Comments on: Guardian 24,711 – Quantum

By: Gareth Rees

Gareth Rees — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:34:58 +0000

I have a contrary view on the difficulty. It’s important for newspapers to have easy crosswords fairly regularly, otherwise how would beginners ever get started? It’s really discouraging when you start out and you’re getting only a couple of answers day after day, but very encouraging when you get an easy one and can finish it. I have a family member who’s just getting going with cryptics, and this is exactly the kind of puzzle that I recommend they try: enjoyable and straightforward.

By: Pasquale

Pasquale — Fri, 29 May 2009 06:28:01 +0000

Eric never had a computer and would never have followed these blogs. His puzzles were always in a fairly straightforward Ximenean tradition, devised for the everyday solver rather than the demanding specialist. A good man. And now may he rest in peace.

By: beermagnet

beermagnet — Fri, 29 May 2009 05:25:22 +0000

Ciaran, small point: The serial number of this crossword was 24711.

By: Neil

Neil — Fri, 29 May 2009 00:24:06 +0000

In the revealed circumstances (thank you Pasquale; I didn’t know, as I suspect many of us didn’t), I too now feel discomfited about my earlier unappreciative comments here. Perhaps the crossword editor might care to comment?

By: Arthur

Arthur — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:16:15 +0000

Agree this was particularly easy, but some quite nice misleading surfaces. I’m not keen on 5dn “stickiness” referring to 2dn in which the definition is “it’s sticky” though – in a quick crossword that would be utterly ridiculous so I don’t see why the rules are any different here.

By: liz

liz — Thu, 28 May 2009 22:14:11 +0000

I wouldn’t like to feel that I was inhibited from saying whether I found a puzzle was easy or hard. I think Dagnabit put it very well — we do need the encouragement from time to time and there are ways to make an easy solve more challenging — in my case, I try to see if I can solve in clue order. I did find this one easy, and my daughter, who is learning how to do cryptics, was v encouraged by it. Even so, she said she thought RUNWAY was too easy! She was happier to get fewer of the Paul clues yesterday. So there you go!

By: Fletch

Fletch — Thu, 28 May 2009 21:19:14 +0000

I’m not sure it was a wise decision to continue publishing Quantum’s puzzles posthumously – they’ve mostly attracted unfavourable comment and then someone mentions he’s dead and everyone feels guilty.

By: Ciaran McNulty

Ciaran McNulty — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:00:59 +0000

Ugy –

I’m guilty of starting a lot of blogs in that way, but really it’s a case seeing if a puzzle is ‘easier than normal’ or ‘harder than normal’ for the day of the week (perhaps combined with the blogger’s instinct to show off).

I can guarantee that all the bloggers once found crosswords as tricky as you do at some point, and it’s a case of practice making perfect.

Our most vocal commenters do tend to be the brainiacs, but please don’t let that put you off from commenting!

By: Ciaran McNulty

Ciaran McNulty — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:58:07 +0000

Pasquale – it really doesn’t seem like a year ago, but I should have realised it was posthumous.

There’s an obituary of Quantum here, for those of us with shamefully poor memories:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2008/jun/06/pressandpublishing.crosswords

By: Dagnabit

Dagnabit — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:00:13 +0000

Congratulations, ugy, and welcome!