Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Listener 4222 - 27 By Mango
67 Answers
A very entertaining puzzle which I couldn't put down: a nicely cryptic preamble, some tricky (but fair) clues, an excellent grid and an endgame which had me beaming. The general theme became apparent fairly early on, but pennies dropped until and after the grid was filled.
I have doubts about the precise appearance of the final grid but things will probably resolve themselves when I'm awake.
A great puzzle with which to end the Listener year. Thank you, Mango.
I have doubts about the precise appearance of the final grid but things will probably resolve themselves when I'm awake.
A great puzzle with which to end the Listener year. Thank you, Mango.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Texasetes. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Stared at the completed grid for a while with no inspiration so far, although we see the thematic elements. Comments to date tend to deepen our perplexity, if anything. Can someone please explain (without giving the game away, as it were) what the various references to "English" are all about?
As they say in these parts, Bliadhna mhath ur a-huile duine, when it comes.
As they say in these parts, Bliadhna mhath ur a-huile duine, when it comes.
I think I have done it at last though with little understanding of the theme I really can't be sure. Himself didn't feel it was very true to life but couldn't see a better way of making the endgame happen.
All that said, it was a fun puzzle, not too hard and passed a couple of very wet days nicely. Happy New Year to all.
All that said, it was a fun puzzle, not too hard and passed a couple of very wet days nicely. Happy New Year to all.
Well I thought this was a great and very satisfying crossword. Great fun to assemble and a delightful theme. Probably this is a case of ignorance being bliss but I didn't think this was ambiguous. Some of the best crosswords have incomprehensible preambles such as the mighty Sine Qua Non. Sadly just chucked 4221 away with 2 clues that I am just not going to get. Happy new year to all.
Late again this week after a wild Christmas and New Year at Alekhine Towers. Bit of a recurring theme for me. Must try harder in 2013.
Like others, I do feel there is a measure of ambiguity in the endgame. It seems to me that some assumptions are definitely required in order to comply with the 'down clue' instructions (eg that all shaded cells must be used or that not all shaded cells need to be used; that the solitary thematic item obeys the Laws of Physics or that the solitary thematic item does not need to obey the Laws of Physics etc etc.). And then there is the matter of whether and what to include in terms of any disappearance.
Oh well ... we'll just have to rely on being lucky this time. On which note ... I'm delighted, although a little embarrassed, to announce my second success of the year (after 4195) with 4219. I sent that one in late too, so maybe I was at the top of the pile come the draw.
Like others, I do feel there is a measure of ambiguity in the endgame. It seems to me that some assumptions are definitely required in order to comply with the 'down clue' instructions (eg that all shaded cells must be used or that not all shaded cells need to be used; that the solitary thematic item obeys the Laws of Physics or that the solitary thematic item does not need to obey the Laws of Physics etc etc.). And then there is the matter of whether and what to include in terms of any disappearance.
Oh well ... we'll just have to rely on being lucky this time. On which note ... I'm delighted, although a little embarrassed, to announce my second success of the year (after 4195) with 4219. I sent that one in late too, so maybe I was at the top of the pile come the draw.
There has been much discussion about the relative merits and de-merits of this puzzle. Whilst recognising many of the admirable attributes of this puzzle, I still think it’s pretty poor overall and I would like to have the opportunity to explain why.
Back in the 1960s, the difficult (worth solving) puzzles were by Ximenes, who wrote a book called The Art of the Crossword which became the bible for setters of that period. In those days, puzzles were mostly about solving clues; the theme-based endgame had yet to be invented. Derrick MacNutt (Ximenes) had much to say about what constituted an acceptable clue and what not. As I recall it all boiled down to two simple rules:
1) The setter does not have to say what he means, but he should mean what he says.
2) However hard a clue is, once the the solver has found the correct solution it MUST be 100% clear to him that he / she is correct.
These days we have The Listener with its theme based endgame. If Derrick was still alive, I’m sure that he would demand the same two rules for the endgame.
Let’s look at a couple of examples of recent Listeners to see what this means in practice.
In September 2012, we were treated to Listener 4207 – Loco by Ferret. The rubric was open to a number of interpretations, but when the solver found the correct one he was rewarded with the BR Logo. It is an example of a self-confirming endgame completely obeying Rule 2. The result is a fulfilling puzzle for the solver, many appreciative thanks and hardly any criticism at all. In fact, only a self-confirming endgame can ever truly obey Rule 2.
Now let’s look at Listener 4222 – 27 by Mango. It starts off rather badly by revealing the entire theme at the clue solving stage. And I do mean entire. Not just the general theme, but the exact phase of the theme which is the subject of the endgame. From this point, no self-confirming endgame is possible short of telling the solver precisely what to do. But we have to have an endgame and it can’t be made too easy, so let’s concoct something vaguely (hardly at all in parts) related to theme and then let’s not really tell the solver what to do. The result is a puzzle for which several of us can produce at least 4 different grids, each of which fulfils the demands of the rubric. An endgame which does not lead to a unique solution is utterly pointless. For the solver there’s no real PDM in this endgame – it’s as rewarding as sex without climax.
It is quite possible to study the rubric and have complete understanding of every last nuance of the theme without necessarily producing the correct grid. The only question that the setters appear to be asking of the solver in the endgame is “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?” Well the answer is, “Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.”
It’s a question that didn’t do Michael Howard much good, and it’s one I hope to never see again in a Listener Crossword, though it’s unavoidable to some degree in any non-self-confirming endgame.
I can assure those that think this puzzle is OK that the questions are not coming from those who haven’t studied the rubric. On the contrary, I think we may have studied it too much. You may well have found the required final grid, but just how confident are you really? If Ladbrokes took bets on the Listener would you gamble £20 on your solution being correct? Then let me ask you this. “Would you bet your house on it?” If the answer is negative, then the endgame does not comply with Rule 2.
Well, I’ve had my say now and I’ve submitted my last Listener Crossword. Does this mean I’m throwing the toys out of the pram? Definitely not. I’m going to try my hand at setting. Will I ever do a Listener again? Probably, when the weather is awful and I have some free time, but I won’t submit it. In the meantime, so that we don’t all waste too much time on future puzzles, would the first person to post on this forum each week kindly tell everybody else whether the endgame is self-confirming or not? Thanks.
Back in the 1960s, the difficult (worth solving) puzzles were by Ximenes, who wrote a book called The Art of the Crossword which became the bible for setters of that period. In those days, puzzles were mostly about solving clues; the theme-based endgame had yet to be invented. Derrick MacNutt (Ximenes) had much to say about what constituted an acceptable clue and what not. As I recall it all boiled down to two simple rules:
1) The setter does not have to say what he means, but he should mean what he says.
2) However hard a clue is, once the the solver has found the correct solution it MUST be 100% clear to him that he / she is correct.
These days we have The Listener with its theme based endgame. If Derrick was still alive, I’m sure that he would demand the same two rules for the endgame.
Let’s look at a couple of examples of recent Listeners to see what this means in practice.
In September 2012, we were treated to Listener 4207 – Loco by Ferret. The rubric was open to a number of interpretations, but when the solver found the correct one he was rewarded with the BR Logo. It is an example of a self-confirming endgame completely obeying Rule 2. The result is a fulfilling puzzle for the solver, many appreciative thanks and hardly any criticism at all. In fact, only a self-confirming endgame can ever truly obey Rule 2.
Now let’s look at Listener 4222 – 27 by Mango. It starts off rather badly by revealing the entire theme at the clue solving stage. And I do mean entire. Not just the general theme, but the exact phase of the theme which is the subject of the endgame. From this point, no self-confirming endgame is possible short of telling the solver precisely what to do. But we have to have an endgame and it can’t be made too easy, so let’s concoct something vaguely (hardly at all in parts) related to theme and then let’s not really tell the solver what to do. The result is a puzzle for which several of us can produce at least 4 different grids, each of which fulfils the demands of the rubric. An endgame which does not lead to a unique solution is utterly pointless. For the solver there’s no real PDM in this endgame – it’s as rewarding as sex without climax.
It is quite possible to study the rubric and have complete understanding of every last nuance of the theme without necessarily producing the correct grid. The only question that the setters appear to be asking of the solver in the endgame is “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?” Well the answer is, “Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.”
It’s a question that didn’t do Michael Howard much good, and it’s one I hope to never see again in a Listener Crossword, though it’s unavoidable to some degree in any non-self-confirming endgame.
I can assure those that think this puzzle is OK that the questions are not coming from those who haven’t studied the rubric. On the contrary, I think we may have studied it too much. You may well have found the required final grid, but just how confident are you really? If Ladbrokes took bets on the Listener would you gamble £20 on your solution being correct? Then let me ask you this. “Would you bet your house on it?” If the answer is negative, then the endgame does not comply with Rule 2.
Well, I’ve had my say now and I’ve submitted my last Listener Crossword. Does this mean I’m throwing the toys out of the pram? Definitely not. I’m going to try my hand at setting. Will I ever do a Listener again? Probably, when the weather is awful and I have some free time, but I won’t submit it. In the meantime, so that we don’t all waste too much time on future puzzles, would the first person to post on this forum each week kindly tell everybody else whether the endgame is self-confirming or not? Thanks.
jim360,
It's always difficult to understand nuances when reading the written word, but I'm not sure I like the phrase "stealing them from the rest of us" in your last post. It may have been written tongue-in cheek (in which case I believe it is customary to add a smiley winky thing ... or even 'lol' these days), but it left me with the implication that you feel my successes have been built on plagiarism.
Apologies if I have misinterpreted ... but 'Grrrr' if I have not.
It's always difficult to understand nuances when reading the written word, but I'm not sure I like the phrase "stealing them from the rest of us" in your last post. It may have been written tongue-in cheek (in which case I believe it is customary to add a smiley winky thing ... or even 'lol' these days), but it left me with the implication that you feel my successes have been built on plagiarism.
Apologies if I have misinterpreted ... but 'Grrrr' if I have not.
Charpy's lengthy post deserves a response before this thread dies and he/she rides off into the sunset:-)
No I wouldn't bet the house on my entry for this puzzle because I have been marked wrong in the past for exceedingly trivial reasons. However I would bet the house that 'three of the four different grids several people can produce' would not meet the requirements of the preamble and particularly the final word in the 'instructions'. There's only one solution leading to the final grid.
No I wouldn't bet the house on my entry for this puzzle because I have been marked wrong in the past for exceedingly trivial reasons. However I would bet the house that 'three of the four different grids several people can produce' would not meet the requirements of the preamble and particularly the final word in the 'instructions'. There's only one solution leading to the final grid.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago
ChatterBank14 mins ago
Shopping & Style15 mins ago
I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
Politics17 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.