# Why You're Not Sub-X with Roux



## PenguinsDontFly (Jul 25, 2016)

This thread is for discussing how to get faster at 3x3 using the Roux Method. The main focus will be on breaking specific "barriers" that people often get stuck at. I am making a video series which I will post on Youtube, and I will also share it on this thread. The first 2 videos has now been released:


















If you want this series to continue, please watch, like, comment, and share this video. Also, I encourage you to give me feedback on what parts of this video were helpful and what you would like to see more of for next time. So far, the feedback I have received is positive, and people have found the video useful. I'm planning on making videos for sub-10, and sub-8.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Jul 25, 2016)

Now, if only someone can make is thread for ZZ... Great work, btw  very helpful.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Jul 25, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> Now, if only someone can make is thread for ZZ... Great work, btw  very helpful.


Thank you! I think ZZ deserves more attention. I think it's a very good method, especially with full ZBLL. Beginners these days are just bombarded with CFOP tutorials and have no chance of discovering a Roux or ZZ tutorial because there are less of them and they have less views.


----------



## LostGent (Jul 25, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> Beginners these days are just bombarded with CFOP tutorials and have no chance of discovering a Roux or ZZ tutorial because there are less of them and they have less views.



This. I've learned CFOP but I'd like to get decent at Roux too as I don't have the highest TPS. Great video too!


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Jul 25, 2016)

LostGent said:


> This. I've learned CFOP but I'd like to get decent at Roux too as I don't have the highest TPS. Great video too!


If roux doesn't work out for your low tps, try ZZ as its aalso good for that.


----------



## TDM (Jul 25, 2016)

Cool video. I've actually done a sub-20 Ao5 video with sub-2.7 TPS already


----------



## LostGent (Jul 25, 2016)

wir3sandfir3s said:


> If roux doesn't work out for your low tps, try ZZ as its aalso good for that.



I'd really like to at some point, I'm just a bit overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases you have to learn in ZZ. Roux seems quite intuitive, at least in its early stages. CMLL is on the cards, but I think I'll finishing learning OLL for CFOP and then focus more on Roux!


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Jul 25, 2016)

LostGent said:


> I'd really like to at some point, I'm just a bit overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases you have to learn in ZZ. Roux seems quite intuitive, at least in its early stages. CMLL is on the cards, but I think I'll finishing learning OLL for CFOP and then focus more on Roux!


Uh sheer number of cases? ZZ has less Algs than both CFOP and Roux (if you use OLL PLL) at 7 for OLL+21 for PLL= only 28 Algs...


----------



## Teoidus (Jul 27, 2016)

wut, 2look CMLL Roux has like 11 algs


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Jul 27, 2016)

Teoidus said:


> wut, 2look CMLL Roux has like 11 algs


9.


----------



## wir3sandfir3s (Jul 27, 2016)

Oh yeah. So ignore The part about ZZ having less Algs than Roux, but it has less Algs than CFOP.


----------



## Teoidus (Jul 27, 2016)

PDF you could ask for viewers that are almost sub-20/sub-15/etc to submit videos of themselves solving and critique them. That way the areas for improvement are more visible for viewers, people can get direct feedback if they want to, and you'll have lots of material to go off of

EDIT: Okay, I actually watched the video and realize you're already doing this. Nevermind 

THOUGH I think you can, if you're in an video-edit-happy mood, do a voiceover on the recorded solve, slowing down/stopping the vid at important parts etc
and maybe do multiple solves


----------



## muchacho (Jul 27, 2016)

I would love to see more solve critiques, I would send some if you want (I'm averaging 23).


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Jul 27, 2016)

Teoidus said:


> PDF you could ask for viewers that are almost sub-20/sub-15/etc to submit videos of themselves solving and critique them. That way the areas for improvement are more visible for viewers, people can get direct feedback if they want to, and you'll have lots of material to go off of
> 
> EDIT: Okay, I actually watched the video and realize you're already doing this. Nevermind
> 
> ...


I guess I could do that for things like "there was a pause here, lookahead more". But I still think showing the reconstruction is the only way to show how to improve efficiency. I might try it for the next one, but I'm not making any guarantees.


muchacho said:


> I would love to see more solve critiques, I would send some if you want (I'm averaging 23).


As you can tell, these videos are going to be long, so I don't want to make them even longer by having too many solve critiques. What I might end up doing is just making a whole solve-critiques specific video where I just critiques 1 solve from a bunch of rouxers.


----------



## shadowslice e (Jul 27, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> I guess I could do that for things like "there was a pause here, lookahead more". But I still think showing the reconstruction is the only way to show how to improve efficiency. I might try it for the next one, but I'm not making any guarantees.
> 
> As you can tell, these videos are going to be long, so I don't want to make them even longer by having too many solve critiques. What I might end up doing is just making a whole solve-critiques specific video where I just critiques 1 solve from a bunch of rouxers.


You could do something like the X-rouxers, 1 scramble and ask for reconstructions as well.


----------



## Teoidus (Jul 27, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> I guess I could do that for things like "there was a pause here, lookahead more". But I still think showing the reconstruction is the only way to show how to improve efficiency. I might try it for the next one, but I'm not making any guarantees.
> 
> As you can tell, these videos are going to be long, so I don't want to make them even longer by having too many solve critiques. What I might end up doing is just making a whole solve-critiques specific video where I just critiques 1 solve from a bunch of rouxers.



Yeah, I guess length is a pretty big issue as well, I hadn't considered that.

I thought showing the reconstruction, esp with movecounts and all on algdb, was a great idea as I don't think many people really think that much about how efficient they're really being. Solves feel like they're short or long but it's an entirely different matter to count the moves up as you go or reconstruct on algdb and watch the movecount go up into the high 50s/low 60s.


----------



## mafergut (Jul 29, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> You could do something like the X-rouxers, 1 scramble and ask for reconstructions as well.


Very nice idea imho.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 1, 2016)

I just uploaded the sub-15 video and added it to the original post.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 13, 2016)

d-d-double post! Sub-12 video uploaded! Sorry for the delay, I was busy all week.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 13, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> d-d-double post! Sub-12 video uploaded! Sorry for the delay, I was busy all week.


Noooo!!!! why sub-12? I'm just about sub-12. Y U no sub-11?

jk  good video btw, it did help me to focus in on what I need to work on.

also, shameless plugging of own algs


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 13, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> Noooo!!!! why sub-12? I'm just about sub-12. Y U no sub-11?
> 
> jk  good video btw, it did help me to focus in on what I need to work on.
> 
> also, shameless plugging of own algs


Thanks!

Yeah, I just want people to use good algs and not have to relearn like I did.


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 17, 2016)

Just broke sub-25 barrier so I decided to watch this video. One of the best guides I have ever seen!Im still using 2LCMLL...Also, is second block usually just DR edge and pairs and last pair and sometimes reverse order?


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 17, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> Just broke sub-25 barrier so I decided to watch this video. One of the best guides I have ever seen!Im still using 2LCMLL...Also, is second block usually just DR edge and pairs and last pair and sometimes reverse order?


I'm slightly going to disagree with pdf here and say that you should blockbuild as much as you can (usually a 2x2x1) though the pairs approach is a good method to fall back on. You should try not to have to destroy your progress to place the DR edge last as that will almost always be more moves than the alternatives and will often involve a rotation which you should try to avoid.


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 17, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> I'm slightly going to disagree with pdf here and say that you should blockbuild as much as you can (usually a 2x2x1) though the pairs approach is a good method to fall back on. You should try not to have to destroy your progress to place the DR edge last as that will almost always be more moves than the alternatives and will often involve a rotation which you should try to avoid.


For the FB I always block-build and I 2x2 for the SB usually. I mix things up on the second block and even more things on the first.
My SB is usually a pair, if I see it quickly, and then edge insert or I pull out the pair and pair the pair. Then last pair or first piece then insert.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 17, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> I'm slightly going to disagree with pdf here and say that you should blockbuild as much as you can (usually a 2x2x1) though the pairs approach is a good method to fall back on. You should try not to have to destroy your progress to place the DR edge last as that will almost always be more moves than the alternatives and will often involve a rotation which you should try to avoid.


I blockbuild, but the reason I emphasize finding DR edge is because any 2x2x1 block you are going to build will involve the DR edge.


----------



## sotolf2 (Aug 22, 2016)

Thanks for the videos, they are really great, I'm far off from any of the times in the videos, and it's kind of frustrating seeing your slow solves, they are over twice as fast as my "fast" ones.


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 22, 2016)

Are their any instances where during a solve you have to use the index finger pull because your other ring finger was out of position or am I adjusting my ring finger too slowly? (M-moves) I started with index, then I used ring. Now I always use ring for LSE but for blocks it varies.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 22, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> Are their any instances where during a solve you have to use the index finger pull because your other ring finger was out of position or am I adjusting my ring finger too slowly? (M-moves) I started with index, then I used ring. Now I always use ring for LSE but for blocks it varies.


If you're talking about OH, for an M move you use your pinky rather than your ring finger and that will just get developed over time until it becomes second nature.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 23, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> Are their any instances where during a solve you have to use the index finger pull because your other ring finger was out of position or am I adjusting my ring finger too slowly? (M-moves) I started with index, then I used ring. Now I always use ring for LSE but for blocks it varies.


Im assuming you're talking about 2H. For M moves during blocks, I either do the standard ring finger way or I push down on UF using my right thumb. Index pull would work too, but only if your hand is already there. I prefer the thumb way because my thumb is usually either on the front of the cube where its a slight adjustment to get it to UF, or it's already there. And yes, for LSE it is way easier to just use ring for everything. The only reason you need to improvise your fingertricks in blocks is because you're doing R and r moves so your hand will be in different positions.


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 23, 2016)

shadowslice e said:


> If you're talking about OH, for an M move you use your pinky rather than your ring finger and that will just get developed over time until it becomes second nature.


Yay, my hanging pinky will finally have its place in cubing society! Unfortunately, my OH is far from being decent.



PenguinsDontFly said:


> Im assuming you're talking about 2H. For M moves during blocks, I either do the standard ring finger way or I push down on UF using my right thumb. Index pull would work too, but only if your hand is already there. I prefer the thumb way because my thumb is usually either on the front of the cube where its a slight adjustment to get it to UF, or it's already there. And yes, for LSE it is way easier to just use ring for everything. The only reason you need to improvise your fingertricks in blocks is because you're doing R and r moves so your hand will be in different positions.


 I use my index pull sometimes because after U'(I still can't reverse flick, partly because of my cube, but I won't blame my cube), my left hand is raised so my right hand can pull. I never thought of the thumb pull! Verrrry interesting, I'll definitely try it.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 23, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> Yay, my hanging pinky will finally have its place in cubing society! Unfortunately, my OH is far from being decent.
> 
> 
> I use my index pull sometimes because after U'(I still can't reverse flick, partly because of my cube, but I won't blame my cube), my left hand is raised so my right hand can pull. I never thought of the thumb pull! Verrrry interesting, I'll definitely try it.


It's especially useful in cases like: M r' U' r


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 30, 2016)

The "Why You're Not Sub-10" video has been uploaded and added to the original post. One of the things I mentioned in the video was learning a second CMLL algorithm in order to influence EO. I feel like that is a very complicated way of describing something simple, so I think we should come up with a name for it. What do you guys think about "CMLL(2)".


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 30, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> The "Why You're Not Sub-10" video has been uploaded and added to the original post. One of the things I mentioned is the video was learning a second CMLL algorithm in order to influence EO. I feel like that is a very complicated way of describing something simple, so I think we should come up with a name for it. What do you guys think about "CMLL(2)".


That's a perfect name! We probably should stick to it so that we don't start worrying about naming it. How many extra algs should rouxers learn? Some can me changed by wide moves or adjusting m-slice. Also, I should probably learn CMLL and become a 2x2 god.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 30, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> The "Why You're Not Sub-10" video has been uploaded and added to the original post. One of the things I mentioned is the video was learning a second CMLL algorithm in order to influence EO. I feel like that is a very complicated way of describing something simple, so I think we should come up with a name for it. What do you guys think about "CMLL(2)".


CLL-PEC (CLL , partial edge control)
CPEC (Corners partial edge control)
CPEO (Corner+ partial Edge orientation)
C 3PEO? (LOL it just sounded similar. Maybe we should call it threepio)

But in all seriousness, I don't really care though I would still end up refering to it as something like "I do CMLL but avoid the bad cases" or "some OLLCP I use to get good cases"


Umm Roux? said:


> That's a perfect name! We probably should stick to it so that we don't start worrying about naming it. How many extra algs should rouxers learn? Some can me changed by wide moves or adjusting m-slice. Also, I should probably learn CMLL and become a 2x2 god.


Do you mean CLL for 2x2?

Also, I think you should probably know about 84 algs though realistically if you count wide move siblings as the same then you'll have maybe 50-60.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 30, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> That's a perfect name! We probably should stick to it so that we don't start worrying about naming it. How many extra algs should rouxers learn? Some can me changed by wide moves or adjusting m-slice. Also, I should probably learn CMLL and become a 2x2 god.


You can never know too many algs. 2x2 is fun.


shadowslice e said:


> CLL-PEC (CLL , partial edge control)
> CPEC (Corners partial edge control)
> CPEO (Corner+ partial Edge orientation)
> C 3PEO? (LOL it just sounded similar. Maybe we should call it threepio)
> ...


I like CMLL-PEC. I guess we'll use either PEC or 2. Either way, it shouldn't matter.
Edit: CPEC is better. Pronounced: "See Peck". Annotation added to the video.


----------



## Daniel Lin (Aug 31, 2016)

Isn't it already called CMLLEO?


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 31, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> Isn't it already called CMLLEO?


That's for solving CMLL and completely solving EO, which would be even more than the ZBLL you have learnt. CMLL2 or CMLL-PEC or Smell (Second CMLL) is used just to influence EO, avoid 6-flip or get arrows.



PenguinsDontFly said:


> You can never know too many algs. 2x2 is fun.
> 
> I like CMLL-PEC. I guess we'll use either PEC or 2. Either way, it shouldn't matter.
> Edit: CPEC is better. Pronounced: "See Peck". Annotation added to the video.


We could name it SMELL(second CMLL)!!!!!!!!


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 31, 2016)

FB 5
SB 9
CMLL 5
LSE 5

Are these splits weird? I need to track pieces better for SB definitely.


----------



## Daniel Lin (Aug 31, 2016)

Umm Roux? said:


> FB 5
> SB 8
> CMLL 5
> LSE 5
> ...


cool, I'm like 2 seconds faster than you

my splits
4
10 lol
4
5
LSE is my favorite step, and I hate SB


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 31, 2016)

Daniel Lin said:


> cool, I'm like 2 seconds faster than you
> 
> my splits
> 4
> ...


So similar, I'll try to get past that before school, or you know, blame the lag on my cube.


----------



## shadowslice e (Aug 31, 2016)

Well, from what I can see, pdf split for each speed seem to be pretty accurate. I'm about 2,4,2,3 and I know that I really do have a comparitively bad SB and some CMLLs suck so I would day they're good to aim for.


----------



## PenguinsDontFly (Aug 31, 2016)

All of you need to work on second block.


----------



## Umm Roux? (Aug 31, 2016)

PenguinsDontFly said:


> All of you need to work on second block.


What a coincidence, I'm starting now!


----------



## SpectralChimaera (Nov 5, 2017)

I picked up roux because it was the most intriguing looking. 


PenguinsDontFly said:


> Thank you! I think ZZ deserves more attention. I think it's a very good method, especially with full ZBLL. Beginners these days are just bombarded with CFOP tutorials and have no chance of discovering a Roux or ZZ tutorial because there are less of them and they have less views.


----------



## abunickabhi (Jul 29, 2018)

Excellent tutorial , can you make one for OH , like how to sub-20 , sub-15, sub-10, sub-8 on OH.

It will be helpful for many cubers. (For eg , I have been stuck at 18 seconds for over a year)


----------



## Janav gupta (Nov 4, 2018)

Can you make one for why you are not sub 40 and 30 with roux? It would be very helpful for beginners like me.


----------

