'Six days shalt thou labour ...'

All about puzzles in newspapers, magazines, and books

Postby simes » Wed Aug 03, 2005 1:43 pm

The hidden triplet and naked sextet are "opposite sides of the same coin". That is, they're mutually exclusive subsets. But, it's often easier to see the smaller triplet than the longer sextet.

Simes
simes
 
Posts: 324
Joined: 11 March 2005
Location: UK

Postby george-no1 » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:08 pm

I know they're the same thing but I would have said that its nearly always easier to see something that's naked, rather than hidden, no matter how many numbers are involved.

Maybe it's just the way my strange mind works.

George:)
george-no1
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 20 May 2005

Postby gmc » Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:12 pm

Very clever - wouldn't have spotted the hidden triplet in a month of Sundays - solved it cos somebody pointed out the quadruplet in box 7
gmc
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 03 July 2005

Postby george-no1 » Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:07 pm

But gmc, would you have spotted the naked sextuplet?

I'm just speculating here, but I reckon

simes wrote:it's often easier to see the smaller triplet than the longer sextet


is not true.

George:)
george-no1
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 20 May 2005

Postby shakers » Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:43 am

Sabreman64 wrote:Yes, I'd say the first Sunday Times sudoku was a fiendish one. I ended up having to fill in a large sudoku grid with all the possibilities in the empty cells. I usually need to do that only with The Times's fiendish puzzles.


Pappocom's program rates this puzzle as "V. Hard", whereas the regular Fiendish puzzles are only "Hard".
shakers
 
Posts: 93
Joined: 10 March 2005

Postby gmc » Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:22 pm

george-no1 wrote:But gmc, would you have spotted the naked sextuplet?

I'm just speculating here, but I reckon

simes wrote:it's often easier to see the smaller triplet than the longer sextet


is not true.

George:)


Haven't a clue what a naked sextet is, but if I wanted to see one it would have to be the Nolan Sisters (well 25 years ago)
gmc
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 03 July 2005

Postby stuartn » Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:56 pm

and is there another hidden triple in column 2 ?

stuartn


www.brightonandhove.org
stuartn
 
Posts: 211
Joined: 18 June 2005

Postby george-no1 » Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:19 am

gmc, a naked sextet is identical to a hidden triplet, it just depends how you see it. As simes put it:

simes wrote:They're mutually exclusive subsets


You said that you would never have seen the hidden triple (2,5,7), so I asked if you could have spotted the naked sextet (1,3,4,6,8,9). If you look at the column 9 pencilmarks that easysurf supplied, it may become a bit clearer.

George:)
george-no1
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 20 May 2005

Postby george-no1 » Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:32 am

It is naked because (3,9) down to (8,9) can only have (1,3,4,6,8,9) in them. Therefore the above candidates can be removed from (1,9), (2,9) and (9,9), leaving a triplet of (2,5,7) in those cells.

George:)
george-no1
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 20 May 2005

Postby george-no1 » Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:34 am

Hey, where's possum's post gone?

(It asked why it was a naked sextet rather than partially hidden)

George (confused)
george-no1
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 20 May 2005

Previous

Return to Published puzzles