gsf wrote:I'm confused
I've tried to classify the puzzles by technique, even though I know it's impossible to make a puzzle that requires a certain technique. As I decided to count URs as an "advanced technique" I started keeping a separate list of puzzles that could be solved with URs.
I also wrote:I wouldn't let a puzzle that can be solved with an uniqueness rectangle on the list under any other technique.
I think your puzzle is a lot easier to solve with the UR, that's why I wouldn't classify it as a puzzle that requires a length 9 xy-cycle as you suggested.
The problem with adding it to the UR category is that I'm not quite sure if I can count the UR as
one advanced step. The two candidates are eliminated by two different kinds of patterns, even though they happen to be eliminated from the same cell by a rectangle in the same four cells. Candidate '6' is eliminated by what Mike Barker classifies as a "UR+2D/1SL"
here. Candidate '8' doesn't have the strong link and is eliminated by the pattern I've described
here. It is very possible that someone sees the first elimination and not the second, therefore it doesn't fulfill the requirement of one advanced move. It's a tricky situation and I'll have to think about it for a while.
RW