The Times Su Doku Championships

Everything about Sudoku that doesn't fit in one of the other sections

Postby tso » Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:42 pm

PaulIQ164 wrote:Plus the fairly obvious fact that by your logic, breasts are imposed on women by our overwhelmingly sexist society. How can they be congenital when they take fourteen years to kick in?!


Oops, you got me there.

PaulIQ164 wrote:
For example, the idea that men are better at chess was exploded by the Polgar family. ... the father taught 1000 girls who were given similar support, there might not be a single man left in the top 10. ...


I just love how you take a single instance to support your point just after pointing the same thing out as a flaw in an argument.


I'm not clear you mean. Possibly my point was also unclear: Mr. Polgar's teaching method is superior. If he taught 500 boys and 500 girls, all other things being equal, his students might fill most of the 10 ten spots in the world -- only a coin flip would tell you if the top spot would be male or female.

PaulIQ164 wrote:
7) At most levels of school, girls outperform boys. Apparantly, lower IQ is an asset to higher learning.

You said yourself the differences don't kick in for 14 years! Of course the differences won't exist at those levels of schooling. Men tend to pull ahead at later levels, just as the people who made the study would presumably predict.


Women -- at least in the US -- have been outperforming men in college in both the undergraduate and post-graduate levels for some time now. There's been a lot of press about it -- mostly focused on the "fact" that we're somehow failing our boys, that somehow, boys aren't getting what they need, they're being left behind -- the underlying assuption being, not only would boys do better than girls if they had equal footing, but that they *should* do better.
tso
 
Posts: 798
Joined: 22 June 2005

Postby PaulIQ164 » Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:10 pm

tso wrote:I'm not clear you mean. Possibly my point was also unclear: Mr. Polgar's teaching method is superior. If he taught 500 boys and 500 girls, all other things being equal, his students might fill most of the 10 ten spots in the world -- only a coin flip would tell you if the top spot would be male or female.


Yes, I think I misread your post. Sorry.

Women -- at least in the US -- have been outperforming men in college in both the undergraduate and post-graduate levels for some time now. There's been a lot of press about it -- mostly focused on the "fact" that we're somehow failing our boys, that somehow, boys aren't getting what they need, they're being left behind -- the underlying assuption being, not only would boys do better than girls if they had equal footing, but that they *should* do better.

Hey, hang on. Why do you say that the underlying assumption is that boys would do better with an equal footing, rather than that they would do just as well?
PaulIQ164
 
Posts: 533
Joined: 16 July 2005

Postby udosuk » Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:27 pm

tso wrote:
PaulIQ164 wrote:
tso wrote:For example, the idea that men are better at chess was exploded by the Polgar family. ... the father taught 1000 girls who were given similar support, there might not be a single man left in the top 10. ...

I just love how you take a single instance to support your point just after pointing the same thing out as a flaw in an argument.

I'm not clear you mean. Possibly my point was also unclear: Mr. Polgar's teaching method is superior. If he taught 500 boys and 500 girls, all other things being equal, his students might fill most of the 10 ten spots in the world -- only a coin flip would tell you if the top spot would be male or female.

Although not a prolific chess player myself, I couldn't imagine any chess player will agree that brilliance in the game could be "taught", even by someone as "superior" as Mr. Polgar... If chess champions could be manufactured like factory process lines then what's the point of playing?
Is Roger Federer so good because he got the great Australian Tony Roche to coach him for 2 weeks during every slam? If that's the case then the top 10 in men's tennis must all be Aussies... (Okay, inappropriate analogy.) But in a game/sport like chess where adults frequently get beaten by children you'd think raw talent/natural gifts would be much more important than the "teaching". Perhaps the Polgar girls are so great because of their bloods, not their father's teaching.

tso wrote:
PaulIQ164 wrote:
tso wrote:7) At most levels of school, girls outperform boys. Apparantly, lower IQ is an asset to higher learning.

You said yourself the differences don't kick in for 14 years! Of course the differences won't exist at those levels of schooling. Men tend to pull ahead at later levels, just as the people who made the study would presumably predict.

Women -- at least in the US -- have been outperforming men in college in both the undergraduate and post-graduate levels for some time now. There's been a lot of press about it -- mostly focused on the "fact" that we're somehow failing our boys, that somehow, boys aren't getting what they need, they're being left behind -- the underlying assuption being, not only would boys do better than girls if they had equal footing, but that they *should* do better.

There're so many reasons why girls outperform boys... The most prominent ones I could think of being the lack of maturity... that the society "requires" the girls to mature much earlier than boys... As for laziness, it all depends on what kind of activities we're focusing on... Men are generally more lazy on household chores but for other activities (labour, sport etc) I seriously doubt it...

IMHO, saying "men have a higher average IQ than women" is not sexist, just like saying "men have a longer average height than women". But saying "men are generally smarter than women" is surely sexist, and most likely not true. I have long pick up the idea that a high IQ doesn't mean much more than finding out about 3816547290 or figuring out the next entry in the series 1,10,20,110,220,1110,2220,10110,20220.
udosuk
 
Posts: 2698
Joined: 17 July 2005

Postby Karyobin » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:14 pm

udosuk wrote:...a high IQ doesn't mean much more than finding out about 3816547290...


WOW! How did you know my bank account no.?
Karyobin
 
Posts: 396
Joined: 18 June 2005

Postby afjt » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:28 pm

WOW! How did you know my bank account no.?


The way Sudoku has taken off, are you sure it isn't Wayne's bank balance ?
afjt
 
Posts: 82
Joined: 07 September 2005

manual intervention in selecting puzzles for championship

Postby Pat » Sun Oct 23, 2005 10:15 am

PaulIQ164 is quite certain about manual intervention in selecting puzzles for the championship, i just wonder if Pappocom has commented on this matter?
- Pat

PaulIQ164 (2005.Oct.18) wrote:There is an objective difference between a Fiendish and an Ultra-Fiendish.

While they both require you to draw from the same pool of tactics to solve them, Ultra-Fiendishes require these tactics to be used more, and in more complicated combinations than regular Fiendishes.

Do you seriously think the organisers simply pressed for two new Hard puzzles on the computer program and used those? I am sure that they didn't.
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby PaulIQ164 » Sun Oct 23, 2005 12:29 pm

I think either Wayne has a special version of the software that he can use to create fiendishes more fiendish than usual, or else especially hard puzzles were selected manually. Obviously I can't prove it, but it seems likely to me.
PaulIQ164
 
Posts: 533
Joined: 16 July 2005

The Times's version of Sudoku

Postby chrisr » Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:41 pm

Wow, this topic is a big can of worms...

Anyway, speaking as someone who does the newspaper sudokus almost exclusively, I fully understand that The Times Fiendishes don't need anything more difficult than a pair to complete. Newspaper puzzles are supposed to be diverting and fun for the general population, not an entrance exam for Mensa. My mother is still grappling with a typical Fiendish, having finally got to grips with the Difficult ones. If The Times Fiendishes suddenly became Very Hard then she would give up.

However, having said all that, I have discovered X-Wings in newspaper sudokus. Firstly, the "Challenging puzzle for the weekend" sudokus on the back of the Friday Evening Standards waaay back in May/June used them: I was new to sudoku then, and had to resort to trial and error to solve them. All the Evening Standard's puzzles are much easier these days, too: maybe too many people complained? Finally, there is a free newspaper called "The Metro" which I pick up on the London trains every weekday. And while Monday - Thursday puzzles are little more than handwriting excercises, the Friday ones for the last 3 weeks have proved much more interesting.
chrisr
 
Posts: 11
Joined: 19 October 2005

re: especially-hard puzzles were selected

Postby Pat » Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:39 pm

PaulIQ164, your suggestions are entirely reasonable! and i do apologize if the poor phrasing of my earlier Post appears to express any doubts on this matter.
- Pat

PaulIQ164 wrote:I think either Wayne has a special version of the software that he can use to create fiendishes more fiendish than usual, or else especially hard puzzles were selected manually.

Obviously I can't prove it, but it seems likely to me.
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby Bigtone53 » Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:58 pm

All the Evening Standard's puzzles are much easier these days, too: maybe too many people complained?


Perhaps too far OT, especially as this just covers London, but I feel that the Evening Standard's Difficult ones are a good run for their money at the end of the day. Nothing fancy, but not straightforward
Bigtone53
 
Posts: 413
Joined: 19 September 2005

re: puzzles from other sources

Postby Pat » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:32 pm

chrisr wrote:there is a free newspaper called The Metro which I pick up on the London trains every weekday;
their Friday puzzles for the last 3 weeks have proved interesting.


i am interested in a comparison of puzzles from various sources, i think many of our members are likewise interested;
so, how about Posting [Image ] an example - any one puzzle which you deem Worthy?

thanks!
Pat
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: 18 July 2005

Re: re: puzzles from other sources

Postby lunababy_moonchild » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:23 pm

Pat wrote:
chrisr wrote:there is a free newspaper called The Metro which I pick up on the London trains every weekday;
their Friday puzzles for the last 3 weeks have proved interesting.


i am interested in a comparison of puzzles from various sources, i think many of our members are likewise interested;
so, how about Posting [Image ] an example - any one puzzle which you deem Worthy?

thanks!
Pat


Now that's ( [Image ] ) clever:D

Luna
lunababy_moonchild
 
Posts: 659
Joined: 23 March 2005

Good one

Postby Guest » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:32 pm

Pi wrote:just one


This is acctually a good idea, but I cant go along with it.. I'll PM you with my idea. ;)
Guest
 

Postby Pat » Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:21 am

User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby jonallen1966 » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:04 am

The London Evening standard have just started a competion
I've started a thread here :
http://forum.enjoysudoku.com/viewtopic.php?p=14952#p14952
jonallen1966
 
Posts: 25
Joined: 29 May 2005

PreviousNext

Return to General