Times Quick Cryptic 1347 by Joker

Author   william_j_sPosted on Categories Quick Cryptic
A fairly straightforward solve, on the whole, but with some unfamiliar bits and bobs to keep me guessing (that meaning of pet, the paint, the king). Quite a few of the definitions are neatly disguised by the surfaces, and my CoD goes to 10ac as a very nice example.

May is shaping up to be slightly less taxing than April was, methinks – thanks Joker!

Definitions underlined.

Across
1 Not doing enough work missing son is absent (7)
LACKING – sLACKING (not doing enough work) without the (missing) ‘s’ (son).
5 Might be indebted for interrupting press release (5)
POWER – OWE (be indebted) inside (interrupting) PR (press release).
8 Demand partner with qualification (13)
CONDITIONALLY – CONDITION (demand) and ALLY (partner).
9 Nick caught rodent in school (7)
SCRATCH – C (caught, cricket) and RAT (rodent) inside (in) SCH (school).
10 Fawn starts to cautiously run along wooded lane (5)
CRAWL – first letters of (starts to) Cautiously Run Along Wooded Lane. Fawn as in to suck up to or flatter.
11 Ill-treatment almost overlooked around university (6)
MISUSE – all but the last letter of (almost) MISSEd (overlooked) surrounding (around) U (university).
13 Yelped painfully and intensely (6)
DEEPLY – anagram of (painfully) YELPED.
15 Currently batting, with victory impossible for either side (2-3)
NO-WIN – NOW (currently) and IN (batting, cricket again).
16 Dog is mother’s pet? (7)
MASTIFF – MA’S (mother’s) and TIFF (pet). I didn’t know that ‘pet’ had this ‘sulk/huff/tiff’ meaning, so one for me to remember.
19 Difficult to handle emulsion paint gets crazed (13)
TEMPERAMENTAL – TEMPERA (emulsion paint) with MENTAL (crazed).
20 Storm crossing northern line of hills (5)
RANGE – RAGE (storm) surrounding (crossing) N (northern).
21 Shorten a game of cards (7)
ABRIDGE – A and BRIDGE (game of cards).

Down
1 Look, America’s hiding carbon situation (5)
LOCUS – LO (look, as in ‘lo and behold’) and US (America) all surrounding (hiding) C (carbon).
2 US politician having sex with female (13)
CONGRESSWOMAN – CONGRESS (sex) and WOMAN (female).
3 Fool I spot holding electric current (5)
IDIOT – I and DOT (spot) surrounding (holding) I (electric current, from ‘intensity of current’).
4 Some baggage is hazard for hostess (6)
GEISHA – hidden in (some) baggaGE IS HAzard.
5 Severely criticise a revolutionary swagger (7)
PANACHE – PAN (severely criticise), A, and CHE (revolutionary).
6 Nicely equipped plane we’d arranged with pilot (4-9)
WELL-APPOINTED – anagram of (arranged) PLANE WE’D and PILOT.
7 Maybe King Priam’s family and Troy lay destroyed (7)
ROYALTY – anagram of (destroyed) TROY LAY. It could have been any king’s family, of course, but Priam (the King of Troy) helps to lead us down the garden path.
11 Supervisor to check lizard (7)
MONITOR – triple definition.
12 Straight after embracing queen (7)
SINCERE – SINCE (after) surrounding (embracing) ER (queen).
14 Nearly spear a graceful antelope (6)
IMPALA – all but the last letter of (nearly) IMPALe (spear), then A.
17 Utter hurrah with son for clubs (5)
SHEER – cHEER (hurrah) replacing the ‘c’ (clubs) with an ‘s’ (son).
18 Note London School of Economics is wrong (5)
FALSE – FA (note, from the sol-fa scale), and LSE (London School of Economics).

41 comments on “Times Quick Cryptic 1347 by Joker”

  1. I was a bit on the sluggish side this morning, but I don’t recall any specific problems. Liked MASTIFF and ROYALTY. 7:09.
  3. I didn’t find this QC straight forward. I felt I was solving 4 mini grids largely because the long interconnecting clues with the exception of WELL APPOINTED were late solves. FOI LOCUS. Biffs x 3 CONGRESSWOMAN, TEMPERAMENTAL (thought it was an anagram of emulsion paint) and MASTIFF. I finished in the SW corner with SINCERE and finally MISUSE. 11:45 Thanks Joker and William.
    1. I, too, spent quite a while trying to make an anagram out of ‘emulsion paint’ which slowed me down considerably. I’d never heard of Tempera which didn’t help.
  4. I thought there was something different and special about this puzzle: no three letter words,indeed no four letter words; and a range of clues from what I now recognise as the crossword universe – e.g. the lizard and antelope, but no plant today.
    I managed to finish in 12:56. FOI was LOCUS. LOI ABRIDGE after IMPALA. COD to SCRATCH, not too difficult but definition well hidden. David
  5. Nice puzzle – more approachable than many of Joker’s offerings but it had some chewy parts. I only made progress on the right at first and filled the RHS completely apart from a space for LOI CHEER which clicked later. I thought the ’13s’ 2d, 8a & 19a were good and I liked SCRATCH, SINCERE, LOCUS, and NO WIN. I wasn’t quick at 16.48 but was not unhappy (I was interrupted by a nuisance call). Thanks to both. John M.
  6. 30 very pleasant minutes working on another excellent Joker puzzle, but a DNF with SHEER. I just couldn’t sort out the definition and the wordplay although it was in plain sight. A lovely deceptive clue and I don’t mind to being beaten by it. Thanks to Joker, and to William for enlightening me.

    Brian

    Edited at 2019-05-08 09:22 am (UTC)

    1. Also could not work out 17D.
      1d 9h 6m.
      Must keep trying to get under 5m haha.
  7. 27 minutes which for me is not bad at all. Hadn’t heard of tempera and didn’t know that meaning for tiff but it was a decent struggle and nice to get them all right. Must break that 20 minute barrier soon! I have no idea how you folks manage to solve these in 6 minutes.
  8. ….LACKING POWER at the start of this one, and was five clues in before putting pen to paper. After subsequently breezing through three quarters, I was back in the NW corner, and couldn’t hit my crossers. I tried 1D which was still in mint condition, and that did the trick. Nice puzzle.

    FOI CRAWL
    LOI CONDITIONALLY
    COD POWER
    TIME 3:59

  9. FOI, LOCUS, LOI, CONGRESSWOMAN, spent a while trying to make an anagram of emulsion paint. Liked CONDITIONALLY. Nice puzzle. 8:56. Thanks Joker and William.
  10. I enjoyed this teaser from Joker. Just enough help to get a foothold and then some tricky stuff to think about. It came as a bit of a shock to discover that I have been mispronouncing Temperamental all these years, and hence had trouble spelling it today. In fact, I spent ages on 19ac, having first fallen into the anagram trap. I also had no idea about pet/tiff, but the final f was a bit of a give away. 26mins in total. Invariant

    On edit having read further posts below: I post my times (except for those days when I need more than one sitting), not to impress (that goes without saying) but to show others who are not in the F1 club that there are regular solvers who can still find these quite a challenge.

    Edited at 2019-05-08 04:04 pm (UTC)

  11. Last one from Seville in 14.56. Game of two halves, with me falling into most of the above mentioned traps.
  12. I did not find this straightforward To be honest over the last couple of weeks I have struggled. To this I add that reading how easy they are and the solving times in minutes make me think I should give this all up. On the other hand if those that state they do these puzzles in a few minutes also added how many years 5hey have been at it, it might make it a little less depressing for those of us starting out.

    1. Can I encourage you to persevere, as it will get easier with time. I’ve been doing these for about 4 years now, and only very rarely finish under 20mins. I don’t think I will ever get down to single figures, but I still enjoy the challenge. We all started with a diary rather than a clock!
      1. Thanks for the reply. I will and it is interesting that you have been at it for 4 years and take around 20 mins, makes me feel less incapable.
    2. It’s not a race! I do the paper version and never bother with the time taken. I have no idea why others clearly feel speed is relevant. It’s just a bit of fun, isn’t it?
    3. I would be very surprised to hear any of the contributors here, including the very speedy ones, say that they never struggled when starting out. It’s normal and, to be frank, part of the fun. Have a look through the archives and you’ll find many honest examples.

      Did you solve any of the clues? If so, well done – each one is a mini-puzzle!

      Do you understand the answers now you’ve seen the explanations? If so, well done – that is the best way to improve! (If not, please ask).

      Have a look at this, my first blog, and also by Joker:
      https://times-xwd-times.livejournal.com/1079246.html
      I struggled, probably cheated a bit, it took me ages, and I still didn’t understand all of the answers. Today’s took me a shade under 10 minutes, fully parsed as I went along. Oh, and I failed to finish the 15×15 today and yesterday. It would be very boring if it were easy.

      1. My experience is very much the same as invariant, we both started about 4 years ago and now I usually finish in 20 to 30 minutes but still have the occasional DNF.
        The strange thing is my progress wasn’t gradual. I was stuck on 2 or 3 plus the blog for months, then half-way for ages. Then suddenly I was finishing in about an hour , then reduced my target to 45 minutes, then 30 and now 20.
        Keep at it and keep posting your comments, it will help any new solvers starting at the same time as yourself.

        Brian

        Edited at 2019-05-08 12:36 pm (UTC)

    4. I’ve been solving for just under 3 years. Year 1 was pretty much defined by DNF. By the end of year 2 I could solve most but not all QCs in about 30 minutes. The Year 3 target for me was to break 10 minutes, which I have, but more often than not I complete a solve in 10 to 20 minutes. Please don’t get discouraged. I find that the posting of times is useful. If a seasoned solver is posting a time near to my 10 minute target then it just means the QC is a bit of a stinker. If a QC is described as ‘easy’ it often means that the wordplay/definitions have cropped up more than once before. Regards Janet
  13. In the light of the above, this seems an opportune moment to re-post an excellent contribution from Nick the Novice, who posted this on 29 November 2017.

    “OK, let me attempt to deal with this recurring observation from Horryd once and for all. There is a fair amount I want to say about this, so please bear with me.

    When the QC first came out in March 2014, I had the privilege of being invited to be a blogger (I had recently discovered the TftT forum as a genuine novice attempting the 15×15, and the then site administrator – Linxit – thought it would be a good idea to have some newbies blogging the new QC). I blogged QC number 3, and have continued as a QC blogger ever since.

    The original statement of intent with regard to the role of the QC (by Richard Rogan, then Times crossword editor) was as follows: “it will be reduced in size and hopefully in difficulty too [relative to the 15×15], the intention being to introduce new people to cryptic crosswords, and to encourage those solvers who’d like to have a go at the main puzzle but feel daunted by it, or who can perhaps only solve a handful of clues”.

    What happened? In the first couple of months, some new solvers started contributing to the TftT QC blogs, which was great. However, the majority of comments on the QC were from seasoned 15×15 campaigners who (as per the convention on the traditional TftT 15×15 blog) published their completion times – some of which were around the 4 minute mark.

    Not surprisingly, the genuine newbies (i.e. the target market) found this intimidating / dispiriting, and a number of them raised this as an issue in the forum. This seemed eminently reasonable to me. A newcomer who is thrilled to have completed a QC in, say, 45 minutes who then goes to the forum and finds that most people are claiming completion times of 5 minutes or so is probably going to feel like a complete failure – whereas in fact they should be congratulated on their achievement.

    As a result of these comments, there was something of a “policy” debate around month 3 of the QC as to whether it was appropriate for people to post their QC completion times. Of course, as a purely for fun hobbyist’s forum, the outcome of the debate was never going to “bind” anyone to any particular future conduct. However, bloggers and commenters were (to a degree) galvanised into taking a stance.

    My personal conclusion was very clear. Given the intent of the QC, it seemed to me entirely wrong in principle to intimidate newcomers by posting completion times. Others took a different view – and of course, that’s fine too. But I have to remain true to my view. If this is unacceptable to the majority of the commenters on the QC site then I will happily resign my blogging spot.

    In addition to the overall “philosophical” viewpoint stated above, I would also make the following more specific points:

    1. The “etymology” point seems to me a complete red herring. When the TftT site was set up, the QC did not exist. The QC is a totally different animal. It is a good thing that the TftT site embraces the QC: it would be a bad thing if traditional aspects of the TftT site (such as giving solution times) undermined the overall intent and purpose of the QC.

    2. Individual completion times seem to me a complete irrelevance in terms of indicating the degree of difficulty of a puzzle. Some might regard a 30 minute solve as indicating an “easy” solve: for others “easy” might equate to 5 minutes. It all depends on your level of experience and overall capability.

    3. I personally think an indicator of “degree of difficulty” is useful – hence my use of “quite tricky”, “fairly straightforward” etc. etc. This seems to me far more useful than a solving time, given the point made in 2. above.

    4. Finally I’ve personally never understood the interest in completion times for crosswords anyway. I suppose if you are someone who enters the competitions then these things matter. However, I’ve always regarded crosswords as a fun recreation rather than a competitive thing (I get plenty of competitive adrenalin flowing in my ‘real’ life). Rather, one might (in a loose kind of way) equate doing a crossword with recreational sex: it’s fun, and the longer it goes on the better – do you set a stop watch?”

    1. Thanks for posting Nick’s comment; I’d forgotten all about him, I’m ashamed to say. If I may repeat something I’ve said on this subject earlier, this blog is not connected in any way, other than its subject matter of course, with the Times, which has its own blog. Specifically, it is not part of the purpose of the bloggers or commenters to conform to the goal of the QC as outlined, for instance, by Richard Rogan. Thus I don’t see (Nick’s point 1) how this site can be said to undermine the purpose of the QC.
      I have several times pointed out that 1) I was terrible at these when I started (about 12 years ago), and 2) it never occurred to me to feel intimidated or discouraged by the times of those much better than me. That lots of people–lots and lots of people–are better than me on just about any measure one can think of is simply a fact of my life. If reading other people’s times bothered me, I’d stop reading their comments.
      1. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong here.

        I posted NtN’s thoughtful and interesting contribution because I wanted the discouraged anonymous poster to see that whether to post times is a matter of debate, so they are not alone.

        I don’t mind the fast posters putting up their times because I find it a useful yardstick. (My standard time is 10-15 mins; my record low is 5:30 and my record high is off the charts!) It’s like watching the Premier League if you’re a Sunday League footballer, or watching Ski Sunday if you’re a once-a-year skier. Some people, and I am one of them, enjoy marvelling at the skills of others, and possibly even seeking to emulate them. That’s why I tend to record my times in Kevins rather than in actual minutes – I find it more interesting to see how I did relative to the best solvers.

        But if you find the times of others depressing, better to stick to the blog till you improve!

        Templar

        Edited at 2019-05-08 03:08 pm (UTC)

    2. A very helpful posting. Thanks to templarredux for resurrecting the detailed thoughts of Nick the Novice. I do find myself agreeing with almost all of this. Some years ago, I found I could rarely complete the 15×15 and, when I did, it was often with work colleagues over coffee and lunch breaks.
      I was therefore grateful when the QC began and I have done every QC since no. 1. I was pleased to have a cryptic puzzle that I could complete every day although it took me quite a while to get in the swing of things and I often had a few clues that required a bit of background information to solve. I now manage times between 10 & 30 mins with the occasional shorter or longer time. I do the Torygraph Cryptic in a slightly longer time (when we shop in Waitrose and I get a free copy) and I derive very great pleasure from the Eye Crossword every couple of weeks.
      I recognise that I started to include my solving times when I signed up to this blog a) because others did it and b) because, like so many people, I quite like to compete with others of roughly similar solving ability.
      I have seen despondent (and even hostile) entries from some newer solvers and, from time to time, have joined others in responding honestly and encouragingly to these posts because it does take time, determination, and some encouragement for most of us to improve our skills in any endeavour.
      I have had increasing concern that the small number of people who post consistent times in the 5min region (and those who apologise if they take more than 4 mins!) are following a different agenda to most of us and may not be adding much to the sum total of human endeavour. Perhaps they might be happier on the Times Crossword site where they can compete in true ‘Bletchley Park’ fashion with other gifted solvers. However, on brief reflection, I guess that is a bit unfairband there shoukd be room for us all provided we are mindful of the range of QC solvers.
      I think our esteemed Main Bloggers do a superb job and I am more than happy to have times as well as parsing notes from them because they help to give a measure of the difficulty of a puzzle, being informative rather than competitive. That said, I note that William did a great job today without posting a time.
      I have resolved to post my reactions to future QCs without including a time. I will simply use that for my own amusement.
      Sorry for the long, boring post but I do think that, as a Community, we need to focus more on the aspiring and middle-of-the-road solvers (like me) and encourage new entrants in discovering the pleasure of Crossword solving rather than risk making them feel inadequate. Most of us have been there! John M.

      Edited at 2019-05-08 02:33 pm (UTC)

      1. Not boring at all! As above, I don’t think there’s a one size fits all and some may find the fast times inspiring. but do keep on encouraging newbies, that’s marvellous.
      2. I stopped posting a time in the intro to my blogs during one of the last outings of this subject! A strange decision really, given how slow I often was, and therefore unlikely to dishearten anyone.

        I will continue in this vein, a la Nick, despite being the only blogger now to do so. Unfortunately, this means I have to carefully choose my ‘indicator of degree of difficulty’, and I think this gets me into more trouble than would just saying how long it took!

      3. Nice! Thank you, John. I am one who does not time myself, because I know I would try to speed up and spoil the fun for myself. If I get approximately 20 to 30min of enjoyable challenge, I have no desire to shorten it. Sal
    3. Just off upstairs now to introduce my wife to “quick cryptic” as a handy euphemism…
      Tim (not that Tim)
  14. A lovely puzzle from Joker, especially given the grid shape. All generally ok once the long clues fell. On the day it’s reported that people are having less sex, it’s good to see US politicians bucking the trend. I share views that the QC should not compete with the 15×15. We need to encourage beginners that they will definitely improve with time and not solving every clue often improves you. Everyone has a right to post what they want but experienced solvers tend to post first so just ask that they are mindful. Nice blog.
  15. 25 minutes, good for me with little sleep after the football.

    I quite like seeing the times as it shows the difficulty, and whether solvers were on the setters wavelength.

    I started in the middle of 2016 and now aim for around 20 mins. I have a go at the 15×15 most days and complete around 50-100%. Work gets in the way.

    Loi the unparsed temperamental.
    Cod conditionally.

  16. I enjoyed this one from Joker which I found to be at the gentler end of the spectrum with only the unknown paint and LOI SHEER causing any problems.
    I thought there might be some sort of nina going on when I saw the answers to 1 and 5a but nothing more sprung to mind.
    Completed in 8.50, having attempted approximately 1347 QCs to date and taking somewhere around 6 to 9 months before I eventually completed one.
    Thanks for the blog
  17. A very late post so probably no one will read it but I just wanted to say how very much I value the comments, advice, insight and guidance that is available in this blog. It’s a privilege to belong to this group.
    I’ve been attempting the QC for about a year now. I very rarely fail to finish it but I also rarely manage to complete it in under 20 minutes. I’m not sure that matters. I just enjoy the mental work out.
    I think the QC must be a different animal to the 15 x 15. I mostly don’t attempt the latter but, whenever I have done so, I have found it extremely difficult. This makes me conclude that for those who habitually finish the bigger, harder crossword, the quicker, smaller one must be a walk in the park! But those contributors who answer both crosswords are assiduous, it seems to me, in their encouragement of those who are less proficient. As in, people like me.

    I enjoyed today’s crossword. It took me 35 minutes so considerably longer than normal but it was still fun. Thanks so much, blogger and setter and all contributors today and every day.

  18. I enjoyed this, for me, challenging puzzle, with plenty of well-formed surfaces and deceptions. Enjoyed SCRATCH, and it took a second look to see SHEER. LOI CONDITIONALLY, which I thought beautifully constructed. I only give times if I’m excited by what I achieved – which for me is anything close to or less than 30 minutes. From the discussion above, after a few hundred more puzzles I may be able to set a target of 20 minutes. That may be several more years in the future! I’ve always found this blog to be encouraging, and don’t mind the times. Arguably it might be nice to see more slow times listed to give balance, but I suspect that most of the slower solvers like me tend not to finish the puzzle at a single sitting, and would find it hard to give a time anyway.

    Thank you Joker – and at least I finished, which wasn’t often the case with Joker when I started.

  19. Sal, thanks for your comment. Since I posted my comment, I have had quite a few responses from people who do like to compare times, at least approximately. So, I have agreed to post an approximate time on the ‘Kevin’ scale to give a rough idea. Kevin Gregg always completes the QC early and posts a time so, like templarredux and others, I will post nxK hoping to be under 4K if possible. I have been surprised by the number of people who like the points of reference provided by the times of other solvers whose names they recognise. I’ll see how it goes…..

Comments are closed.