ab wrote:I agree with Ruud.Ruud wrote:Tarek wrote:any opinions
It would be nice for this thread to stabilize at some point. ... We can always start a new batch in another thread ...
Ruud.
I tend to agree with Ruud and ab, that it would be natural to 'round off' at some point, and end up with a stable collection. For my part, I'm satisfied with filling my quota. It's nice to have as many different contributors as possible, as this guarantees variation, and each contribution is a stimulus for others.
This one shows good variety: Both an x-wing, a hidden triple, a hidden double, a naked pair, and locked candidates. But my counter is not always reliable, as it might count techniques that are 'not needed'... (it has been a useful screening tool though).
- Code: Select all
+-------+-------+-------+
| 3 9 . | . 5 . | . . . |
| . 6 . | . 2 . | . 5 9 |
| . . 4 | 3 . . | . . 8 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 6 . . | . . . | 5 1 . |
| . 5 . | . . . | . 7 . |
| . 4 8 | . . . | . . 2 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 4 . . | . . 1 | 2 . . |
| 2 1 . | . 8 . | . 9 . |
| . . . | . 7 . | . 4 1 |
+-------+-------+-------+