----------



## cardsNcubes (Oct 19, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Here are my thoughts on ZZ:
> 
> 1. EOline looks intimidating
> 2. Very good blockbuilding
> 3. Multiple ways of finishing the cube allowing freedom of choice



At first EOLine is tricky, and doing EO+Line is very difficult, but the challenge is fun. 2&3 are both true.



waffle=ijm said:


> THANKS! and now I feel all warm inside



Are you sure it's not the cookies?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

cardsNcubes said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Here are my thoughts on ZZ:
> ...



Yea, right now I'm doing line and then EO, but maybe I should be doing EO first? Where is that good text tutorial on ZZ again...


----------



## cardsNcubes (Oct 19, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Yea, right now I'm doing line and then EO, but maybe I should be doing EO first? Where is that good text tutorial on ZZ again...



Yeah, EO should be first. And for the best text tutorial click the link in my sig. It takes you to Cride's page.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 19, 2009)

cardsNcubes said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Yea, right now I'm doing line and then EO, but maybe I should be doing EO first? Where is that good text tutorial on ZZ again...
> ...



Thanks, I'm reading it right now .


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Oct 19, 2009)

waffle: i don't feel like posting on youtube, so, do you think you could possibly make another block building video? I watched both example solve videos and that other block building video but it's still so bad for me.

EDIT: Just took another avg with Roux. It's a lot lower but it's not proper. I've been using Fridrich F2l to get all 4 pairs which is really bad i think. Plus, my intuitive Fridrich is pretty bad in general.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 30, 2009)

Back...and I also have practiced Roux 
I guess first and second block is not a big problem at all, I just need MUCH more practise. 
I still have big problems with the L6E. Always about 18 moves.
I don't understand your solutions really. It looks mostly that the UL and UR pieces are lucky solved.
Can you give some strategies?


----------



## Rikane (Oct 30, 2009)

I'm pretty sure L6E can be solved in 5 moves or less (STM) when I made the alg pictures, I don't recall having to write more than that. Except for the case where the edges and corners are all the same colour, but the centre is different.
If you've registered on roux central (I don't remember), then you can find them there.


----------



## Daniel Wu (Oct 30, 2009)

Rikane said:


> I'm pretty sure L6E can be solved in 5 moves or less (STM) when I made the alg pictures,



WHAT??? L6E in less than 5 moves??? :confused:


----------



## waffle=ijm (Oct 30, 2009)

rickcube said:


> Rikane said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty sure L6E can be solved in 5 moves or less (STM) when I made the alg pictures,
> ...



I'm pretty sure he means 4c.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Oct 30, 2009)

Rikane said:


> I'm pretty sure L6E can be solved in 5 moves or less (STM) when I made the alg pictures, I don't recall having to write more than that. Except for the case where the edges and corners are all the same colour, but the centre is different.
> If you've registered on roux central (I don't remember), then you can find them there.



zubby?

and on average for LSE i get about 14 moves, when im not speedsolving it, and i think 14.7 when i am. LSE is all about recognition and speed. The best thing you can do is slowly solve a bunch of L6E scrambles and do it in the fewest moves possible, trust me its not that hard


----------



## Rikane (Oct 30, 2009)

Yea, I blanked out, and I DID mean 4c, thanks waffle.

Sorry about that, gears is right as well.

Sickness does make me a fool, haha.


----------



## Daniel Wu (Oct 30, 2009)

Darn. I was hoping for a revolutionary new L6E trick or something. Oh well.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 31, 2009)

...still need help...
solve that scrambles!
4.) M2 U M' U2 M U2 M' U2 M2 U M2 U M U M' U M2 U2 M' U M' U2 M2 U' M
5.) U' M' U2 M' U M U M2 U2 M U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U2
6.) M U2 M U2 M2 U M U2 M U2 M’ U2 M’ U2 M’ U’ M’ U2 M U2 M U’ M


----------



## StachuK1992 (Oct 31, 2009)

Tiw said:


> ...still need help...
> solve that scrambles!
> 4.) M2 U M' U2 M U2 M' U2 M2 U M2 U M U M' U M2 U2 M' U M' U2 M2 U' M
> 5.) U' M' U2 M' U M U M2 U2 M U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U2
> 6.) M U2 M U2 M2 U M U2 M U2 M’ U2 M’ U2 M’ U’ M’ U2 M U2 M U’ M


No. Just practice. That's all there is to it.
You're asking way too much of these members.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 31, 2009)

The scrambles are specially for waffle and minigoings. They have fun doing that for me


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 31, 2009)

My solutions, for what it's worth:

4) M2 U M' U2 M U2 M' U2 M2 U M2 U M U M' U M2 U2 M' U M' U2 M2 U' M
M' U' M U2 M' U' M' - M2 U' M U2 M' U' M2 U

5) U' M' U2 M' U M U M2 U2 M U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U2
U2 M' U2 M' U M - U M U2 M' U M2 U - E2 M E2

6) M U2 M U2 M2 U M U2 M U2 M' U2 M' U2 M' U' M' U2 M U2 M U' M
M2 U M' U M - U2 M' U2 M U2 M2 U - M U2 M2 U2


----------



## Tiw (Oct 31, 2009)

Thanks!
Your solutions are interesting...
Has step 4c skipped radomly in your solution of the 4th scramble?
What have you done in the solution of the 5th scramble at the beginning?
I don't understand your EO.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 31, 2009)

Tiw said:


> 4.) M2 U M' U2 M U2 M' U2 M2 U M2 U M U M' U M2 U2 M' U M' U2 M2 U' M


...


Tiw said:


> 5.) U' M' U2 M' U M U M2 U2 M U M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U2


...


Tiw said:


> 6.) M U2 M U2 M2 U M U2 M U2 M’ U2 M’ U2 M’ U’ M’ U2 M U2 M U’ M


...


----------



## Johannes91 (Oct 31, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Has step 4c skipped radomly in your solution of the 4th scramble?


No, I used U-permutation.



Tiw said:


> What have you done in the solution of the 5th scramble at the beginning?
> I don't understand your EO.


Sometimes I think it's better to leave F/B centers on U/D. The EO definition stays the same.

Here's an example where it helps a lot. Scramble: M U' M2 U' M U2 M U2 M'. Solve EO: M'.


----------



## Tiw (Oct 31, 2009)

...a U-perm^^

Scramble: M U' M2 U' M U2 M U2 M'. Solve EO: M'.
--> Nice! And in your EO of scramble 5, you set up with M' U2 M' and then you orient all with M, right?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 3, 2009)

Johannes91 said:


> Tiw said:
> 
> 
> > Has step 4c skipped radomly in your solution of the 4th scramble?
> ...



ok so how do you do EO and L/R pieces at the same time like that? it doesnt make much sense to me.

i guess what i mean is how do you do it with F/B on U/D


----------



## Johannes91 (Nov 3, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> Johannes91 said:
> 
> 
> > Sometimes I think it's better to leave F/B centers on U/D. The EO definition stays the same.
> ...


I don't do them at the same time...? First EO, then permute UR and UL (preserving EO), then permute M. I don't understand what you're asking, please clarify.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 3, 2009)

ohhh ermm never mind i saw what you did now.... 

the fifth scramble confused me a bit...

but my question is more along the lines of this:
How can you do EO with F/B centers on U/D?


----------



## Johannes91 (Nov 3, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> How can you do EO with F/B centers on U/D?


The definition for UL and UR doesn't change: their orientation is correct iff the L/R sticker is on F/B/R/L face.

The definition for M-edges stays almost identical, too. You just look at their orientation relative to the M-centers instead of the faces of the cube. Put another way, if F/B are on U/D, every good M-edge becomes bad and vice versa.

That's it. Finding good solutions is (for me, anyway) a lot harder than if you always had U/D on U/D, but also more interesting and in some cases it saves many moves.


----------



## Tiw (Nov 8, 2009)

I guess I get the hang of step 4 (--> It's party time! )
When I have 3 bad edges on top I can choose between UM, UM' , U'M and U'M'. This is all you need for a good step 4!!!!!
I have done an average of 100...a lot of work...and my average is 14.48 moves Stm! I'm so happy!


----------



## Derrick Eide17 (Nov 8, 2009)

Roux is sexy


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 8, 2009)

Tiw said:


> I guess I get the hang of step 4 (--> It's party time! )
> When I have 3 bad edges on top I can choose between UM, UM' , U'M and U'M'. This is all you need for a good step 4!!!!!
> I have done an average of 100...a lot of work...and my average is 14.48 moves Stm! I'm so happy!



Yup. 'Tis what I do too.


----------



## Tiw (Nov 9, 2009)

Derrick Eide17 said:


> Roux is sexy




You're completly right 



miniGOINGS said:


> Tiw said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I get the hang of step 4 (--> It's party time! )
> ...




I've forgotten to mention that if you have bad edges at LU, FU, RU, FD and the UL and UR edges on UF and DF you can do an M to fix the EO and it solves the L and R edges!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Nov 10, 2009)

Tiw said:


> Derrick Eide17 said:
> 
> 
> > Roux is sexy
> ...



Roux is all about learning from patterns that you find. Good job.


----------



## gogozerg (Nov 14, 2009)

Derrick Eide17 said:


> Roux is sexy


So true.


----------



## darthyody (Nov 19, 2009)

I just got my first sub-30 avg of 12 with Roux and a PB of 20.54 seconds. I haven't really been using Roux a whole lot since I learned it in the last few months until the last few days. I figured if I want to do 2x2 fast I need CLL, and all that alg learning for 2x2 alone seems wasteful so it kicked me back into using Roux even though I have yet to learn a single CLL alg (still using 2LLL).


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 30, 2009)

can someone please explain step 4's optimization at the bottom of this link?

http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_4.html


----------



## waffle=ijm (Nov 30, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> can someone please explain step 4's optimization at the bottom of this link?
> 
> http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_4.html



The purple are misorented. The Alg on the side shows where UL/UR are. when you do the alg, UR/UL should be together (like you do in 4b) and can be placed into the position easily (completing 4b).


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 30, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > can someone please explain step 4's optimization at the bottom of this link?
> ...



i dont see how though..

like with 5a.

i do an M, now they are next to each other but what do i do from there?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



The "*" tells you that three misoriented edges have appeared on top. It says it right on top of these charts.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 1, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



i saw that but i dont get what to do..

ok so this scramble
LR'FU2L2R2B'LR'UB2

DF+DB are misoreinted
UR is at DF and
UL is at UF

so from what rouxs site said is you do an M and three bad edges have appeared on top.

so i do M and UL+UR are next to each other but oriented differently.

what would the 'alg' for EO and UL+UR in this situation


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

First you would do an M like on Roux's site, this makes the top and bottom colors the B and F respectively. EO accordingly. Finish.

So it should be like this

M U2
M' U M
U' M' U2 M' U' M

it makes it so less moves are done.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 1, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> First you would do an M like on Roux's site, this makes the top and bottom colors the B and F respectively. EO accordingly. Finish.
> 
> So it should be like this
> 
> ...



ohh ok i get it now hmm

anyone want to try and generate scrambles for each of the cases so i can see if i understand it? itd be much appreciated. ive been trying to with cube explorer but im not sure what im doing most of the time...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> ohh ok i get it now hmm
> 
> anyone want to try and generate scrambles for each of the cases so i can see if i understand it? itd be much appreciated. ive been trying to with cube explorer but im not sure what im doing most of the time...



cube explorer cannot do M slices.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 1, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > ohh ok i get it now hmm
> ...



i know thats why the scramble up there was not in M slices.
it can still however generate scrambles that can be done with M slices.

either way i would still like scrambles to see if i know what im doing as far as i know i only know from that one position.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 1, 2009)

so for this alg: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
i did
M' U' M U M' U2 M' U2 M U2 M2 U' M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M'

ok so seeing as that solution is horrible and i know i completely just messed up, or at least i think i did, what should i have done diffrently?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> so for this alg: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
> i did
> M' U' M U M' U2 M' U2 M U2 M2 U' M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M'
> 
> ok so seeing as that solution is horrible and i know i completely just messed up, or at least i think i did, what should i have done diffrently?



My solution would be

M'
U' M U M U2
M' U2 M U' M2 U2 M' U2 M2

I could find a short solution, but I'm sort of busy right now. 

the optimization concept is pretty easy when you know how to preserve the EO from different angles.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 1, 2009)

Scramble: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
Right away I do: M' U M' U2 M' U M' U2 M U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U2 M


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Scramble: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
> Right away I do: M' U M' U2 M' U M' U2 M U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U2 M



the purpose is find optimum solutions by approaching the EO at a different angle.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 1, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Scramble: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
> ...



Oh yea.
M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U2 M' U M' U M2 U2 M2 U


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 1, 2009)

This is still shorter. 15 STM

M'
U' M U M U2
M' U2 M U' M2 U2 M' U2 M2


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 1, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> This is still shorter. 15 STM
> 
> M'
> U' M U M U2
> M' U2 M U' M2 U2 M' U2 M2



I was just fooling around with F2L and got this:
M U' M' U M' U M2 U M U2 M2 U2
12 STM


----------



## gogozerg (Dec 4, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> Scramble: F2 L2 U2 F2 L2 F2 U2 L' R' D' L D L' R F' L' F U
> Right away I do: M' U M' U2 M' U M' U2 M U2 M' U' M2 U2 M U2 M



Orientation: M'U'MUM'
Solve UL+UR: U2MU2M'
Last permutation: UMU2
-> 12 moves.


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 24, 2009)

HEY.

got bored an watched your vids, i can easily sub 30 with Fridrich, but this interesting, you explained the method well, i had no idea what it was an hour or so ago.

Thumbs up!


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Jan 1, 2010)

Ok well, I took an average amount of time for each step. Any ideas what I should be working on now?

Scramble 1:
First block: 4.32
Second block: 8.98
CMLL(2look): 6.43
EO+ULURpermutation: 3.44
MPermutation: 1.06
TOTAL: 24.23

Scramble 2:
First block: 7.42
Second block: 9.83
CMLL (2look): 5.27
EO+ULURPermutation: 4.03
MPermutation: 3.21 :fp (I did the wrong one T_T)
TOTAL: 29.76

However, this is with lookahead before I actually execute. My averages are usually between 40-50 with roux...I have a feeling its the f2b.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 1, 2010)

ArcticxWolf said:


> However, this is with lookahead before I actually execute. My averages are usually between 40-50 with roux...I have a feeling its the f2b.



You should be aiming for these breakdowns.
Average Time: (FB)-(SB)-(CMLL)-(LSE)
70: 20-20-10-20
60: 15-20-10-15
50: 10-15-10-15
40: 8-12-8-12
30: 6-9-5-10
25: 5-8-4-8
20: 4-7-3-6
15: 3-5-3-4
10: 2-3-2-3

If you did an average of 12 for each step (without lookahead) I could tell you exactly what you should work on.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Jan 1, 2010)

7.10-6.63-4.45-9.34
for 27.52

my second block has always been faster than my first. I have a special statue strategy.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 1, 2010)

Stachuk1992 said:


> 7.10-6.63-4.45-9.34
> for 27.52
> 
> my second block has always been faster than my first. I have a special statue strategy.



Explanation?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Jan 1, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > 7.10-6.63-4.45-9.34
> ...



basically, I did an average of 1000 the day I started Roux, for only the second step. I made a quick Python program that gave <r,R,U> scrambles, and went to town.

I have a lot of little tricks that I've memo'd "algs" for.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

Stachuk1992 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Stachuk1992 said:
> ...


elaborate?
2B is where i need work


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

ArcticxWolf said:


> Ok well, I took an average amount of time for each step. Any ideas what I should be working on now?
> 
> Scramble 1:
> First block: 4.32
> ...



work on your transitions between steps 1-2, 2-3, 4a-4b-4c

ill take a breakdown soonish


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

my BD:
FB-2B-CMLL-LSE

5.78-6.50-3.91-7.04

i need LSE work....
idk how to improve LSE tho....


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 1, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> idk how to improve LSE tho....



Make a cube with 2 fused 1x2x3 blocks.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > idk how to improve LSE tho....
> ...



wha...why?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 1, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



Then you can only do M and U.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



... i do only MU solves but i cant seem to get faster...,


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 1, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> ... i do only MU solves but i cant seem to get faster...,



Aim for 8 TPS.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 1, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > ... i do only MU solves but i cant seem to get faster...,
> ...



how can you increase tps?


----------



## puzzlemaster (Jan 1, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



Be rowe.


----------



## Cool Frog (Jan 5, 2010)

im going to learn because it feels good on my fingers to do M and U moves...


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 7, 2010)

does anyone have a good way to do the E2, *wafflemakeavidofyoursplease*


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 7, 2010)

this is just for reference for 2.5 look LSE 
M'UM'U'MUM / M'U'M'UMU'M
M’UM’UMUMUM’UM’
M’UM’UMUM’U2M’UM


----------



## Rook (Jan 19, 2010)

...I think I might just convert to Roux-ism. 

CFOP is always to same old "make cross, fill in F2L slots, OLL (that I need to get around to completing. I might not even finish if I get good at Roux), and PLL. Block-building actually seems quite fun, even if I fail at it. (I still use F2L to make the first 1x2x3 block ) 

I just did 5 solves. 1:23.18, 1:06.12, 1:00.44, 1:13.59, 1:07.82. My first block is still F2L. For some reason I can't look ahead for the second block part. I just randomly do M' U2 M' and M' U M' until I get the final case since I haven't memorized the cases for EO. Then I take 20 seconds to permute UL/UR  and finally, I finish up. I expect to be able to sub-1 easily by tomorrow.

Thanks once again 

~Rook


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 19, 2010)

Rook said:


> ...I think I might just convert to Roux-ism.
> 
> CFOP is always to same old "make cross, fill in F2L slots, OLL (that I need to get around to completing. I might not even finish if I get good at Roux), and PLL. Block-building actually seems quite fun, even if I fail at it. (I still use F2L to make the first 1x2x3 block )
> 
> ...


lol, well i used to do nothing but M'UM' for EO, its easy to do, i eventually learned the two cases where you do M'/M U2 M'/M and the one case where you do M2.

as far as 4b that shouldnt take you too long.

What you should do is track one of the pieces as your doing EO, and when you can control it put it in the D layer. Then you can put the other in the D layer my either doing M'U2M' or MU2M. AUF then M2.

I dont know if i made any sense but at least i tried to help : D?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 19, 2010)

Yea, try to get at least 1 L&R edge on D while doing EO (2 is better though). That way you have short insertions.


----------



## CitricAcid (Jan 20, 2010)

UGH! I want to be a Roux-er, but I don't know if I have the nerve to be in the 50's again. 

I think I'll try to convert AFTER DC Open, and then try be Roux for CMU Spring. 

Or not... lol.

Any help or suggestions?

A reason I think I would like Roux is because I don't like to solve big cubes.

SO, being a Rouxer will further discourage me to not solve them!  

And, I'd like to start fresh. It would be fun to be a noob again. lol.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 20, 2010)

I was well around sub-25 with CFOP when I switched. I only really went up to 35 and back down to my usual times within a week.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 20, 2010)

CitricAcid said:


> UGH! I want to be a Roux-er, but I don't know if I have the nerve to be in the 50's again.
> 
> I think I'll try to convert AFTER DC Open, and then try be Roux for CMU Spring.
> 
> ...


lol bigcubes, use stadler its fun xP

but in short yes, switch to roux, as for help or suggestions : http://rouxcentral.forummotion.com/forum.htm [/shameless promotion xP]


----------



## CitricAcid (Jan 20, 2010)

I think I'll start learning now, and TOTALLY convert after DC. I don't want to suck AGAIN after improving so much since CMU Fall.

So, yeah. 

Thanks for making a great tutorial Waffle! 
*Preforms Interpretive Dance, Throws Face On Ground, Then Leaves Waffle's Palace Made Of Waffle.*


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 20, 2010)

Yea, Roux is fun, try it out for a bit.


----------



## happyface352 (Jan 20, 2010)

Waffle, I've learned Roux solely from your tutorial.
I am/was? a sub 25 CFOPer (which I definitely did a crash course for, because I learned most of it besides 8 or 9 OLLs starting from last September ) but Roux is just too awesome.

I'mma going to try out Roux for the next couple days ^^


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 26, 2010)

RU'r'U'M'UrUr'

LSE hax.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 27, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> RU'r'U'M'UrUr'
> 
> LSE hax.



It looks like it's (A)(B)(-A)(-B) to me. So it's like setup moves, M', undo setup moves and undo M'. Makes sense I guess.

Of course, I know nothing about cube theory and the like, so yea...


----------



## mouse_addict (Feb 14, 2010)

ive been practicing the first 2 1x2x3 blocks and it takes me about 30 seconds. I feel like im doing somthing wrong...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 14, 2010)

mouse_addict said:


> ive been practicing the first 2 1x2x3 blocks and it takes me about 30 seconds. I feel like im doing somthing wrong...



if you are taking an f2l approach it's wrong. other than that block building does take a while to get used to.


----------



## mouse_addict (Feb 14, 2010)

im just doing it completely intuitively is there a certain technique to it?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 14, 2010)

mouse_addict said:


> im just doing it completely intuitively is there a certain technique to it?



not really. just wing it. and you'll get used to it. it's not like you'll get sub-6 after _x_ amount of solves. It really takes time to get used to

my approach is making a 1x2x2 then expand to 1x2x3.


----------



## koreancuber (Feb 14, 2010)

I might look into this Roux method. Thanks for the effort.


----------



## Haste_cube (Feb 14, 2010)

arghhh it seems that my L6E is slowing down
it takes me 3~7s to solve the cube from the fourth step
If only I could finished the L6E in 3s then my avg would be around 17s


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 14, 2010)

I am seriously considering taking up Roux again.


----------



## mouse_addict (Feb 14, 2010)

thanks waffle ive solved it a couple of time now all thats left is to memorize some algorithms... yay


----------



## jms_gears1 (Feb 22, 2010)

mouse_addict said:


> thanks waffle ive solved it a couple of time now all thats left is to memorize some algorithms... yay



algs are amazingly easy to learn, its fun..


----------



## miniGOINGS (Feb 22, 2010)

I heart Roux. I think I'm going to rewatch these vids again when I get home. Or now. Or next class.


----------



## negative_earth (Mar 1, 2010)

so... what about hybrids? ^_^

i find it's "easy" to build the blocks in "half" cross and f2l

i just can't stand the "coolness" of using M slices


----------



## crazyasianskills (Mar 4, 2010)

I cant figure out which colors I should have on top and bottom or what. My recognition is all messed up. I feel like I should have white on bottom like always. But Im trying not to take an F2L approach.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 4, 2010)

crazyasianskills said:


> I cant figure out which colors I should have on top and bottom or what. My recognition is all messed up. I feel like I should have white on bottom like always. But Im trying not to take an F2L approach.



for M-slice EO, either the U color or the D color can be on U or D. Anything else is misoriented 

If you have a hard time cycling until oriented look of the case you have below and apply the alg

2 wrong:
UF/UB M' U M U' M' U M'
DF/DB M U M U' M' U M'
UF/DB M' U M' U M U M'
UL/UB M' U M' U2 M' U M'

4 wrong:
All Top Layer: M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UR/UL/DF/DB M U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UL/UF/UR/DF M' U M'
UL/UB/DF/DB M2 U' M' U M'

6 wrong:
All of 'em: M' U M' U M U M' U2 M' U M'


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 4, 2010)

...Waffle, you got me into the habit of Yellow on U...

But I actually do think that it has fast recog for L6E like that.


----------



## Haste_cube (Mar 4, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> ...Waffle, you got me into the habit of Yellow on U...
> 
> But I actually do think that it has fast recog for L6E like that.



o really? hmm my yellow face always on L or R face, so the U face will be green, blue, red, or orange..
maybe I'll try yellow on U face later


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

thanks a ton im still learning some algs but im at 35 seconds (as opposed to 46 with Friedrich)


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> thanks a ton im still learning some algs but im at 35 seconds (as opposed to 46 with Friedrich)





Remember, blocks are more important than full CMLL. I got sub-22 at one point, and Waffle can get sub-20 with 2 look, a lot of others could do much better.


----------



## nlCuber22 (Mar 20, 2010)

owaitijustrealizedthatrouxare<3


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

i do my first block by placing the three edges then the remaining 2 corner pieces is that weird:confused: i tried out a lot of ways of doing it but that seems like the fastest for me

i also use one pll that comes up occasionally im not trying to mix methods but it just occurred to me and i already knew the alg


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> i do my first block by placing the three edges then the remaining 2 corner pieces is that weird:confused: i tried out a lot of ways of doing it but that seems like the fastest for me



Gilles doesn't recommend that because it usually wastes a lot of moves.


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

the way that waffle explains it (1x1x2 block) feels awkward to do what other ways are there to do it?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> the way that waffle explains it (1x1x2 block) feels awkward to do what other ways are there to do it?



I use MBR, 1x1x3 (2 corners 1 edge), and then 1x1x3 (2 edges 1 center). I've always done it like that, for both blocks.


----------



## Googlrr (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> the way that waffle explains it (1x1x2 block) feels awkward to do what other ways are there to do it?



It definitely feels weird at first. You pretty much just get used to it. MBR is very nice too, I used that for a good while to adapt to Roux. Now I just switch off between starting with a 2x2x1 and between 1x1x3 depending on what looks best. Just stick to it and you can get your blocks down to very few moves.


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

i tried them all 
mine 5secs
mbr 7
waffles(?) 12
i have to get better better any way feels more comfortable then waffles and already almost as fast. but MBR is very similar to how i do it now.


----------



## Googlrr (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> i tried them all
> mine 5secs
> mbr 7
> waffles(?) 12
> i have to get better better any way feels more comfortable then waffles and already almost as fast. but MBR is very similar to how i do it now.



I still wouldn't recommend the placing 3 edges, then the 2 corners. That sounds a whole lot like LBL method with one less cross and 2 less corners.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> i tried them all
> mine 5secs
> mbr 7
> waffles(?) 12
> i have to get better better any way feels more comfortable then waffles and already almost as fast. but MBR is very similar to how i do it now.



I <3 MBR

It's actually really easy to go from LBL to MBR. Then later, once you feel comfortable you can move on to 1x2x2. I'll probably never get there though, I'm sticking with MBR.


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > i tried them all
> ...



im atributing my time to just having used it the moast im going to use the 1x1x3 block then extend for the first block now


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> i tried them all
> mine 5secs
> mbr 7
> waffles(?) 12
> i have to get better better any way feels more comfortable then waffles and already almost as fast. but MBR is very similar to how i do it now.



Do you do L block on D at first then rotate for R block?
MBR is ok for some cases
Waffles is good for most.

Basically instead of thinking about it as a 1x2x2 block, break it down into pairs.

What i do is i generally find a C/E pair that i can make in at most 3 moves. Then i find the piece that matches with the center and the pair to form a 1x2x2 block.

then i create generally an F2L pair to insert into the 1x2x2 to make it a 1x2x3


----------



## mr. giggums (Mar 20, 2010)

I'm used to making a 1x2x2 block as my main method is petrus one tip is to create the corner edge pair it could be anywhere then make the center edge pair make sure to not to break up the corner edge pair. After that all you have to do is connect them an easy way to do this is to put the corner edge pair one quarter turn away from the top layer with no pieces in the top layer and turn the top layer so it is right underneth the pair then turn the pair up to connect them and you have your 1x2x2 block.


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

i find it easier to make a 1x1x3 block then just add the corners and edge for the second block i make the 1x1x2 then just add the other two 1x1x2 blocks


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 20, 2010)

kunz said:


> i find it easier to make a 1x1x3 block then just add the corners and edge for the second block i make the 1x1x2 then just add the other two 1x1x2 blocks



I would recommend practicing both, Dont do timed solves for a while.

Analyze each scramble and figure out which would take the least amount of moves for the case, wether it is 1x1x3 or 1x2x2.

as for SB you should work on making a 1x2x2 block, and then either pairing up a pair and inserting it. or if the corner is already inserted then do MSB, which mini can explain to you.


----------



## kunz (Mar 20, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > i find it easier to make a 1x1x3 block then just add the corners and edge for the second block i make the 1x1x2 then just add the other two 1x1x2 blocks
> ...



this is basically what i do...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 21, 2010)

kunz said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > as for SB you should work on making a 1x2x2 block, and then either pairing up a pair and inserting it. or if the corner is already inserted then do MSB, which mini can explain to you.
> ...



Yea, for the second block, I took the alg R U' M' U R' and inversed it, mirrored it, expanded it and a whole bunch of other stuff, and I solve the SB edges (MBD) now freestyle. Pair up the corners to the DR edge, and then solve the other 2 freestyle.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 21, 2010)

People are silly :3



Spoiler



There's no proper way to build blocks...just wing it


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 21, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> People are silly :3
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lol there are no proper ways per say, but there are techniques that we can discuss are there not?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 21, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



What do you mean freestyle?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 21, 2010)

when I made the tutorial, I was hoping that people would transition to a one-look block that you can just do without having to create more problems with random techniques.

EDIT - now I feel like remaking them...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 21, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> What do you mean freestyle?



I don't use algs, it's completely intuitive the way I do my blocks now. When I started MB, it was very broken up. Now I just do MBA MBB MBC MBD, but completely intuitive.

EDIT: Waffle, I don't think I'll ever get to a 1 look block. 2? Definitely. 1? Probably never.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 21, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> when I made the tutorial, I was hoping that people would transition to a one-look block that you can just do without having to create more problems with random techniques.
> 
> EDIT - now I feel like remaking them...



Umm yea, the idea is to have one look blocks, but learning these *random techniques* are like stepping stones, Showing people how to put together the F2B blocks.

Once you can learn to do a 2 look block then it becomes much easier to make it one look

although im still having trouble seeing the entire block.

But since your much more experienced now that you have made your tutorial, i wouldnt mind seeing how youd them now.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 21, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> learning these *random techniques* are like stepping stones



For me, learning random techniques make you stick with those random techniques. If you were just to wing it every time, you develop that habit of freestyling and make almost one-look. That's how I view it at least and I think I'm ended up okay with just winging it from the beginning.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 21, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > learning these *random techniques* are like stepping stones
> ...



welll you are faster than me so meh.

Hmm well then. Make dem videos >


----------



## kunz (Mar 22, 2010)

thanks for the help and im starting to get my first block down quick 

but im wondering what else i should get better at 

9 seconds first block 
9 seconds second block
6 seconds corners (2 look)
3 seconds permutation
8 seconds finish
45 seconds total


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 22, 2010)

kunz said:


> thanks for the help and im starting to get my first block down quick
> 
> but im wondering what else i should get better at
> 
> ...



blocks. both of them need work...then L6E


----------



## Ness (Mar 23, 2010)

hey,
I'm finally able to see the first block (at least 1x2x2) in inspection and I usually get sub-5 for the first block. But I still end up with 12-16 seconds for F2B. 
Could you give me some tips how to improve my transition from first to second block. 
Well, I guess it's just practise.. I always try to locate some second block pieces while doing the first block to continue w/ them faster, but I often can't manage that. So I get delays up to 2 seconds while doing the second block... That's quite frustrating because approximately every tenth solve is sub-18 without any skips, because I had no delay (and probably also knew the CMLL).. 
Just practise looking ahead?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 23, 2010)

Ness said:


> hey,
> I'm finally able to see the first block (at least 1x2x2) in inspection and I usually get sub-5 for the first block. But I still end up with 12-16 seconds for F2B.
> Could you give me some tips how to improve my transition from first to second block.
> Well, I guess it's just practise.. I always try to locate some second block pieces while doing the first block to continue w/ them faster, but I often can't manage that. So I get delays up to 2 seconds while doing the second block... That's quite frustrating because approximately every tenth solve is sub-18 without any skips, because I had no delay (and probably also knew the CMLL)..
> Just practise looking ahead?



A lot of people insert the DR edge while looking for F2L pairs. Because I used Matt's Block, I can do MBC really quickly.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Mar 23, 2010)

Ness said:


> hey,
> I'm finally able to see the first block (at least 1x2x2) in inspection and I usually get sub-5 for the first block. But I still end up with 12-16 seconds for F2B.
> Could you give me some tips how to improve my transition from first to second block.
> Well, I guess it's just practise.. I always try to locate some second block pieces while doing the first block to continue w/ them faster, but I often can't manage that. So I get delays up to 2 seconds while doing the second block... That's quite frustrating because approximately every tenth solve is sub-18 without any skips, because I had no delay (and probably also knew the CMLL)..
> Just practise looking ahead?




Practice second block...a lot...like you should know where all the pieces are at all times and try to solve without pauses no matter how slow you are and gradually build up speed.


----------



## Ness (Mar 24, 2010)

@ waffle: That's what I expected 

@mini: At the the beginning I did it that way. But isn't it very inefficent, because you limit your moves again? I mean you have to do 2 f2l pairs then. Instead you can blockbuild the second "block" in order to save some moves...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 24, 2010)

Ness said:


> @mini: At the the beginning I did it that way. But isn't it very *efficent*, because you limit your moves again? I mean you have to do 2 f2l pairs then. Instead you can blockbuild the second "block" in order to save some moves...



I agree, it's very inefficent. I actually find that MBR works pretty well (at least for me). Right after first block, I find the optimal solution for the second block corners, and as I'm doing that I find a way to place the edge between them. Once I connect that block to R, I simply pair the other 2 edges with their corner. Very fun. A lot of M slice.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 24, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Ness said:
> 
> 
> > @mini: At the the beginning I did it that way. But isn't it very *efficent*, because you limit your moves again? I mean you have to do 2 f2l pairs then. Instead you can blockbuild the second "block" in order to save some moves...
> ...



i would like to see vids of you solving


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 24, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> i would like to see vids of you solving



Slow or fast? I might do some next week (spring break).


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 24, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > i would like to see vids of you solving
> ...


both.
What about those vids you were supposed to have?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 24, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> both.
> What about those vids you were supposed to have?



I've pretty much given up on them. What angle do you want?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 24, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > both.
> ...



lol that bad huh?
umm what ever angle shows how you solve them best.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Mar 24, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> lol that bad huh?
> umm what ever angle shows how you solve them best.



Yup.

POV like Waffle for slow, Over-Shoulder like Faz for speed? I'll video my best average of 12, my best average of 5, and my best single (unless any are in one of the other videos), as well as a couple slow solves.

Should I explain what I'm doing in the slow solves, point it out like Yau, or just do it slowly?

EDIT: Nice sig.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Mar 24, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > lol that bad huh?
> ...



lol that sounds like a good idea.

and if you want you could explain, that way you can use it as a sort of supplementary type vid when you tell someone about MB


----------



## Kirjava (Mar 25, 2010)

13:41:36 <+Venim> 3x3 Scramble #3180: R' U' R2 F' R2 F R' L U R B' U2 D' F2 D' U2 R L2 D R' D F2 R2 F' R2 
13:41:47 <+Kirjava> I wanna type out a solution
13:41:49 <+Kirjava> just cause
13:43:35 <+Kirjava> x2y2U2RF'Lx'BLU2L'yx
13:44:41 <+Kirjava> U2M2UR'U2rU'MUr
13:45:31 <+Kirjava> U'FR'F'RU2RU2r'
13:45:48 <+Kirjava> U2M'UM2U2M2
13:46:11 <+Kirjava> wtf
13:46:13 <+Kirjava> 33 moves?!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 5, 2010)

Waffle, after recently switching to 1x2x2 for 2nd block, I have a quick question.

What do you look for at the second block?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 5, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Waffle, after recently switching to 1x2x2 for 2nd block, I have a quick question.
> 
> What do you look for at the second block?




neutral 1x2x2 -> 1x2x3


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 5, 2010)

Let me rephrase that, are you looking for a corner edge pair, and then looking for the other edge to build the 1x2x2?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 5, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Let me rephrase that, are you looking for a corner edge pair, and then looking for the other edge to build the 1x2x2?



whichever is easier for that case. I just wing it.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 5, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> whichever is easier for that case. I just wing it.



Sounds good to me.

By winging it, do you usually try to take a quick look for an easy block, or just start right away?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 5, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > whichever is easier for that case. I just wing it.
> ...



I started right away.


----------



## thierce (Apr 6, 2010)

Is there something like "The Ultimate Guide to Blockbuilding"?
Because my second block is kinda F2L-influenced  Insert the D Edge, build the pairs, insert them somehow...

And also, as I'm gradually learning CMLL cases, would you recommend recognition for more than one side?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 6, 2010)

thierce said:


> Is there something like "The Ultimate Guide to Blockbuilding"?
> Because my second block is kinda F2L-influenced  Insert the D Edge, build the pairs, insert them somehow...
> 
> And also, as I'm gradually learning CMLL cases, would you recommend recognition for more than one side?


 
For your first question theres no real 'guide' however i have a video on my youtube channel that may help.

and dont learn CMLL until your around 20 seconds, but preferablly sub-20


----------



## thierce (Apr 6, 2010)

Hm, as you wish... 

Thanks for the videos, I'll look into them when I get home 

Btw, just being curious: Is there such a thing as a Roux ranking? I'd love to know, who of the WCA-listed Cubers uses Roux


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 6, 2010)

thierce said:


> Hm, as you wish...
> 
> Thanks for the videos, I'll look into them when I get home
> 
> Btw, just being curious: Is there such a thing as a Roux ranking? I'd love to know, who of the WCA-listed Cubers uses Roux


Not so much on WCA as an unofficial one at rouxcentral
Rouxcentral.forummotion.com


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 6, 2010)

Funny you asked, Roux Rankings is one of the sections of the RouxCentral forum (that exact name too!), but they are not official times, just best averages of 12.


----------



## Edward (Apr 6, 2010)

thierce said:


> Is there something like "The Ultimate Guide to Blockbuilding"?
> Because my s*econd block is kinda F2L-influenced * Insert the D Edge, build the pairs, insert them somehow...
> 
> And also, as I'm gradually learning CMLL cases, would you recommend recognition for more than one side?



I do that to. What I found helps, is to make SURE you don't use f2l techniques. Do like you did the first block, except with no cube rotations, and no L moves. Solve slowly and untimed, try to find little (non fridrich) tricks to help the blockbuilding.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 6, 2010)

Edward said:


> I do that to. What I found helps, is to make SURE you don't use f2l techniques. Do like you did the first block, except with no cube rotations, and no L moves. Solve slowly and untimed, try to find little (non fridrich) tricks to help the blockbuilding.



It's generally a good idea to stick to the <r, R, M, U> movegroup. This allows the left hand to stay in place, and no rotations are needed.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 6, 2010)

Edward said:


> What I found helps, is to make SURE you don't use f2l techniques.




You shouldn't write off F2L altogether - F2L and F2B still share a lot of stuff.


On another note - Roux is good for speedBLD


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 6, 2010)

Probably the only person to have a success!

Which step did you find the hardest?


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 6, 2010)

CMLL - four corners are surprisingly harder than six edges to trace. I traced one of the corners wrong, aswell - so I had to do them again. The first and second blocks were pretty easy, and I traced what the LSE would start at and just worked out the MU solution in my head.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 6, 2010)

I'm sure that the first block would be extremely easy, the second not so much. I would think that the second block would be harder than CMLL, but as you said, I would probably be suprised. I would never even think of doing this, congrats! Sub-15 next time?


----------



## thierce (Apr 7, 2010)

Okay, thanks for the hint with the limited movegroup and NO CUBEROTATIONS at all  I'll for sure give it a try 

But still, what about the RD Edge? Is it to be inserted first? I mean, if it's nearly in place, there's no point in discussing, but.... you know? 

And if i got that Edge inserted first, how to NOT insert F2L-like, as now I have a restriction... 
pairing is combination of M-Slice and maybe F2L, which one of them happens to be easier, but insertion is rather F2L-influenced.

Any hints?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 7, 2010)

For my last slot, I usually do F2L, If you get the edge oriented on the U layer, it's <R, U> gen, although in somecases it's faster to use r moves and the M slice.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 7, 2010)

MBR has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 7, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> MBR has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.



Yea, probably.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 7, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > What I found helps, is to make SURE you don't use f2l techniques.
> ...



really..... What idiot refuses to use F2L techniques.

You all do realize that block building is based off of pairs right?
If you break down most (all?) block building methods, you first place two pieces together forming a pair wither its a C/E pair or a center edge pair.

F2L just restricts pairs so that the unique sticker is the same colour as the D face. Whereas any/all block-building methods dont require you to use the D color as the unique sticker provided that you did not put the restriction on yourself.


----------



## joey (Apr 7, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> MBR has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.


How else would I boot, without my 512-byte sector? ):


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 7, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> MBR has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.



lol. ya it is.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

joey said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> > MBR has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
> ...




dohoho


----------



## Edward (Apr 8, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> > Edward said:
> ...


I didn't mean kick it out in regular solves. I meant that while practicing, doing this will help you find non F2L strategies, which could be shorter and more efficient. I only say this because it seems to be working for me.


----------



## kunz (Apr 8, 2010)

how do you use MBR, couldn't find much about it


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

I heard about it today via word of mouth. 

I'd suggest to not look further. Of all the strategies I use for the second block, I pretty much never make a 1x1x3.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 8, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> I heard about it today via word of mouth.
> 
> I'd suggest to not look further. Of all the strategies I use for the second block, I pretty much never make a 1x1x3.



why make a 1x1x3 its extremely inefficient. but meh. Not bashing you mini xP.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 8, 2010)

Edward said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > Kirjava said:
> ...



hmm, well instead of kicking it out during practice. Make it more effecient, if you see a case that uses an F2L slot make sure that thats the best way to do it. but dont NOT use it in practice especially if you use it in regular solves.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

Actually, I use a 1x1x3 if I get a 1x1x3 skip XD


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 8, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Actually, I use a 1x1x3 if I get a 1x1x3 skip XD



lawl. i might just start having to do that.
Kirjavas a pretty cool guy, eh skips teh 1x1x3 and doesnt afraid of anything.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

Anyway, new topic. 

Where do you guys look when you see this;







I usually check BU, but I've been trying to lookahead so I know which way the cycle goes recently.

It's the only part of LSE where I don't know what I'm going to do before I get to it.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 8, 2010)

I put the UF on DB and then look at UF and UB


----------



## kunz (Apr 8, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Anyway, new topic.
> 
> Where do you guys look when you see this;
> 
> ...



flip over the cube and its U2 M' U2 M'


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 8, 2010)

kunz said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> > Anyway, new topic.
> ...


do an M2....


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

kunz said:


> flip over the cube and its U2 M' U2 M'




Naa.


----------



## BigGreen (Apr 8, 2010)

kunz said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



That might not always work. (this case is a paradox because it can be 2 cases)


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

BigGreen said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > Kirjava said:
> ...




omg schrödinger's case.

uhm, did you ever find out what you do in that situation?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Apr 8, 2010)

M'? Then you could recognize it.


----------



## Athefre (Apr 8, 2010)

Before I adjust U, I look at the side of the edge that isn't matched with the center, it lets me know which of the two cases it is. I then do u2Mu2M or M'u2M'u2.

I use u2s for other cases to reduce my movecount and so I don't have to rotate the cube.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 8, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> M'? Then you could recognize it.




This is slower than looking at the back face.


----------



## Athefre (Apr 8, 2010)

Whoops. I was thinking of when the centers are correct. In this situation, I would still look at the edge that isn't matched with the U center before I adjust U. If it's side color matches the B center, I do u2Mu2M'. If it's the opposite color, of course it's MU2MU2. You can also think of the edge's side color as opposite or same as the F center. You know when you see an edge matched with the U center after finishing L and R that you'll have to just align U correctly (As long as the F center and FD sticker don't match), so really it's about looking at the side of the other U edge before adjusting.

It's the same as looking at the RU color before doing UM'U2M'.


----------



## thierce (Apr 8, 2010)

Argh I do hate that case... If it's not a skeip, one can easily look ahead, which one of the cases is formed. But if it's a skip, I have to look at D face :fp:


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 8, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Anyway, new topic.
> 
> Where do you guys look when you see this;
> 
> ...



I look at BU. It might be faster to look at DF though. Maybe you could learn the cases that get to this point and recognise them earlier?

Also, 1x1x3 is stupid for SB, for FB it can be good, but it's stupid for SB. I mostly notice that it takes to many moves to add the second corner, and doing 2 edges inserts is annoying. If you get a corner skip after the 1x2x2 though, it eliminates both of those things though. So yes, using strictly 1x1x3 for SB is pretty much pointless.


----------



## Athefre (Apr 8, 2010)

Do you guys not like my suggestion or does it not make sense? Because, it's fast for me. You're always going to end 4b with UL/UR at UF and UB, so it's as simple as looking at the "lone" edge on U before you adjust. Do you guys automatically adjust U after finishing UL and UR without thinking first?


----------



## n305 (Apr 9, 2010)

It does for me actually, I have no idea why I haven't thought about it earlier. 

What I was trying to do was to track what is gonna be on the bottom which was easy when I had M2 insertion of UL/UR, but when the insertion was M or M' I had no idea.

But now, doing what you said, looking at the edge that is going to the back I can distinguish all the cases and even save an U move.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 13, 2010)

F2 M' F2 U M' - New 4flip?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 14, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> F2 M' F2 U M' - New 4flip?


how would you do that fast tho...


----------



## koreancuber (Apr 14, 2010)

Omg... I fail at block building.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 14, 2010)

koreancuber said:


> Omg... I fail at block building.



...meeee tooo!!!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 15, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> koreancuber said:
> 
> 
> > Omg... I fail at block building.
> ...



losers  JK 

lrn2blocks


----------



## koreancuber (Apr 15, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > koreancuber said:
> ...



 I suck... Any practice drills that you recommend before I return to my CFOP?


----------



## Edward (Apr 15, 2010)

koreancuber said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...


Advanced blockbuilding tips video pwease?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 15, 2010)

try solving with fewest moves no matter how long it takes you. you can be concerned about speed later.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 15, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> try solving with fewest moves no matter how long it takes you. you can be concerned about speed later.



I actually find it fun trying to do the blocks in as few moves. It just feels so...natural. Also, nice one Waffle.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 16, 2010)

So Waffle can solve them cubes and STILL has time to hunt deer? Wow.

http://www.deer-huntingtips.com/deerhuntingvideos/video-poster/cubes4lyfe.html


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 16, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> So Waffle can solve them cubes and STILL has time to hunt deer? Wow.
> 
> http://www.deer-huntingtips.com/deerhuntingvideos/video-poster/cubes4lyfe.html



it's a good hobby of mine. sometimes I just throw a cube at them and they just die.


----------



## n305 (Apr 18, 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW4NYqeZKWU - recognition of the step 4c.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 18, 2010)

n305 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW4NYqeZKWU - recognition of the step 4c.



INBEAD


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 18, 2010)

a quick <MU> scramble to see if i have the concept down and what not

U M' U2 M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M U M2 U' M' U' M U2 M' U' M' U2 M' U' M2 U

EO+L/R: M'U2M'UM'U'MU2M
4c (same so U)
UM2U2M2U2


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 18, 2010)

Doesn't everyone do this already? I thought the cancellations were obvious.

I was expecting something like forcing a last layer skip while doing UL/UR, or avoiding the dots pattern. Maybe you should document those cases, too.

Edit; Stuff like M U2 M U M' U2 M' U' is worth knowing, too.


----------



## Codee (Apr 18, 2010)

thanks for all the vids they really helped alot


----------



## BigGreen (Apr 19, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> a quick <MU> scramble to see if i have the concept down and what not
> 
> U M' U2 M' U2 M' U2 M2 U2 M U M2 U' M' U' M U2 M' U' M' U2 M' U' M2 U
> 
> ...



M'U'M'UMUM
U'M'U2M'
U'M

lol center colors dont matter


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

M'U2M'UM
U2M2U'M'U2M'U'

lol LL skip


----------



## kunz (Apr 19, 2010)

what do you do if the 2 last edges are oriented wrong? 
ive only gotten it like twice but its really annoying when it happens


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

Pureflip or Waterman stuff.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 19, 2010)

Lol Kirjava and BigGreen.


----------



## kunz (Apr 19, 2010)

whats pure flip?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 19, 2010)

kunz said:


> whats pure flip?



it flips 2 misoriented edges without changing the permutation


----------



## kunz (Apr 19, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > whats pure flip?
> ...



thanks, is there an algorithm?


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

Nah, it's the only case on the cube where an algorithm cannot possibly exist.


----------



## Edward (Apr 19, 2010)

kunz said:


> waffle=ijm said:
> 
> 
> > kunz said:
> ...



There's one I know
M U M U M U2 M' U M' U M'


----------



## kunz (Apr 19, 2010)

Edward said:


> kunz said:
> 
> 
> > waffle=ijm said:
> ...



sweet thanks


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

needs less M

M'UM'UM'UM'U2M'UM'UM'UM'


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 19, 2010)

BigGreen said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > a quick <MU> scramble to see if i have the concept down and what not
> ...



how...
When i try and not worry about the centers it doesnt work out for me.
How do you see it...


----------



## Athefre (Apr 19, 2010)

Think Gears, think!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 19, 2010)

Hahahaha, no wonder Gears can't understand 2.5LLSE, he doesn't actually know what a bad edge is!


----------



## n305 (Apr 19, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Doesn't everyone do this already? I thought the cancellations were obvious.



Yea, maybe.

But it was You guys debating what to do in this case:


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

There are multiple equally valid ways of removing ambiguity in that case.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 19, 2010)

Athefre said:


> Think Gears, think!


I cant find that goddang lightbulb....


miniGOINGS said:


> Hahahaha, no wonder Gears can't understand 2.5LLSE, he doesn't actually know what a bad edge is!



I DOES TU >: o


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 19, 2010)

U M2 U M2 U' M' U M2 U2 M U2 M' U M2 U' M U M2 U' M2 U M2 U' M2 U'

*Solution:
U'M'U'MU2M
UM'UM2
UM'U2M2U2M*

wellll that sucks.....
but at least it didnt pay attention to centers?

U' M' U2 M U2 M2 U' M' U2 M' U2 M U2 M' U' M2 U' M U2 M U2 M U' M 

*Solution:
M'UM
UMU2M'
U'M2*

U2 M2 U M U M2 U M U M' U M U M' U' M2 U' M2 U M U M2 U2 M U

*Solution:
UM'U'M'UM'
UM'U2M
U'M2U2M'*

How would you solve these scrambles?


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 19, 2010)

M2UMU
M'U2M'
UM2U2M


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 19, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> M2UMU
> M'U2M'
> UM2U2M



grr. I didnt see that hmm...
I dont understand why i cant see solves like that....


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 19, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> grr. I didnt see that hmm...
> I dont understand why i cant do see solves like that....



I do...


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 19, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > grr. I didnt see that hmm...
> ...



?
also get on RC...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 19, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> ?
> also get on RC...



Understand EO...

Also, I am.


----------



## EnterPseudonym (Apr 21, 2010)

I can't get the hang of permuting UL/UR in step 4b without messing up EO. Any advice?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 21, 2010)

EnterPseudonym said:


> I can't get the hang of permuting UL/UR in step 4b without messing up EO. Any advice?



Mhm. The easiest way is to get both edges onto D, then AUF, and then M2. After a while, you realise the cancelations. Try to only use M2, M(') U2 M('), and AUF.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 21, 2010)

EnterPseudonym said:


> I can't get the hang of permuting UL/UR in step 4b without messing up EO. Any advice?



do some MU U-perms, but FOCUS on what actually is happening. Where all the pieces go etc. 

you'll know where to put pieces to get UL/UR without having to actually do U-perms when you know which pieces move where.


----------



## EnterPseudonym (Apr 21, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> EnterPseudonym said:
> 
> 
> > I can't get the hang of permuting UL/UR in step 4b without messing up EO. Any advice?
> ...



Ah thank you. I tried three times to solve UL/UR unsuccessfully before, just tried it your advice and it worked like a charm. Again Thank you.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 21, 2010)

EnterPseudonym said:


> Ah thank you. I tried three time to sole UL/UR unsuccessfully before, just tried it your advice and it worked like a charm. Again Thank you.



Your welcome. 

Usually at the end of EO, I manipulate the last 2 moves to give me the best case for L&R edges. Good luck.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 21, 2010)

I UNDERSTAND IT WOOOT
gahh now i feel stupid its so easy...
Now i just need to be able to see it fast during solves.


----------



## cincyaviation (May 1, 2010)

i still don't get edge orientation, are all of the case 3 cases supposed to orient all the edges? some of the cases don't seem to get solved by the algs he gives


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 1, 2010)

cincyaviation said:


> i still don't get edge orientation, are all of the case 3 cases supposed to orient all the edges? some of the cases don't seem to get solved by the algs he gives



it's by cycles. you keep doing the alg so it goes to another case and so forth. keep cycling and it should orient.

if you're too lazy to cycle and just want algs...here you go.

2:
UF/UB M' U M U' M' U M'
DF/DB M U M U' M' U M'
UF/DB M' U M' U M U M'
UL/UB M' U M' U2 M' U M'

4:
All Top Layer: M' U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UR/UL/DF/DB M U2 M' U2 M' U M'
UL/UF/UR/DF M' U M'
UL/UB/DF/DB M2 U' M' U M'

6:
All of 'em: M' U M' U M U M' U2 M' U M'


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 1, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> cincyaviation said:
> 
> 
> > i still don't get edge orientation, are all of the case 3 cases supposed to orient all the edges? some of the cases don't seem to get solved by the algs he gives
> ...



How many times have you had to post this?

EO is super easy how do people not understand?

Perhaps someone whould make a video explaining it
sounds like a good idea to m... owait

haider


----------



## Edward (May 1, 2010)

Transitioning from a LBL (such as Fridrich) type method, EO was hard for me to understand. You kinda have to go at it with an open mind. It feels so new at first.

Former Petrus users have it a little easier because there is a similar step in Petrus.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 1, 2010)

Edward said:


> Transitioning from a LBL (such as Fridrich) type method, EO was hard for me to understand. You kinda have to go at it with an open mind. It feels so new at first.
> 
> Former Petrus users have it a little easier because there is a similar step in Petrus.



But EO is soooo simple,

its just making bad edges good.

Bad edges are edges that dont have U/D stickers on the U/D faces. 
(when centers matter)

then you just cycle them, which waffle explains very well....

it just frustrates me when ppl cant understand Roux EO.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 1, 2010)

dude chillax a little. some people will get it right away, other's won't.

I didn't even get it the first time.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 1, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> dude chillax a little. some people will get it right away, other's won't.
> 
> I didn't even get it the first time.



lol sorry im more irritated at my computer...
The damn thing keeps randomly turning off, i think its overheating, so i took of the side panel for a bit cleaned the internals out. And its still turning off just not as much...

I think the power supply needs to be replaced...

unless someone wants to give me a laptop ;P


----------



## Rikane (May 1, 2010)

I didn't understand EO until the second time I tried it. So when I tried to learn EO the second time, I really had to work at it, eventually I got it, and it's smooth sailing after that.


----------



## Edward (May 3, 2010)

What advantage does non matching blocks have over regular solving besides less moves?
I've been doing some solves with it, and I'm not that much slowed down by it. 

And is it something I should completely switch? or is it like the xcross of Roux, only use it when it will benefit alot.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 3, 2010)

Edward said:


> What advantage does non matching blocks have over regular solving besides less moves?
> I've been doing some solves with it, and I'm not that much slowed down by it.
> 
> And is it something I should completely switch? or is it like the xcross of Roux, only use it when it will benefit alot.



i dont think there are any advantage to NMB besides less moves. 

The difficulty, i would think, is not the actual blocks its the NMCMLL recog.

Once you could get that down however i think it would be more like XCross for fridrich.


----------



## gogozerg (May 3, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> The difficulty, i would think, is not the actual blocks its the NMCMLL recog.


Solving the last four corners with non matching 1x2x3 side blocks is possible, it's just more work, more cases to detect.
Ask James Straughan for details.


----------



## Kirjava (May 5, 2010)

*Welcome to 'Forcing Dot Skips' with Kirjava*







uM'U2M2U2M'D' or UM'U2M2U2M'U' or uxU2M2U2M2F'






U'M2U2MU2MU

There are of course others, but these are the main two that come up often and are easy to recognise.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 5, 2010)

Kirjava, I have better algs someone. I'll post them soon.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 5, 2010)

gogozerg said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > The difficulty, i would think, is not the actual blocks its the NMCMLL recog.
> ...



I know its possible, just harder to recog. Ive looked at the NMCLL page on Gille's site.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 5, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> gogozerg said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



lol gogozerg is gilles roux.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 5, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > gogozerg said:
> ...



hahahaha welllllll then hello there Gilles

Did you know your dad owns a restaurant near my house?


----------



## Athefre (May 5, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> gogozerg said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



He's talking about this:

http://www.athefre.110mb.com/NMCMLL.html


----------



## AngeL (May 6, 2010)

Hey Roux users. Just letting you know I'm joining your ranks. I've only been cubing two months, got my fridrich down to right around 40, but I've been getting a bit bored with it. The only creative part is the cross, then it's just algs. Even intuitive F2L basically turns into algs after enough practice.

I've always been scared away from Roux by the M moves, but I've finally sanded my cube, really broken it in and gotten good silicon lube, so M moves are much easier. So, I learned Roux and LOVE it. Easily the most fun method I've looked into.

My times are still really bad just because it's such a different method, but I do think I'm getting faster. I think my worst part is definitely block building. I'm struggling to see anything other than F2L pairs, and I know there's a lot more to it than that. Anyone got tips or vids about this? Or should I just experiment and learn on my own?


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 6, 2010)

AngeL said:


> So, I learned Roux



Lies!!! 

Yea, Roux is a lot of fun. I suggest looking at Waffle's videos on YouTube (cubes4lyfe), he has a lot of good vids for Roux.

Keep practicing, and Roux will become even more fun.


----------



## Edward (May 6, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> AngeL said:
> 
> 
> > So, I learned Roux
> ...



But no blockbuilding tips video D:
.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 6, 2010)

Edward said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > AngeL said:
> ...


I have one ^^. Its shaky and i needed a script but i think its helpful


----------



## Kirjava (May 7, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Kirjava, I have better algs someone. I'll post them soon.




Are you sure about that? XD


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 7, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Are you sure about that? XD



Grrr. 

You know what you did!

Good job though.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 10, 2010)

Ive been practicing F2B quite a bit, trying to improve my blocks.

I ran into a 'case' that i dont know how to handle effectivley any help is appreciated.

D2 B2 F2 D' F' L2 R U2 B F' L R F2 R' F' U2 F U' L B2 D' U L' D2 U2
Solution:
Inspection: x2
FB: UR2DrB'R2F
SB: U2r'URrUr'

So far thats what ive got. I have no idea how to effeciently handle the last C/E pair for the SB block.

Heres a couple ways i would have handled it:
R'U'rU2Mr'U'r
U2r'UrM'UM2U2r'U'r
BUB2RBrUR'U2r
r'URU2R'UrUr'U'r


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2010)

Yeah, that's nasty. I usually do UR'U'M2UM'U'r or U'R'UMU'rU2r'U'r

I'll do some second block examples later today, waffle requested some.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 10, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Yeah, that's nasty. I usually do UR'U'M2UM'U'r or U'R'UMU'rU2r'U'r
> 
> I'll do some second block examples later today, waffle requested some.


 
Ahhhh I like the first one.
Thanks. 
Cant wait for SB examples

I think in the past couple of weeks ive really improved my blocks.

Im not going to time myself until next month, instead im going to work on my blocks, and look ahead.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 10, 2010)

Just so i have this somewhere, some of my F2B solves


L' B2 F L2 B L' R F2 U2 L' D' U B2 F D2 U' B2 F2 D U2 R2 B2 F' L R2

Solution:
FB: L2U'L2U'DL2B'U2
SB: xU'M'UR'U'RU'R'UR2UR'U'RU2R'URU'R'

D2 B2 F2 D' F' L2 R U2 B F' L R F2 R' F' U2 F U' L B2 D' U L' D2 U2

Solution:
INSPECTION: x2
FB: UR2DrB'R2F
SB: U2r'URrUr'UR'U'M2UM'U'r
D B' R' U2 R' B D B' F2 L' R' B' F' U2 L' R2 B F' R2 U' B2 R2 D2 U' L2

Solution:

InspecTion: 
FB: U'R'BD'UrB'U'R'U2F' (11)/ UR2D'BU'F'URU'B(10)
SB: R'U'r'U'R2 U'rUr'UM'U2r'U'R(14)/ R2U'R2U'M'UR'UR'U2RUR'UR (15)

B2 F' L' D U2 B F' D B F' D' B2 D U2 R D' R' F' U2 B2 R D2 U' F U

Solution:

Inspection:x'y'
FB:Ru'M2u y ru'R'U
SB:UM2UM'U'R'U'r'U'r'U'RU2R'URU'r'

I really like the FB of this solve 
R2 D2 U2 B2 F2 R2 U B' L R' D' L' B' F' L D U F L R2 F2 D2 R' F2 D2

Solurion:

Inspection:
FB: RD2F'B'U' (B2x2) U2 R'UF
SB: (Mr')U'RU'R x' UrFr'U'R'F(Rx) 

I like this solve too.


----------



## Boxcarcrzy12 (May 10, 2010)

How many algs are there total for roux?? Im debating learning it, but im badddd at cramming.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2010)

Boxcarcrzy12 said:


> How many algs are there total for roux?? Im debating learning it, but im badddd at cramming.



42 CMLL cases...that's it

or 9 for two look CMLL (recommended for beginners). I've sub-17 avg using only 2 look

kirjava has sub-15 avg using only 2 algs with roux.

it's not the algs that hard. it's block building.


----------



## Boxcarcrzy12 (May 10, 2010)

ughhh not what i wanted to hear but thanks


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 10, 2010)

Boxcarcrzy12 said:


> ughhh not what i wanted to hear but thanks



42 isn't a lot to be honest. and if you know 4 look last layer from basic CFOP. then you already know the algs for 2 look corners.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 10, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> I'll do some second block examples later today, waffle requested some.



you should just do some example solves, instead of exclusive SB.

also you should do it on video xP. Because Kirs videos = WIN


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 10, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> Boxcarcrzy12 said:
> 
> 
> > ughhh not what i wanted to hear but thanks
> ...



this.

If your going to learn a speedcubing method, and dont want to learn algs your SOL, however if you stick with fridrich, your going to have learn > 42 algs.

If im not mistaken you have OLL = 57, and PLL = 21, then there are some F2L cases that youd end up learning to improve them (well usually).

Then theres petrus where you learn the 7 cases for corners orientation, then 21 for PLL
so about 28. While not as much as Roux its not significantly less.

Besides all that C*LL algs are really easy to learn, the hard parts getting recog down. And once you learn how to do that for one case the rest come easily. 

CMLL is pwn. Nuff said.


----------



## Kirjava (May 10, 2010)

HAI WAFFLE

3x3 Scramble #4977: L' U' R' L' D L2 B' F' R' U' B' L B U L2 F2 B2 D2 F' L2 D' U2 B U2 F' 

1) U'lU (M'R') U'R yx'y F'UF2 - cube rotation isn't how it's performed, w/e (also, there's a nicer first block - sue me ^_^)
2) (MR)URU2RU2RU2R'U'rUr'

3x3 Scramble #4978: D R F' R2 B R L U' B' L2 B2 D U L R' D' R2 U' R2 F' R2 L' B L2 U2 

1) x2y' FL'B'L x'y R2U'R2U' x
2) R2U'rUrU r2U2RUR'M2UrU'r'

3x3 Scramble #4979: R' U2 L2 D2 B2 F' L2 D2 B D' U' B2 R' F' R2 F' L' R' D2 L' B2 D F D2 U2 

1) x'y R2B'R'U x' U2B2
2) r2U2R2U'R'U'R'U'RU'r'URU'R'

3x3 Scramble #4980: L D2 L U2 R2 L' D B D2 F D2 U F' D F R2 B' D2 U2 F R2 U' L2 B2 L2 

1) y2 FR2BL x'y U2MF
2) R2UR'U'R2UR2Ur'URU'R'

3x3 Scramble #4981: R D' B2 F' U2 D2 L U R L2 D' L2 F U F' R' U2 R2 F2 B2 D R' F' R U

1) U'F'R2U'L2R'E2 (lol) R' xy'
2) R2U'R'UR'U'RrUr'


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 11, 2010)

I spent a like an hour looking for good ways of doing my blocks. I was doing amazing (like sub-20 moves). Then I accidentally hit F5.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 11, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> HAI WAFFLE



Ohai
thx


----------



## Edward (May 11, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> I spent a like an hour looking for good ways of doing my blocks. I was doing amazing (like sub-20 moves). Then I accidentally hit F5.



Where were you? You were on a site to help with blocks? Gimme.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 11, 2010)

Edward said:


> Where were you? You were on a site to help with blocks? Gimme.



No. I was sitting on this chair for 2 hours. Looking for blocks.


----------



## Edward (May 11, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > Where were you? You were on a site to help with blocks? Gimme.
> ...



Gahh, I'm not on the ball today, I'm interpreting everyone's posts the wrong way. I understand now. My bad .


----------



## Kirjava (May 11, 2010)

Two hours? O_O I did those above in like 10 mins 

Also, I don't think they're an accurate enough representation of how I solve, either. I don't know how to convey exactly how I solve though.


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 11, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Two hours? O_O I did those above in like 10 mins
> 
> Also, I don't think they're an accurate enough representation of how I solve, either. I don't know how to convey exactly how I solve though.



LOL

That's including eating though.

I basically scrambled, solved, scrambled, solved, scrambled, solved... untill I found a decent solution.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 11, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> Two hours? O_O I did those above in like 10 mins
> 
> Also, I don't think they're an accurate enough representation of how I solve, either. I don't know how to convey exactly how I solve though.



lol easy make a vid.
Lol, take a normal average, then go back through each F2B and show us what you did there.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 11, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> HAI WAFFLE
> 
> 3x3 Scramble #4977: L' U' R' L' D L2 B' F' R' U' B' L B U L2 F2 B2 D2 F' L2 D' U2 B U2 F'
> 
> ...



I dont understand how you see blocks or how you get the solutions you do. I never see them like that..

How do you think during inspection?
Like could you walk us through your thought process while building the blocks in your head?

If so thanks that would be mighty helpful, and Aki would approve i thinks.


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 12, 2010)

Kirjava would it be possible to come up with another alg for the LSE case where all edges are unoriented, The one you created a while ago the RU'rU'M'UrUr' (Kirs hax) is awsome however it places two adjacent edges into the D layer, i was wondering if there was one that would place two opposite edges into the D layer.


----------



## Kirjava (May 12, 2010)

MU2M'UM'UMUM' works if the L/R edges are on UF/UB


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 12, 2010)

also more LSE hax:
RU'r'UM'U'rUr'

for when bad edges are UF/UB and DF/DB


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 17, 2010)

even moar LSE hax

6E-OPP: rU'r'U'M'UrUR'U2M [L/R @ UL/UR]
6E-ADJ: RU'r'U'M'UrUr' [L/R @ UF/UR]

4E-OPP (L/R BAD): RU'r'UM'U'rUr' [L/R @ UB/UF]
4E-OPP (L/R GOOD): RU'r'U(r'R)U'rUr'U'M'U2M (need a better alg >.>) [L/R @ UL/UR]
4E-ADJ: RU'r'U(r'R)U'rUr' [L/R @ UF/UL]


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 18, 2010)

Question: Scramble from an x2 away from your preffered color scheme.

*R2 D' F R U' R2 B F' D L F R2 F' U' R' U R' D2 F2 D U' B R2 F2 U' x'*

*how would you handle this case?*

*Solve both of the 1x2x2s then solve the pairs for both blocks. or do FB->SB like normal?*


----------



## Kirjava (May 21, 2010)

no idea what you can see on that scramble.


```
14:50:48 <+Venim> 3x3 Scramble #5361: B2 F L2 U2 B' F2 D' L R' B' R' L' B2 R2 L' D' U B' L' B2 U B2 R' U2 D' 
14:50:51 <+Kirjava> I shall type my solution for blox
14:52:06 <+Kirjava> R2FU'MUx'zU2RU'x
14:52:53 <+Kirjava> UrM'B'R'Br2UR
14:53:18 <+Kirjava> R'ULU'RUL'
14:53:53 <+DanCohen> heh
14:53:54 <+Kirjava> M'UM'UMU'M'U2M'U2LR
```

EDIT: 31 ATM, 39 HTM


----------



## miniGOINGS (May 21, 2010)

ATM?


----------



## jms_gears1 (May 21, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> ATM?



pretty sure its STM


----------



## Kirjava (May 23, 2010)

Axial Turn Metric


----------



## Kirjava (May 26, 2010)

y/n?


----------



## BigGreen (May 26, 2010)

at 1:30
couldnt you just do Ur'UrU2r'U'R?


----------



## Edward (May 26, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> y/n?



OH SO NOW YOU MAKE IT?


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 26, 2010)

I love you kir...but I noticed that I would block build using kinda your style...therefore I am just slow


----------



## koreancuber (May 26, 2010)

oh yeah... i must master blockbuilding for zz


----------



## Kirjava (May 26, 2010)

BigGreen said:


> at 1:30
> couldnt you just do Ur'UrU2r'U'R?




Or RUR'U'r'U'rURU'R'. I think I panicked. I like your alg better though.

I might make some more if anyone cares in the future, or I might just make random videos, idfk.

EDIT; Or U'R'U'RUMUR'U2R.


----------



## chocochoco (Jun 1, 2010)

Edward. can you give us the answer? :d


----------



## Edward (Jun 1, 2010)

chocochoco said:


> Edward. can you give us the answer? :d



You talkin' to me?


----------



## EnterPseudonym (Jun 1, 2010)

Edward said:


> OH SO NOW YOU MAKE IT*?*





Edward said:


> chocochoco said:
> 
> 
> > Edward. can you give us the answer? :d
> ...



You put a question mark at the end of your sentence.


----------



## Edward (Jun 1, 2010)

EnterPseudonym said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > OH SO NOW YOU MAKE IT*?*
> ...



I was referring to how I had asked him for a while to make a blockbuilding tut, and when I finally quit Roux, he makes it. Get what I'm sayin' mayne?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jun 1, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> BigGreen said:
> 
> 
> > at 1:30
> ...



haha you should def make some more. Just next time dont mumble a lot xD


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 8, 2010)

> 16:33:59 <+Kirjava> oh
> 16:34:07 <+Kirjava> I found a nicer way to do NMBlox
> 16:34:17 <+Kirjava> you do R2 or r2 after solving UL/UR
> 16:34:25 <+Kirjava> since it's easier to do it there than at the end of the solve
> 16:34:38 <+Kirjava> and you get a really nice look at LL



...


----------



## nck (Jun 8, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> > 16:33:59 <+Kirjava> oh
> > 16:34:07 <+Kirjava> I found a nicer way to do NMBlox
> > 16:34:17 <+Kirjava> you do R2 or r2 after solving UL/UR
> > 16:34:25 <+Kirjava> since it's easier to do it there than at the end of the solve
> ...



I'm completely lost.


----------



## Googlrr (Jun 8, 2010)

nck said:


> Kirjava said:
> 
> 
> > > 16:33:59 <+Kirjava> oh
> ...



Middle is a layer too, and in the case of Roux, it is indeed the last one to be solved.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jun 8, 2010)

Why R2 or r2? What about r, R, r', and R'?


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 8, 2010)

because **** that


----------



## Absolute ze woah (Jun 9, 2010)

I just realized I was trying to learn how to do this with an unsolvable cube...rofl/fml/ rage quit (I'll be back later lol) ...

Also, if someone could help me...
I'm confused....Lets say I'm facing at and making the first block on the green side with yellow on the right and white on the left... When I'm making the block the front face of the block must be green but then does the left face of the 1x2x3 of the block have to match the left centercap (in this case white)

Because at this site 
http://rubiks.wikia.com/wiki/Roux_Method
They do match with the center piece but sometimes in your videos, they don't :S


----------



## AngeL (Jun 10, 2010)

Center orientation doesn't matter until the end. It's helpful to learn how to make your blocks completely independent of where the centers (Other than the one in your block, of course) are. It just requires knowing your color scheme really well and a bit of practice.


----------



## Googlrr (Jun 10, 2010)

Is there any sort of program for practicing specific CMLLs? I mean like, something I can tell me to give me only Sunes, or something like that? I wanted to drill those down to try and help me recognize cases, but you can't specify in any of the ones I found. If one doesn't exist, would anyone be interested in me creating a rough version? I just don't want to spend the time writing up a program if there's already something like this. 

Thanks.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 10, 2010)

What I do to practise algs is make a text file that contains different groups of algs. I then have a shell script that prints a random line from the file so I use that as a scramble.

But tbh, CMLL isn't enough cases to warrant that, is it? It's been so long since I didn't know it.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 10, 2010)

lol look for the LL trainer and set to ZBLL


----------



## Googlrr (Jun 10, 2010)

Kirjava said:


> What I do to practise algs is make a text file that contains different groups of algs. I then have a shell script that prints a random line from the file so I use that as a scramble.
> 
> But tbh, CMLL isn't enough cases to warrant that, is it? It's been so long since I didn't know it.



It's not as much the number of cases I have trouble with, it's just the similarity between them. I suppose this would be the easiest solution that I'll probably end up going with.



waffle=ijm said:


> lol look for the LL trainer and set to ZBLL


I've used this before, but my problem is that I don't really want to see all the cases. I was thinking something more along the lines of badmephistos PLL trainer, CMLL style where I can disable cases that I don't really have a problem with or haven't yet learned. 


anyway, I appreciate the speedy responses. Peace.


----------



## AngeL (Jun 12, 2010)

Hey, Rouxers. Just wanted to let you know that Yoda convinced me to stay with Roux. I've been stuck at the :40 second barrier for a while now and it's been getting frustrating, and I've been thinking about going back to CFOP because of the easier lookahead/recognition/etc. Then, Star Wars came on TV and I realized that CFOP is the dark side, Roux is the way of the Jedi.

The dark side (CFOP) is for those who want power (low times) and want it now. Roux is the light side because it requires patience, discipline, and humility. (AKA, really bad times for a long time, lol) 

So, I decided to stick with Roux because "Once you start down the dark path,forever will it dominate your destiny."

Back to working on blocks some more...


Edit: Don't kill me Fridrich users, I love Fridrich too, I just love Roux more


----------



## Daniel Wu (Jun 12, 2010)

lolzers. That was epic. 

I used to do roux.. But I didn't stop because I wanted fast times quickly. Just that roux is kind of annoying for big cubes and OH.

I guess I'm on... THE DARK SIDE.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jun 12, 2010)

hahaha funny starwars analogy is funny


----------



## Johannes91 (Jun 12, 2010)

rickcube said:


> I used to do roux.. But I didn't stop because I wanted fast times quickly. Just that roux is kind of annoying for big cubes and OH.


Well those are excellent reasons to stop using it for two-handed 3x3x3 solving.


----------



## Daniel Wu (Jun 12, 2010)

Johannes91 said:


> rickcube said:
> 
> 
> > I used to do roux.. But I didn't stop because I wanted fast times quickly. Just that roux is kind of annoying for big cubes and OH.
> ...


Doing roux for 3x3 speed and something else for OH and big cubes would bother me. for some reason because I'm weird like that.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 13, 2010)

or you just use roux for OH and big cubes...hasn't stopped me.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jun 13, 2010)

How can Fridrich be the dark side? It's sooo wonderful! 



waffle=ijm said:


> or you just use roux for OH and big cubes...hasn't stopped me.



1UP


----------



## Daniel Wu (Jun 13, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> or you just use roux for OH and big cubes...hasn't stopped me.


Yeah... But you're waffle. I can only hope of one day reaching your level.


----------



## Athefre (Jun 14, 2010)

Syrup moves slowly.


----------



## n305 (Jul 5, 2010)

roux is dead?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jul 6, 2010)

n305 said:


> roux is dead?



lolno


----------



## BigGreen (Jul 6, 2010)

n305 said:


> roux is dead?



roux is a ninjapirate so it cant die EVER


----------



## spdcbr (Jul 19, 2010)

Sorry for bump. I have a question, can you be fast as others without being partial neutral? Is it harder?


----------



## Toad (Jul 19, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> Sorry for bump. I have a question, can you be fast as others without being partial neutral? Is it harder?



If your lookahead is perfectly neutral then you will always get the advantage of having easier crosses and/or xcrosses.

However, people will argue that, with fixed colour your lookahead could will usually be better as you're always looking for the same thing.

As proved by Feliks, it seems the best result is being colour neutral but Erik and others aren't exactly bad


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jul 19, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> Sorry for bump. I have a question, can you be fast as others without being partial neutral? Is it harder?



look at big green...sub-10 avg and he's hardly partial neutral


----------



## spdcbr (Jul 19, 2010)

Mmmm ok. But does it have a drastically higher move count for the first block? Or is the difference only 2~3 extra moves?


----------



## BigGreen (Jul 19, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> Mmmm ok. But does it have a drastically higher move count for the first block? Or is the difference only 2~3 extra moves?



move count vs speed doesnt really matter


----------



## Escher (Jul 19, 2010)

randomtoad said:


> As proved by Feliks, it seems the best result is being colour neutral but Erik and others aren't exactly bad


 
He was only opp. colour neutral for the WR...


----------



## vgbjason (Jul 19, 2010)

randomtoad said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry for bump. I have a question, can you be fast as others without being partial neutral? Is it harder?
> ...





Kirjava said:


> yellow white white yellow yellow



'Nuff said.


----------



## riffz (Jul 20, 2010)

Escher said:


> randomtoad said:
> 
> 
> > As proved by Feliks, it seems the best result is being colour neutral but Erik and others aren't exactly bad
> ...



Yes, but if all the good crosses were on orange/red he would still have set the record.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jul 20, 2010)

riffz said:


> Escher said:
> 
> 
> > randomtoad said:
> ...



thatd still be opp colour neutral..........


----------



## spdcbr (Jul 31, 2010)

My second block is the step I need most work on. The amount of moves for me can be 15~18 or on bad cases even over 20 . Can anyone direct me to some example solves of post some solutions of their own?


----------



## spdcbr (Jul 31, 2010)

bump


----------



## dabmasta (Aug 1, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> bump



rly?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 1, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> bump



now I don't feel like answering


----------



## iChanZer0 (Aug 1, 2010)

when are you going to make your new tutorial for roux


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Aug 1, 2010)

I don't mean to be rude but didn't you say you were taking a break waffle? Or maybe that was miniGoings, but I could have sworn you were in that thread too.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 1, 2010)

SB blok = high move count


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 1, 2010)

lol I'm not taking a break yet. and I was planning to do the Roux tuts but With work and personal life, I have yet to do anything about them.


----------



## riffz (Aug 1, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> riffz said:
> 
> 
> > Escher said:
> ...



:fp


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 1, 2010)

waffle=ijm said:


> lol I'm not taking a break yet. and I was planning to do the Roux tuts but With work and personal life, I have yet to do anything about them.



dont you have one vid? Or was that me dreaming.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 1, 2010)

riffz said:


> jms_gears1 said:
> 
> 
> > riffz said:
> ...



.. whats the facepalm to exactly.


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 1, 2010)

dabmasta said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > bump
> ...





waffle=ijm said:


> spdcbr said:
> 
> 
> > bump
> ...



I'm sorryz QQ
Well at least they're a few hours apart...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 1, 2010)

spdcbr said:


> dabmasta said:
> 
> 
> > spdcbr said:
> ...



to answer. move count helps. but not a lot. A lower move count will only help you to see how to make the blocks but you can cheat it a little by using a **** load of fast moves.

I say to look for a low move count because it forces you to look for blocks more efficiently.


----------



## riffz (Aug 3, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> riffz said:
> 
> 
> > jms_gears1 said:
> ...



My point was that, regardless of what set of opposite colours had the best crosses, he could have taken advantage of them.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 3, 2010)

I LIKE TO SPAM MY OWN THREAD


----------



## spdcbr (Aug 17, 2010)

Question: Should you be able to plan your whole first block to get faster if you are at the point I am now? (sub-30) If yes, then how would you go about practicing that?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 17, 2010)

Yes. and practice tracking better but knowing where pieces go. Doing the First block BLD is always fun


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Sep 14, 2010)

Where did roux central go, and how long has it been down? D:


----------



## Daniel Wu (Sep 14, 2010)

ArcticxWolf said:


> Where did roux central go, and how long has it been down? D:


It poofed a long time ago.


----------



## ArcticxWolf (Sep 14, 2010)

Oh. Is there still a place to access the information which was on rouxcentral?


----------



## Daniel Wu (Sep 15, 2010)

The thread about RC.

There's a link somewhere in there for the getting sub 20 with roux for noobs that was once on roux central. It was one of the more helpful things on the site.


----------



## Pyliip (Sep 25, 2010)

Hi, thanks lot, thanks to you am now sub60 with the Roux Method (i learned it 3 years ago but stopped cubing and forgot about it) and I started learning it 6 days ago. I will maybe ttranslate your tutorial into french, making some vids, so that more people can learn it =)


----------



## Tykwondo35 (Sep 28, 2010)

What are the 9 algorithims for cmll or coll to get sub 20


----------



## Daniel Wu (Sep 28, 2010)

The 7 algs for the second look of [wiki]2LLL[/wiki] and the T perm and Y perm.

Edit: Yes 2 LOLL not 2LLL.


----------



## AngeL (Sep 29, 2010)

^That's the second look of 2look OLL, btw, in case there was any confusion.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 29, 2010)

I'm gonna work on getting RC back, at least to snatch the info that was posted.


----------



## Catalin (Nov 14, 2010)

COLL or CMLL?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Nov 14, 2010)

if you stick with Roux CMLL
if you are a real Roux User, you'll know an infinite number of corner algs for any case anyway.


----------



## Pixel 6 (Nov 17, 2010)

Averaging 35 or so still... but every once in a while a 2x.xx jumps out at me and keeps me motivated! 

Slowly learning some CMLL's, (easy ones) and trying to get better at tracking and orienting pieces more fluidly. Look ahead is still shoddy... not used to where some of the pieces I'm looking for can be hiding.

Can't wait till I'm faster in Roux than I am in Petrus.

- Pixel -


----------



## Pixel 6 (Dec 2, 2010)

Actually taking some time this week to learn CMLL's. Got the H cases down. (wow. the whole 4) Have been trying to figure out what my current OLL's do transferring over from Petrus. So only have about 15 CMLL cases that I know exactly how to do. 

Tired of doing OC, then a T or Y Perm, so that's been my motivation.

Got a PB of 18.65 in Roux few days ago. No skips. PB with Petrus was 15.36, and had a PLL skip.

The last few average of 100's I've done have been pretty consistent at 32.xx Got a buddy of mine who's learning Roux, so we race all the time and it's been great to practice. We just did average of 50, he was at 30, me 32. So pretty close.

Thanks Waffle for all your great info!

- Pixel -


----------



## Rikane (Dec 2, 2010)

Yay, I recently returned to roux and I'm almost sub-20 for some reason... When I left, I had trouble getting sub-25. I'm looking to eventually posting some average videos on youtube, that is when I find a good camera angle. 
Blocks make up a large portion of my solve... I don't know how to lookahead with Roux D:


----------



## StachuK1992 (Dec 2, 2010)

Ah, you're back!


----------



## LarsN (Dec 2, 2010)

Roux is cool!

I've been using CFOP with cross on left for three years now (avg about 14ish). But now when I practice I get bored, which is why I'm starting to have fun with some Roux solves. I use COLL for the last four corners, because I use that for CFOP already. I'm having trouble seeing the whole first block during inspection, but I can easily see the 2x2x1. I average about 22-23 seconds right now.
Will I benefit from learning CMLL algs at this point?
I suspect that doing fridrich like pairing for the second block is not the fastest/most optimal way to go. Any tips on how to not look at the second block like a fridrich f2l?


----------



## abctoshiro (Dec 2, 2010)

Okay, I just watched some of your tuts and... their nice.

I average now about sub-20 (I still don't know because I haven't timed myself again after my last ao12 last week).

Uhm, almost no known CMLL's, but 9 move first block. Second block troubles me much because of the movecount.


----------



## Rikane (Dec 2, 2010)

I'm practising daily, but I'm really too lazy to learn anymore algs, so I think eventually, I'll think about CMLL. Until then, I guess I can try to see how far I can get with two look corners. 

If I could lookahead properly, I think I could easily be sub-20... but I guess a lot of us have that problem, so I'm nothing special.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 6, 2010)

sub-15 Roux without CMLL is possible.


----------



## Rikane (Dec 6, 2010)

I'ma do it. I can do it, because I believe, in the power, of Roux. And me, just a bit.


----------



## Edward (Dec 6, 2010)

Rikane said:


> I'ma do it. I can do it, because I believe, in the power, of Roux. And me, just a bit.


 
Don't believe in yourself, believe in the cube who believes in you :I


----------



## Pixel 6 (Dec 11, 2010)

For me this was a pretty good solve. Better than average at least. Any pointers or observations an to where I can make improvements?






- Pixel -

Every time I see Waffle's name, 
I think "Belgian Waffle"
Then I think "Belgian Rofl"... 
Then I laugh... LOL


----------



## Athefre (Dec 11, 2010)

Is that LSE Orient -> DF+DB -> EPLL?


----------



## Pixel 6 (Dec 11, 2010)

I believe so... Pretty flexible on how I solve. On the first block I'll do front or back pair, doesn't matter. 2nd block, no rotations from here on out, again no preference on front, back, or bottom edge blocks. Then a CMLL if I know it... Or 1 of 7 corner perms if I don't. Then Y or J perm... Edge orient... Insert L/R edges, then slap em around to finish. 

That make sense?

- Pixel -


----------



## Googlrr (Dec 13, 2010)

Hello there,

I was wondering how most Roux-users handle computer cubing. I've been working on it for a little while (Averaging~25 secs) and my biggest problem is still M-slicing I think. I'm finding that the U+M buttons are quite awkward to do, especially when I get a case where I want to do an M'UM' or similar. I don't suppose there's any computer cube program with a distinct M slice button or macro ability, or would that be considered cheating to most people?


----------



## LarsN (Dec 21, 2010)

About transition between step 4b and 4c:

I've found an easy way to do this transition that might help new Roux'ers in this step. Using this approach you will take advantage of low movecount and never having trouble finding the correct 3-cycle in the M-slice.

While doing step 4b at the point where you have the UL-UR edges in DF-DB, look at the LU-RU stickers. You need to notice if they are same or opposite colors. This is easy to do without slowing down after a litte practise. Finish step 4b by doing M2, but AUF according to the 2 cases:

LU-RU stickers are same (3-cycle on M-slice):
AUF to have the corners correctly permuted. Start 4c by doing M or M' in the directing that brings the UF-UB sticker that doesn't match the U-center. Then U2 and the rest should be obvious.

LU-RU stickers are opposite (rest of the cases):
AUF to match the LU-RU stickers with the centers. If corners happen to be correctly placed proceed with M2 U2 and the rest should be obvious. If corners are not correctly placed do M or M' in the directing that brings the UF-UB sticker that doesn't match the U-center. Then U2 and the rest should be obvious.

The somewhat tricky E2 M' E2 M' case will end up in the second case and will be solved with M' U2 M2 U2 M' U2 M2

I'm not sure that this decription is easy to understand, but play around with the concept and it should be easy to see. Note that I'm not a very fast Roux user (avg 22s) and I suppose that the fast users either do this automaticly or has a better way, but I couldn't find anything about it.


----------



## Athefre (Dec 27, 2010)

A similar idea in a video was posted on page 78.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW4NYqeZKWU

The final rules are a little different.


----------



## Kynit (Dec 27, 2010)

I'm not sure if this has ever been posted (likely), but...

Roux step 4:
1. Orient edges
2. Solve UF and UB, do U (M slice is still open)
3. Solve UL and UR around the U center
4. U'

I like the lookahead on this, and it seems very intuitive. Any thoughts?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 27, 2010)

same as regular LSE. it's just some minor manipulation. like doing EO with any center on U or something


----------



## patzanashu (Jan 4, 2011)

hey.....i started using roux 2 weeks ago(i was a CFOP user with 15s avg without 25 OLL alg)....my time with roux is 29s avg and i have in plan to lern some tricks and tips after i get sub 25s avg and at sub 18s some CMLL alg...10x waffle 4 this thread!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 10, 2011)

Question. Some people are already aware of my website in my attempt to compile all the Roux I know. 

What would people rather see done? Written CMLL guide with PDF? or The Sub-15 guide?


----------



## Edward (Jan 10, 2011)

You're current sub 15 section is already amazing. I'd rather see CMLL guide...


----------



## BigGreen (Jan 10, 2011)

sub-13 guide


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jan 10, 2011)

sub-15.


----------



## BigGreen (Jan 10, 2011)

sub-10


----------



## patzanashu (Jan 11, 2011)

23s avg....both of them will be nice!!!


----------



## RaresB (Jan 17, 2011)

i dont get 4c at all i am running into cases you didnt bother explaining... were you tired while making 4c because i understand nothing, however i do compliment the rest of your videos


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Jan 17, 2011)

pwnAge said:


> i dont get 4c at all i am running into cases you didnt bother explaining... were you tired while making 4c because i understand nothing, however i do compliment the rest of your videos


 
Dude... only three cases exist. U2 M' U2 M or U2 M U2 M' or E2 M E2 M'


----------



## Cool Frog (Jan 17, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> Dude... only three cases exist. U2 M' U2 M or U2 M U2 M' or E2 M E2 M'


 
U2 M2 U2 M2?


----------



## RaresB (Jan 17, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> U2 M2 U2 M2?


thanks i got it now. Roux is pwnage (like my name) Btw when you block build is it ok if you do it a bit like f2l


----------



## cincyaviation (Jan 17, 2011)

pwnAge said:


> thanks i got it now. Roux i pwnage (like my name) Btw when you block build is it ok if you do it abit like f2l


 
No, you are not allowed to put 2 pieces together and slot them. That is unacceptable.


----------



## RaresB (Jan 17, 2011)

cincyaviation said:


> No, you are not allowed to put 2 pieces together and slot them. That is unacceptable.


 
I understand would you like to make it the 11th commandment my lord.


----------



## nlCuber22 (Jan 17, 2011)

pwnAge said:


> I understand would you like to make it the 11th commandment my lord.


 
Being a smartass will get you nowhere. Just a tip.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 17, 2011)

When blockbuilding (or at least in my experience) there's nothing wrong with doing F2L like pairing when efficient, just don't make it a habit. You can do things like it once in a while, but don't just solve the F2B like F2L with no M Layer.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 17, 2011)

Moo spamming is a key to Roux blocks. By sticking to ONLY F2L solutions, you'll get nowhere


----------



## Cool Frog (Jan 17, 2011)

pwnAge said:


> thanks i got it now. Roux is pwnage (like my name) Btw when you block build is it ok if you do it a bit like f2l


 
CFOP style pairing is basically very, very, basic block building. Try to use more efficient moves to make block pairs and inserting of the single edge (for right block).
Left block there is no need for CFOP based blockbuilding
Edit: Ninjas where an hour ahead of me.:fp


----------



## AngeL (Jan 22, 2011)

Does anyone more experienced with Roux than me have an opinion on using white/yellow on R/L? I love it for lookahead on F2B but most people seem to have white/yellow on U/D.


----------



## Shortey (Jan 22, 2011)

afaik BigGreen uses white and yellow on L/R


----------



## Ordos_Koala (Feb 1, 2011)

waffo, can you do fast solves using CFOP too? I just want to know if you think it is good to learn more methodns (learn, not just try)


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 1, 2011)

Learning more methods can always give you insight to doing certain steps more efficiently. Blockbuilding methods can most certainly help you build an x-cross and might even improve your F2L.


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 1, 2011)

AngeL said:


> Does anyone more experienced with Roux than me have an opinion on using white/yellow on R/L? I love it for lookahead on F2B but most people seem to have white/yellow on U/D.



I am color neutral, but usually force Red/Orange U and D face. Who are these most people? I know Kirjava prefers Blue/Green on U/D I personally don't mind and find that, that step gets faster with just solving over and over.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 1, 2011)

Ordos_Koala said:


> waffo, can you do fast solves using CFOP too? I just want to know if you think it is good to learn more methodns (learn, not just try)


 
sub-18 CFOP


----------



## patzanashu (Feb 15, 2011)

19s avg with 16.69 pb nl.no CMLL learned!


----------



## Pixel 6 (Mar 5, 2011)

Hey, I've been using this site for learning CMLL's:

http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/home

But I'm running into a problem with one of the Bruno - Pi cases... the "/" slash one... the alg doesn't seem to work. I get the idea of using both of those types of sunes... but am I doing it wrong? or is the notation off?

R U R' U R U2 R' - U' L' U R U' L U R' 

This is the one that I'm messing up somehow.

Is the alg below that one setup right as well?

- Pixel -


----------



## NeedReality (Mar 8, 2011)

Pixel 6 said:


> Hey, I've been using this site for learning CMLL's:
> 
> http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/home
> 
> ...


 
For the "Slash" you can use: R U R' U R U2 R' U' R U' L U R' U' L

and for "Black-Slash" you can use: R' U' R U' R' U2 R U' L' U R U' L U R'

Both taken from Waffle's old CMLL videos. I actually just started learning CMLL as well with that site and found those two to be wrong.


----------



## DYGH.Tjen (Apr 2, 2011)

I realized what I was doing wrong. After ~2 months of re-starting cubing, I got bored of 3x3x3 speedsolving and instead concentrated on 3BLD and 2x2x2 speed. I really loved them. Then I realized why I was frikin bored of 3speed. CFOP! After watching your Roux vids and going to your website (and reading from the start till the end and trying out stuff), I straightaway converted from CFOP to Roux. CFOP is damn boring! On the other hand, Roux is awesome!  Thanks a lot Waffo! Iou. <333 Roux

Happy cubing, tjen


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 11, 2011)

Hmm. Thanks for the guide; I like the method, though I'm still averaging just under 2 minutes with it. -.- (my average with CFOP, which I'm trying to convert from, is around 30 seconds)
My recognition is teh suckz...

[EDIT]: Just for the record, I used your written tutorial on your website. The insane amount of time I would've spent just watching videos kind of deterred me. Sorry.
Is there anything important of note in your videos that's not on your written description at your website? (wafflelikescubes.webs.com)


----------



## thierce (Apr 14, 2011)

Geez, I didn't know, people know that site  Good to hear that (I'm the creator). I do use exactly that two algos mentioned there.
I can't see the problem with them  I am executing them from exactly that position. Can you maybe try to explain what exactly messes up?


----------



## 5BLD (Apr 14, 2011)

Yeah, i've been learning off that site too! I average 21.60 with half of the cmlls. The L orientations look scary.
Waffle, how do you go about doing it one handed? I can't seem to get the angle right on the table.


----------



## thierce (Apr 14, 2011)

Good to hear that it's of some help. Did you also have the problems with those two Pi-cases?


----------



## 5BLD (Apr 14, 2011)

I'm not sure really... I worked those two out myself actually. I was just messing about with sunes and stuff. I recognise them by diagonal same colours on top if you know what I mean. I use:
Diagonal right: Anti sune U' L' U R U' L U R'
Diagonal left stickers: Sune U' R U' L' U R' U' L
I think that the U in the middle is wrong on one of them on your page...
The problem with me is recognition for the L cases... And for some reason, the H cases too although they are only 5 or 4 of them. Your site is very helpful!


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 15, 2011)

[youtube]MJKXOPbIipI&lc[/youtube]


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 15, 2011)

you said my name :O

smexy.


----------



## 5BLD (Apr 15, 2011)

Thanks waffle, that really helped. When I watched you and thom doing it, either I couldn't judge the angle, or you were going too fast! I used to lean on the FRD corner. This was easier for M' but for M it does an r'. I need to press harder on the table, looks like.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 15, 2011)

How long does it generally take to learn full CMLL? 

I'm trying to learn them at the moment, but the amount of algorithms is... Overwhelming... 
I'm thinking one "section" (video) every two days (second day for practice and understand when to execute better), which means I should know full CMLL in just over two weeks' time (though school will probably interrupt here and there)...

[I learned all the T CMLL cases in the last hour. lol]


----------



## Cool Frog (Apr 15, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> How long does it generally take to learn full CMLL?
> 
> I'm trying to learn them at the moment, but the amount of algorithms is... Overwhelming...
> I'm thinking one "section" (video) every two days, which means I should know full CMLL in just over two weeks' time (though school will probably interrupt here and there)...
> ...


 
I find learning the algorithms not that hard, Learning the recognition was a bit harder.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 15, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> I find learning the algorithms not that hard, Learning the recognition was a bit harder.


 
This is why I put the second day aside, to practice some recognition. (One day - learning the algorithms themselves, next for better recognition)
In between will be normal Roux-solving practice, of course... And perhaps some table abuse practice.


----------



## ilikecubing (Apr 22, 2011)

Hey Guys,

I learned roux 2 months ago just to have some fun and I find it pretty innovative and cool,I havn't done a lot of solves,only about 100 solves till now because my main method is CFOP,I only do Roux for a change sometimes.

Here is an example solve of How I would go about solving,




B2 F' D' R2 B' D2 B2 F' D U' R F B' D R2 D F' U B' U R B' R F2 L2 

Inspection :z2

First Block : U R' D' 

r2 M' U' L U2 L' U L U' L'

Second Block : L2 D' L2 U M' U R' U2 R U' R' U R 

R U' R' U' R U R' U' R U R'

COLL : U' R' U2 R' D' R U2 R' D R2

LSE : U' M' U M' U M U M'

M2 U M U2 M U' M2 U




I know my Blocks are just too bad,any advice or tip would be appreciated or better ways to get the blocks done.Thanks


----------



## NeedReality (Apr 22, 2011)

ilikecubing said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I learned roux 2 months ago just to have some fun and I find it pretty innovative and cool,I havn't done a lot of solves,only about 100 solves till now because my main method is CFOP,I only do Roux for a change sometimes.
> 
> ...



I tried the scramble and this is what I did in a speed solve: 

Example Solve



Spoiler



z2

First Block: U R' D' 

R' U M2 U2 B

Second Block: M' U R' U R' U' R U R'

U M' U2 R' U R

CMLL: U' l' U2 y R U2 R' U2 R' U2 F z' y' 

LSE: U2 M' U M'

U M' U2 M U M2 

U' M2 U2 M2



Your main problem with your blocks is that you are still doing them as strict F2L algs despite using the M slice to move the pieces around (that's not to say those cases don't come up). On the second part of your first block, you could have done M U' R' U' L U L' and still done it in F2L-esque fashion but with fewer moves. It's all about experimenting to see the different ways to solve blocks.

Don't feel that you have to put the second block's "cross" edge in first either - you can just as well pair up that piece with a corner as a pair (pairs don't have to be the conventional F2L pairs). One way (there are many) that you could finish that block part when you pair it up like that is like this: Example

There are so many ways to do blocks though, so it'd be impossible for me to just say "Do this for this case, this for another, etc." Remember that for the first block you are very free to move any pieces around in any way - use this to your advantage. The M slice is also crucial for connecting pieces for your blocks, something I didn't really understand at first because I was in a full F2L-mindset (and that you could insert completed pairs that need rotations to insert in CFOP by just using r/r' and U moves). Some of the best things you can do are watch/perform example solves, read about Roux on Roux's site/Waffle's site/the forum, and just play around with the cube.

Disclaimer: I'm not claiming to be a Roux expert, just trying to help. Hopefully this did, at least a little bit.


----------



## Cool Frog (Apr 22, 2011)

ilikecubing said:


> B2 F' D' R2 B' D2 B2 F' D U' R F B' D R2 D F' U B' U R B' R F2 L2
> 
> Inspection :z2
> 
> ...


 B2 F' D' R2 B' D2 B2 F' D U' R F B' D R2 D F' U B' U R B' R F2 L2 
Left: D U B U' F r' F
Right:U' R r U r U R U2 R2U M2 U2 R' U R
CMLL:R'U' R U' R' U2 R
LSE: U' M U' M' R' U R U M U2 M' U R' U' R
rawr Can someone check for me please? (computer cannot run lucas garron place)


----------



## RyanReese09 (Apr 22, 2011)

Did by hand, checked twice. Works.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 23, 2011)

Could someone please suggest to me a rotationless algorithm for the all-oriented, but incorrectly permuted CMLL case where each corner is opposite? I don't really like the one in the video (sorry).

(Currently I use my normal Y-perm, but I'm confident there's a better algorithm out there specifically for Roux...)


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 23, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> Could someone please suggest to me a rotationless algorithm for the all-oriented, but incorrectly permuted CMLL case where each corner is opposite? I don't really like the one in the video (sorry).
> 
> (Currently I use my normal Y-perm, but I'm confident there's a better algorithm out there specifically for Roux...)


 
:O

R' F R U2 r U' r' U2 F' U2 r U R'

Found it myself, love it to bits (very nice for 2x2 me thinks).


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 24, 2011)

Neat. I'll probably be using that unless I get a better one (though it seems pretty good; I wonder if I can sub-2 it).

Thank you.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

Hey what's up mini haven't heard from you in like a year :O


----------



## Athefre (Apr 24, 2011)

Mine is: RBU2B'UR'FR'F'R2UR'


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/53712024/Waffle-s-CMLL-Algorithms

I made a document with the CMLL Algorithms, credits to: http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/home
It's incredibly waffle-fied.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 24, 2011)

miniGOINGS said:


> :O
> 
> R' F R U2 r U' r' U2 F' U2 r U R'
> 
> Found it myself, love it to bits (very nice for 2x2 me thinks).


 
How fast can you average with that alg? I'm having trouble getting sub-3. 



Athefre said:


> Mine is: RBU2B'UR'FR'F'R2UR'


 
I suck at B-turns, so I probably wouldn't use that.



spdcbr said:


> http://www.scribd.com/doc/53712024/Waffle-s-CMLL-Algorithms
> 
> I made a document with the CMLL Algorithms, credits to: http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/home
> It's incredibly waffle-fied.


Is there a more... Printer friendly one? I'm on the move a lot, and I'm learning my CMLL's, so having a hardcopy of them should help. Otherwise, awesome! I really wanted one of these...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 24, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> How fast can you average with that alg? I'm having trouble getting sub-3.


 
Oh man, I haven't really timed it... I'll see.

EDIT: Just got 1.72, sub-1.5 should be possible once I get used to using it more.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Apr 24, 2011)

spdcbr said:


> http://www.scribd.com/doc/53712024/Waffle-s-CMLL-Algorithms
> 
> I made a document with the CMLL Algorithms, credits to: http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/home
> It's incredibly waffle-fied.


 
lolol. Most of that websites info came from me or waffo :3


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> Is there a more... Printer friendly one? I'm on the move a lot, and I'm learning my CMLL's, so having a hardcopy of them should help. Otherwise, awesome! I really wanted one of these...



Look on the side. There's a print button



jms_gears1 said:


> lolol. Most of that websites info came from me or waffo :3


 
Haha man I remember roux central xD I can't believe someone (mini or stachu I don't remember) deleted it without saving all of the useful information on there... ;;

@waffo: Can you link the sheet to the first page? :3


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 24, 2011)

spdcbr said:


> Haha man I remember roux central xD I can't believe someone (mini or stachu I don't remember) deleted it without saving all of the useful information on there... ;;


 
That was me. In some ways I regret it, because it was nice to have a community place like that, but in other ways I don't really. When Statue gave control to me the forum had pretty much died out already, and I went through EVERY single post to make sure there was no valuable information not able to be found elsewhere, and trust me, 90% of it was just conversation (most of it mine ). It also wasn't completely my idea, a number of people pointed out its ultimate uselessness, but it was fun for a while. I just honestly don't think there is enough purpose for a forum devoted to a single method.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

I know what you mean by not enough purpose for a forum devoted to a single method, but I know of some info that might have been useful/I wanted to refer back to. 
----
On another note, when are we going to fill in CMLL for the wiki?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 24, 2011)

go for it....do it yourself....I'm lazy


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 24, 2011)

spdcbr said:


> I know what you mean by not enough purpose for a forum devoted to a single method, but I know of some info that might have been useful/I wanted to refer back to.
> ----
> On another note, when are we going to fill in CMLL for the wiki?


 
Really? Anything in particular? Thinking back on it now, I guess it wasn't hurting anybody being there...

Well, with the Wiki it really just comes down to someone putting in the time and effort to do it, and so far no one has done that for most of CMLL.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

I'll get to work on the wiki. I lol'd when I saw this: 

No. Steps: 1 
No. Algs: unknown 
Avg Moves: 

Does anyone know what avg moves are? 40-50?
I'll also try to work on CMLL


----------



## Athefre (Apr 24, 2011)

It doesn't help that CMLL isn't shown on the front page of the Wiki. You either have to click CxLL and navigate through a lot of pages or you have to scroll to the bottom of the main Wiki page and click "Algorithm Database" then "3x3" then "CMLL" and are presented with a very annoying, cluttered layout.

The cases should all be on the CMLL page similar to the PLL page.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

It's on the front page now. Anyone other than me getting to work on the CMLL page? :/


----------



## miniGOINGS (Apr 24, 2011)

40-50 moves for CMLL average? Mine are sub-10, soon to be sub-9. :S

And James, you're right, it could be cleaned up a lot. If someone had the initiative to do that it would be great.


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 24, 2011)

miniGOINGS said:


> 40-50 moves for CMLL average? Mine are sub-10, soon to be sub-9. :S
> 
> And James, you're right, it could be cleaned up a lot. If someone had the initiative to do that it would be great.


Woops sorry I meant for the whole solve


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Apr 24, 2011)

spdcbr said:


> Look on the side. There's a print button


 
I know, but... That's a lot of useless ink. As in, is there one with less exaggeration on the background (credit given where it's due is good, but that's a lot of ink that won't actually serve a purpose in the background there...)?


----------



## Cool Frog (Apr 25, 2011)

I know after EO you can force the Opposite layer edges so one is on the U and one is on the D nearly 100% of the time. Is this a good idea?
In a speedsolve is there any way to recognize if you get a lucky case effeciently?


----------



## spdcbr (Apr 25, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> I know, but... That's a lot of useless ink. As in, is there one with less exaggeration on the background (credit given where it's due is good, but that's a lot of ink that won't actually serve a purpose in the background there...)?


 
Oh....well I just like my sheets all pretty like that  here's a white bg version: http://www.scribd.com/doc/53749649


----------



## OMGitsSolved (Apr 28, 2011)

Can someone make a video of all the reflections of the last case in 4c? And I'm really mad, how fast were you guys when you first learned it and how long did it take you to get sub 30? I can't get the blocks built fast enough and I always get 50's....


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Apr 28, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> I know after EO you can force the Opposite layer edges so one is on the U and one is on the D nearly 100% of the time. Is this a good idea?
> In a speedsolve is there any way to recognize if you get a lucky case effeciently?


 
Umm... DURING orientation I can ALWAYS force one on U and one on D (and sometimes both on D, which is uber useful). For most cases, it doesn't take any extra moves, just different moves than you may be used to.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 28, 2011)

OMGitsSolved said:


> Can someone make a video of all the reflections of the last case in 4c? And I'm really mad, how fast were you guys when you first learned it and how long did it take you to get sub 30? I can't get the blocks built fast enough and I always get 50's....


 
have you seen my website recognition for one of the cases? most likely that's the only case that's holding you back


----------



## Athefre (Apr 28, 2011)

Teachin tha nouxbs.


----------



## Cool Frog (Apr 28, 2011)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> Umm... DURING orientation I can ALWAYS force one on U and one on D (and sometimes both on D, which is uber useful). For most cases, it doesn't take any extra moves, just different moves than you may be used to.


 
Yeah, If they are both on the M slice you can put them on the D.
Was just wondering because the case where the UL is in the UR spot is really nice. (Or I am just really used to it.)


----------



## OMGitsSolved (Apr 28, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> have you seen my website recognition for one of the cases? most likely that's the only case that's holding you back


 
Thanks man, I'm practice some and now I'm about 35 seconds. Ugh how long did it take for you to be sub 25?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Apr 28, 2011)

like....2 weeks....I didn't start timing myself until I was faster


----------



## Xishem (May 4, 2011)

This page: http://wafflelikescubes.webs.com/sub15guidetoroux.htm

Is there a reason that the last 2/3 of it are no longer there? I'm not sure who runs/ran the site, so I'm not sure who to address this to.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 4, 2011)

It's not there because I didn't finish it yet 
there's a copy somewhere else though.....


----------



## StachuK1992 (May 4, 2011)

http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/getting-sub-20-for-noobs-using-roux
sup?


----------



## thierce (May 4, 2011)

I may add a decent PDF version of the algorithms in the near future 
Sounds like it could be useful.

Edit: I created a printer-friendly PDF and uploaded it to my site. Please note that its quite ugly and only the print layout.
I may look into some LaTeX-Fu, as I'm not quite satisfied with that look


----------



## Kirjava (May 4, 2011)

Yeah, the CxLL pages are a total cluster****.

Someone decided to make a separate page for each case and list them with recognition that no one uses.

I understand why it's listed separately so you can have all the different types of C*LL alg on each page, but it'd be smarter to just have separate pages for CMLL/COLL/CLL/etc that list every alg.


----------



## Xishem (May 4, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> It's not there because I didn't finish it yet
> there's a copy somewhere else though.....


 
Ah. I thought that you had, but I must have been thinking of the link that Stachu posted. Either way, I found what I'm looking for. Thanks, you two.


----------



## LarsN (May 5, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> Someone decided to make a separate page for each case and list them with recognition that no one uses.


 
I use part of that system for recognition. I learned it from Bob Burtons COLL page. But I don't like many of the algs listed in the CxLL pages.
There is the wiki algorithm database, but that one is a mess as well. The CMLL algs are not sorted in anyway at all.

I'm going through my CMLL algs at the moment. You can find them here. They are in a process of being updated as I find better algs. Most of them are from Kirjava's CMLL thread, but a lot of others are selected from different places and algs I found myself.


----------



## Forte (May 5, 2011)

Athefre said:


> Teachin tha nouxbs.


 
osht i wanna be called a nouxb


----------



## JLarsen (May 5, 2011)

StachuK1992 said:


> http://sites.google.com/site/schweitzerpatrick/getting-sub-20-for-noobs-using-roux
> sup?


 I friggin love the stages of development.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (May 13, 2011)

Might be a noob, question, but...

Could some of you pro-Roux solvers briefly describe your "M-move" fingertrick (clockwise following "L")? I find mine to be very slow, but perhaps my fingertrick isn't bad and I just need practice. (Waffle's just so fast that I can't keep up on his videos.  )

My fingertrick involves moving my left index finger and pushing UB toward UF. Is this the general fingertrick or is there better?


----------



## Xishem (May 13, 2011)

I'm not "pro". ~17s.

But I bring my left ring finger to FD, and pull the M-slice back. I generally hit the edge of the edge somewhere between the mid-bottom of my fingernail and just below the bottom of my fingernail.


----------



## LarsN (May 13, 2011)

Not pro either ~20s

First of I M-slice with my right hand, which is not that common I think. For M I push DB with my middle right finger. For some situations I push BU with my left index though.


----------



## avgdi (May 13, 2011)

I'm not pro, but here's a video I made the other day for my M turns.


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 13, 2011)

sorry but that's not new 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPxlpKqF_as&feature=channel_video_title


I for one just Double Turn.


----------



## BigGreen (May 13, 2011)

clearly the best way to do M is L' l


----------



## avgdi (May 13, 2011)

I'm aware it's not new. I just happened to make a video of it recently for a friend so I figured I'd share it.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (May 15, 2011)

Just for the record, I used the word "pro" not to express that you must have a very good time (i.e. short for professional), but I used the prefix "pro," as in "in favour of," "in support of," etc. As in, a Roux-solver. 

Regardless, thanks for the answers. They helped. I mostly use the one described in the video, though, as it's basically a reverse of my M' fingertrick.




BigGreen said:


> clearly the best way to do M is L' l


 
No, you clearly mean L' R x


----------



## Cool Frog (May 15, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> No, you clearly mean L' R x


 
You say U I say U5
You say R I say l x


----------



## waffle=ijm (May 15, 2011)

http://wafflelikescubes.webs.com/

moo finished with most of it.


----------



## 5BLD (May 15, 2011)

Yahh! The stages of development are done!


----------



## bwronski (Jun 10, 2011)

I finally understand Edge orientation...so I know love roux. I couldnt care less about my times right now because it is too much fun. Im definetly switching...plus I was in a rut with fridrich (20-24 seconds) for around a year. 

Question. If after you orient edges and the bottom two are solved, do you just do a PLL? U H or Z? Instead of solving the UR and UL edges then the last 4?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 10, 2011)

You can easily do MU algs for U H and Z. so yes.


----------



## bwronski (Jun 10, 2011)

Sweet. and your website helped alot! Some stuff was better written and others on the videos


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Jun 14, 2011)

bwronski said:


> I finally understand Edge orientation...so I know love roux. I couldnt care less about my times right now because it is too much fun. Im definetly switching...plus I was in a rut with fridrich (20-24 seconds) for around a year.
> 
> Question. If after you orient edges and the bottom two are solved, do you just do a PLL? U H or Z? Instead of solving the UR and UL edges then the last 4?



In theory yes, but at the end of EO you should already place L/R edges in sweet spots ( one of them in D layer !?) to speed up the next step. =>
In practice it is just to rare to care.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 14, 2011)

Hm... All you sub-15 or almost sub-15 (like me) Roux users... How much time do you spend on each of the steps? Cuz I think my CMLL might actually be letting me down now (been working on blocks like mad...).

In case you wanted to know, this is my split:
Blocks: 8-9 secs
CMLL (incl recog): 3-5 secs
Moo: 3-5 secs
And the last average of 12 I took was 15.87 secs. But realistically, I'd say I average like 16-17.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 14, 2011)

2.5 / 3.5 / 2 / 3 

or something


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 14, 2011)

K, looks like you're pretty balanced... Let's see what others have...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 14, 2011)

3-3-2-4


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 14, 2011)

K thanks thom and waffo, looks like I'm roughly on the right track then... Although we all have different styles, I know. I think I'll keep at blocks then... Maybe a bit of mooing too... And as I always say to myself, CMLL will come with time (although I dunno whether that's true or not)


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Jun 15, 2011)

5BLD said:


> CMLL will come with time (although I dunno whether that's true or not)


 
Not true for me, at least. especially CLL recognition for U, T (and L) are normaly done from a differnet angle than your fastest OCLL. 

personally I started learning CLL myself, by using random mirrored positions, then I started with the 6 Sune cases (because I already knew Niklas and Sune) ... retrospective this all were rather bad decisions.

Learning the 4 H cases is maybe the best startingpoint (easy recognition patterns, nice algs, and just 4 algs ) this can be done easily while still concentrating on blocks. (if you like it continue with Pi)

Another Point: don't hurry. Only learn the next set of 6 algs when you have integrated the last set well into your solving.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 15, 2011)

Lol, i know full CMLL already; I meant getting fast at it. It takes me like 3 to 5 seconds usually; more than a quarter of my whole solve... Which is like 13-18 secs, I'm very inconsistent I know.

But I hate drilling algs and love mooing, so I think it'll come with time while I practice blockbuilding and mooing (in real solves).


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 16, 2011)

moo. first page.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 16, 2011)

Wow. You've really put alot of effort into this


----------



## buelercuber (Jun 16, 2011)

Wow i actually am trying roux now, finally got a good tutorial!! thanks waffo!!


----------



## Cubenovice (Jun 16, 2011)

Hopping on the Roux train too...

Read through your website yesterday, very well written!
I already found out that (for me) EO will take some serious practice to get fast at.

LOL at the interaction between the GC and Waffo ;-)


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 16, 2011)

buelercuber said:


> Wow i actually am trying roux now, finally got a good tutorial!! thanks waffo!!


You're welcome. 



5BLD said:


> Wow. You've really put alot of effort into this


Thanks. I actually procrastinated in creating the remake vids for a good 10+ months. ;-;



Cubenovice said:


> Hopping on the Roux train too...
> 
> Read through your website yesterday, very well written!
> I already found out that (for me) EO will take some serious practice to get fast at.
> ...



Thanks! And yes LSE is quite a pain at first since it's not really something that's familiar from LBL or CFOP.


----------



## LarsN (Jun 17, 2011)

From Waffo's guide:
"Just look for the relationships between the stickers. Opposite colors, adjacent colors, stuff like that. I DO NOT SUGGEST MY RECOGNITION METHOD "

Which recognition method is recommended then?

I use what I learned from Bob burtons COLL page, but it is giving me pains with NMCMLL. That's why I'm considering to change method. Where can I read about other methods and which do you find best for NMCMLL?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 17, 2011)

While I used sticker recognition when I was first learning CMLL, I kind of just "know the case" and same goes for NMCMLL for me. I just pay attention to the permutation of the corners more


I found this page a while back on Gilles' page http://grrroux.free.fr/method/Step_3j.html not much explanation other than on the bottom page which, in my opinion, is enough.


----------



## Athefre (Jun 17, 2011)

I've since created a better recognition for NMCLL than on my first page you linked to:

http://www.athefre.110mb.com/NMCMLL.html

I'm also working on a third that reduces NMCLL to 42 cases instead of 83.


----------



## Hershey (Jun 17, 2011)

What is NMCLL?


----------



## Athefre (Jun 17, 2011)

Do R2U2R'U'RU'R'.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 17, 2011)

Yeah waffo, I recognise cases similarly to you do, even for non-matching funnily enough. I took the algs from Gilles page, kinda did them backwards and then drew the case etc.
Why didn't I see your tutorial in the first place? It would've helped me alot...


----------



## uberCuber (Jun 17, 2011)

Hershey said:


> What is NMCLL?


 
Non-matching CLL. CLL for when the first two blocks don't match directly


----------



## LarsN (Jun 20, 2011)

Okay, I played a bit around with NMCMLL and found out that I only use it for cases where the blocks are seperate by an R2. This is because I use white/yellow as U or D color. I'm not color neutral enough to do it with a quarter turn difference.
This helped a lot on the number of cases and lets me continue to use the Bob Burton matching/opposite/adjant sticker approach. I've generated a table of cases if anyone is interested, but beware I made it for my own use and it might not be easily understandable 

Here is the table


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 20, 2011)

oh wow. that's actually great. thanks


----------



## Athefre (Jun 20, 2011)

LarsN said:


> Okay, I played a bit around with NMCMLL and found out that I only use it for cases where the blocks are seperate by an R2. This is because I use white/yellow as U or D color. I'm not color neutral enough to do it with a quarter turn difference.
> This helped a lot on the number of cases and lets me continue to use the Bob Burton matching/opposite/adjant sticker approach. I've generated a table of cases if anyone is interested, but beware I made it for my own use and it might not be easily understandable
> 
> Here is the table


 
This is slightly different from my page. Are you using this just for normal and R2 blocks?

What about my recognition system did you not like that made you make this document?


----------



## buelercuber (Jun 20, 2011)

Ok, finally some good rouxtorials!! these are great, i'm already sub 30 with them ( i average sub 18 with CFOP) Can't wait till i get faster and get better at block building!!


----------



## StachuK1992 (Jun 21, 2011)

Hey kids, what's your First Block average? (be honest, please)
Movecount and time.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 21, 2011)

3.22, 1.73, 3.03, 2.37, 3.41, 3.22, 2.09, 2.95, 2.39, 3.17, 2.47, 2.84 = 2.78 (σ = 0.41)

9, 8, 8, 13, 9, 8, 9, 13, 12, 8, 9, 8 = 9.5 moves


----------



## Hershey (Jun 21, 2011)

StachuK1992 said:


> Hey kids, what's your First Block average? (be honest, please)
> Movecount and time.


 
Average of 5: 7.15
1. 6.79 B' D' U' B' D' F B2 R' L2 F2 L' U L R' F U' L2 F2 U2 B' L' F L2 B2 F' 
2. (4.32) R' L2 F' D' B' R2 L' B' U B2 L R2 F2 R2 U' B L' F B' D' R D' U' L2 U2 
3. (14.81) F' D' U2 L2 D' L R' U' B' R' D R L2 U2 L F B D2 B R2 L B' L' B' U' 
4. 7.99 D2 L' D F2 B U D' L U' L2 D2 U' B2 F' R L D' F U' F' U R L B' U' 
5. 6.66 L F2 U2 L' B2 R2 D2 B L2 D F2 R B' L2 U' D2 R' B2 D' U' R2 L2 F' U D 

Sorry, no movecount.
I'm a CFOP user, by the way.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Jun 21, 2011)

Thanks, Waffle.

Guys, please don't post unless in response to my question unless you've been doing this for over a month. :/
Nothing personal, I just want don't need data that I don't want.


----------



## Hershey (Jun 21, 2011)

StachuK1992 said:


> Guys, please don't post unless in response to my question unless you've been doing this for over a month. :/


 
Oh. Sorry.


----------



## Athefre (Jun 21, 2011)

I did an average of 25 solves for the first block last month just to check movecount, doing it the same as I would in a speedsolve. The average was exactly 8.00. For time, I probably average 2.5s in a speedsolve.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 21, 2011)

From 08-16-2010;

2.42, 2.07, 2.51, 2.39, (2.79), 1.78, 1.39, (1.32), 2.08, 2.64, 2.14, 1.63 = 2.11

also,

19:55:30 <BigGreen> 2.07, 2.76, 2.14, 2.36, 1.78, (0.97), 2.72, 2.04, 3.20, 2.06, 1.89, (3.60) = 2.30 first block


----------



## LarsN (Jun 21, 2011)

Athefre said:


> This is slightly different from my page. Are you using this just for normal and R2 blocks?
> 
> What about my recognition system did you not like that made you make this document?



Yes, first image is the normal case and the adjant images are R2 blocks cases for the same alg/case.

I could not determine your recognition system, because of technical issues I couldn't see the images on your page. I mostly browse from a computer at my work, which has some filter that limits my acces to certain pages. I could probably see it at home, but when I'm at home I'm a full time dad, no time for cubing


----------



## Athefre (Jun 21, 2011)

LarsN said:


> Yes, first image is the normal case and the adjant images are R2 blocks cases for the same alg/case.
> 
> I could not determine your recognition system, because of technical issues I couldn't see the images on your page. I mostly browse from a computer at my work, which has some filter that limits my acces to certain pages. I could probably see it at home, but when I'm at home I'm a full time dad, no time for cubing


 
Ah. It's actually not necessary to memorize any extra cases for R2 corners. All you have to do is use your usual recognition and mentally "flip" the F/B colors depending on whether they both have the same U colors or not.


----------



## LarsN (Jun 22, 2011)

Athefre said:


> Ah. It's actually not necessary to memorize any extra cases for R2 corners. All you have to do is use your usual recognition and mentally "flip" the F/B colors depending on whether they both have the same U colors or not.



Yes, I can see the point of that. But it doesn't seem to work with my method. I guess that is for when you look for matching stickers, but that's not what I do. I look at 3 or 4 fixed stickers (depending on the corner orientation) and determine their relationship.
Of the two methods I like the one I use best because I only need to look at U and sometimes F to determine the case. With R2 NMCMLL I need to look at R sometimes though.


----------



## Athefre (Jun 22, 2011)

LarsN said:


> Yes, I can see the point of that. But it doesn't seem to work with my method.


 
It should work. Tell me what stickers you check for the Sune orientation and I'll describe in more detail.


----------



## LarsN (Jun 22, 2011)

Athefre said:


> It should work. Tell me what stickers you check for the Sune orientation and I'll describe in more detail.


 


I look at FUR, UFL and ULB

For this case I determine that FUR and UFL are opposites.

This got me thinking though and I may get it now. You are saying that with NMCMLL (R2 only I guess) in the above case I should look at the relevant corners U-face sticker. If they are not the same I should change one sticker of my targets to the opposite. If that was relevant for this case I would get two same colored stickers. Right?

It seems a bit tricky to do fast, but I could use it to check the case when I am unsure.

EDIT: I got a chance to look at your NMCMLL method. It does look really interesting. It could convince me to use full NMCMLL.


----------



## BigGreen (Jun 22, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> 19:55:30 <BigGreen> 2.07, 2.76, 2.14, 2.36, 1.78, (0.97), 2.72, 2.04, 3.20, 2.06, 1.89, (3.60) = 2.30 first block


 
1.81, 2.16, 1.20, (0.64), 1.78, 2.34, 2.12, 1.66, 2.53, 2.43, (2.90), 1.93 = 1.99

.64 was 4 moves


----------



## Athefre (Jun 22, 2011)

LarsN said:


> I look at FUR, UFL and ULB
> 
> For this case I determine that FUR and UFL are opposites.
> 
> ...



Yep, that's how it works and with practice it's pretty fast.



LarsN said:


> EDIT: I got a chance to look at your NMCMLL method. It does look really interesting. It could convince me to use full NMCMLL.



I only use R2 blocks sometimes. I don't think there are any Roux users that use full NMCMLL yet.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 22, 2011)

***** u trippin


----------



## BigGreen (Jun 23, 2011)

BigGreen said:


> 1.81, 2.16, 1.20, (0.64), 1.78, 2.34, 2.12, 1.66, 2.53, 2.43, (2.90), 1.93 = 1.99


i dont like this one

1.47, 1.79, 1.83, 1.45, 1.98, 1.70, 1.94, 1.98, 1.97, (1.42), (2.30), 1.58 = 1.77


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 24, 2011)

wtf


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Jun 24, 2011)

LarsN said:


> ... You are saying that with NMCMLL (R2 only I guess) in the above case I should look at the relevant corners U-face sticker. If they are not the same I should change one sticker of my targets to the opposite.


 
I read multiple times that R2 NMCMLL is a piece of cake - but it was not true for me (maybe now I understand) ... 

1st Test: In the quote above I can replace U-face with L/R-face and it is still correct ? EDIT Wrong it only works with U. 

2nd Test: If I just use 3 stickers for recognition, it's easier because I just have to convert 1 sticker, while 4 sticker recognition requires 2 stickers to be converted. EDIT also wrong there is no real difference

P:S: I would recognize the given Sune case by recognizing UFR is opposite UBL and UBL is same as BUR (I'm not really looking at the back - back here is my left side)
So in general for all R2-Sunelike-cases: 1. Look for two oposite or same colored stickers on top 2. apply an "inmind" flip of the 3rd recognition sticker if necessary


----------



## pijok (Jul 2, 2011)

Athefre said:


> I'm also working on a third that reduces NMCLL to 42 cases instead of 83.


How are you trying to do that? It seems impossible with the concept of looking at white and yellow stickers to recognize the cases...


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Jul 9, 2011)

Well, I am now a sub-20 Roux solver... And before that I could hardly even manage sub-30 Fridrich. :-/

Thanks so much! This method is great fun, and it gets me good times. :3

P.S. Even my Fridrich times dropped as a result of learning Roux... I guess it's just because I have a better feel for the cube now, though.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Jul 19, 2011)

Question: is it worth the trouble to try being colour neutral with Roux? I'm only opposite colour neutral as of right now...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jul 19, 2011)

lol. no one is color neutral on roux.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Jul 19, 2011)

But why is that? It doesn't look like a particularly hard method to be colour neutral with, to be honest. Only the CMLL detection would mess you up, really. Or am I wrong (which is certainly possible)?


----------



## RyanReese09 (Jul 19, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> lol. no one is color neutral on roux.


 
IIRC Chris Hardwick is?

99% sure he said he was.


----------



## Robert-Y (Jul 19, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> lol. no one is color neutral on roux.



I am 

I almost average sub 15.

EDIT: But I think it may be safe to say: No one who does roux as their main method, and who is very fast, is colour neutral?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Jul 19, 2011)

Robert-Y said:


> I am
> 
> I almost average sub 15.


 
see no one is color neutral on roux.


----------



## cmhardw (Jul 20, 2011)

RyanReese09 said:


> IIRC Chris Hardwick is?
> 
> 99% sure he said he was.


 
I'm color neutral-ish. I will solve any easy block first, but I'm noticeably slower if the D layer color is either blue or green, and considerably slower if the D layer color is either orange or red. I'm learning Roux for fun mostly, and I figured since absolutely everything in this method is new to me, that I may as well use this as an excuse to be color neutral in at least one method.

However, I'm much faster when the D layer color is either white or yellow (the same colors I use for cross in Fridrich).


----------



## Hershey (Jul 20, 2011)

I am color neutral when using roux (for fun, not main method).
I guess that's because I still use CFOP and make 3 cross pieces and then put 2 corners in for the first block (please don't shoot me).


----------



## dieguito (Jul 20, 2011)

Could you please make a tutorial on Roux for the 4x4?


----------



## Hershey (Jul 20, 2011)

dieguito said:


> Could you please make a tutorial on Roux for the 4x4?


 
KBCM and Stadler is the closest to Roux for 4x4 I think.

K4 starts out like Roux, but the rest of the solve is more of a LBL or CFOP method.


----------



## OMGitsSolved (Jul 20, 2011)

dieguito said:


> Could you please make a tutorial on Roux for the 4x4?


 
Just use Reduction until it has been reduced to a 3x3 state. Then, solve just as you would on 3x3 (fixing parity of course)


----------



## RyanReese09 (Jul 21, 2011)

Hershey said:


> K4 starts out like Roux, but the rest of the solve is more of a LBL or CFOP method.


 
Do you read what you type before you post? Or do you headbang the keyboard until something comes out as a coherant sentence?

In case you don't understand, you're wrong.

Infract me if you wish, I'll take it like a man.


----------



## BigGreen (Jul 21, 2011)

RyanReese09 said:


> Do you read what you type before you post? Or do you headbang the keyboard until something comes out as a coherant sentence?
> 
> In case you don't understand, you're wrong.
> 
> Infract me if you wish, I'll take it like a man.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jul 21, 2011)

Robert-Y said:


> But I think it may be safe to say: No one who does roux as their main method, and who is very fast, is colour neutral?


 
Methinks correct.


----------



## Hershey (Jul 21, 2011)

RyanReese09 said:


> Do you read what you type before you post? Or do you headbang the keyboard until something comes out as a coherant sentence?
> 
> In case you don't understand, you're wrong.
> 
> Infract me if you wish, I'll take it like a man.


 
I did read before I posted. What was wrong when I said K4 starts like Roux but is more of a LBL type method? To take it even further, what have I done wrong? What makes me such a bad cuber and what makes you such a good cuber? Even if I did say something useful, you would probably still flame me.


----------



## RyanReese09 (Jul 21, 2011)

Hershey said:


> I did read before I posted. What was wrong when I said K4 starts like Roux but is more of a LBL type method? To take it even further, what have I done wrong? What makes me such a bad cuber and what makes you such a good cuber? Even if I did say something useful, you would probably still flame me.


 
You have 466 posts. I've probably flamed you 4 or 5 times. I'd go even as high as 10.

I see every post on this forum. *EVERY*. If I flamed every post of yours I'd have been banned permanently months ago. If you do K4 and end up with a LBL type method you're doing it completely wrong. I never said I was a better cuber, I just said you were wrong. Which you were.


----------



## RyanReese09 (Jul 21, 2011)

[21:34] <+RobertY> Quote of the day?: "K4 starts out like Roux, but the rest of the solve is more of a LBL or CFOP method."
[21:34] <+RobertY> by hershey
[21:34] <+RobertY> yeah it's like cfop
[21:34] <+RobertY> for people who are doing it compeltely wrong

Sorry Robert.


----------



## Hershey (Jul 21, 2011)

RyanReese09 said:


> [21:34] <+RobertY> Quote of the day?: "K4 starts out like Roux, but the rest of the solve is more of a LBL or CFOP method."
> [21:34] <+RobertY> by hershey
> [21:34] <+RobertY> yeah it's like cfop
> [21:34] <+RobertY> for people who are doing it compeltely wrong
> ...


 
Ok fine. It isn't like CFOP, but is it a LBL method? After the 1x3x4 and centers, you finish one layer, then finish the first 3 layers, then corners of the last layer, and lastly the edges.


----------



## Athefre (Jul 30, 2011)

I have a 4c technique that I suggest Roux users try. I've been using it long enough now that I feel that it is a great solution for those annoying 3-cycles. It will result in you having zero pauses during LSE.

During 4b, near the end of placing UL and UR, watch the U/D color of one of the edges that goes to DF or DB. Now find the other of that color. It will be on U. Align that edge so that it is diagonal from the edge on D. Lastly, there will be an edge on U that doesn't match the U center. Bring it toward U using M or M' and do U2. Then you can finish the rest. It's difficult to explain with just words so here are a few examples:

U M2 U M2 U M U2 M' U2 M' U M2 U M2 U M' U M2 U2 M' U' M2 U M'

Solve: M'U'M' U...Now, see the sticker at UB? Remember the color and slot UL and UR with M2. Now that sticker is at DF. There is another unsolved edge on U that has that color. It is at UL. Do U to place it diagonally from DF. Then do M' to bring the unmatched U edge toward U, then U2. Finish with M.

U' M2 U' M U2 M' U' M2 U' M2 U' M2 U2 M' U' M U' M' U2 M' U' M2 U2

Solve: U'MUM'U2M'U2M' U'...Now remember the sticker at UB then do M2. It is now at DF. It's matching color is at UR. Place it diagonally from DF by doing U'. Since it doesn't match the U center, bring it toward U by doing M. Then do U2 and finish with M'.

U' M2 U' M' U2 M2 U' M' U2 M' U M' U2 M2 U2 M U2 M2 U2 M U M2 U M U M'

Solve: M2UM'UM' U'M2U...Before slotting the last UL/UR edge, look at the sticker at UB and remember it's color. Do M'U2M'. Now that sticker is at DF. The other color like it is at UR. Place it diagonally from DF by doing U'. The UF sticker doesn't match the U center. So do M' to bring it toward U. Then do U2 and finish with MU2.

For the bar cases (U2M2U2, E2M'E2), you'll know you have one of those before finishing 4b because you see the bar of matching colors on U. So continue to use whatever way you like for those cases.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 30, 2011)

Athefre said:


> I have a 4c technique that I suggest Roux users try. I've been using it long enough now that I feel that it is a great solution for those annoying 3-cycles. It will result in you having zero pauses during LSE.
> 
> During 4b, near the end of placing UL and UR, watch the U/D color of one of the edges that goes to DF or DB. Now find the other of that color. It will be on U. Align that edge so that it is diagonal from the edge on D. Lastly, there will be an edge on U that doesn't match the U center. Bring it toward U using M or M' and do U2. Then you can finish the rest. It's difficult to explain with just words so here are a few examples:
> 
> ...


 
Hm, interesting idea, but it will certainly cause a stumble for the E2ME2M and U2MU2M cases... 
Most of us rouxers do this automatically anyway like auto-optimisation.

OT: Yup, I'm back and I don't care. I see an interesting post, I reply anyway. Go ahead, flame me. I just wanna see whether it's improved over, what, almost two months possibly?


----------



## Athefre (Jul 30, 2011)

It doesn't cause any problems for U2M2U2 or E2M'E2. I've done about 5,000 solves using this. It works.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 30, 2011)

Athefre said:


> It doesn't cause any problems for U2M2U2 or E2M'E2. I've done about 5,000 solves using this. It works.


 
Really? For me, it causes trouble because I usually look at FD to check and find the other edges through process of elimination...
Interesting how different rouxers solve...

EDIT:
How many sub-15 rouxers are there? I know it's asked alot but never properly answered...


----------



## Cheese11 (Jul 30, 2011)

dieguito said:


> Could you please make a tutorial on Roux for the 4x4?


 
I could do that if you would like. Just pm me on YouTube (EricKulchycki) and I'll make it.


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 30, 2011)

Cheese11 said:


> I could do that if you would like. Just pm me on YouTube (EricKulchycki) and I'll make it.


 Out of interest, what's so different about roux for the 4x4 to the 3x3?


----------



## Cool Frog (Jul 30, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> lol. no one is color neutral on roux.


 I am, But the thing is on how EASY it is to force different colors, I honestly don't think there is any advantage or disadvantage to it. 
I usually just go with whatever seems easier, as long as I can plan the entire first block.


Phlippieskezer said:


> But why is that? It doesn't look like a particularly hard method to be colour neutral with, to be honest. Only the CMLL detection would mess you up, really. Or am I wrong (which is certainly possible)?


 CMLL is rather easy, same recognition, different day


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 31, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> I am, But the thing is on how EASY it is to force different colors, I honestly don't think there is any advantage or disadvantage to it.
> I usually just go with whatever seems easier, as long as I can plan the entire first block.
> 
> CMLL is rather easy, same recognition, different day


 
Yeah, cmll is easy because its pattern recognition; instead of colour recognition.
And yeah, the reason why you find colour neutral so easy is because you recognise patterns of colours, whilst most of us look for, say, white stickers. I use the same colour scheme as waffo but sometimes go colour neutral if it's easy and then force yellow/white anyway... In fact, I DO go full colour neutral on the first block, then force white on bottom.

Also, you probably started colour neutral didn't you? I should've too; instead of using the CFOP colours =/


----------



## pijok (Aug 2, 2011)

Athefre said:


> I have a 4c technique that I suggest Roux users try. I've been using it long enough now that I feel that it is a great solution for those annoying 3-cycles. It will result in you having zero pauses during LSE.
> 
> During 4b, near the end of placing UL and UR, watch the U/D color of one of the edges that goes to DF or DB. Now find the other of that color. It will be on U. Align that edge so that it is diagonal from the edge on D. Lastly, there will be an edge on U that doesn't match the U center. Bring it toward U using M or M' and do U2. Then you can finish the rest. [...]


 Scramble: F2 M' F2 M U M2 (6STM)
How are you going to solve it?


----------



## Athefre (Aug 2, 2011)

pijok said:


> Scramble: F2 M' F2 M U M2 (6STM)
> How are you going to solve it?



You found the one case that doesn't solve a 3-cycle as a 3-cycle. But it's also a case that really doesn't matter. It only adds one more move to that case, and that is made up for by not having recognition time.

So the solution is: M2UMU2MU2M2U2 compared to the old way of M2U'M2U2MU2M.


----------



## uberCuber (Aug 2, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Also, you probably started colour neutral didn't you? I should've too; *instead of using the CFOP colours* =/


 
I think what you mean is _your_ CFOP colors lulz. It's not like CFOP has set colors any more than Roux does.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 2, 2011)

My bad. I meant the CFOP colours *most* CFOPers use... i.e. white on bottom. And yellow too.

As in the 'Roux colours' are white and yellow on L/R if you see what I mean.

Although- as you say, there are no set colours for any given method... I was referring to the way most people did it.


----------



## Cheese11 (Aug 2, 2011)

5BLD said:


> My bad. I meant the CFOP colours *most* CFOPers use... i.e. white on bottom. And yellow too.
> 
> As in the 'Roux colours' are white and yellow on L/R if you see what I mean.
> 
> Although- as you say, there are no set colours for any given method... I was referring to the way most people did it.


 
Ya, I solve Roux. My colours are white or yellow on the sides, and either orange or green on top.


----------



## pijok (Aug 3, 2011)

Athefre said:


> You found the one case that doesn't solve a 3-cycle as a 3-cycle. But it's also a case that really doesn't matter. It only adds one more move to that case, and that is made up for by not having recognition time.
> 
> So the solution is: M2UMU2MU2M2U2 compared to the old way of M2U'M2U2MU2M.


yeah, thanks, it works well.
i'm going to use this method, it is very fast


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 3, 2011)

Cheese11 said:


> Ya, I solve Roux. My colours are white or yellow on the sides, and either orange or green on top.


 
Are orange/green opposites on your cube? Curious.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 3, 2011)

Cheese11 said:


> Ya, I solve Roux. My colours are white or yellow on the sides, and either orange or green on top.


 
Hm... interesting. Orange or green? Hm... well Stachu has already asked what I was gonna ask.
But what do you average? It might be fun analysing each others' videos and stuff.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Aug 4, 2011)

Athefre said:


> You found the one case that doesn't solve a 3-cycle as a 3-cycle. But it's also a case that really doesn't matter. It only adds one more move to that case, and that is made up for by not having recognition time.
> 
> So the solution is: M2UMU2MU2M2U2 compared to the old way of M2U'M2U2MU2M.



On my first try to solve F2 M' F2 M U M2 I even needed 2 more moves M2UMU2M'U2M2U2M2 than the old way, but this case never happend to me in real solves.

But using this in praxis feels really good because silly 'errors' like last 4b move = U first 4c move = U2 won't happen anymore.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 4, 2011)

Thinking back to nouxb times... Ah yes. My old thread. Stuff that was fired at me and I didn't understand any of it. Well now I do...
Any of you actually tried Roux CLS? Or any of you use KCLL in practice?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 4, 2011)

Roux optimized CLS+A set of KCLL was something I tried.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 4, 2011)

Did it work?
I tried both too but for KCLL it seems such a small advantage; and CLS was awkward.
However, the reason could be just because I'm not used to it.

Btw, I did not try them together like you did... That seems even more awkward... But as I said earlier, it might be because I'm not used to it.

Ive also been experimenting with 'setting' up the second block during the first...


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 4, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Or any of you use KCLL in practice?


 
All the damn time.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 4, 2011)

Meh. So you discovered all these cases over time? Or just used them for a few algs?


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 4, 2011)

I don't understand you. I know multiple CLLs for each case and use a specific one to give me a good case. If there's an EO skip I'll do COLL, for example. Or sometimes I'll do M2 before CLL to skip EO. Happens a lot more in OH.


----------



## Escher (Aug 4, 2011)

_I_ use KCLL and I do about 100 Roux solves a year.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 4, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> I don't understand you. I know multiple CLLs for each case and use a specific one to give me a good case. If there's an EO skip I'll do COLL, for example. Or sometimes I'll do M2 before CLL to skip EO. Happens a lot more in OH.


 
Ah right I see what you mean now. You know many algs for each case and know how it affects LSE. Well that's what KCLL is... Right, so it's just from ages of experience then...

Which reminds me. I need to go finish off learning COLL for CFOP and Petrus. 
And now, Roux... Not that it's necessary but it'll give me an advantage.


----------



## Cool Frog (Aug 4, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Or any of you use KCLL in practice?


 
KCLL
Kirjavas CLL
(LL part confuses me)

Ohya, anyone notice EO is harder to identify on crazy colour schemes.
Waffo has his old avatar <3


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 4, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> (LL part confuses me)



The LL part /is/ weird. Blame CMLL.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> KCLL
> Kirjavas CLL
> (LL part confuses me)
> 
> ...


Is he not solving the Corners of the Last Layer, the Kirjava way?


----------



## Cool Frog (Aug 4, 2011)

StachuK1992 said:


> Is he not solving the Corners of the Last Layer, the Kirjava way?


 
Nobody is, they are just doing something SIMILAR to the way he does it. nobody can be just like Kirjava, because he is well, Kirjava
(just how you are you, and me is me)


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 4, 2011)

I guess I can't do MGLS because I'm not Lucas or Shotaro. Good to know.


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 4, 2011)

Call it KCEO if it makes you feel better. It really just needed a term so people knew what I was talking about.


----------



## blakedacuber (Aug 4, 2011)

just out out of curiosity what does the "M" stand for in CMLL?


----------



## RyanReese09 (Aug 4, 2011)

M (slice).


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Aug 5, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> Roux optimized CLS+A set of KCLL was something I tried.





5BLD said:


> ...Any of you actually tried Roux CLS?



I'm not sure I get the CLS concept right within Roux:

- Step3 get replaced by CLS (M-Slice, EO disruption allowed) -- Is there some "commutator magic" available to do this without so many algs? 
- Step4a get replaced by CP + EO in one go ( A subset of KCLL if I'm right) -- Is there a List of algs somewhere ? 

Knowing A KCLL would also be a simple and efficient way to handel NMCLL I believe.


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 5, 2011)

Well, for CLS I tried MGLS as I was too lazy to come up with my own algs. Yes commutators are possible though.
Personally I don't think it's particularly practical.

KCLL is vaguely defined so we all have different ways of doing it. 
Either learn lots of algs for every case, or as Thom said earlier, know how it affects edges and therefore know which one to use (over time it is inevitable you know multiple algs for each case.)
Now I do the latter; I know COLL too and also know multiple algs for most of the cmlls. So I incorporate it into my solves now by acknowledging the edge orientation and doing a specific one to give me a good case.

To clarify, KCLL is CMLL but influencing EO.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 5, 2011)

Yo waffle did you ever find CLS algs?
...


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 6, 2011)

lol I need aCube4 for that


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 6, 2011)

How many possible 4b cases are there?


----------



## Cool Frog (Aug 6, 2011)

jms_gears1 said:


> How many possible 4b cases are there?


 
4, with no AMS


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 6, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> 4, with no AMS


 
wait, isnt there 8 at least? 4 with U on U and 4 with D on U


----------



## 5BLD (Aug 6, 2011)

jms_gears1 said:


> wait, isnt there 8 at least? 4 with U on U and 4 with D on U


 
10 distinct cases. I think...
Let's try to list them all although it would be much easier to calculate mathematically.
No flip
Two up opposite
Two up 
Four up adjacent
One down one up
One down three up
Two down
Two down two up opposite
Two down two up adjacent
Two down four up

Yah, 10 I think.
Although I remember someone telling me there were 11.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Aug 19, 2011)

Omg. I'm not gonna name names but I use the most basic roux and I don't use fancy tricks. Kthx


----------



## Jaycee (Sep 11, 2011)

Bump because apparently this is the Roux method's home thread >

Not a pointless bump, however.

1)For a person who just started using Roux, how long do you think it should take before they're sub-30?
2)Are there any ways to get faster at EO and UL/UR permutation other than "Drill, drill, drill!"?
3)On average, how many moves should each block take at a beginner level? (I'm thinking 12-15, then 15-18 becos beginner level.)
4)How did you train your look-ahead? Even in CFOP, I just can't do it.
5)Am I the only one who loves L6E more than anything else Roux-related? xD

Sorry if these have been answered in this thread; I've only watched the first 2 videos in the OP and haven't read anything else in this thread.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 11, 2011)

1) Depends on how much you practice. I was sub-30 in about 2 weeks, but was not sub-20 for 2 years.
2) Try combining the substeps by looking for a different way of doing EO. Usually you can find small tricks yourself
3) 15 at max I would say is okay for a beginner but you need to work on lowering your moves before you can lower your times
4) Solve without pauses even if you have to turn SUPER slow
5) Nope, LSE is my fav part.


EDIT - Bumping this thread doesn't really matter as long as you have content to add. Because this is a how-to thread, in my opinion, questions that relate to this is fine.


----------



## Phlippieskezer (Sep 11, 2011)

Jaycee said:


> 1)For a person who just started using Roux, how long do you think it should take before they're sub-30?
> 2)Are there any ways to get faster at EO and UL/UR permutation other than "Drill, drill, drill!"?
> 3)On average, how many moves should each block take at a beginner level? (I'm thinking 12-15, then 15-18 becos beginner level.)
> 4)How did you train your look-ahead? Even in CFOP, I just can't do it.
> 5)Am I the only one who loves L6E more than anything else Roux-related? xD


 
Hello. I'll try to answer to the best of my abilities. 

1) I probably shouldn't answer this. I hit sub-30 in a day or two after switching to Roux, but I progressed really quickly, from what I gather. I spent those two days doing pretty much nothing but cubing, though...
2) Only thing I can really think of is slow down and try to understand how the pieces move. Practice, and try to understand what it is you're doing.
3) Differs from person to person, but I always used this page, which says how many moves you should aim for depending on your current time barrier.
4) Slow down, look ahead. Generic advice, but it works, though I still struggle with look ahead myself. However, one thing I can say, is that I averaged around 1.88 TPS when I averaged around 25 seconds. Turning fast isn't the only important thing in Roux.
5) No. It's my favourite part too. I used to hate M-slices until I wandered it Roux. Now I LOVE them! :3


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 11, 2011)

Phlippieskezer said:


> 3) Differs from person to person, but I always used this page, which says how many moves you should aim for depending on your current time barrier.


 

http://wafflelikescubes.webs.com/sub15guidetoroux.htm also [/shameless advertising]


----------



## Jaycee (Sep 12, 2011)

So these are my time breakdowns for all 4 steps. I did my first Ao12 yesterday and got 1:15-ish.

*First block with LONG inspection time and slow turning* : _5.40, 4.35, 9.22, 5.53, 8.25, 5.70, 7.69, 4.06, 5.41, 7.46, 4.29, 5.70 = 5.98_

I think I'm pretty good with this now. Either that or I've gotten a lot of easy scrambles. If I turned faster I probably would've been faster but I was using this time to train my look-ahead. :3

*Second block with somewhat long inspection time and slow turning *: _10.54, 12.13, 9.53, 17.19, 14.40, 14.31, 11.76, 12.93, 10.32, 10.54, 10.00, 13.09 = 12.00_

Um. I suck. I just can't find my pieces well enough and move them to the correct position without losing them. I also have trouble with keeping my moves limited to R, r, U, and M. This was with inspection and a planned solution so I'd actually say I average 20-25 with this.

*2-Look CMLL :* _4.01, 3.33, 3.61, 3.89, 4.31, 3.92, 3.39, 5.98, 3.65, 0.99, 3.01, 2.75, 4.63, 3.82, 1.82, 3.37, 2.38, 1.09, 4.45, 0.98 = 3.24_

All sup-4s had diag-swap permutation -.- I'd definitely add on another 4 or 5 seconds if I'm using a weird color scheme and for orientation recognition, and because I'm not always that fast. 

*L6E* : _7.82, 12.62, 4.96, 6.98, 5.33, 7.25, 11.33, 12.00, 10.69, 1.02, 8.52, 10.62, 7.97, 7.53, 9.73, 4.38, 10.95, 9.80, 10.76, 5.19 = 8.43._

A lot of lucky cases but still great. I need to be warmed up to do this well, and you can safely add on 4 or 5 seconds if I'm not or using a color scheme I'm not 100% used to.

So, here are my step time breakdowns using just these times.

First Block = 6 seconds
Second Block = 12 seconds
2-Look CMLL = 4 seconds
L6E = 9 seconds

Total : 31 seconds. Well, that can't be right! Considering this is all with inspection time I'd probably say I'm more like this.

First Block = 8-9 seconds
Second Block = 20-25 seconds
2LCMLL - 6-8 seconds
L6E = 9-15 seconds

Total : 43-57 seconds. Huh. That still doesn't seem right. Let me do an Ao5. I'll post the results in a few minutes.


----------



## Jaycee (Sep 12, 2011)

Hmph. My dad's making me get off. :/

I did one solve. My time was 34.92 

I'll do the rest tomorrow afternoon.

~Jaycee


----------



## Jaycee (Sep 12, 2011)

Ummm...... SO 2 or 3 days ago I averaged 1:15 with Roux.

Now :

34.92, 42.70, 43.42, 39.08, 36.42 = 39.40 Average of 5. LOL.


----------



## Divineskulls (Sep 12, 2011)

First average of five after really practicing with Roux:

49.98, 52.95, 52.60, 49.63, 41.32----> 50.74

Here's a real quick breakdown:

First block:13.55
Second block:15.01
2LCMLL:6.23
L6E:20.82

Jeez, I need to work on everything. 

I can't seem to get used to the blockbuilding, after *temporarily* switching from CFOP. :/


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 14, 2011)

...you don't get blockbuilding in one sitting...or even a few weeks.


----------



## 5BLD (Sep 14, 2011)

Examples of random LSE tricks please.


----------



## cubersmith (Sep 14, 2011)

Is it just me or is Roux becoming waaay more popular than petrus?


----------



## 5BLD (Sep 14, 2011)

It is and I don't want it to be. I might switch to Petrus.

Edit: or CFOP. a while back I wanted to but Roux was too cool to switch.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 14, 2011)

Stop saying you'll switch because in the end, all we ever do is solve a cube. The end result is the same. Pick a method, use the method to the fullest, and (lack of better words) shut up.


----------



## 5BLD (Sep 14, 2011)

Meh. What happened to exploring other methods, broadening knowledge etc?
Doing it your way would be fairly one-dimensional IMO. 
And incidentally, there are far better words to say than your last statement.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Sep 14, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Meh. What happened to exploring other methods, broadening knowledge etc?
> Doing it your way would be fairly one-dimensional IMO.
> And incidentally, there are far better words to say than your last statement.


 
And you have far better things to do than complain about your method becoming popular. If it really bothers you, that's fair enough and isn't a problem. But you don't need to keep posting about it. Just switch. Or don't.


----------



## 5BLD (Sep 14, 2011)

One, I'm not complaining. I was stating my opinion. And two, yeh I will shut up if I am this much of a pain. (Edit: only I can say this about myself ok?)


----------



## MalusDB (Sep 15, 2011)

So I hearded that there was some Roux in this thread, but all I see is butthurt.


----------



## Jaycee (Sep 15, 2011)

MalusDB said:


> So I hearded that there was some Roux in this thread, but all I see is butthurt.


 
Check the first 115 1/2 pages for some Roux.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 17, 2011)

I'm thinking that maybe this would work well for non-matching R and R' blocks:

http://rubikscube.info/lastsix2look.php

It's more about memorization than the popular LSE method, but that may be necessary. Gilles has mentioned this before as being a great alternative (for matching blocks). It seems to be a real competitor for movecount. Tracing UL and UR during CMLL, and even the second block, shouldn't be too hard.


----------



## 5BLD (Sep 17, 2011)

12.24 Roux avg100.
Randomly Roux. Now back to Waterman and Petrus.

Also, athefre, your 2.5 look LSE looks like a good idea... I will take a good look at it when I'm done messing with other methods.


----------



## Athefre (Sep 17, 2011)

It's not mine. All I'm saying is that it should work well with any kind of block combination.


----------



## Miikalsen (Nov 10, 2011)

Really want to learn this thought, but cant get the 6 last edges thingy..


----------



## waffle=ijm (Nov 10, 2011)

Which part of LSE?


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 10, 2011)

Athefre should make braindead LSE method for beginners. Movecount not being an issue.

There's no easymode for roux so something supersimple for LSE would give a nice transition to it.


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 10, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> Athefre should make braindead LSE method for beginners. Movecount not being an issue.
> 
> There's no easymode for roux so something supersimple for LSE would give a nice transition to it.


 
I have a "Braindead" soution for LSE that I used when I started cubing...
Just ask and I'll share.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 10, 2011)

Cheese11 said:


> Just ask and I'll share.


 
why not just say? >_>

inb4 solve DF+DB


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 10, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> why not just say? >_>
> 
> inb4 solve DF+DB


 
I didn't just say because I'm at school and work had to be done.

anyway,

After you finish the corners then you find the white edge peice and put it in the DB or DF slot, then find the yellow edge peice and put it in the UF or UB position. The white or yellow on the edge peices must face out, not up or down. Thats how you know which spot it needs to go in. Once you get the edges in their spot, then you do M' U2 M.

After that you realign the centres, and look for a edge piece that is flipped. Hold the flipped edge piece in the UF slot and perform the moves, M' U' M' U' M' U2 M U' M U' M U2. Repeat for all "Flipped edges".

Then just proceed with H's (Not the case or perm, the two dots that make an H), or M moves and U2.

I hope you get it, I'm really bad at explaining stuff though. I could make a video if you want? But that shouldn't be necessary.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 10, 2011)

that... doesn't even work


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 11, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> that... doesn't even work


 
Oh snap, I kind of wrote this in a rush, sorry.

After the M' U2 M', you have to turn the U face so either the yellow corners or white corners are opposite (As in white opposite yellow) the edge in the DF slot. Then do an M2.


----------



## Kirjava (Nov 11, 2011)

still doesn't work


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 11, 2011)

So, when teaching new flux members, why aren't people taught EO as UL/UR edges need to have U stickers on U/D and the rest need to just match the centers?


----------



## 5BLD (Nov 11, 2011)

Because NM centres confuse people.
For beginners it's much easier to EO with centres same/opposite... Although good point. 
I don't see why not.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Nov 11, 2011)

Miikalsen said:


> Really want to learn this thought, but cant get the 6 last edges thingy..



I think the most straight forward way to solve this is also the easiest for beginners:

1. solve UR and UL edge ( M'U2M and some more easy cases)
2. Orient M ring ( y UMU' R2 UM'U' R2 y' and the invers are my favorites, but thats a matter of taste)
3. Finish like normal roux 

a nice side effect of this is, that in each of these steps you still train something that's usefull in an regular Roux solve, too.


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 11, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> still doesn't work


 
I went over it and I still got it.


----------



## AgentKuo (Nov 18, 2011)

This makes me want to learn Roux.
But I haven't learned OLL and PLL yet, should I learn those first? Or does it make a difference?


----------



## 5BLD (Nov 18, 2011)

It makes no difference; just learn 2 look CMLL when you learn. Only eight algs.
Go ahead and learn Roux if you find it interesting 

Edit: (the second look of 2-look) OLL and (Corners only) PLL will work too.


----------



## DYGH.Tjen (Nov 19, 2011)

Learning a lil' Roux from your page, 5BLD (and PC's). <3


----------



## Athefre (Nov 20, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> Athefre should make braindead LSE method for beginners. Movecount not being an issue.
> 
> There's no easymode for roux so something supersimple for LSE would give a nice transition to it.



From a post I made in Random Cubing Discussion:

1. Place an oriented edge at DB
2. Adjust U to have a misoriented edge at BU
3. M'UM and repeat step 2 until 3 on U, 1 on D goal (M'UM)

4. Place UL or UR on D, solve with M2
5. Place other UL or UR edge on D, solve with MU2M or M'U2M'
6. Similar M permutation explanation to this page. Except have the solution for "dots" be "U2M2U2 and now you have the U2M2U2 case"

There are several ways to teach UL/UR solving. Place them both on D then solve is another option. I used Ortega 3x3 when I was a beginner and didn't have much trouble learning to place the edges. Orientation was the step I struggled with when I started Roux.

Almost every new solver is taught LBL, which means a transition to CFOP is easiest for them. I've been wanting a beginner Roux guide to exist and spread.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Nov 21, 2011)

Because the second block is killing my times (and the first block is not that strong either) I tried the following variation:

0. Instead of solving "white on L" solve "white on D" (will please every CFOPer)

1a. Line horizontal (edges DL and DR and the two centers L/R) 
1b. since 1a is very simple in many cases it is quite normal to plan XLine = (prepare solving any F2l pair during inspection)

2. solve 3 more F2L pairs ( there exist some M / F / B shortcuts wich are not present in CFOP)

classical Roux follows

3. Corners (like normal)

4a. Orient edges ( it only takes a short time to get used to the fact that w/y stickers now mean exactly the opposite in contrast to "white on left" )
4b. Solve UR/UL (that one took me much longer to get used to, because sometimes I have to solve red/orange somtimes blue/green , sometimes I go for solving the two D-edges) 
4c. Place M edges 


I didn't believe that this methode is faster than regular Roux ( for a highly skilled user),
But I thought after doing this for some days that I should get similar results as with regular Roux.
...
... but it didn't happen I'm still significant slower and its the F2L/F2B part that makes me slow.

Did anyone try this, too? Or does anyone have an explanation why its slow?


PS: Naming of this variant:
Roux with slots => makes :Roulette
since there is an X-Slot => :Rolex


----------



## Piebomb (Nov 24, 2011)

I have a hard time doing my first block in less than 20 seconds and my second block is actually really easy for me since there are no cube rotations so I almost always do my second block in less time than my first one


----------



## 5BLD (Nov 24, 2011)

For first block what's your movecount on average? Aim for sub-11 on average. I can show you a couple examples if you like, but you'll have to give me some scrambles because im lazy lolz...


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 24, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> that... doesn't even work


 
Ahh! switch the first and second around, it should work now.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 25, 2011)

DYGH.Tjen said:


> Learning a lil' Roux from your page, 5BLD (and PC's). <3


 
THANKS!!  
BTW is there anything we are missing or something you think we should work on the site? Just some constructive critisism.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 25, 2011)

AgentKuo said:


> This makes me want to learn Roux.
> But I haven't learned OLL and PLL yet, should I learn those first? Or does it make a difference?


 
I didnt even finsh learning the PLL's when i switched. Either way you wont use them in Roux.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 25, 2011)

Just a general question, which is more important to work on, F2B or LSE. Because my F2B is about 12-ish and my LSE is 5.5-ish.


----------



## NeedReality (Nov 25, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Just a general question, which is more important to work on, F2B or LSE. Because my F2B is about 12-ish and my LSE is 5.5-ish.



F2B is more important, in my opinion. My LSE still kind of sucks (4-5) but I get pretty decent times because my F2B is ~7. There's a lot more room you can shave off of your F2B as opposed to your LSE as well (max of like 3-3.5 seconds off LSE if you get to a high level but maybe double that off of your F2B)


----------



## 5BLD (Nov 25, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Just a general question, which is more important to work on, F2B or LSE. Because my F2B is about 12-ish and my LSE is 5.5-ish.


 
IMO you should work on F2B. It matters more as you get faster.
Try to work on movecount, not speed though.
For me F2B is just under 6.00, and LSE, just under 3.00, so for me I still need to work on blocks....


----------



## Schmidt (Nov 25, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> THANKS!!
> BTW is there anything we are missing or something you think we should work on the site? Just some constructive critisism.


You might consider changing the rest of the 2 look so it is the same as ortega 2x2x2
this one [R U2 R' U' R U R' U' R U R' U' R U' R'] could be [y2 F R U' R' U' R U R' F'] (the start of a Y perm)


----------



## Cool Frog (Nov 26, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> I didnt even finsh learning the PLL's when i switched. Either way you wont use them in Roux.


 
I use E perm/J perm/T perm in roux.
along with most of my old OLL's


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 26, 2011)

So, everyone using 5BLD's website.
Make sure you also look at: Roux's site

Its still by far the most complete website in detailing this method.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 26, 2011)

Schmidt said:


> You might consider changing the rest of the 2 look so it is the same as ortega 2x2x2
> this one [R U2 R' U' R U R' U' R U R' U' R U' R'] could be [y2 F R U' R' U' R U R' F'] (the start of a Y perm)


 
Yeah but our philosophy is no rotations. But ill look into shorter algs for 2 looks.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 26, 2011)

Cool Frog said:


> I use E perm/J perm/T perm in roux.
> along with most of my old OLL's


 
I only use J perm. My old OLLs never really show up ):


----------



## Cheese11 (Nov 26, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> I only use J perm. My old OLLs never really show up ):


 
J perm and Y perm fo me.


----------



## Schmidt (Nov 26, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Yeah but our philosophy is *no rotations*. But ill look into shorter algs for 2 looks.


Then do U2 instead 



PandaCuber said:


> I only use J perm. My old OLLs never really show up ):



As a true roux user, if the first 2 layers are completed, would you still orient, put UL & UR in place and then L6/4E??


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 26, 2011)

Schmidt said:


> As a true roux user, if the first 2 layers are completed, would you still orient, put UL & UR in place and then L6/4E??


 
If you mean that my roux solve suddenly turned into a cfop solve after blocks? Yes i would still continue with the same steps i always use. lse.


----------



## Cool Frog (Nov 26, 2011)

Schmidt said:


> Then do U2 instead
> 
> 
> 
> As a true roux user, if the first 2 layers are completed, would you still orient, put UL & UR in place and then L6/4E??


 
CLL/ELL


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Nov 28, 2011)

Similar Question to the CFOP case:

After CLL when there is any "line" (any two oriented and placed edges) at DF /DB , is thies worth to treat as a special case ?

Personaly when I only react on this case if the Line consists of UL/UR, and use a CFOP OLL.


----------



## PandaCuber (Nov 30, 2011)

This is my breakdown. 
F2B-11.33
12.03 11.91 11.66 10.86 (12.99) 10.70 8.75 12.10 11.55 11.04 (6.98) 12.66


Cmll=LSE with no inspection time.
8.43, 8.40, 8.08, 9.18, 8.89,9.51, 8.90, (9.57), 6.52, 8.15,7.05, (5.89)[Cmll skipp!]
avg12: 8.31 (σ = 0.93)

I realllyyyy want sub 20. Oh so badly. 

Some old question. What doo i dooo?


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 1, 2011)

I'm having trouble with a specific scramble. Unfortunately, I don't have the written scramble, and I have no clue how to generate a scramble from a cube position. (Is there a way?) So I attached an image.

I don't understand the bad edges on this one, no matter how many times I count them, I always end up with 3, which can't be right...

I made a blue block and a green block, with white on bottom.

white/red : bad, red is next to green --> aren't opposites
yellow/green : good, green is next to bluue --> opposites (plus, blocks colors [g & b] must be on L/R/F/B)
white/orange : good, white is next to yellow --> opposites
yellow/red : good
yellow/blue : bad, block color (blue) can't be on D
yellow orange : bad, orange is next to white --> aren't opposites

What am I missing?


----------



## Brest (Dec 1, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> I'm having trouble with a specific scramble. Unfortunately, I don't have the written scramble, and I have no clue how to generate a scramble from a cube position. (Is there a way?) So I attached an image.
> 
> I don't understand the bad edges on this one, no matter how many times I count them, I always end up with 3, which can't be right...
> 
> ...


Scramble (White U / Green F): B F' R D2 R B F' U' B2 F2 L2 D'

The two edges on the bottom (BY/OY) are 'bad'.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 1, 2011)

But why isn't the R/W one a bad edge?

And, how did you generate the scramble & picture? I believe this is a Visual Cube image, but the scramble?


----------



## Brest (Dec 1, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> But why isn't the R/W one a bad edge?
> 
> And, how did you generate the scramble & picture? I believe this is a Visual Cube image, but the scramble?


 
RW --> White is next to Yellow (opposites). Red to Green is not used for this edge position.

Scramble generated with Cube Explorer 5.

Picture generated with Visual Cube.


----------



## Litz (Dec 1, 2011)

As long as a U/D color sticker is on U/D face, that edge is oriented. Don't focus on the red sticker. When you look at the edge, you see it has two stickers: a white and a red one. You know white is a D color and since it's the U sticker, it's oriented. 

That's all you need to do for all edges. Focus on the U/D colors and if you see one not on U/D, that means you need to orient it.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 1, 2011)

Litz said:


> As long as a U/D color sticker is on U/D face, that edge is oriented. Don't focus on the red sticker. When you look at the edge, you see it has two stickers: a white and a red one. You know white is a D color and since it's the U sticker, it's oriented.
> 
> That's all you need to do for all edges. Focus on the U/D colors and if you see one not on U/D, that means you need to orient it.


 
So I only check U/D during EO. Got it.

Thanks to both of you!


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 1, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> So I only check U/D during EO. Got it.
> 
> Thanks to both of you!


 actually, you only need to check the U/F faces to know EO.

You can tell if the DF edge is bad by seeing if the sticker on the F side is either a U/D color. If thats the case then the edge is bad.

You can tell if the DB edge is bad by knowing the state of the other 5 edges you can see.


----------



## BadMeetsEvil (Dec 3, 2011)

How can the E2 M' E2 case be executed quickly? What fingers should I use?


----------



## JasonK (Dec 3, 2011)

BadMeetsEvil said:


> How can the E2 M' E2 case be executed quickly? What fingers should I use?


----------



## Kirjava (Dec 3, 2011)




----------



## BadMeetsEvil (Dec 4, 2011)

Thanks for that. Also, recognition of the 3 edge shuffles on M is kind of hell for a beginner. Is it possible to permute all 6 edges in one step after orienting them? How many algs would that require?
I guess recognition will get easier with more practice though, so this is kind of a question more out of curiosity than actually wanting to learn it.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 4, 2011)

Just learn it the proper way. Recognise it as 3-cycles; commutators, where you bring one piece to its position through the M slice and using the side effect of the U2 to cancel. Sorry I can't explain this simply... maybe someone else can.

But yeah, imagine that you're doing a 2-cycle of edges (U2 swaps 2 edges) then adjusting the M slice and doing another 2 cycle, making the U2s cancel each other out. Hope that made sense.


----------



## Kirjava (Dec 4, 2011)

I look for the edge that's 'on it\'s own'.


----------



## BadMeetsEvil (Dec 4, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Just learn it the proper way. Recognise it as 3-cycles; commutators, where you bring one piece to its position through the M slice and using the side effect of the U2 to cancel. Sorry I can't explain this simply... maybe someone else can.
> 
> But yeah, imagine that you're doing a 2-cycle of edges (U2 swaps 2 edges) then adjusting the M slice and doing another 2 cycle, making the U2s cancel each other out. Hope that made sense.



Yeah, that part is quite simple. i can recognise which of the two cases it is. I take too long *finding the solved edge*, placing it and performing the cycle. Too much inspection of B/D faces or adjusting M layer. Both the cases look same from a certain position when there seems to be one misplaced edge in UF and the U colour on UB and F colour on DF match with the centres on those faces. Kinda like a Y perm. can the case be recognised looking at only up and front faces? Like all PLLs can be recognised from 2 faces right?


----------



## BadMeetsEvil (Dec 4, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> I look for the edge that's 'on it\'s own'.



I guess I do the same (If that meant the edge in its right position relative to centres). If so, I'm glad to know that some of the best rouxers do the same thing. One thing about roux I noticed, there aren't many variants as such because the original method is the best way to go about the solve. Now that's pretty cool.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 4, 2011)

I do that too, it's how most do it.
Now there's one important thing I'd like to tell you.
In the last six edges *recognise EO by looking for U colour on top for L/R edges BUT recognise the rest relative to the centres! Don't bother orienting the centres. You'll thank yourself later.*

There is a plethora of new techniques to be discovered by disregarding centre orientation, which unfortunately im only exploring now because I learnt to always orient centres first...

EDIT: Yes I only look at U and F for the whole of LSE.


----------



## Athefre (Dec 4, 2011)

5BLD said:


> I do that too, it's how most do it.



I've always assumed most look for the edge that has opposite colors relative to the centers. That's how I did it until I switched to what I posted earlier in this topic.



5BLD said:


> Now there's one important thing I'd like to tell you.
> In the last six edges *recognise EO by looking for U colour on top for L/R edges BUT recognise the rest relative to the centres! Don't bother orienting the centres. You'll thank yourself later.*
> 
> There is a plethora of new techniques to be discovered by disregarding centre orientation, which unfortunately im only exploring now because I learnt to always orient centres first....



I've been practicing this for years and still can't always recognize EO as fast as if the centers were oriented. It often requires cube tilts to check if that UL, UB, or DF edge belongs at L or R.

I recommend orienting the centers early. Then, learn some of the EO shortcuts that take advantage of changing the center orientation.


----------



## Kirjava (Dec 4, 2011)

Athefre said:


> I recommend orienting the centers early. Then, learn some of the EO shortcuts that take advantage of changing the center orientation.


 
This is good advice.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 4, 2011)

Athefre said:


> It often requires cube tilts to check if that UL, UB, or DF edge belongs at L or R.


Well I track LR and know EO while doing CMLL. So that's not a problem. But I guess you're right... orienting centres early might be easier.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 4, 2011)

shortcuts is way to go brah.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Dec 5, 2011)

5BLD said:


> EDIT: Yes I only look at U and F for the whole of LSE.



I never treid if recognition of the last step is possible with looking at just 2 faces - I don't think it is. ( align centers and hold the cube with the "separated" edge at UF )




P.S.
In my opinion *the edge that's 'on it\'s own'* is not mean to be the solved one, but the one with 2 opposite colored centers next to it.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 6, 2011)

I have two small questions :

1. When building blocks, do I need to pay attention to the S slice? I feel like I don't.

2. I'm having trouble getting one of my edges up (still doing blocks). Often, you'll find the edge you're trying to pair up is on the bottom layer. While solving the first 3 pairs, it is okay, but I with the fourth one, I need to perform an S-slice turn. That's the only way, right?

I realize that I'm answering my own questions, but I feel like I need someone to confirm that what I say it right. Thanks!


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 6, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> I have two small questions :
> 
> 1. When building blocks, do I need to pay attention to the S slice? I feel like I don't.
> 
> ...


 
Um. You could use the middle layyer.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 6, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Um. You could use the middle layyer.


 
I'm building with a block on the F and one on the back, and then I turn it so work on corners. So yes, what I call S is actually the actual "M-Slice". (English not being my everyday language, I'm not quite sure if this is clear or not.)

Now that I think of it, I think it'll be better if I started building with "THE M-Slice" facing me...


----------



## jaywong88 (Dec 6, 2011)

nice tutorial..maybe after i can master CFOL i will try roux..


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 6, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> I'm building with a block on the F and one on the back, and then I turn it so work on corners. So yes, what I call S is actually the actual "M-Slice". (English not being my everyday language, I'm not quite sure if this is clear or not.)
> 
> Now that I think of it, I think it'll be better if I started building with "THE M-Slice" facing me...


 
Yeah, I believe it is easier to do a block on the left and on the right. It is easier to track pieces(for me). And the S move is quite annoying to do.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 6, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> I have two small questions :
> 
> 1. When building blocks, do I need to pay attention to the S slice? I feel like I don't.
> 
> ...



1. Of course! The S slice is important, especially the way you do it.
The way you do your block on F is fine as long as you do it in sub-10 moves on average. (or sub-13 if you're developing)
The problem with F is reduced visibility. Give U, B and L a go and see if it's better...

2. Not sure what you're asking, please elaborate...
But you can do Bw instead of F if its the first block. I do that sometimes.
Don't think of it as a cross edge then pairs; think of it as blockbuilding, the whole block as a whole. Try to get out of your CFOP habits if that was your previous method.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 7, 2011)

5BLD said:


> 1. Of course! The S slice is important, especially the way you do it.
> The way you do your block on F is fine as long as you do it in sub-10 moves on average. (or sub-13 if you're developing)
> The problem with F is reduced visibility. Give U, B and L a go and see if it's better...



Okay, let's do this again. Let's say I construct my blocks on R and L. I tried today, and don't think it'll be that hard to get used to it. Do I need to pay attention to the M-Slice? (The actual M-Slice, the one I'll be turning later on to orient corners and everything) I feel like I don't, because since I'm always building blue on L and green on R, red is always F and orange is always B, so I don't really need to look at the centers to do so... Does this make more sense? Is that correct?


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 7, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> Okay, let's do this again. Let's say I construct my blocks on R and L. I tried today, and don't think it'll be that hard to get used to it. Do I need to pay attention to the M-Slice? (The actual M-Slice, the one I'll be turning later on to orient corners and everything) I feel like I don't, because since I'm always building blue on L and green on R, red is always F and orange is always B, so I don't really need to look at the centers to do so... Does this make more sense? Is that correct?


 
Well if you need an edge and its on the D face, you could use the M slice to bring it up. Look at videos and watch how others solve blocks.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 7, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> Okay, let's do this again. Let's say I construct my blocks on R and L. I tried today, and don't think it'll be that hard to get used to it. Do I need to pay attention to the M-Slice? (The actual M-Slice, the one I'll be turning later on to orient corners and everything) I feel like I don't, because since I'm always building blue on L and green on R, red is always F and orange is always B, so I don't really need to look at the centers to do so... Does this make more sense? Is that correct?


As I said before, you do. Dont bother keeping M centres solved, use the M slice free properties of Roux to your advantage. And not just if the edge is in the D layer.

If you meant whether you should keep M solved, then no. But pay attention to the pieces in the slice.

But as I said don't bother keeping M slice centres intact; don't bother solving from only one orientation as there are so many more possibilities with a free M slice.



> (The actual M-Slice, the one I'll be turning later on to orient corners and everything)


I hope you mean 'edges'.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 7, 2011)

5BLD said:


> If you meant whether you should keep M solved, then no. But pay attention to the pieces in the slice.
> 
> But as I said don't bother keeping M slice centres intact; don't bother solving from only one orientation as there are so many more possibilities with a free M slice.



That's what I meant. Still new using the lingo.




> I hope you mean 'edges'.



Ah ah, I did.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 10, 2011)

I have so many questions, thanks guys for being there 

I know there has been studies with CFOP about people being color neutral when doing their cross. (I think the result showed you'd better stick to one color) So, my question is, am I doing a good choice to stick with one color using Roux? I always position my cube with white D, blue L and green R. Otherwise, I get mixed up when orienting corners.


----------



## Athefre (Dec 10, 2011)

Try using Green on L too. You'll be able to pick the best of two first blocks. Later, or now, you can also do this with Yellow on D. Giving you four blocks to choose from. It's easy and will save you from a hard to plan first block.


----------



## majikat (Dec 10, 2011)

I've actually been experimenting with color neutral with Roux as well.
It's quite interesting to me, since rather than 6 options from the start like CFOP has, you have 24 potential 1x2x3 blocks to choose from...so, to be fully colour neutral would be nigh on impossible...but I think it would help to be able to have more than two starting points.


----------



## Cheese11 (Dec 10, 2011)

majikat said:


> I've actually been experimenting with color neutral with Roux as well.
> It's quite interesting to me, since rather than 6 options from the start like CFOP has, you have 24 potential 1x2x3 blocks to choose from...so, to be fully colour neutral would be nigh on impossible...but I think it would help to be able to have more than two starting points.



I too tried this. Didn't work, therefore I now do everything on the "x" axis. Which is 4 starting points.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Dec 11, 2011)

I think the farthest that CN is actually effective in Roux is by fixing U/D or L/R faces with opposite neutrality. i.e. White/yellow for U/D or white/yellow for L/R (as far as I know those are the two most common). After that the blocks just become confusing and become difficult to choose the best without bias.


----------



## Athefre (Dec 11, 2011)

My experience has been that x2y2 is the most useful with xy2 neutrality being useful, and easy enough, for the first blocks that have the final pair already there. It can sometimes take too much time picking the best pair to add to the 1x2x2 to make xy2 worth it in every solve.


----------



## kasochi (Dec 12, 2011)

Hi Waffle, thank you for your nice tutorials!
Since I knew this cool method I have spent almost 2 months learning it and achieved sub20 in ao12 recently. I love this method and want to break my best average(13.xx with CFOP) with Roux.


----------



## SamKennedy (Dec 17, 2011)

I took an average of 12 of the numbers of moves I take for each step:

First block: 12.4 moves
Second block: 17.2 moves
Corners: 19.6 moves (2-look)
Edge Orientation: 7.5 moves
Left and Right Faces: 6.25 moves
The Rest: 5.5 moves
Total: 68.4 moves

If I'm using 2-look corners, how many moves should each step actually take on average?


----------



## Googlrr (Dec 19, 2011)

I have a question regarding the antisune case with the back swap. On waffles website the algorithm used is R U2 R' U' R U' R' F R' F' R U R U' R'. How does one fingertrick that R' F R' F' R. I can't really find a comfortable way to make this one flow well.

edit: after timing i cant seem to get much faster than 2.9 seconds with this.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 19, 2011)

Googlrr said:


> I have a question regarding the antisune case with the back swap. On waffles website the algorithm used is R U2 R' U' R U' R' F R' F' R U R U' R'. How does one fingertrick that R' F R' F' R. I can't really find a comfortable way to make this one flow well.


 
l' U R' U' l. But that alg has so many moves... you'd rather use (U2)R'U'RU'R'UR'D'RUR'DR2.


----------



## Googlrr (Dec 20, 2011)

5BLD said:


> l' U R' U' l. But that alg has so many moves... you'd rather use (U2)R'U'RU'R'UR'D'RUR'DR2.


 
Ahh much better. Didn't really think of turning it that way. Thanks!

I'm liking that other alg. Much less awkward turning.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Dec 24, 2011)

Waffle said:


> CMLL - Corners Orientation and Permutation and then something about M-Slice


 
Okay, honestly, what does the M stands for in CMLL? Only that you shouldn't pay attention to the M-Slice?


----------



## MostEd (Dec 24, 2011)

its nlike the cll algs that do abuse the m slice but keep the blocks intsact


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Dec 24, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> Okay, honestly, what does the M stands for in CMLL? Only that you shouldn't pay attention to the M-Slice?


 
I'm not sure anybody knows. The whole nomenclature is pretty terrible for CxLL to be honest, but we don't have anything better at the moment. So, it really is just "Corners Orientation and Permutation and then something about M-Slice".


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 24, 2011)

Sarahjdes said:


> Okay, honestly, what does the M stands for in CMLL? Only that you shouldn't pay attention to the M-Slice?


 
Yes.
Corners, free M-Slice, of the last layer. Dunno why the M slice isn't stuck at the end/


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 24, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Yes.
> Corners, free M-Slice, of the last layer. Dunno why the M slice isn't stuck at the end/


 
Mostly due to a bad naming convention tbh.


----------



## mistressofnone (Dec 28, 2011)

i learn roux yesterday from donovan's a waffo's videos.. i'm sub 50 inconsistent now.. whenever i try to solve cfop again it seems boring.. o.0 any tips?


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 28, 2011)

Blockbuild efficiently. It's pointless to count your moves during speedsolves unless you have Brest at the ready to recinstruct your every solve, so instead, practice movecount solves where you try to be efficient and plan out your first block, or square. Without regard to speed.

For your first block try to get a sub-11 movecount. And for SB get used to M slice pairing. Also, in blocks don't bother turning fast. Just turn as fast as you can that you don't hesitate at all.

Corners don't matter. Just some of waffo's algs are pointlessly long like his s***antisune for example. (his RU2R'U2R'FRF'RUR'U'R'FRF' or something)

For last six edges get used to EO and keep a low movecount too. Just get used to the feel of using MU moves and transition between steps is very very important. And at the end if you get E2ME2M', do it. Don't do MU2M2U2MU2M2U2M or whatever. 

Don't worry about switching. I switched a few months ago at 23 sec average CFOP, but I hated it, just like you. So I switched to Roux, and now I'm at a 10 sec average, meaning I'm one of the fastest... Goes to show it's important to enjoy your method. Good luck


----------



## MostEd (Dec 28, 2011)

Adding to block speed
Whenever i turn slower i get faster times
and going fast i get sup26s


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 28, 2011)

MostEd said:


> Adding to block speed
> Whenever i turn slower i get faster times
> and going fast i get sup26s



Yeah, same this happens with me. 



5BLD said:


> waffo's algs are pointlessly long like his s***antisune for example. (his RU2R'U2R'FRF'RUR'U'R'FRF' or something)


 
I use that alg  ...Guess its time to loook for another one. Even though i can almost sub 2 it.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 28, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Yeah, same this happens with me.
> 
> 
> 
> I use that alg  ...Guess its time to loook for another one. Even though i can almost sub 2 it.


 
Exactly. It's very hard to sub1.5 it comfortably. Quite a few of his algs are pointlessly long, tbh I have no idea why he uses them... check through all your CMLLs and if any are even a little too long search or generate another.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Dec 28, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Exactly. It's very hard to sub1.5 it comfortably. Quite a few of his algs are pointlessly long, tbh I have no idea why he uses them... check through all your CMLLs and if any are even a little too long search or generate another.



I think hes still faster than you nub D:<

(it doesnt matter how long they are tbh, its how you execute it. In other words, its not the size that matters its the motion of the fingertricks)


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 28, 2011)

5BLD said:


> Exactly. It's very hard to sub1.5 it comfortably. Quite a few of his algs are pointlessly long, tbh I have no idea why he uses them... check through all your CMLLs and if any are even a little too long search or generate another.



What generate algs? How? I have that one scramble generator by putting in colors of cube. Like cube 5.00 or something, but idk how to use it lol.



jms_gears1 said:


> its not the size that matters its the motion of the fingertricks


 
LOL.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 28, 2011)

jms_gears1 said:


> I think hes still faster than you nub D:<
> 
> (it doesnt matter how long they are tbh, its how you execute it. In other words, its not the size that matters its the motion of the fingertricks)


Um, actually I think I'm faster now.
Also the alg I use has a better motion of fingertricks too. (U2) R'U'RU'R'UR'D'RUR'DR2

edit: just to make it clear, I wasn't calling his antisune ****, but we casually call that particular case '****antisune'.




PandaCuber said:


> What generate algs? How? I have that one scramble generator by putting in colors of cube. Like cube 5.00 or something, but idk how to use it lol.


Put in the stickers and stuff and put the M slice as 'unknown'... then generate. Tbh I'm not particularly sure XD


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 28, 2011)

if you're saying than you're faster than me then have fun with that. also I have yet to update my CMLL pages on my website. I'm sure I can sub-1.1 all my algs.


----------



## thackernerd (Dec 28, 2011)

I just learned roux a little while ago, I plan on making it my main method if I can get fast enough with it because it's definitely more fun than CFOP is. If you guys could give me some tips I would greatly appreciate it.


----------



## Schmidt (Dec 28, 2011)

thackernerd said:


> I just learned roux a little while ago....


You might want to get to know the method before you start timing yourself, so you don't get bad CFOP habits in your Roux solves like y R U R' y'. And in the few Roux tuts I've seen D moves were not present and neither were x4 and y4 moves.


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 28, 2011)

Thackernerd: Experiment with stuff that works for you, whatever the moves. Just try to minimise regrips...

I personally like to do a lot of u moves, minimising rotations... (also f and b for the same reasons but not d). Also I only use D in CMLL algs or in the first move of the first block. I hate inserting stuff underneath with D so I use u instead.

edit: also work on LSE transitions. they are important


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 28, 2011)

@5BLD I did change my alg for that case that since I can only 1.3-ish my old alg. but you are interested in the fingertricks for that old alg here you go. My new alg is R2DR'URD'R'UR'U'RU'R'


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 28, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> @5BLD I did change my alg for that case that since I can only 1.3-ish my old alg. but you are interested in the fingertricks for that old alg here you go. My new alg is R2DR'URD'R'UR'U'RU'R'


Nice U2 there... I do that for RU2R'U2R'FRF' but it's not as comfortable for me...
I use basically the same alg as you but in a different way. R'U'RU'R'UR'D'RUR'DR2 cuz unlike you I can't reach high tps...


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

Now the battle begins! Waffle vs 5BLD!


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 29, 2011)

LOL... Well I do stand corrected; he has gotten a bit faster, mid 10s i saw him write in a comment. So about my speed. Let's see who reaches sub-10 first


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

5BLD said:


> LOL... Well I do stand corrected; he has gotten a bit faster, mid 10s i saw him write in a comment. So about my speed. Let's see who reaches sub-10 first


 
First person to send in a sub 10 Ao12 of themselves WINS!


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 29, 2011)

No, let's just make it when you average sub10 globally. I might get sub-10 ao12s, doesn't mean I am sub-10.

edit: actually your challenge sounds reasonable enough although I don't know if waffle is as happy to participate


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

5BLD said:


> No, let's just make it when you average sub10 globally. I might get sub-10 ao12s, doesn't mean I am sub-10.


 
First one to get sub 10 Ao750 WINS!


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 29, 2011)

lololololol I even find an ao100 a lot to do. I edited my post, ao12 sounds fine although i dunno if waffle is as happy/bothered to do it.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Dec 29, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> Now the battle begins! Waffle vs 5BLD!


It's comment like these that bothers me.

I'm in school so less time to cube which means not a lot of practice. I don't cube much to begin with even less with school. I'm actually surprised that I can do mid-10 avg. So who would get sub-10 first? Probably 5BLD. But that doesn't mean you can be (not saying you are, but don't become) a pompous little asswipe that knows everything just because you're fast.


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

waffle=ijm said:


> It's comment like these that bothers me.
> 
> I'm in school so less time to cube which means not a lot of practice. I don't cube much to begin with even less with school. I'm actually surprised that I can do mid-10 avg. So who would get sub-10 first? Probably 5BLD. But that doesn't mean you can be (not saying you are, but don't become) a pompous little asswipe that knows everything just because you're fast.


 
In respect to my comment, I didnt try to upset you. 
I just wanted to see an up-to-date Ao12 from you.


----------



## Cheese11 (Dec 29, 2011)

PandaCuber said:


> First one to get sub 10 Ao750 WINS!


 
How did you choose 750?


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

Cheese11 said:


> How did you choose 750?


 
Its a high/random number,


----------



## jrb (Dec 29, 2011)

I'm trying to decide whether or not to switch to Roux. Reasons I want to switch to Roux:
(1)It's much funner than boring CFOP
(2)I haven't really been improving much with CFOP for the last few months

Reasons I want to stay with CFOP:
(1)I'm faster with it right now and I don't want to get a lot slower

What do you guys think I should do?

EDIT:I average ~ 30 with Roux and ~ 21-22 with CFOP


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 29, 2011)

If reason 1 of Roux is present, you should switch. I did exactly that ages ago but I'll just annoy people if I repeat that story.


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 29, 2011)

I switched too and my cfop times have either gotten faster or stayed the same.


----------



## jrb (Dec 29, 2011)

5BLD said:


> If reason 1 of Roux is present, you should switch. I did exactly that ages ago but I'll just annoy people if I repeat that story.


 


PandaCuber said:


> I switched too and my cfop times have either gotten faster or stayed the same.



OK! You've inspired me to switch methods! Thanks to both of you for your help


----------



## 5BLD (Jan 3, 2012)

How do you practice LSE increasing TPS? I notice your (waffle/Thom) LSE is really smooth and 4c recog is fast.

Is there an exercise other than just solving MU over and over?


----------



## MostEd (Jan 3, 2012)

5bld: metronome LSE&


----------



## 5BLD (Jan 3, 2012)

I dunno why but metronome makes me have a very rough turn style, when I want the exact opposite. Maybe it's that i'm not doing it right?


----------



## MostEd (Jan 3, 2012)

try to do it slowly smooth, then gradually increase speed? without metronome then


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 4, 2012)

it's only fast because A/B/C are often combo'd with each other. shortcuts yo


----------



## Athefre (Jan 7, 2012)

An update to my 4c 3-cycle recognition. It had a problem, the M2U2M'U2 cases were automatically solved as M'U2M'U2M2U2. The solution to this is easy. If you notice that, right before finishing 4b, UB+center and FD+center are opposites (as if you have the "dots" case), after 4b adjust U the opposite way you usually would and do M2. Unless I've looked over a case that would cause this to not work.

EDIT: U2MU2M  It's not worth it to examine six stickers to save that move or two.

I know this is waffle=ijm's tutorial. But, I don't know where else to post Roux stuff that I feel is important that others see.


----------



## cubersmith (Jan 7, 2012)

I feel so bad, I keep putting off learning this.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 7, 2012)

Athefre said:


> An update to my 4c 3-cycle recognition. It had a problem, the M2U2M'U2 cases were automatically solved as M'U2M'U2M2U2. The solution to this is easy. If you notice that, right before finishing 4b, UB+center and FD+center are opposites (as if you have the "dots" case), after 4b adjust U the opposite way you usually would and do M2.
> 
> I know this is waffle=ijm's tutorial. But, I don't know where else to post Roux stuff that I feel is important that others see.



Nice


----------



## 5BLD (Jan 8, 2012)

Athefre said:


> An update to my 4c 3-cycle recognition. It had a problem, the M2U2M'U2 cases were automatically solved as M'U2M'U2M2U2. The solution to this is easy. If you notice that, right before finishing 4b, UB+center and FD+center are opposites (as if you have the "dots" case), after 4b adjust U the opposite way you usually would and do M2. Unless I've looked over a case that would cause this to not work.
> 
> EDIT: U2MU2M  It's not worth it to examine six stickers to save that move or two.
> 
> I know this is waffle=ijm's tutorial. But, I don't know where else to post Roux stuff that I feel is important that others see.


 
I discovered a very simple way to recog yesterday.
I found just glancing at the gonna-be BU sticker (is revealed during LR edge insertion) , and the centres, is enough info for the 4c case.


----------



## tasguitar7 (Jan 8, 2012)

Alright so i have been messing around and I'm trying to decide which is better to do with Roux. (I currently use 2look CMLL and average 25 seconds)

I found that if you do 2look CMLL, orientation then permuation it averages 7.5 moves for orientation, and 12.17 moves for permuation. 19.67 total

I also found algs (easy to execute so not optimal) using cube explorer for 2look CMLL, permutation then orientation, which averages 6.3 moves for permutation, and 9.625 moves for orientation. 15.925 total

I also averaged the number of moves in the full CMLL algs found on 5BLD and Pandacuber's roux tutorial. They average 10.5 moves.

Is it a good idea for me to switch to my 2look system for now or stop beating around the bush and learn full CMLL? Another reason I ask is also because I have difficulty with CMLL recognition and I was hoping using my 2look system for now would help me improve recog without overwhelming myself with algs at the same time.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 8, 2012)

Recognition comes with time and practice. The sooner you work on it. The sooner you get better.


----------



## Athefre (Jan 9, 2012)

5BLD said:


> I discovered a very simple way to recog yesterday.
> I found just glancing at the gonna-be BU sticker (is revealed during LR edge insertion) , and the centres, is enough info for the 4c case.


 
That's among the many recognition styles I've used. It provides the information, but for me it wasn't fast enough. There were still solves where I would have a slight delay because of the thinking time to compare edge and center colors. My goal has been to completely remove delays from LSE. I have achieved it with a minor cost of two of the 3-cycles requiring just one move more. I guess there's no easy way around that. But to me it's worth it to average just .5 moves or whatever more so that I have a perfect flow LSE.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 9, 2012)

tasguitar7 said:


> Alright so i have been messing around and I'm trying to decide which is better to do with Roux. (I currently use 2look CMLL and average 25 seconds)
> 
> I found that if you do 2look CMLL, orientation then permuation it averages 7.5 moves for orientation, and 12.17 moves for permuation. 19.67 total
> 
> ...


 
I used to fear CMLL. I was like 'OMG 42 Cases!? I'll never learn them D:' But then I started with easy cases and cases that made it so I didnt have to do Y perms (I do slow yperms slow) 
Over time recognition gets better and better.
I would say take baby steps. Start with shorter easier algs, Like H's. Then youll get the hang of CMLL.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 9, 2012)

or get the hard ones over with.


----------



## IanTheCuber (Jan 9, 2012)

You should probably do the super easy ones first, right when you start, and work your way up the ladder until you know all of them. Them maybe you could modify the method a bit.


----------



## Cheese11 (Jan 9, 2012)

I just learn the cases that have the most move average first, so the hard ones get put of the way.


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Jan 9, 2012)

tasguitar7 said:


> I found that if you do 2look CMLL, orientation then permuation it averages 7.5 moves for orientation, and 12.17 moves for permuation. 19.67 total


Permutation with an 9- ,12-, and ZERO-move alg. should average just around 8,6 moves.


EDIT: Learning one aditional CLL per OC-Case dpoubles your chances for 0-move Permutation and give's the opportunity to avoid the 12 move cases => though permutation averages at around 6 moves.


----------



## Sarahjdes (Jan 13, 2012)

I learned F2L a while ago. Before I decided to switch to Roux. Thing is, I usually end up inserting pairs. Sometimes I'd put the bottom edge along with a corner, but I only do it every 5 solves or so. It's not a reflex for me.

After watching Donovan's Roux tutorial on Youtube, I realised that it never occured to be that I could build a block "upside down". (I solve with white on bottom, since I started learning OLL/PLL, which yellow on top, so I'm used to tracking the yellow sides when I'm doing my CMLL) I'm used to build it with the white edge and "white corners", and I can't help it to build it with the actual white line on the bottom. I want to get used to building it no matter what the orientation of the block is, and then do some L turns to orient it the right way (assuming I'm building it on the L face). Would it be worth it? I feel like I could save a couple of moves and that it might be easier to track pieces after my inspection.

Any tips? I was thinking of starting by positionning my white-blue edge (assuming I'm first building my blue block) somewhere on my next to the blue center, no matter if it's looking up, down, back or front, and work from there. Of course, at some point I'll have to practice building my block starting with the blue-white-orange corner and, let's say, blue-white edge, and so on, but I think I need to start somewhere. I don't want to start going in every directions at once... Does this sound like a good plan following the Roux philosophy?

I hope this was clear... English is not my first language, and even though I don't make too many grammar/spelling mistakes, I feel like I still have problems organising my thoughts.

Oh, and I usually average sub-75 with Roux, with a 20-20-10-25, since I'm still cycling for EO. I start working on it soon.

Thanks a bunch!


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 13, 2012)

I Hope we are talking about the same thing. What I usually do it put my corner on the U face, no matter the orientation. bring the edge to the U face with the orientation that I choose, cause the M slice lets me. then I connect them and place them into their corresponding slot/


----------



## Sarahjdes (Jan 13, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> I Hope we are talking about the same thing. What I usually do it put my corner on the U face, no matter the orientation. bring the edge to the U face with the orientation that I choose, cause the M slice lets me. then I connect them and place them into their corresponding slot/


 
Yes, this is what I usually do. But I'm trying to get to bloc building without continuously inserting pairs into slots.

But I see that you are sub-19 using the inserting thing, so I guess it's an okay way to do it!

Is everyone else doing it this way? Is there anyone that builds the first block not correctly positionned, and then rotates the L or R face to get in it's "canonical position"?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jan 13, 2012)

Sarahjdes said:


> Yes, this is what I usually do. But I'm trying to get to bloc building without continuously inserting pairs into slots.
> 
> But I see that you are sub-19 using the inserting thing, so I guess it's an okay way to do it!
> 
> Is everyone else doing it this way? Is there anyone that builds the first block not correctly positionned, and then rotates the L or R face to get in it's "canonical position"?


 
Well I try not too on the first block. I do on the second block for that one. 
But i know waffle does block build on the second block which i find extremely hard to do.

Everyone block builds differently, but I kinda do it like CFOP. Creating pairs and inserting them. But creating pairs as efficient as possible.


----------



## Pixel 6 (Jan 28, 2012)

Hey, I made a 5 part Roux video tutorial and am looking for feedback on it.

My idea was to take parts from an unstickered cube, and a stickered cube to make it easier for new people to track pieces. For first block, only those 6 pieces are on the cube.... The rest are blank. I then just added the stickered pieces for the next step and continued the tutorial so on so forth. 

Any thoughts on my vids?

Rouxtorial

My current iitimer averages right now are:
ao5 - 21.xx
ao12 - 22.xx
ao100 24.xx
pb 12.73 

I'm happy with the first 3 steps, but my mooing sucks. First block varies, but second block is usually done by 10 seconds. Cmll done at an average elapsed 13-15 seconds. LSE is like another 5-10 seconds... My LSE needs work, but I'm not sure what to do in this area to improve. Better technique/finger tricks? I can see what to do pretty quickly, it's just waiting for my fingers to catch up... 

I'm getting sub 20 solves about once every 7-10 solves... Other than that I'm consistently in the low 20s. 30's require pretty bad fails.

Anyhow, I do want to develop my tutorial on my site so any advice is appreciated. No better way to learn, than to teach.

- Pixel -


----------



## brunosouz (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm using Roux at a long time, since January of last year, and I can get 20~30s with this method(Of all the methods, it's the best one for me).

I had to make a little break at cubing, so when I came back to it, improved a little..

Is it so hard to improve look-ahead at Roux? Cause I'm trying a lot and it's a little difficult for me. So.. does someone have a hint for me?

Thanks and sorry for my bad english, it's not my native language =X


----------



## 5BLD (Feb 12, 2012)

brunosouz said:


> I'm using Roux at a long time, since January of last year, and I can get 20~30s with this method(Of all the methods, it's the best one for me).
> 
> I had to make a little break at cubing, so when I came back to it, improved a little..
> 
> ...


 
It's not hard to improve look-ahead with Roux. It is hard to look ahead with Roux.

I practice look-ahead by first planning the first block in inspection. To start with give yourself as much inspection as you like, so you can solve the block blindfolded. Yes go use the blindfold a couple times if you're not confident yet.

Next, here's the 'test' that you're looking ahead, and trains it. Immediately on the last 2 or so moves of the first block shut your eyes. Now solve the first square of the second block without looking. Do this a couple times, then move on the doing the last pair without looking etc...


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 12, 2012)

brunosouz said:


> I'm using Roux at a long time, since January of last year, and I can get 20~30s with this method(Of all the methods, it's the best one for me).
> 
> I had to make a little break at cubing, so when I came back to it, improved a little..
> 
> ...


 
What is your native language? If its spanish, maybe I could help.

For lookahead, one big thing is turning slow. If you turn too fast, you wont be able to find next pieces. 
Also when making blocks, look for next block. EX: When inserting corner-edge pair, look for next corner or even both,


----------



## brunosouz (Feb 13, 2012)

Yeah, I'm trying this, I just don't know if it's helping, cause it's still difficult to track pieces. I can't stay looking at them.

My native language is portuguese, I can speak.. intermediate english I think, but with some mistakes 

And 5BLD, I'll give a try to solve the blocks blindfolded, then I'll work in my recognition, but the blocks first cause, I take, more or less, 20 seconds for them and 8~10 seconds for the Corner Orientation and LSE.

Thanks for the quick answer =)


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 13, 2012)

I am stuck at a plateau. Help? 

My times.(Rounded up)
~Avg: 17

F2B: 8
CMLL(Full): 2
LSE: 4

The times above were done pre-inspected. 

F2B + CMLL = 11
CMLL + LSE = 6.5

CMLL Without any inspection: Sub 3. 

Any tips would be appreciated.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Feb 13, 2012)

work on blocks and lse. more look ahead too.


----------



## Brest (Feb 13, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> I am stuck at a plateau. Help?
> 
> My times.(Rounded up)
> ~Avg: 17
> ...





Spoiler



[youtubehd]4x7R_RopjPQ[/youtubehd]


L U2 L2 U2 L2 D' L2 B' F' D B2 L' R' F2 L' U' B2 L' R2

y' x' // inspection
L' U' L D' // LB block
U' M' U2 L' U L // LF pair
U' R2' U2' R' U R U2' r' U' r // RB block
U (R U R' U')2 R U R' // RF pair
U F U' L' U R2 U' r B R2' U' x' // CMLL
M3' U2 M' U' M2' U' // UL/UR
M' r' R U2 r' R U2 M' // L3E
alg.garron

```
Step	time	STM	stps	ETM	etps
[COLOR="red"]Total	16.33	55	3.37	63	3.86[/COLOR]
					
Lblock	2.94	10	3.40	10	3.40
Rblock	5.41	22	4.07	24	4.44
[COLOR="blue"]F2B	8.35	32	3.83	34	4.07[/COLOR]
					
CMLL	3.37	11	3.26	12	3.56
LSE	4.61	12	2.88	17	3.63
[COLOR="blue"]L10P	7.98	23	2.88	29	3.63[/COLOR]
```


----------



## 5BLD (Feb 13, 2012)

What's my weakness do you think guys? I'm obviously going to be biased when analysing my own solves...


Spoiler


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 13, 2012)

Brest said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Oh wow thanks brest.

Looks like I gotta work on my second block.
Then maybe improve my tps on CMLL and LSE to 4.


----------



## Jaycee (Feb 17, 2012)

R2 D2 F2 R2 D2 L F2 U2 L' D2 R D R2 B D B2 U2 L2 D' F' L'

z'
r' U L' F2 L U D F D' L'
r' U' R' U2 R U R U2 R U2 R' U' r U R'
F R U' R' U' R U R' F'
U M' U M U' M' U' M' U' M' U2 M U M2' U M' U2 M'

Does this look good (aside from the LSE :fp) for a Roux noob? I decided to try again when I realized I might do better with white on L than D.


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 17, 2012)

Jaycee said:


> R2 D2 F2 R2 D2 L F2 U2 L' D2 R D R2 B D B2 U2 L2 D' F' L'
> 
> z'
> r' U L' F2 L U D F D' L'
> ...


 
Better than my solves...


----------



## Cheese11 (Feb 25, 2012)

Jaycee said:


> R2 D2 F2 R2 D2 L F2 U2 L' D2 R D R2 B D B2 U2 L2 D' F' L'
> 
> z'
> r' U L' F2 L U D F D' L'
> ...


 
I got:

x' y
D' U' R2 L U' L' F' U r' U' M' L' U L
U' R' U R U M2 U' r U' R U r' U' r U M U' M' r U r'
U R U R' U R U2 R' U2 R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R'
M U2 M U' M' U2 M' U2 M U2 M2 U M2 U2

I get a high five for my ridiculous move count


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 25, 2012)

My turn

x2 y U R' U2 B2 
U R2 U2 R' U F' 
M U' M' U2 r' U R' U2 R2 
U M U' M' U2 R' U R 
U R U' L' U R' U' L 
M U' M' U M' U2 M' U M' 
U M' U2 M' U M2 U u2 M' u2 M

alg.garron

I think im doing better at making my solve more efficient.


----------



## Escher (Feb 25, 2012)

Jaycee said:


> R2 D2 F2 R2 D2 L F2 U2 L' D2 R D R2 B D B2 U2 L2 D' F' L'


 
Was bored so I had a go:

x2 U2 R U R2 y U' R' U B2 (8)
r2 R U R U R2 r' U2 R' U R (19)
U' R' U L' U2 R U' R' U2 R L (30)
M U' M U M' U2 M U2 M U M' U2 M' U2 (44)


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 26, 2012)

So, I realize that my right block sucks hardcore. (Usually twice as slow as my first block)
I also know that my first block isn't as efficient as it could be.
I don't really know how not to be CN since I rely quite a bit on it and spend most of the inspection trying to find something decent


Spoiler



THERE IS TOO MANY DAMN BLOCKS!!!!ONE!!!



How to practice Right block? 
How to Practice left block?

I will deal with my poopish LSE later.

(Ohya I am like 16-23 times(I once got a avg of 5 that was 16 second with a Standard deviation of 3.85))


----------



## PandaCuber (Feb 26, 2012)

Cool Frog said:


> How to practice Right block?
> How to Practice left block?


 
Your question is, how to practice blocks?

Left block(First block) - Since youre CN, this should be easier and more efficient than me  Youre looking for Corner edge pair, anything works. Square should be easy enough to find. practice that blindfold. And look for efficient pairs and efficient inserts. 
Then Second block it all about speed.(for me)
I try to speed up cause there are more moves and I gotta try to do it in the same amount of time as FB. 

I practice by solving slow and trying to find new efficient moves. Also looking for finger tricks. Then the occasional blindfold Block.


----------



## mynameiswillem (Jun 1, 2012)

*A few Roux questions*

I am starting to learn Roux to try to get sub-20. I only average around 22 with CFOP. So, I was wondering what CMLL and COLL actually stands for. I think I'm going to learn CMLL. 

Another question I have is why do some Roux solvers solve the UL and UR edges then cycle the M layer edges rather than solving the DF and DB and then doing a simple U layer edge cycle?

And do any Roux solvers solve their two 1x2x3 blocks with different colors? I can't really think of a good way to explain what I'm thinking. I think that might help with C*LL recognition.


----------



## Noahaha (Jun 1, 2012)

COLL= corners of last layer
CMLL= corners of last layer (M-slice)

COLL only affects corners and edge permutation while CMLL uses shorter algs but affects the M-slice, so its better if you're using roux.

People solve UF UR because it's faster.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 1, 2012)

mynameiswillem said:


> Another question I have is why do some Roux solvers solve the UL and UR edges then cycle the M layer edges rather than solving the DF and DB and then doing a simple U layer edge cycle?
> 
> And do any Roux solvers solve their two 1x2x3 blocks with different colors? I can't really think of a good way to explain what I'm thinking. I think that might help with C*LL recognition.


 
Ew. Ew. Ew. Solve DFDB first? Then ELL? Really? EO, ULUR, EP is so much more efficient, that's why.
Even if you do EO, then DFDB you're left with still, two edges solved and EO solved- and really, you would prefer an M-slice cycle to a U-layer cycle.

For the second question, yes, I do. I do any colour blocks but white or yellow on L/R or F/B.

COLL: Corner Orient Last Layer
CMLL: Corners (without giving a damn of the M slice) of the Last Layer


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 1, 2012)

mynameiswillem said:


> Another question I have is why do some Roux solvers solve the UL and UR edges then cycle the M layer edges rather than solving the DF and DB and then doing a simple U layer edge cycle?


 
Some? Don't you mean all?

EPLL sucks compared to M slice perm.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 1, 2012)

mynameiswillem said:


> Another question I have is why do some Roux solvers solve the UL and UR edges then cycle the M layer edges rather than solving the DF and DB and then doing a simple U layer edge cycle?


 
Because it takes less moves than if you insert D edges first.


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

i dont get the rule about ur and ul edges during 4a...

explain?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 17, 2012)

ThtDarnNeighbor said:


> i dont get the rule about ur and ul edges during 4a...
> 
> explain?



There is no Rule.

Maybe this video will help

And have you checked out 5BLD and my Tutorial?

4B: 
Your L/R edges are those that will be solved at UL and UR. Place them opposite each other on the whole cube (at DF and UB, or UF and DB) then do this sequence:
M U2 M' / M' U2 M
That pairs them. Then place them at DF and DB(Put pair on the D face).Then adjust the U face until an M2 will slot them in place.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 17, 2012)

ThtDarnNeighbor said:


> i dont get the rule about ur and ul edges during 4a...
> 
> explain?



Theres no rule, only lots of special cases for the placement of ULUR during step 4a (EO). As you progress i can guarantee you'll discover lots. If you're stuck I can give examples tho


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

im having trouble recognizing bad edges because of this

idk what are good and bad cuz the UL and UR may or may not be bad


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 17, 2012)

ThtDarnNeighbor said:


> im having trouble recognizing bad edges because of this
> 
> idk what are good and bad cuz the UL and UR may or may not be bad



when doing 4a, a bad edge is an edge that is not the same color as your Up and Down faces. 
EXAMPLE:
If you have white on D and yellow on U(or vice versa), then any color during step 4a, that is NOT those 2 colors, is a Bad Edge. 

during step 4a(EO) Do not look for the LR edges. Dont worry about them, till you actually finish EO( edge orientation). 

Get it?


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

and also, in most tutorials the eo uses U turns
i like turing the u face with my left index so how can i change it to U' turns?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 17, 2012)

ThtDarnNeighbor said:


> and also, in most tutorials the eo uses U turns
> i like turing the u face with my left index so how can i change it to U' turns?



Well, when you use your left hand, most people use it for U'
And right hand, U. 

you could also flick the other way, but it would be really uncomfortable


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

no like the eo alg e.g. M U M
can i like reposition the case to make it M U' M?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 17, 2012)

ThtDarnNeighbor said:


> no like the eo alg e.g. M U M
> can i like reposition the case to make it M U' M?



of course.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 17, 2012)

ya. why not. use tricks like that to influence the next steps. it's not rocket science to figure out you can. Roux isn't rigid like that.


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

how so


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 17, 2012)

Work on solving, before you start looking at shortcuts.


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

i can semi solve with roux now

but i need to look at the eo algs half the time

the 4c is common sense


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 17, 2012)

Algs? For EO?
Just do it the way I teach; M'U'M' flips UL UR UF and DB, get any four edges flippe this way, then <<M2,<U>>,<<M>,U2>>> to get 3 on top, then AUF, M'U'M'.

If you want me to elaborate on that watch my LSE tutorial or ask me, i like to keep things short


----------



## ThtDarnNeighbor (Jun 17, 2012)

and smthg random i thought i would ask
i solve the blocks f2l style, like i do an edge then two pairs

how can i solve the f2l where black is facing U and the edge is connected to the corner

EDIT: also can you make some sort of a sheet like the one in ur 8 minute tutorial where it shows the 3 eo algs and the diagrams?
many thanks


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 17, 2012)

http://wafflelikescubes.webs.com/orientation.htm


----------



## Hunter (Jun 22, 2012)

Hey Waffo, what do you think about doing a short video on how you use roux for larger cubes? Possibly show finger tricks for 4x4, 5x5 and 7x7?

I think it would be good for the roux method if more people used it for big cubes.

Thanks!


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 22, 2012)

Its trivial right- 4x4 you push the gap for M moves for ex. 5x5 you use a flat ringer (ring+finger=ringer). Etc. I can't do it on >6 because small fingers.

Unless there is some other non-obvious way, then I'd be eager to see.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 22, 2012)

5BLD said:


> Its trivial right- 4x4 you push the gap for M moves for ex. 5x5 you use a flat ringer (ring+finger=ringer). Etc. I can't do it on >6 because small fingers.
> 
> Unless there is some other non-obvious way, then I'd be eager to see.



Or the casual r' R


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 22, 2012)

Hunter said:


> Hey Waffo, what do you think about doing a short video on how you use roux for larger cubes? Possibly show finger tricks for 4x4, 5x5 and 7x7?
> 
> I think it would be good for the roux method if more people used it for big cubes.
> 
> Thanks!


you are lucky I'm bored.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaSDjFEND4M&feature=youtu.be


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 22, 2012)

waffle=ijm said:


> you are lucky I'm bored.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaSDjFEND4M&feature=youtu.be



Hey Waffo, How about an avg of 5? or 12?


----------



## Hunter (Jun 22, 2012)

Thank you very much! That did help.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 22, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> Hey Waffo, How about an avg of 5? or 12?



you're lucky I'm bored again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBSyCKqxwFA&feature=youtu.be


----------



## blakedacuber (Jun 22, 2012)

I wanna switch to roux but I like OH too much and i don't know how to do the table(abuse) thingy wanna show me?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 22, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJKXOPbIipI&feature=plcp


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 23, 2012)

waffle=ijm said:


> you're lucky I'm bored again.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBSyCKqxwFA&feature=youtu.be



Its not Slowaffo, its Sexywaffo


----------



## tasguitar7 (Jun 24, 2012)

Right now I average 5-6 seconds per block and LSE. My CMLL is horrible. 2-Look is awful and I have trouble recognizing for 1-Look so it pushes my times above 20 almost always. How can I recognize CMLL cases easier?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jun 24, 2012)

tasguitar7 said:


> Right now I average 5-6 seconds per block and LSE. My CMLL is horrible. 2-Look is awful and I have trouble recognizing for 1-Look so it pushes my times above 20 almost always. How can I recognize CMLL cases easier?



Assuming you already know Full CMLL...

What I did is started 'predicting' the case. When youre doing the second block, you can kinda see the cmll 'building' itself. 
Im still pretty bad at that, but as time goes on, you kinda just get good at seeing the case from every angle.

maybe 5bld/waffle has better advice.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 25, 2012)

make up your own recognition for CMLL one that works for you and caters to YOUR ability. aside from that your blocks are what needs work.


----------



## Hunter (Jul 3, 2012)

Thanks Waffo!!

Using your tutorials, my Roux avg is now equal to what it was with CFOP, but it still has a downward slant.

Your tutorials were well done. Thanks!

Hunter



PS: Has anyone has a LSE skip?


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Hunter said:


> Thanks Waffo!!
> 
> Using your tutorials, my Roux avg is now equal to what it was with CFOP, but it still has a downward slant.
> 
> ...



Good Job!

Maybe not LSE skip. but after cmll. i did moo and it was done.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

I wanna learn Roux but Im already sub 19 in Fridrich ??? any ideas


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 3, 2012)

learn Roux


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

5BLD said:


> learn Roux



doesnt get much simpler than that.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

PandaCuber said:


> doesnt get much simpler than that.



I already wrote down algs nd did 6 solves and only completed 3


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> I already wrote down algs nd did 6 solves and only completed 3



what are you doing with algs? cmll = niklas and sune. only need 2 algs.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

Yeah 2 look CMLL and LSE are somewhat hard for me somtimes


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> Yeah 2 look CMLL and LSE are somewhat hard for me somtimes



ahh okay. just in case. Moo.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

Srry what Im new to Roux ;Moo???


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> Srry what Im new to Roux ;Moo???



Moo is your bestfriend. Moo is your master. Moo is the one.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

I dont think I use moo I use direct algs for that I will overlook MOO just in case though


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> I dont think I use moo I use direct algs for that I will overlook MOO just in case though



Dont be a Mr.Alg. become Mr.Moo


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

OK but it look confusing so I use the cycle instead of direct??


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> OK but it look confusing so I use the cycle instead of direct??



yup.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

ok so I use M' U M' till I get to what??


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> ok so I use M' U M' till I get to what??



til you orient all edges. 
moo is is an alg that 'flips' bad edges. 
your goal is to orient those edges. (orient would be to have only edges that are white and yellow on top and bottom(if you have white/yellow on D))
when you get the moo case, it orients. 
when you dont, it cycles through cases that get to moo. 
moo is 4 unoriented(3 on top(UR UF UL) and 1 on bottom(FD))


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

Thanks ahahah you should see all the algs I have untill you told me MOO soo what do you average on Roux


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 3, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> Thanks ahahah you should see all the algs I have untill you told me MOO soo what do you average on Roux



16 on a good day


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 3, 2012)

Right on going to go practice


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 4, 2012)

Im getting used to it but im very bad at block building


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 4, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> Im getting used to it but im very bad at block building



example sovle?


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 4, 2012)

Like on video and post it or just go through in my mind??? or look at example solves


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 4, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> Like on video and post it or just go through in my mind??? or look at example solves



do a written example solve herer so we can show you your errors.


----------



## Tj2OY (Jul 5, 2012)

1x2x3 block on left side 1x2x3 block on right side orient the corners and puremute them and LSE


----------



## Jaycee (Jul 5, 2012)

Tj2OY said:


> 1x2x3 block on left side 1x2x3 block on right side orient the corners and puremute them and LSE



He means something like this

Scramble: D2 L' R2 U L2 B' F' L' R2 B2 L F L' D2 L' B' D B2 U2 D
X Cross: L' F U' B' L B L U2 x2
F2L 2: U2 R' U R F' U' F
F2L 3: y R U2 R' y U R U' R'
F2L 4: U' L' U' L
OLL: U' R U R' U R' F R F' R U2 R'
PLL: U2 R U R' U' D R2 U' R U' R' U R' U R2 U D'

But with Roux of course. Tell us exactly what you do.


----------



## Hunter (Jul 15, 2012)

Wow! I asked about this a while ago, and I just had a LSE skip!!  Sadly I was not timing. :fp

---------------------------------------

I would like some critique on my solve please. 

Scramble: R' L2 B2 R' D' F' R B2 D R' L' F L U F B' L2 F'

(White on top, red on front for scramble and solve)

*
1st block:*
I see a blue/orange block on the front there. So I will start with the right block.

Starting with *M2 D'* I get the blue/yellow piece in the correct spot. then a *R U' R2 U R*

Now I have the 1x2x2 block. To create the blue/red pair I start with a *U2 L'* to get them separated and positioned better. Then it is a *M U' r U' R'*

There is the right block with 14 moves.


*2nd block:*

Nothing stands out, so I will do a *U2 L2* to position the green/yellow piece. Then to create the 1x2x2, *M U' M' * And to insert the pair, I do a *U2 L U' L'*

I see the last two pieces in the U layer, so I do a *M* to separate them. Then a *U2 M2* to pair them. And to finsih I do *U2 L' U L*

Finished in 16 moves.



*CMLL*

For my setup move, it is a *U'* Then the alg: *R U R' U R U2 R'* to orient them.

To permute them, its a *U2* setup move. And my T-perm. *R U R' U' R' F R2 U' R' U' R U R' F'*


*LSE*

Starting out I will do a *M'* to get white on top. Now its a super easy case. A *U'* setup move then *M' U M'* to fix the bad edges. For the blue/green edges, all I have to do is a *U2 M2 U'*

And to finish the solve, *U2 M2 U2 M2*


----------------------------


Thanks guys! Any feedback would be appreciated.

Hunter


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 15, 2012)

Um, didnt solve cmlll nor lse..


----------



## Athefre (Jul 15, 2012)

Hunter said:


> I would like some critique on my block building.
> 
> Scramble: R' L2 B2 R' D' F' R B2 D R' L' F L U F B' L2 F'
> 
> ...



This is fine. Finding an edge to start the 1x2x2 is usually a good strategy. But, that edge doesn't have to be the D-layer edge. You could have went with the edge that is already at FR and added to it.



Hunter said:


> then a *R U' R2 U R*



Try to get out of the CFOP slot habits. You could have simply done x U' R2 U.



Hunter said:


> Now I have the 1x2x2 block. To create the blue/red pair I start with a *U2 L'* to get them separated and positioned better. Then it is a *M U' r U' R'*


Not bad. Because you have so much freedom, you need to start thinking about both pieces at once instead it always being separate, rejoin, add. Also, M U' r U' R' could have been M U' L F'. Even shorter for this final pair would have been M' U2 F M2 F.

A better solution for this first block would have been M U M' U' x2 M2 U' M' F

You should never need 14 moves for the first block. Try to keep your average around 9 and set a max of maybe 11.

*


Hunter said:



2nd block:

Click to expand...

*


Hunter said:


> Nothing stands out, so I will do a *U2 L2* to position the green/yellow piece.



Ok, but try to usually make a pair first.



Hunter said:


> Then to create the 1x2x2, *M U' M' * And to insert the pair, I do a *U2 L U' L'*


You could have done U2 M' U' l U' l'



Hunter said:


> I see the last two pieces in the U layer, so I do a *M* to separate them. Then a *U2 M2* to pair them. And to finsih I do *U2 L' U L*



You could have done l' M' U2 M U' l.

My second block solution, if I was a left block last solver, may would have been L' U L' U2 L to make a first pair. The edge for the 1x2x2 happens to be in position. Just luck, I probably wouldn't have planned these moves over others to cause that. I see that the other corner is already joined and the edge is on U. So U' L U M' U' L.


----------



## CJF2L 1 (Jul 16, 2012)

how do you orient UF and DF
cause whenever i get that case i get stuck


----------



## 5BLD (Jul 16, 2012)

U2MUM auf MOOO


----------



## Athefre (Jul 16, 2012)

Or UMUM. Do either depending on the location of the LR edges.


----------



## PandaCuber (Jul 21, 2012)

Are you updating the site or something Waffo? Its seems to be crashing lately.


----------



## Hunter (Jul 22, 2012)

Thanks Athefre! seems there is more to block building than I thought!


----------



## jms_gears1 (Nov 11, 2012)

So, I was solving and I had a bad FB so then I was like, darn I wish I had the scramble so that I could see what I could have done differently. So now im like, hey everyone what are your worst FB scrambles?

If possible, say which face for F and U when scrambled and what block you solve, it just makes things easier.


----------



## Isaac Paurus (Nov 23, 2012)

_"Keep Track of above - DO IT!"_ keep track how?

and _" The best you can do for speedsolves for the first block is about 10 STM
"_ What's STM? 

thanks  im excited to get faster with this )


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Nov 23, 2012)

Isaac Paurus said:


> _"Keep Track of above - DO IT!"_ keep track how?
> 
> and _" The best you can do for speedsolves for the first block is about 10 STM
> "_ What's STM?
> ...



[wiki]STM[/wiki] as well as [wiki]Metric[/wiki]


----------



## Isaac Paurus (Nov 23, 2012)

JonnyWhoopes said:


> [wiki]STM[/wiki] as well as [wiki]Metric[/wiki]


what?


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Nov 23, 2012)

I need some second block tips. I either do fridrich f2l techniques or overuse the m slice for pairing so either way it is inefficient.

STM stands for slice turn metric. It is way to count moves. STM counts M (or any other slice for that matter) as one move. Also, any outer layer turn is one move. M U M' U2 M U M' counts as seven moves. In other metrics the move counts would be different. STM is popular for Roux as it is so M heavy.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Nov 23, 2012)

Isaac Paurus said:


> what?



They're links. You click them.


----------



## Bestsimple (Nov 25, 2012)

I too would like some critique and help on my block building.

Scramble with white on top green in front.

First block examples

1. Scramble: B' F D L R2 D' B2 U2 B2 F U B' R U2 B' F' R B2 R F' D2 L' B' F' U B L R' D B2

Solve: U2 L2 U x' U2 R' U2 B

2. Scramble: F' D L' D U' R2 F2 R2 D' B F2 L2 U2 R U2 R' U' L R' D' U' B' R' D' L' R' F' D2 L' D'

Solve: x2 y2 M2 D2 L D' x' U2 L D' M' F'

Thanks!

Tell me if i've done anything wrong with me notation or anything.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Nov 26, 2012)

Isaac Paurus said:


> _"Keep Track of above - DO IT!"_ keep track how?



sorry for the late reply. 
I mean you need to make sure you prioritize your practice.


----------



## izaRo (Dec 10, 2012)

how many algorithms are in roux
?


----------



## 5BLD (Dec 10, 2012)

Please learn to search. Bearing in mind you have just asked the question to the universe the answer is obviously 42.


----------



## Isaac Paurus (Dec 10, 2012)

5BLD said:


> Please learn to search. Bearing in mind you have just asked the question to the universe the answer is obviously 42.


hahaha 42 i love that movie


----------



## Xishem (Dec 16, 2012)

What algs do you guys use for 6-flip EO case? I'm specifically looking for one that I heard from Thom a while ago, but exploring new ones would be good too.


----------



## A Leman (Dec 16, 2012)

Xishem said:


> What algs do you guys use for 6-flip EO case? I'm specifically looking for one that I heard from Thom a while ago, but exploring new ones would be good too.



I am a noob, but I use RU'r'U'M'UrUr'.


----------



## Xishem (Dec 16, 2012)

A Leman said:


> I am a noob, but I use RU'r'U'M'UrUr'.



Yep! That's the one Thom told me about. Thanks.

Anyone have any other good ones?


----------



## Cool Frog (Dec 17, 2012)

Xishem said:


> Yep! That's the one Thom told me about. Thanks.
> 
> Anyone have any other good ones?



I use an alternative for when that 6 flip leaves shitty UL/UR cases.

M U' F' R' F M' F' R F


----------



## TwisterTimmy (Dec 25, 2012)

Hi Everyone,

I want to ask if anyone had tips on how to transition *well* from Fridrich to Roux? Since I did my research and practiced Roux a few times, however, I havent been able to improve my time at all! Using Fridrich/CFOP I average 31.75 (avg of 100), but using Roux I average around 55-65 seconds, with a lucky PB of 40 seconds. Any help with practice methods will be greatly appreciated, and to point out what I find my weaknesses are, I will list them down below:

1. Block Building, I still cant get rid of the CFOP's F2L habits and use the full cube

2. Second block (i find) is extremely difficult without using F2L 

3. Slow when orienting the last 6 edges

I believe that those 3 are my 3 biggest weakness, however, ANY tips and practice techniques could help! (Currently I'm following Waffle's 'Guide to sub 15')


----------



## PandaCuber (Dec 25, 2012)

Look at other roux solves. Learn their style. Adopt it. Practice no rotations and soon you will become pro.


----------



## cowabunga (Dec 25, 2012)

TwisterTimmy said:


> (Currently I'm following Waffle's 'Guide to sub 15')



I am as well. At your current speed just keep doing lots of solves and you will improve. 
Try not to time every solve and find more efficient ways to make blocks.
Oh and have patience


----------



## Smiles (Dec 26, 2012)

Bestsimple said:


> I too would like some critique and help on my block building.
> 
> Scramble with white on top green in front.
> 
> ...



okay i'm not a pro, but

1. F U' L U' R y L' U L
that's what i would have done, but yours is fine too. the U2 B at the end could have been L2 F' L2 for an easier finger trick.

2. U' D' R F R U' L' y L U' L', or, y2 U' B2 U' F' L U' R2 L' U L
your solve would have an L2 at the end, so technically all these solves are 10 STM. I saw these 1 QTM pairs more easily, since usually M2 pairs aren't apparent to me.

if you analyze my solves compared to yours, they're about just as good. the only difference is that i'm saving a few SQTM and not using x rotations, but that doesn't really make a difference. your blocks are good.





TwisterTimmy said:


> 1. Block Building, I still cant get rid of the CFOP's F2L habits and use the full cube
> 
> 2. Second block (i find) is extremely difficult without using F2L
> 
> 3. Slow when orienting the last 6 edges



Look at some example solves, and try to find out what they're doing for first block. For second block, experiment with orienting edges with the M slice, and using double layer turns to preserve corner-edge pairs. make sure you're not rotating. if you ever want to rotate the cube because of a certain "F2L" case, try this:
get the edge that you want to insert to the UF/UB position, then do an M/M' turn to orient it, then proceed normally. that might be a bit confusing.



TwisterTimmy said:


> I believe that those 3 are my 3 biggest weakness, however, ANY tips and practice techniques could help! (Currently I'm following Waffle's 'Guide to sub 15')



How colour neutral are you? Like do you have fixed L/R colours? Fixed U/D colours? If your U/D colours are always the same, then you should have no problem recognizing the LSE orientation cases.

EO tips: there are always an even number of edges oriented / disoriented. Since you can only see 5 edges at once (all of U, and FD), you can use deduction to reason whether the BD edge is oriented or not. when practicing, make sure you don't look around during EO. do not rotate even if you really want to.
For example, if there are 3 bad edges on the U face and FD is a good edge, then the BD edge is a bad edge.

good edge / bad edge recognition:
Assume white/yellow are your U/D colours. look for the white and yellow edge stickers. If any sticker on the U face is *not* white/yellow, it is *not oriented.* if you just glance at the U face, white and yellow kinda blur together and you can easily see which one is not white/yellow.
Since white/yellow must also be facing down on the D layer, it shouldn't be facing forward. So if you see *white/yellow on the F face*, it is *not oriented.* If you see *any other colour* on the FD sticker, it is *oriented.*


----------



## TwisterTimmy (Dec 26, 2012)

Smiles said:


> ~snip~




Hey, thanks for the tips! I found the EO tips extremely useful and I'm practicing right now to take away the need to look around the cube and find un-oriented edges  Thanks again! I'll make sure I keep all that in mind! 

-TwisterTimmy



cowabunga said:


> I am as well. At your current speed just keep doing lots of solves and you will improve.
> Try not to time every solve and find more efficient ways to make blocks.
> Oh and have patience




I hope you're doing well on the guide, I find it extremely helpful to know general guidelines when at a certain speed  Also, I'll try and have patience! Its just very difficult for me since I'm an avg 30 seconds cuber on CFOP already (though thats not fast at all) and now I have to "start over"  

Thank you for all the support though (thats to everyone!)

- TwisterTimmy


----------



## Xishem (Jan 2, 2013)

Any fast recognition systems for L6E on adjacent NMB? I've messed around with it for a while and can't find anything decent.

I guess I should say, specifically for orientation. Permutation isn't... bad, but orientation is a nightmare.


----------



## Bestsimple (Jan 14, 2013)

Thanks heaps for the advice btw what's SQTM?


----------



## JasonK (Jan 14, 2013)

Bestsimple said:


> Thanks heaps for the advice btw what's SQTM?



SQTM = Slice Quarter-Turn Metric. It's a cross between STM and QTM: slice moves (M, E etc) are one move but half-turns (U2, M2 etc) are two moves.


----------



## Kirjava (Jan 14, 2013)

Xishem said:


> Any fast recognition systems for L6E on adjacent NMB? I've messed around with it for a while and can't find anything decent.
> 
> I guess I should say, specifically for orientation. Permutation isn't... bad, but orientation is a nightmare.



No idea. Are you able to recog corners easily? How?


----------



## MWilson (Jan 14, 2013)

What is NMB?


----------



## Brest (Jan 14, 2013)

Dominate said:


> What is NMB?



Non-Matching Blocks


----------



## Xishem (Jan 18, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> No idea. Are you able to recog corners easily? How?



"Easily". I just use hyperorientation recog.


----------



## Athefre (Jan 19, 2013)

Xishem said:


> Any fast recognition systems for L6E on adjacent NMB? I've messed around with it for a while and can't find anything decent.
> 
> I guess I should say, specifically for orientation. Permutation isn't... bad, but orientation is a nightmare.



I've been working on this problem for a while. The simplest way is to track the UR edge during the second block and CLL and with the last move of the second block align the centers to match the left block. Or the other way around if you prefer. This way when you get to LSE you already have the required information about the edge that isn't like the others.


----------



## chimchu (Jan 19, 2013)

can someonehelp me decide between roux and fridrich? i like the idea of roux but i want to eventually be able to solve in around 7 seconds, or maybe even go for the record. i dont really have time to memorise the 130 algs for basic fridrich but i already use a beginer method similar to fridrich. can i hear your input?


----------



## ottozing (Jan 19, 2013)

If you don't have the time to learn 130 algorithms, you don't have the time to get sub 8 seconds. Deal with it.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 19, 2013)

chimchu said:


> can someonehelp me decide between roux and fridrich? i like the idea of roux but i want to eventually be able to solve in around 7 seconds, or maybe even go for the record. i dont really have time to memorise the 130 algs for basic fridrich but i already use a beginer method similar to fridrich. can i hear your input?



Roux users are getting fast. Speed isn't really determined by method rather the time and practice you put into getting better. For example, I seldom practice nowadays and I don't improve anymore. I could get faster if I practiced more but I'm lazy and choose not to. 

Saying you don't have time to learn anything new is like saying you want to be fast without effort and that just doesn't happen.


----------



## RubiXer (Jan 19, 2013)

ottozing said:


> If you don't have the time to learn 130 algorithms, you don't have the time to get sub 8 seconds. Deal with it.


This is so true. Also Chimchu I did it in less than 5 months...


----------



## chimchu (Jan 19, 2013)

i'm not lazy, just studying for finals. i will learn fridrich eventually i just mean is it worthwhile to start fridrich now, or try roux and see if i like it better

and will i get as good with "m" finger tricks as i am with "u"? because i do think the roux method could be as fast, but i'm afraid i would'nt be as good at it because i'm used to the layer by layer.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jan 19, 2013)

chimchu said:


> i'm not lazy, just studying for finals. i will learn fridrich eventually i just mean is it worthwhile to start fridrich now, or try roux and see if i like it better


Well my suggestion is getting your priorities straight. Study first then cube later. Trust me, the cubing world is fast paced but that does not mean you won't be able to catch up later.



chimchu said:


> and will i get as good with "m" finger tricks as i am with "u"? because i do think the roux method could be as fast, but i'm afraid i would'nt be as good at it because i'm used to the layer by layer.


M turns take sometime to get used to when transitioning from LBL. But you get better at it the more you use it.


----------



## chimchu (Jan 19, 2013)

Thank you waffle. i decided to start fridrich now, but im learning bob burtons 4 look last layer which only has like, 10 algs and your roux block building tutorials are actually helping me solve the f2l intuitively.


----------



## Ickathu (Jan 19, 2013)

don't be deterred by the alg count. Most "fast" methods require a fair amount of algs. The last layer can be solved with just 4 algs, then the next level of progression would be 11 algs (2 EO, 7 CO, 1 EP, 1 CP), then 16 (2 eo, 7 co, 4 ep, 3 cp), then slowly you'd build up to 30 (2 eo, 7 co, 21 PLL) and finally 78 (57 OLL, 21 PLL).
The alg count in the full roux method (not counting extra stuff like EO+CMLL algs) is only 42.
The alg count for ZZ (not counting COLL stuff, which most users end up learning) is only 28.

So don't be scared by a "high" number of algs. I know somewhere over 100 algs and lots of people know more than that. I didn't even really _try_ to learn that many, I just learned algs slowly and decided one day to count how many I knew and it was over 100, and that was fairly long ago, I probably know more now.

oh, and 2 look CMLL, which is what you would learn first before you started learning all the CMLL algs has only 9 algs, iirc.


----------



## chimchu (Jan 20, 2013)

thanks ickathu. at least someone can help out a noob without being rude. and i already learn 5 2 look cmll algs since yesterday so i think i'll be fine. i just have to be persisitant lol.


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Feb 11, 2013)

Should I do eo intuitively with moo or learn the algs. I think algs would be faster.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Feb 11, 2013)

TheNextFeliks said:


> Should I do eo intuitively with moo or learn the algs. I think algs would be faster.



You're wrong. It's faster to learn how to cycle intuitively. In fact, the entirety of LSE should be intuitive.


----------



## CheesecakeCuber (Feb 11, 2013)

Yes! Intuitive LSE is definitely faster. It's not very hard to learn what cases come after what. After, becoming more familiar with EO cases and solving with Roux a fair amount of times, you'll be able to cycle pretty fast.


----------



## Ickathu (Feb 11, 2013)

Intuitive all the way. That way you can become familiar with it and you'll know what you're doing and be able to track pieces and look-ahead to UL/UR. Also, you'll be able to modify the algs a bit if you see an easier way to set up the next step. For instance you could modify the EO solving to automatically pair up opposite or even insert UL and UR by a simple variation (U instead of U', M instead of M', that kind of stuff.)


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Feb 12, 2013)

UL/UR is the slowest part of lse for me. More than eo. I have trouble finding them. I usually auf so corners are correct then auf again to solve them.


----------



## kasochi (Feb 20, 2013)

I have a question about LSE with wide turns.
You know, wide turns can shorten moves of some last 3-cycle cases(for example, M2 U2 M' U2 M' case can be solved by Uw2 M Uw2 M, too).
Is this way suitable for speedsolve?


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 20, 2013)

Seems way way slower to me. Lower movecount doesn't mean faster alg.


----------



## kasochi (Feb 20, 2013)

thanks.
I'll continue to practice w/o this way.


----------



## adragast (Mar 28, 2013)

Just a small thank you note. Some weeks ago, I used Roux for the first time at a comp and got a single best of 22.11 and an average of 23.70. I am about 20s with Fridrich so I am satisfied with these times. A big thanks to the Roux community :tu


----------



## oll+phase+sync (Mar 28, 2013)

adragast said:


> Just a small thank you note. Some weeks ago, I used Roux for the first time at a comp and got a single best of 22.11 and an average of 23.70. I am about 20s with Fridrich so I am satisfied with these times. A big thanks to the Roux community :tu


May I ask how many algs you use for Fridrich and how many for Roux?


----------



## adragast (Apr 16, 2013)

oll+phase+sync said:


> May I ask how many algs you use for Fridrich and how many for Roux?



I am not sure about the exact count but I use one look OLL and one look PLL (does not mean I am fast with them). For Roux I use 2 look CMLL.


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Jul 26, 2013)

I average like 26 ATM. My splits are like 6-7-4-9. Which step should I work on? What tips do you have?


----------



## CheesecakeCuber (Aug 4, 2013)

TheNextFeliks said:


> I average like 26 ATM. My splits are like 6-7-4-9. Which step should I work on? What tips do you have?



Planning of at least 2/3 of the FB. 
FB to SB transition always. 
LSE. I average about 18-19 and my LSE is 4 seconds on avg.


----------



## YddEd (Aug 4, 2013)

TheNextFeliks said:


> I average like 26 ATM. My splits are like 6-7-4-9. Which step should I work on? What tips do you have?


Your blocks?
How many moves do you usually do on your first and second block?


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Aug 4, 2013)

CheesecakeCuber said:


> Planning of at least 2/3 of the FB.
> FB to SB transition always.
> LSE. I average about 18-19 and my LSE is 4 seconds on avg.



Yeah my lse is really slow. How to improve it? 



YddEd said:


> Your blocks?
> How many moves do you usually do on your first and second block?



Ok. Idk like 10-12 for first and a little more for second I think.


----------



## CheesecakeCuber (Aug 4, 2013)

TheNextFeliks said:


> Yeah my lse is really slow. How to improve it?
> 
> Ok. Idk like 10-12 for first and a little more for second I think.



Use the Roux scrambler on qqtimer a lot. Drill your M U technique. Make sure you already know the next LSE case while you are executing the current one.

For blocks, do slow solves and watch Alex's example solves. You can see some really nice fluidity and technique there.


----------



## Cool Frog (Aug 4, 2013)

I average ~14-16 and my LSE is 4 seconds

WORK ON DEM BLOCKS. (I need to work on them more, also)


----------



## Renslay (Aug 4, 2013)

Cool Frog said:


> I average ~14-16 and my LSE is 4 seconds



Ditto.


----------



## 7nand (Jan 17, 2014)

Hey Waffle, 
I don't know why but, I tend to solve the 1x2x3 blocks by using F2L. Is this common for beginners? Or is this because I always use CFOP? I average 23 sec with CFOP.. maybe that's why.. I totally understood how to solve using roux method because of your tutorial...  Thanks... but the only prob is that I use F2L while solving the blocks...  
Please help.. I'll try my best to learn..
Thanks


----------



## Renslay (Jan 17, 2014)

7nand said:


> Hey Waffle,
> I don't know why but, I tend to solve the 1x2x3 blocks by using F2L. Is this common for beginners? Or is this because I always use CFOP? I average 23 sec with CFOP.. maybe that's why.. I totally understood how to solve using roux method because of your tutorial...  Thanks... but the only prob is that I use F2L while solving the blocks...
> Please help.. I'll try my best to learn..
> Thanks



It's because you are so used to CFOP. This is common for beginners who switch to Roux from CFOP, and it usually results higher move-count.
Your first block should be around 6-11 STM. If it is not the case (it is usually higher if you build it "cfop"-ish, i.e., DL edge first and two corner-edge pairs last), examine Roux reconstructions for block building techniques.


----------



## 7nand (Jan 18, 2014)

Renslay said:


> It's because you are so used to CFOP. This is common for beginners who switch to Roux from CFOP, and it usually results higher move-count.
> Your first block should be around 6-11 STM. If it is not the case (it is usually higher if you build it "cfop"-ish, i.e., DL edge first and two corner-edge pairs last), examine Roux reconstructions for block building techniques.


Oh .. Ok I'll try watching some more videos on how to solve the blocks. 
Thanks!!!! Btw, what's STM??


----------



## Methuselah96 (Jan 18, 2014)

7nand said:


> Oh .. Ok I'll try watching some more videos on how to solve the blocks.
> Thanks!!!! Btw, what's STM??



http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Stm


----------



## 7nand (Jan 18, 2014)

Methuselah96 said:


> http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Stm



Thanks!!!


----------



## 7nand (Jan 18, 2014)

Can anyone suggest some videos on block building for me?? plz..


----------



## CheesecakeCuber (Jan 18, 2014)

7nand said:


> Can anyone suggest some videos on block building for me?? plz..



Waffle's example solves and Alex's examples on cubingworld


----------



## 7nand (Jan 18, 2014)

CheesecakeCuber said:


> Waffle's example solves and Alex's examples on cubingworld



They do the examples too fast for me.. Please suggest some other videos... based on block builing 
Thanks


----------



## GuRoux (Jan 18, 2014)

I agree, a lot of the videos go too fast, there aren't many good slow block building videos out there but here are some roux reconstructions that you can learn from: http://cubesolv.es/?solver=&competition=&puzzle=&time-specifier=&time-value=&tags=roux


----------



## 7nand (Jan 19, 2014)

GuRoux said:


> I agree, a lot of the videos go too fast, there aren't many good slow block building videos out there but here are some roux reconstructions that you can learn from: http://cubesolv.es/?solver=&competition=&puzzle=&time-specifier=&time-value=&tags=roux



Awesome reconstructions!!! Thanks!!


----------



## joele19681 (Jan 21, 2014)

great now i'm gonna learn


----------



## waffle=ijm (Jun 4, 2014)

Hey guys, it's been a while since I've done an update on the site. I was wondering if there is anything you'd like to see, or for me to change while I have the free time.


----------



## DeeDubb (Jun 4, 2014)

waffle=ijm said:


> Hey guys, it's been a while since I've done an update on the site. I was wondering if there is anything you'd like to see, or for me to change while I have the free time.



I think your site is great, but maybe some more info on block building. Rather than just examples, show some different ways the blocks pair up, different angles you pair from, etc. Also, I remember there was some unfinished stuff at the bottom of the page, maybe you can finish that stuff


----------



## Niah (Jun 4, 2014)

advanced tutorial on misaligned centres?


----------



## GuRoux (Jun 4, 2014)

Niah said:


> advanced tutorial on misaligned centres?



there really isn't an advanced tutorial, just a tutorial. Everything is essentially the same, the only difference is what is a good edge and bad edge. Any edge with a misalignededge color facing up or down will be considered good. the edges without the misaligned center color will be considered good or bad the same way it usually does with the regular aligned center colored.


----------



## 5BLD (Jun 4, 2014)

GuRoux said:


> there really isn't an advanced tutorial, just a tutorial. Everything is essentially the same, the only difference is what is a good edge and bad edge. Any edge with a misalignededge color facing up or down will be considered good. the edges without the misaligned center color will be considered good or bad the same way it usually does with the regular aligned center colored.



Ah but don't forget that the UL/UR edges are always followin' corners.


----------



## DeeDubb (Jun 4, 2014)

5BLD said:


> Ah but don't forget that the UL/UR edges are always followin' corners.



I'm still so bad at doing anything other than tracking the UL/UR edges while I'm doing EO. It seems hard to modify the EO method to set up optimal UL/UR. I think I've been complaining about this since I started, and I still can't figure it out. I'm almost to the point where I want to memo algs for every EO/ULUR case.


----------



## GuRoux (Jun 5, 2014)

DeeDubb said:


> I'm still so bad at doing anything other than tracking the UL/UR edges while I'm doing EO. It seems hard to modify the EO method to set up optimal UL/UR. I think I've been complaining about this since I started, and I still can't figure it out. I'm almost to the point where I want to memo algs for every EO/ULUR case.



wow, you're pbs have become a lot better since the last time i saw. I'm also wondering how many tricks i don't know about for that.


----------



## GuRoux (Jun 5, 2014)

5BLD said:


> Ah but don't forget that the UL/UR edges are always followin' corners.



that's what i meant by "the edges without the misaligned center color will be considered good or bad the same way it usually does with the regular aligned center colored."


----------



## jesus (Dec 31, 2014)

So I clicked the main tutorials spoiler and nothing showed up except blank space. Any help?


----------



## qqwref (Dec 31, 2014)

Ah, they changed how videos are linked in this forum a while back and these links still use the old format. Those are all youtube videos and you can see the links if you click the "reply with quote" button below the first post.


----------



## mafergut (Mar 6, 2015)

Excelent tutorial, at least for what I was looking for, which is CMLL, EO & LSE.

I am a CFOP solver but after reading many people talk about Roux (and ZZ, and Petrus...) I decided to take a look at the method. I watched the beginners videos by DeeDubb and I got interested but, of course, once you go past beginner stage, even a more intuitive method (comparing to CFOP) like Roux involves some hard alg learning.

As a CFOP solver I just know the 57 OLL cases and 21 PLLs (well, some additional algs for other PLL orientations, as well, but only a handful). What has turned me away from getting into more advanced stuff like ZBLL, etc is the sheer amount of algs needed.

And now, I see that, even for Roux I would need at least like 48 new algs (or 24 depending if you count mirrors or inverses or ...?) for CMLL and some others (okay, easy ones) for OE & LSE. So, yeah, this is what I was looking for but now I'm not sure I can hold another set of 48 algs without losing the other 80 

So, is this what it takes to get within the 20-30 second realm with Roux? Or should I just start with a sort of 2-look CMLL using normal OLLs + J/L/T-perm + Y-perm even if not as efficient?

Sorry if the question does not belong here, take it as a rethorical question if it doesn't and I'll go to the Q&A forum to post it but I just wanted also to state my opinion about the tutorial in this thread and ended up asking a question without even knowing


----------



## GuRoux (Mar 6, 2015)

mafergut said:


> Excelent tutorial, at least for what I was looking for, which is CMLL, EO & LSE.
> 
> I am a CFOP solver but after reading many people talk about Roux (and ZZ, and Petrus...) I decided to take a look at the method. I watched the beginners videos by DeeDubb and I got interested but, of course, once you go past beginner stage, even a more intuitive method (comparing to CFOP) like Roux involves some hard alg learning.
> 
> ...



2 look is the norm for 20-30 second solvers. most of algs for two look are the same as the ones you mentioned but a few are easier. i'd just search up two look cmll and you will notice about 2 algs are completely different and other algs have minor difference. your choice if you want to change algs.


----------



## mafergut (Mar 6, 2015)

Yeah, I've seen that the algs in Waffle's tutorial for permutation in 2-look CMLL are not really J-perm or Y-perm but a bit shorter and don't care about M-slice but, as I already know them, even if they are a bit longer, I don't think I will be any slower with my already know T or J-perm and Y-perm so I think I'll start using those and let's see what happens next. Thanks for the answer. I have taken the question to the appropriate forum and I will ask more things there later if needed.


----------

