| New 2s pattern spotted today | 
| foilman Kwon-Tom Admin
 Puzzles: 3939
 Best Total: 24m 6s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 14:54:44 Take a look at this pattern which can be found in the top left corner of today's puzzle:-
 
 
 
 Two lines and one cross can be deduced from this.
 
 Last edited by foilman - 2006.02.10 14:55:58 | 
| Stephen Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 5535
 Best Total: 21m 48s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 14:59:52 Nice! (though the pattern has to be bounded by the corner of the board...) I also spotted a new pattern (for me) today (see what happens when we get a very challenging puzzle!) - I expect some of you have this one already, but you can add 2x's and a line to the following:
 
 
 
 Last edited by Stephen - 2006.02.10 15:02:12 | 
| astrokath Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 3258
 Best Total: 13m 42s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:11:33 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by foilman Take a look at this pattern which can be found in the top left corner of today's puzzle:- Two lines and one cross can be deduced from this. | 
Indeed.  That was one point in the puzzle where a lot of progress can be quickly made... you don't want to have an odd number of lines heading into that corner. As for Stephen's pattern - I knew the line, but had forgotten the x's.  That's also a useful pattern to remember.
 
 Last edited by astrokath - 2006.02.10 15:23:36 | 
| drnull Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1053
 Best Total: 23m 25s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:22:18 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by astrokath Indeed.  That was one point in the puzzle where a lot of progress can be quickly made... you don't want to have an odd number of lines heading into that corner. | 
Ahh, I see.  That's slick.  Still pondering Stephen's pattern, though.
 | 
| itchfizzix Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 3070
 Best Total: 17m 57s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:27:43 I'm going to keep working on that first one with the two's... I get the idea, but am not "seeing it" - yet.  The second made sense after I printed it out and tried all possible combinations with different colors.
  | 
| drnull Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1053
 Best Total: 23m 25s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:30:00 
 Ok, that makes sense.  The line part of that had been shown to me before, but I never saw those two x's.  That could be helpful in the future.Quote: | Originally Posted by stephen Nice! (though the pattern has to be bounded by the corner of the board...) I also spotted a new pattern (for me) today (see what happens when we get a very challenging puzzle!) - I expect some of you have this one already, but you can add 2x's and a line to the following: | 
 | 
| drnull Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1053
 Best Total: 23m 25s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:35:26 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by itchfizzix The second made sense after I printed it out and tried all possible combinations with different colors.    | 
It's good to go back and try putting a line where you have the x's, and working out why that can't be true.  Most of these bigger patterns can be broken down to where assuming a line or x creates a contridiction quickly.
 
 Course, I also never liked memorizing formulas in algebra & geometry classes...  I would rather derive them on the test.  Might take a little longer at first, but it keeps you from making silly mistakes later.  And plus, after you've derived it 10 or 15 times, you've learned it instead of memorizing it.
 
 edit: btw, I'm not saying that so much for your benefit (as you seem to be doing just fine on your own) but more for the guys who are new and looking for pointers.
 
 Last edited by drnull - 2006.02.10 15:36:32 | 
| Stephen Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 5535
 Best Total: 21m 48s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 15:36:10 Yes - it was the 2 x's that were new to me too.  Actually it occures to me thinking about it again that the 0 is irrelevant (but was present in today's puzzle) - so long as the 2 has an 'x' opposite the 3.
 | 
| drnull Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1053
 Best Total: 23m 25s
 | Posted - 2006.02.10 18:30:38 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by foilman Two lines and one cross can be deduced from this. | 
You can also get 2 lines from this. (just to simplify it a bit more)
 
 | 
| lodenkamper Kwon-Tom Fan
 Puzzles: 21
 Best Total: 47m 58s
 | Posted - 2006.02.11 02:59:26 
 
 This is a relative of the x23 pattern Stephen mentioned.
 
 Two xs can be deduced here.
 
 - Bob
 | 
| astrokath Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 3258
 Best Total: 13m 42s
 | Posted - 2006.02.11 09:34:03 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by lodenkamper This is a relative of the x23 pattern Stephen mentioned. Two xs can be deduced here. - Bob | 
So they can...
 | 
| chairman Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1397
 Best Total: 17m 32s
 | Posted - 2006.03.31 21:02:29 Today's puzzle contains a new pattern, at least for me it does. Like procrastinator's 2 with x-es on the sw corner, its solution uses   the Highlander argument. The question mark can be a blank spot or any number. The blank spots must be blank.
 
 | 
| tzukanion Kwon-Tom Addict
 Puzzles: 441
 Best Total: 17m 39s
 | Posted - 2006.04.01 05:07:18 Which of the borders in your example are borders of a puzzel and which are not? Does it matter?
 | 
| chairman Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1397
 Best Total: 17m 32s
 | Posted - 2006.04.01 08:50:13 Apologies, I forgot to say that the 2 is on the northern border.
 East and west sides are not involved. I'd better have used some more
 space. Still, the three spots adjacent to the 2 must be blanks, the
 others don't matter. One line and two x-es can be deduced.
 
 
 
 | 
| foilman Kwon-Tom Admin
 Puzzles: 3939
 Best Total: 24m 6s
 | Posted - 2006.04.01 10:15:20 Yes... it's a variation of the other 2s pattern, as you say. Makes sense to me!
 | 
| astrokath Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 3258
 Best Total: 13m 42s
 | Posted - 2006.04.03 11:21:14 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by chairman  the Highlander argument.  | 
Nice pattern, nice terminology!
 | 
| PuzzleLover Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1033
 Best Total: 38m 17s
 | Posted - 2006.04.24 00:41:35 
 If 2 is on the north edge, I can only deduce one x and no lines, and then only if the 1 is on the west edge.  I see no local deductions if you only know 2 is on the north edge.  Am I missing something?  Thanks.Quote: | Originally Posted by chairman Apologies, I forgot to say that the 2 is on the northern border. East and west sides are not involved. I'd better have used some more space. Still, the three spots adjacent to the 2 must be blanks, the others don't matter. One line and two x-es can be deduced. | 
 
 The following three patterns show how every ? above can be either an x or a line.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Last edited by PuzzleLover - 2006.04.24 00:42:19 | 
| procrastinator Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1083
 Best Total: 12m 56s
 | Posted - 2006.04.24 04:20:32 
 This is impossible.Quote: | Originally Posted by puzzlelover | 
 | 
| PuzzleLover Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1033
 Best Total: 38m 17s
 | Posted - 2006.04.24 04:31:19 
 Am I being dense?  I don't see why this is impossible.  Here's one instance of the above.  Is it impossible, and if so, why?  Thanks.Quote: | Originally Posted by procrastinator Quote: | Originally Posted by puzzlelover | 
This is impossible. | 
 
 | 
| procrastinator Kwon-Tom Obsessive
 Puzzles: 1083
 Best Total: 12m 56s
 | Posted - 2006.04.24 04:45:15 
 Quote: | Originally Posted by puzzlelover Here's one instance of the above. | 
And here's the other:
 
 
 
 Do you know what chairman means by "the Highlander argument"?
 |