# Matt's Block Tutorial



## miniGOINGS (Sep 27, 2009)

This tutorial will explain how to use Matt's Block to solve the first two steps of the Roux Method.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 27, 2009)

questions.

effective?
fast?
why recommend this over traditional roux block building?
why restrict moves when I can do anything I want for blocks and it just as fast?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> questions.


So I figured...



waffle=ijm said:


> effective?


Mhm, it allows for good look a head and recognition.



waffle=ijm said:


> fast?


For only having a few months of practice with it, and being completely not colour neutral in the least, I'm sub-25 with it, and have achieved sub-20 non-lucky times with it, I think sub-15 is possible.



waffle=ijm said:


> why recommend this over traditional roux block building?


It is more of an intermediate approach.



waffle=ijm said:


> why restrict moves when I can do anything I want for blocks and it just as fast?


Because restrictions are usually a good thing for less advanced cubers and allow for very fast, fluid solves.

EDIT: Waffle, aren't you going to defend the traditional way of doing Roux?


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 28, 2009)

Nice bump, mini. :|

Do blocks however you want. There's no reason to always do them the same way. That's like *always* doing cross pieces in a certain order. It's stupid.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

Stachuk1992 said:


> Nice bump, mini. :|
> 
> Do blocks however you want. There's no reason to always do them the same way. That's like *always* doing cross pieces in a certain order. It's stupid.



You have 3 different anchor pieces to choose from (and thats only for 1 colour), 2 different edges to connect to the center, endless different ways of building the left 1x1x3, 2 edges to choose which one to do first and multiple ways of doing each one. I never build my blocks the same way. Ever.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 28, 2009)

miniGOINGS said:


> EDIT: Waffle, aren't you going to defend the traditional way of doing Roux?



fine

1) I have a very low move count for the first block. usually 9-10
2) Inserting FL and BL piece only gives me more to think about and I become less concentrated in looking ahead to the next block
3) I avg about 2-3 seconds for the first block using the shortest moves that i can find. 
4) I see no point in making the lower 1x1x3 when I can pretty much do each block with 1.5 looks.


Overall Matt's block is too complex having to break down the blocks into 2+ steps. Roux block building is to simplify the solves, not make it more complex.


----------



## piemaster (Sep 28, 2009)

Hey waffle, is your "stop using roux" signature seirous?


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 28, 2009)

piemaster said:


> Hey waffle, is your "stop using roux" signature seirous?



i'm sick of roux users proclaiming they are "rebels."

I fear that more people who use roux, the more so-called rebels will be there so I urge people to stop using roux if you just want to be rebels.

Anymore and I think I'll stop using roux and cubing altogether.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> 1) I have a very low move count for the first block. usually 9-10


You have been using Roux for such a long time, and have gotten so good at it, that this approach is unsuitable for you.



waffle=ijm said:


> 2) Inserting FL and BL piece only gives me more to think about and I become less concentrated in looking ahead to the next block


That's because you're not used to insertin FL and BL while looking ahead, it takes some time to get used to.



waffle=ijm said:


> 3) I avg about 2-3 seconds for the first block using the shortest moves that i can find.


Not everyone can get sub-30 with Heise, your blockbuilding skills are amazing so again, this approach is unsuitable for you.



waffle=ijm said:


> 4) I see no point in making the lower 1x1x3 when I can pretty much do each block with 1.5 looks.


Again, you are talking about yourself, not every other cuber here.



waffle=ijm said:


> Overall Matt's block is too complex having to break down the blocks into 2+ steps. Roux block building is to simplify the solves, not make it more complex.


In conclusion, this is a stepping stone towards full-out 1 look blocks. Because you are so advance, this approach is impractical for you, but to get to where you are now, you had to start somewhere. What I am proposing is a different way of getting to 1 look blocks.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 28, 2009)

good answers. I only replied due to your request.

Use what method of block building you want. though I recommend 1x2x2 to 1x2x3. I say that this is also a valid start.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> good answers. I only replied due to your request.
> 
> Use what method of block building you want. though I recommend 1x2x2 to 1x2x3. I say that this is also a valid start.



Thank you . I'm not trying to reinvent Roux, or make a hybrid, I just want to help people get to the stage that you are at. I thought that if I could survive a Waffle attack, I should be able to defend this to anyone. Thanks for your honesty.


----------



## ErikJ (Sep 28, 2009)

I don't think this will help people get better at block building. they should just start off with regular roux.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 28, 2009)

Erik's Awesome Sig said:


> Block building is not for the weak hearted.



real block building or perish.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

ErikJ said:


> I don't think this will help people get better at block building. they should just start off with regular roux.



I would have to disagree on this one. Although they are only placing a few pieces at a time, they are learning things about how the cube moves and are noting things down in their mind which they will build on to in order to get better at block building.


----------



## joey (Sep 28, 2009)

Or you could just use roux.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Sep 28, 2009)

joey said:


> Or you could just use roux.



This isn't a replacement for Roux, just an altrernative way of building the blocks that may be easier for some people to understand.


----------



## waffle=ijm (Sep 28, 2009)

joey said:


> Or you could just use roux.



you have no idea how much you just hurt me...

I have a sore throat and I was laughing so hard. 

this made my day.

but yeah, this is like somewhat a starting concept for roux that I don't really support but is okay.


----------



## Spitfire97 (Oct 2, 2009)

waffle=ijm said:


> piemaster said:
> 
> 
> > Hey waffle, is your "stop using roux" signature seirous?
> ...



WTF?!?!?!


----------



## miniGOINGS (Oct 17, 2009)

Spitfire97 said:


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



Spitfire, you don't use Roux, do you?


----------

