The New Sudoku Players' Forum

[Bernard Stay]

After 5 trouble-free weeks I'm stuck here on No.7. I've operated two sets of triplets but can see no more, and no X-wings. I've wasted enough of this Sunday. Hint please.

Thanks:-

***|*61|*3*
693|274|***
1**|*3*|26*
--------------
***|**2|**1
*5*|1*9|*7*
4**|6**|***
--------------
962|*1*|**3
***|42*|95*
574|*9*|***

Particularly difficult I think because we were given no 8s at all.

[Karyobin]

Yeah I thought this one was hard too, I had to use candidates to crack it in the end and they normally aren't necessary for ones to be found in the paper.

Anyway, in answer to your question (if I can remember how I did it)...

ermm... Aaahh yes, there's a triple of 3's, 7's and 8's in row 4. This means that you can exclude some candidate 8's in box 4 (as well as some 3's, 7's and 8's in row 4, obviously). I found that after that it became a doddle, so I didn't bother finishing it.

[Bernard Stay]

Yeah I thought this one was hard too

ermm... Aaahh yes, there's a triple of 3's, 7's and 8's in row 4. This means that you can exclude some candidate 8's in box 4 (as well as some 3's, 7's and 8's in row 4, obviously). I found that after that it became a doddle, so I didn't bother finishing it.

Thanks K - but I have four 3s in r4 - at r4c1,r4c2,r4c4 & r4c7 which if correct rule out a triple (?). The whole line reads: 378|38|6789||37|458|2||34568|489|1

Any one comment?

[possum]

I thought that was a triple too, Bernard, on the basis that those three cells can only be 3, 7 or 8. The eliminations I have made following that discovery have not got me any further forward, partly because I fell asleep shortly afterwards.

[Karyobin]

Yes, exactly. Cells 1, 2 and 4 form the triple, so 3, 7 and 8 and be erased from all other cells in that row.

[Guest]

Bernard is right - it's not a triple because of the 3 in r4c7. However, in the same row there is a quadruple.........and that will get you to the solution.

[domt]

Bernard is right - it's not a triple because of the 3 in r4c7. However, in the same row there is a quadruple.........and that will get you to the solution.

I am confused. surely it is a triple as if you take c7 as a 3 as a working hypothesis then c4 is a 7, c1 is an 8 and no value can go in c2 unless incorrect workings. Is that not a triple then?? (My definitions could be wrong)

dom

[Enigma]

The point is that R4 c1,2 and 4 can only contain 3, 7 or 8. This is the triple, so other cells in that row can't contain any of these numbers... ie you can eliminate 3 from c7.

I don't think the puzzle was more complex than this one triple, was it ? I didn't need to use any other triple, and certainly not quadruples.

Paul

[Karyobin]

What's going on here - have some folk totally forgotten what a triple is?! Of course it's a flaming triple, to whit: three cells that between them only contain three possible candidates. This very fact leads to exclusions in the row.

I've been bogged down in cricket too, but wake up people!

Enigma: I concur. This triple opened the whole thing up.

[silvercar]

It wasn't just the 3,7 & 8 triple it was the addional fact that the 8 in particular could only be in box 4 of line 4 and hence could be eliminated from other cells in box 4.

[Karyobin]

Yup, that too.

[Enigma]

Anyway, given it did need a triple, compared to recent Times fiendishes, I suppose it would qualify as an advanced super fiendish.

Back to the cricket. Obviously Bell doesn't do Sudoku as I haven't seen any numbers in the 1-9 range on his rows this time round.

[Bernard Stay]

I am confused. surely it is a triple as if you take c7 as a 3 as a working hypothesis then c4 is a 7, c1 is an 8 and no value can go in c2 unless incorrect workings. Is that not a triple then?? (My definitions could be wrong)

dom

I get it, and following it the puzzle comes out, but I am puzzled as to how one is supposed to spot such a triple. The quote above suggest that we have to do a trial and error on such sets of four to see if any of them can be reduced to triples. This is not only daunting but also not really logic - not 'cricket' perhaps (and that looks like it's fast going down the pan!)

[Heuresement]

I get it, and following it the puzzle comes out, but I am puzzled as to how one is supposed to spot such a triple.

After I had managed to grab the Sunday Times mag from my wife, for the second time, I spent ages filling in as many squares as I could using my usual reasoning. Eventually I was stumped, and also could not spot any x-wings. So I decided to starting writing in all the possible candidate digits into each cell. Fortunately, when I started on row 4, I was able to see thr triple very quickly, and combined with the fact that the 8 could only be in the first two gave me enough clues to finish off.

Being truthful, I was really lucky to spot this so quickly. I am interested to know whether other people could mentally spot such a triple without sketching in all the possible candidates into each cell. I always find sketching in possible candidates a dull process and avoid it unless I am stumped. Given the Times current easy output, this is now only on Sundays.