How Fiendish was 16th September's Fiendish ??

All about puzzles in newspapers, magazines, and books

How Fiendish was 16th September's Fiendish ??

Postby katymeredith » Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:58 pm

Can anyone comment on how fiendish the 'Fiendish' in today's (16th September) Times was?

It's the first time I've done a 'Fiendish' in my head:idea: (i.e. without marking candidates, without trial & error/chains/colours) I was just wondering if I really have cause to crow or whether it was actually a 'hard' in fiendish clothing?

Posts: 5
Joined: 15 September 2005

Postby zebedeezbd » Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:38 pm

I would be interested to know who rates the puzzles. Does Pappacom supply the puzzles to The Times already sorted into difficulty categories, or does the newspaper rate them?

I think Pappacom's su dokus in The Times tend to be truer to their rating than the killer su dokus, for which the ratings so far have been seemingly random.
Posts: 60
Joined: 14 September 2005

Postby CathyW » Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:36 pm

I expect if the puzzle was dubbed into the Sudoku program it would be classified as medium. Can't say I did it without marking any candidates at all but it certainly wasn't 'Fiendish'. I think if you want truly Fiendish puzzles at present you have to look at the ones in the Sunday Times magazine:!:
Posts: 316
Joined: 20 June 2005

Re Times Fiendish 16th Sept

Postby kev37 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:22 pm

I'm new to this forum, and still getting to terms with the terminology.I managed to solve this puzzle , but no way could I have done it in my head. It wasn't till I got home and tried it in Pieter Madek's spreadsheet that I got a result. I eventually used a forcing chain based around 4 and 9 in r1 c5 and guessed the right one. Would be great to know an easier way as I can't get the champagne if I don't get in the lunchtime draw:)
Posts: 1
Joined: 16 September 2005

Postby Pappocom » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:51 am

zebedeezbd wrote:Does Pappacom supply the puzzles to The Times already sorted into difficulty categories

Yes, but into the Pappocom Sudoku program categories of Very Easy, Easy, Medium, Hard and (in the case of the Sunday Times) Very Hard.

Papers are free to apply inventive grade-names of their own, if they choose. It would be nice if they did so consistently, however.

- Wayne
Posts: 599
Joined: 05 March 2005

Postby 737 driver » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:38 am

Nothing beyond naked & hidden singles required on that one. The spreadsheet I use can point out (but doesn't automatically solve with) the higher stuff (naked & hidden pairs & triples) & makes forcing chains pretty easy to try out, but it automatically only shows what must be due to the singles. The spreadsheet got all the cels filled without any thought from me. Unless I have to think about it, it isn't particularly fiendish, to my computer-assisted way of thinking.
737 driver
Posts: 4
Joined: 30 July 2005

Postby Lardarse » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:21 am

Pappocom, I don't have your program installed, nor do I have access to the puzzle deing described, but it would be nice to work out how this puzzle (and a lot of the other recent puzzles) are categorized...
Posts: 106
Joined: 01 July 2005

Postby tso » Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:11 am

I posted ratings of some of the recent TIMES puzzles in another thread:

None of these are Sunday puzzles. They seem to be consistant other than a string of at least seven puzzles labeled "Fiendish" that were one grade lower than they should have been.
Posts: 798
Joined: 22 June 2005

Return to Published puzzles