Times 24,576 A real yawn

62 comments on “Times 24,576 A real yawn”

1. 13 mins. So, yeh, quite simple — for Jimbo at least! Without any checking letters, I managed the ingenious bit of onomatopoeia at 18dn: plinkers! (That was before I found out that the word refers to people better described as “plonkers“.) Anyone else have problems with “urgent” => VEHEMENT at 22ac? Nothing in the big OED supports this, least of all the etymology.
   1. Chambers gives “evincing an urgency”
      1. Thanks.
         Still, it’s hard to think of an example where it must mean just that, unambiguously, and not something else.
         1. What’s wrong with it is that the surface reading is gobbledygook. Compare the just as simple “Burdens will get sorted out in this town” which appears to have a surface meaning. What do you understand the phrase “out of doors sago is OK – till now” to convey?
2. Unsurprisingly, a PB for me of 25 mins. Slight hold-up in the NW (1ac, 2dn & 14ac), as I had no knowledge of the son of King João of Portugal and had to get NAVIGATOR from the wordplay. Last two in were the crossing pair in the NE (7 &11). As a member of a Welsh choir, I really had to know how to spell LLANDUDNO, though my frozen summer holidays in Wales in the mid-60s were spent further south in Tenby. Last in MIAMI. COD to ‘Adam and I …’
3. Disgusted of …

   Even this plodder could have managed today’s offering on the morning commute, at least were I to come up from the town of the curmudgeonly correspondent, Jimbo’s spiritual home.

4. Well there you go. Some days it’s haute cuisine, some days it’s a Big Mac. Thirty minutes for this particular plate of pie ‘n’ peas, and it would have been quicker but for the two NE resorts which held me up at the end. I ran up against a few unknown words – kea, panic grass, llano – but nothing caused too much consternation.

   And without wishing to be quite as scathing as Jimbo, some of the surfaces are pretty dire.

5. This was an amusing, one coffee solve. There were lots of anagrams and easy phrases although I almost slipped up with The First Lesson, thinking it was some Biblical allusion with which I was unfamiliar. Beginners might have trouble with Prince Henry the Navigator and Kea, llano and panic grass are probably little known outside the crossword community. I have never come across the MY abbreviation for motor yacht.

   Why does the editor have runs of hard crosswords and runs of easy ones? Probably because he does not know which are which until we tell him on this blog. Even if he test solves them all himself or gets reports from other test solvers the judgement will be a bit subjective. He can probably only sort them into hardish and easyish piles.

   1. I was going to say something similar, Lenny, but you got here first and said it better.
      1. Sorry, guys but I don’t buy it. If I, an amateur, can readily split puzzles into three groups based upon types and structures of clues and definitions – beginner, intermediary (the usual standard offering), and advanced then so can the Editor who, in my opinion, is actually paid to do it.
         1. One reason for these may be that the editor has other things on his mind when selecting puzzles. He ensures that we never get the same setter or the same grid two days in a row (and I think the same setter twice in the same week is prohibited except for a Jumbo/daily pair). He also does his best to keep recurrences of popular answers apart.

            People here remind us nearly every day that:
            * the only measurable levels of difficulty for a puzzle (how long it takes or whether you finish) depend hugely on whether you get stuck in one or more areas of the grid
            * there is always someone who found an easy puzzle (including today’s) much more difficult than others did, or the other way round with a hard puzzle.

            Here’s further evidence from the only really informative comparison of puzzle difficulty I can think of – the results of Times championship finals as held in the past which show, for each puzzle and solver, the number of right answers and the time taken (all correct solutions only, to the nearest half minute). The first set to hand in my Times champs memorabilia folder is the final of 1996. Looking at the times for the top 5 finishers, and rating puzzles as easy if they took 8 minutes or less, hard if they took more than 12, and medium if between, the following facts show how much the difficulty varies, even for the best solvers of all, who you might expect to stand the best chance of performing consistently (their average times in the same final range from 9 to 11 minutes per puzzle, which is about as close as it ever gets).

            * Every puzzle except No.2 was the easiest of the day for one of the five.
            * Every puzzle was the hardest for one of the five, except for No. 3, which was equal hardest with No. 2 for one of the top 5.
            * For puzzles 1, 3, 4 the fastest solver for that puzzle in the top 5 finishers beat the slowest of those 5 by at least 5 minutes. Oddly No. 2 (the hardest on average) had a range of only 3.5 minutes.
            * Every puzzle except no. 2 (which was medium or hard for every solver) was easy for at least one of the top 5, medium for at least one other, and hard for at least one other.

            Extending the analysis to all 18 finalists, every puzzle was unfinished after 30 minutes for at least one finalist, and every puzzle was solved in less than 9 minutes by at least one finalist.

            I would encourage the editor to continue to worry about the measurable things he worries about, and the quality of the clues. He should NOT worry about the fact that average difficulty for each week goes up and down a bit.

6. Didn’t get on the wavelength here – too like the flat clue-mentality of one of the lesser papers. Also put in ‘the first couple’ for reasons not unrelated to dorsetjimbo’s quibble, which held me up. So 22 minutes for what should have been a sub-15. Alarmed that ‘The Times’ might go populist with the crossword as it has in some cases with its choice of columnists.
7. I read through the clues after printing off at midnight and rather surprisingly little jumped out at me so I abandoned the thought of trying to solve it before sleep.

   This morning it took me 30 minutes. I didn’t know the Prince Henry reference so 2dn was a bit of a struggle and PARAPET as a form of protection is not something I think I ever knew. Didn’t know PANIC = ‘grass’ either.

   I’m quite happy for the editor to offer us simpler fare now and again and after the past two weeks now seems a good time to serve some up. Also I imagine the Times puzzle is aimed at the general readership of the newspaper rather than a minority, however large and vocal, of crossword enthusiasts so they need some easier ones to draw in and encourage new solvers.

   1. Two thoughts, Jack

      Why does the Editor have runs of easier and runs of harder puzzles rather than mixing them up?

      I’m also happy to see some easy puzzles – the argument in favour of them is well rehearsed. But easy doesn’t equate with poor fare. What can one say about clues such as “Out of doors sago is OK – till now”

8. Didn’t time this, but had two stops to go on the Central Line when I finished, so close to 10 I think. Is it worth mentioning that the omitted 12 manages to be a triple definition?
   I’d be happy to use this one when helping others to catch the bug: those obvious anagrams, and even the clunky surface readings, help to flag up how a cryptic clue works, and there’s very little outside a standard vocabulary.

   I used to get regular mailings (by accident) from a ferocious British Israelite from Tunbridge Wells condemning the EEC and the Church of Rome in equal and undistinguishing passion. Happy days!

   1. Wouldn’t that be a bit of a stretch? I’m assuming that ‘into’ is your second definition. Wouldn’t something like ‘is into’ be necessary?
      1. Maybe, but we’ve had “into” for enthusiastic about quite a lot recently (and vice versa) and I’m not clear what into is otherwise doing in the clue. Go into = dig? Go as in “have a go at” or “have a dig at” I get. I would prefer an “is” in there too, but I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch.
         1. Point taken – ‘go into’ = ‘dig into’.
9. I agree that this was very easy and rather poor in some cases (how is 24ac a cryptic clue?) but I failed to see EMCEEING and eventually gave up having convinced myself that it couldn’t be the anagram of PIECE MEG it appeared to be. The resorts in the NE held me up for a while too so even without the M.C. it wouldn’t have been a very quick time.
   Dunce cap for me today.

   1. Sorry that should be 24dn.
      1. It’s just a DD, isn’t it?
         1. Of course but I can’t remember seeing a DD with two such very obvious definitions.
   2. If it is of any comfort to you, I had not met this ugly verb and its hideous spelling till some crossword in the past. I did not believe it existed and had to look it up! It now appears regularly in various places.
      This seemed an easy puzzle – brain only really engaged to sort out the mostly facile plays. Under 10 m and I wonder if PB has a new pb?
      1. It is hideous, isn’t it? No excuse for dienneffing.
      2. Nowhere near I’m afraid. I seem to be edging into the group of regular finalists not quite quick enough to win unless there are a few clues that help them much more than others. It seems a very long time since I’ve been within 2 minutes of my PB (see “About this Blog…” if you want to know what it is).
         1. The ravages of time old chap – and it gets worse with each passing year!
10. 5:07.  Unknowns: MY for “motor yacht” (29ac MY FOOT), Prince Henry the NAVIGATOR (2dn), and the grass PANIC (23dn).

    I agree with Jack that the Times needs a smattering of puzzles as easy as this, but I also agree with Jimbo that puzzles as easy as this needn’t be as dull as this.  If I wanted a Telegraph puzzle I’d know where to look.

    Clue of the Day: the simple but satisfying 25ac (LAP).

    1. I see the Telegraph now also offer a ‘Toughie’ puzzle. Has anybody tried these yet? How do they compare with The Times?
       1. The few I’ve tried seemed no harder than a normal Telegraph puzzle to me. Mind you, I’ve only solved maybe three or four since it started so that’s hardly a statistically significant sample! They’re discussed on Big Dave’s blog, try there for a definitive answer.
       2. I’ve tried a fair number of Toughies, usually in a batch of four at the end of the Tue-Fri toughie ‘week’. Difficulty varies hugely, from puzzles taking 7 or 8 minutes to ones taking 20 or more, or where I surrender on the last clue or two. The puzzle is sometimes billed as “the toughest on Fleet Street”, but my guess is that if you looked at the puzzles in all 5 broadsheet cryptics, that would be true no more than 2 days a week on average.

          The setters also vary, from one or two whose style I seriously dislike to some of the best around. As the DT’s “cluedup” site still refuses to implement any system of telling you who the setter is, I just do the lot in a week and find out from the blog whether I’m anygry with someone I thought was good, or the opposite.

11. When I complete correctly, and without aids, both the Times and the Guardian crosswords in my allotted morning crossword/coffee slot (an hour or less), it suggests that the challenege is somewhat less than usual. My problem: how do I fill my ‘finish off crossword’ slot this evening?
    1. Take up sudoku restricting yourself to super fiendish.
12. Yes, I have completed a couple of “Toughie” puzzles. I think that they rank with the middle range of Times puzzles. Certainly not higher.

    Nothing much to say about today’s: except, Jimbo, ER=HM, not HRH!

13. Jimbo, give some of us lesser mortals a break, we need a bit of encourageemnt as we devlop our skills!
14. Jimbo, give some of us lesser mortals a break, we need a bit of encouragement as we devlop our skills!
15. As one of The Times setters (not of this puzzle), I thought some of you were a bit unfair to my colleagues (including the crossword editor) — not to mention being sniffy about Telegraph puzzles. There’s a whole solving public out there who will feel happy about having an accessible puzzle that guides them along, even at the risk of what you call ‘clunkiness’. You most regular bloggers tend to be at the smart end of the solving public, but daily crosswords aren’t just for you!. If crosswords are to be learnt by a new generation, it’s good that there should be some puzzles (in whatever newspaper) to encourage them.
    1. Very much agree with this point, particularly with respect to the generally dismissive attitude about the Telegraph’s puzzles. I have no figures on which to base this, but looking at the number of people I see solving puzzles on the train I’d guess that the Telegraph has the largest number of regular solvers. I agree that the other broadsheets offer more challenging and generally inventive puzzles, but an availablilty of simpler crosswords is essential if this already esoteric hobby is to avoid disappearing into obscurity.
       1. Perhaps it is worth reiterating that, although “the Times needs a smattering of puzzles as easy as this”, “puzzles as easy as this needn’t be as dull as this”.  I am a positive evangelist for the Times crossword – so much so that I volunteer 1½ hours a week (during term) to teaching students how to solve it – so I’m always grateful for puzzles at the easier end of the spectrum that I can usefully pass on to beginners.  But easy puzzles can only attract new solvers if they are also satisfying, clue by clue.
          1. Well said Mark. Nobody has questioned the need for easier puzzles but offerings such as “some raindrops link reps with change” shouldn’t be allowed in any puzzle.
             1. Whilst I understand the ‘consiliatory’ nature of your comment and also the point of it, I would perhaps add that there is a fairly large correlation between the two things you are attempting to “lift and separate” 😉 I have spent ages trying to understand why some clues are harder than others, setters wavelengths, types of solvers etc, but the repeated answer that comes back is the cleverness of the parsing/surface. Often much of the struggle comes from the subconscious and where it has been taken on initial read. Likewise much of the skill comes from rising above this. It is almost by definition therefore that the easier clues are “clunky” – ie the breakdown and the definition are clear, hence rendering the surface worse off, and the quality lower. The harder clues which are misleading and cryptic in the true sense, are likely also to be smoother, of higher quality and read better on the surface.
       2. Not sure whether being esoteric / obscure / a minority pursuit is a bad thing. I am sure a lot of the contributors on here are quite happy to be in a small but viable community. The fact that the telegraph crossword is numerically more popular is as irrelevant as the fact that the Da Vinci Code outsold the booker winners. It is debatable also whether one begets the other. Does the market for fine wine collapse if the supermarkets stop selling plonk ??
          1. I didn’t mean to suggest that the popularity of the Telegraph’s puzzle means it’s the best. I don’t think it is. But it is perhaps the best at providing truly accessible puzzles, and it’s an important gateway drug for the next generation of solvers. I think writing if off is discouraging for trainee solvers, and is pretty unfair given that many of us will have cut our teeth on that paper’s easier fare. I do agree with Jimbo and Mark that a few of the clues in this one offer little to anyone, however.
             1. What we really need is an example of a puzzle that is of moderate difficulty, witty, and not reliant on cliches.

                Very few of come along, but the blogger should point to them as examples of what can be done.

                1. A couple of nominations from me:

                   From the memories page: Jumbo 780.
                   From puzzles I picked for courses: 23,747

       3. Hear, hear. The first finish-off of a Times by a new solver even if the bloggers deemed it easy must be so encouraging.
16. …to get an easy one I could whip through in 16 minutes.

    Some of the clues were so simple, I had difficulty with them….but not for long.

17. It was certainly very easy (18 minutes for me, and I very rarely solve the Times in a quicker time than that). I agree that some of the clues had poor surfaces, though they weren’t all bad.
    Panic as a kind of grass was new to me.
18. I don’t mind the odd doddle. But this was perhaps on the too easy side.
19. 7.07 so also found it easy , although PANIC was unfamiliar as a grass and I liked the way the clue deceived me at first.
    I am happy with the mix of puzzles served up and I do think they can be roughly, but fairly ,graded into 3 level of difficulty.
    For the general solver it might even be useful to use a SUDOKU type grading as, and those who want to avoid the ‘super fiendish’ can do so, alternatively they can gain a bit of extra satisfaction from getting a completion on such a puzzle ,or knowing that their failure to fathom it is excusable. I believe the Magpie crossword monthly employs a grading – am I right? – so if it is ok for the experts….
    1. I think grading is a tricky area. Times difficulty depends on such a number of factors – eg. a “hard” puzzle is easy if your gk fits, an easy one may be a problem if you are not a UK vocab person.
    2. The Magpie does try to estimate difficulty on a scale from A to E, but my memory from a past subscription is that the solvers often disagreed with the rating.
20. I don’t see any ‘boolean’ gain for “or” rather than “and” in 9D. The answer can be defined by ‘Adam’ or ‘I’, but both ‘Adam’ and ‘I’ can reasonably suggest the answer, unless you want to insist that Adam is unindicated def by example in a multi-faith world (you missed a trick there, Jimbo!). So the setter has a choice of two words and chose the one that gave us a plausible surface.

    On the surface meanings, I’d count the only dire ones as 13, 7, and 18. I’d count 4, 16, 22, 28, 2, and 8 as a bit dull but not dire. That leaves 21 decent ones by my count.

    Easy but elegant puzzles are possible – Brian Greer has it down to a fine art and writes them most Sundays for the Telegraph – I’m lucky enough to write them up on the Big Dave blog. But I don’t know how you find a setting team of 15 Brian Greers.

    1. It’s ironic that this simple, boring puzzle has generated more comments than most – only two puzzles with more comments in the last 3 months.

       😉

21. Anonymous @5.27 is in very good company. On reading that the Provost of Eton timed his soft-boiled eggs by completing the Times puzzle, P.G. Wodehouse wrote to the Editor: “To a man who has been beating his head against the wall for twenty minutes over a simple anagram, it is gall and wormwood to read a statement like that one about the Provost of Eton and the eggs. May I commend your public spirit in putting the good old emu back into circulation as you did a few days ago! Now that the Sun-God Ra has apparently retired from active work, we are intensely grateful for an occasional emu.”
22. Personally, I love easy puzzles because they allow me to delude myself that I’m not really much slower than Peter. Around 9 minutes for this.

    By the by, if anyone else gets driven nuts by LiveJournal’s practise of collapsing all the threads on a busy page like this one, there is a workaround for either Firefox or Opera (not IE that I’m aware of). For Firefox:

    1. Install the Greasemonkey Firefox add-on:
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748/

    2. Restart Firefox

    3. Install the Thread Unfolder script (click the ‘Script itself’ link and it auto-installs):
    http://clear.com.ua/en/projects/firefox/unfolder

    4. Add ?format=light to the URL for the blog page. This script only seems to work if you switch to the light, mobile version of LiveJournal for the Times for the Times blog (I think it’s theme-dependent).

    You’ll see an ‘Expand All’ link next to the ‘Post a Comment’ link. Does what it says on the tin. You lose a bit of formatting with the light theme but it saves a lot of annoyance on days when the comments pile up (you can use the regular theme on other days).

    Opera is a bit more complicated, but if anyone wants to know I can spell it out.

    Use at own risk and don’t blame me if your browser self-destructs (mine didn’t – yet)

23. thankyou john from lancs for articulating shared sentiments (i think i read that phrase in the book how to solve the times crossword), nevertheless notwithstanding the negative comments i am delighted to have finished this puzzle at last!
24. dissapointed with the comments about grading crossword, i have been doing this puzzle for over a year now and this is the first i finished unaided, so was very pleased only to see the snobbish elitist comments
25. Easy? Yes, but easy was what I needed today, missing my usual lunchtime solving session to a school sports day. A few clunkers, but enjoyable for this usually slow solver! COD 9d.

    Jon

26. About 15 minutes here, held up only by misreading the anagrist for the SO FAR SO GOOD clue, so that had to be corrected. Congrats to all those reporting PB’s or first time finishes. Beyond that, it seems that everything else has been said already. Regards to all.
27. Ummm, wow, a plethora of comments. 9 minutes here and breathed a sigh of relief, because I had a huge hangover, was already running late and needed a quick wake-me-up while the coffee was coming.
28. To PB’s 13, 7 and 18 I’d add 19, 20 and especially 6 as dire clues. But it’s the lack of subtlety throughout that makes a good time the only thing to relish: where’s the wit? Is it really snobbish and/or elitist to regret the descent, sorry, move, to a comparatively mechanical and witless operation? I like the Times because it’s harder than the Telegraph, not the same.
    1. My list was of clues with dire surface meanings (or rather a dire lack of convincing surface meaning). Whatever you think about other aspects of 19, 20 and 6, I can’t see what’s wrong with their surface meaning.

       I don’t see a “comparatively mechanical and witless operation” when people were complaining less than a week ago that the puzzles were getting too difficult. The Times is usually harder than the Telegraph but there is no rule that it has to be every day. All the papers have to cater for a range of solvers, as I seem to be reminding people just about daily at present.

Comments are closed.