daj95376 wrote:One ER gets you nothing. Two ERs get you nothing. Three ERs get you one elimination.
All four eliminations can be made with a continuous loop of two ERs and one strong link. [
edit: I see Sudtyro posted the same while I was typing.]
- Code: Select all
. . / | / . / | . . 9
9 . / | / *9 / | . . .
-9 . *9 | *9 -9 *9 | . . .
----------+-----------+----------
. 9 / | . . . | . . .
. . / | . . . | 9 . .
. . / | 9 . 9 | . . .
----------+-----------+----------
-9 . *9 | *9 -9 *9 | . . .
9 . / | / *9 / | . 9 .
9 . / | / *9 / | . 9 .
r3c3 =9= r7c3 -9- r7c456 =9= r789c5 -9- r23c5 =9= r3c456 -9- r3c3 =
A continuous loop implying r37c15<>9
Is this
the ER technique? Of course not. I'm not making that claim and I didn't make such a claim earlier either.
I agree that one ER and one strong link is
the classical example of an ER technique, but think saying it is
the ER technique is misleading.
And I obviously agree there is a difference between an ER and ER technique. Your earliest post (to which I responded on this topic) described an ER as the combination of two strong inferences -- one each in a box and a row (or column) ... which it is not. Had you used the term
ER technique there, I doubt I would have responded in the first place.
I doubt there is anything more I could say on this subject, so you may have the last word.