AZ Republic 11-05-05 toughie

All about puzzles in newspapers, magazines, and books

Postby emm » Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:51 am

Pat, you’re such a ferret. I didn't expect to see this in my mailbox - I had the AZ Toughie dead and buried long ago.

Pappocom rates the puzzle VHard, exceptionally difficult, arguably unfair and valid. I think these *Unfair Yet Valid* puzzles are the kind that can be solved with colouring or chains, as opposed to puzzles needing fishy stuff which are just *Plain Invalid*.

I don’t mind if chains are outlawed. I never liked them - perhaps because of the overtones of domination - but colouring’s a different matter. For one thing it’s pretty and besides that it’s ‘conjugateness’ is very appealing. As long as colouring is excluded, Wayne and I are going to be a little at odds. That one small bias aside, I’ll continue to defend his programme to which I feel deeply loyal in much the way one always is to one’s first love, even after one has moved on to other things ... if you get my drift.:D

I’ve had a computer-free holiday and found I was quite happy swimming in the sea of puzzles that didn’t require solvers or advanced mental gymnastics and also that on the whole, the general population is pretty unimpressed by double implication bifurcation chains. Surprise! I think that despite our quibbles over the invalid / unfair exclusions, Wayne has probably pitched his programme just about right for most of the puzzle-solving world.
emm
 
Posts: 987
Joined: 02 July 2005

re: The Arizona Republic (2005.Nov.5)

Postby Pat » Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:10 pm

em wrote:Pat, you’re such a ferret. I didn't expect to see this in my mailbox - I had the AZ Toughie dead and buried long ago.
my fault, i remember having seen your Nov.16 response yet i somehow missed the next one on Nov.19 - can't quite understand how.

em wrote:Pappocom rates the puzzle VHard, exceptionally difficult, arguably unfair and valid.
this is where i had misunderstood your earlier posts (Nov.6, also Nov.8)
- sorry!!
i kept pursuing the question simply because it bothered me that it could be Very Hard - now i know you meant all along arguably unfair.

em wrote:I think these Unfair Yet Valid puzzles are the kind that can be solved with colouring or chains, as opposed to puzzles needing fishy stuff which are just Plain Invalid.
Pappocom doesn't seem interested in clarifying this distinction.

em wrote:I don’t mind if chains are outlawed, I never liked them - but colouring’s a different matter. For one thing it’s pretty and besides that it’s ‘conjugateness’ is very appealing. As long as colouring is excluded, Wayne and I are going to be a little at odds. That one small bias aside, I’ll continue to defend his programme.
I think that despite our quibbles over the invalid / unfair exclusions, Wayne has probably pitched his programme just about right for most of the puzzle-solving world.
yes, certainly right for me! colouring i haven't reached - i solve on paper - so the Pappocom puzzles suit my level.

~ Pat
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby Myth Jellies » Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:21 am

If you think that X-Wings are an okay tactic, then you might want to give Filet-O-Fish and Sashimi X-Wings a try. If you have ever found something that was almost an X-Wing (your puzzle here is full of them) then you might be pleasantly surprised.
Myth Jellies
 
Posts: 593
Joined: 19 September 2005

Previous

Return to Published puzzles