« NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP | Main | Welcome Message »
GAMES '08 Thread
A thread to discuss contests within the confines of the issue. (I'll try to spend more time here.)
Comments
Dibs. Yes, AlphaCube (2/08) seems like a good contest. The wild card doubling cube idea makes this one fresh. I'm enthused to try a GAMES contest again.
Breaking News: The versatile Jesse Kolman of Goodyear, AZ gets runner-up props for Five By Five.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Nov 24, 2007 10:48:41 PM
I'll have the answers to State Your Case on Monday.
JM
Posted by: JmSR | Dec 2, 2007 8:01:29 AM
The clarification for the Alphacube contest is now posted on the GAMES website.
Posted by: Laurie | Dec 4, 2007 6:23:00 PM
Hi...
To Bob Lodge -->
Your e-mail server is giving me the message "user is over quota" again....
I think the service you use only allows you to store so many e-mails from one address...
Would you purge some of my old e-mails to make room so that I can e-mail you?....
Best regards...Jim
Posted by: Jim from Minnesota | Dec 11, 2007 1:08:50 PM
For those working on the AlphaCube contest, it looks like the example cube given can spell out eight names, not seven. NUNAVUT can also be spelled.
Posted by: Clive | Dec 27, 2007 2:02:56 AM
They're not updating the Games site, surprise, surprise. Anyone solve online #15?
Posted by: Ross | Jan 8, 2008 2:18:10 PM
The online contest pages tend to be updated about a week after the deadlines...so I expect they'll do something with it in the next day or two.
I did solve the contest. The contest rules specify that if they don't get 5 correct entries, they'll extend the deadline and start posting clues...so I'll keep quiet for now about the solution.
Posted by: susy | Jan 8, 2008 3:18:35 PM
The online contest answers have been posted.
Posted by: Jeff | Jan 9, 2008 5:28:18 PM
With the sad Packer loss yesterday, I'm ready to switch sports...Counting the days until March Madness!
Posted by: Paula | Jan 21, 2008 1:10:48 PM
Wow...I haven't been to this site in quite some time. I know it's a little late, but "Happy New Year" everyone. I, too, am counting down the days until March Madness (IV already?) begins, which means I have to get the puzzle-making gears in motion as well. On another note, I not only solved online contest #15, I was one of the lucky 5 winners! I haven't really looked at #16 yet, but at least I know my GAMES subscription is good for another year!
Posted by: Sean F | Jan 22, 2008 2:50:38 PM
I'll put a call for submissions soon.
Posted by: JmSR | Jan 22, 2008 3:43:40 PM
There's a new Scrabble contest from the National Scrabble Association: www2.scrabble-assoc.com/subitems.asp?id=39&sid=157&ssid=108
The word list used in the contest is at: files.j--a.net/OWL2.txt
These word-crunching contests may appeal to many of us.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Feb 2, 2008 3:35:21 AM
Forgot to add, short contest period - deadline is 2/15.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Feb 2, 2008 3:37:16 AM
I'm so sorry - staying up too late tonight. The word list link I posted also contains additional, longer words which are acceptable for North American Scrabble, but not for this contest (because they don't appear in the OWL2, the Scrabble reference for shorter words). All words 2-9 letters long are acceptable for the contest. The only longer words in the list which are also acceptable are noun plurals, verb inflections, and adjective comparatives and superlatives of base words 2-9 letters in length in the list. To take an example:
ABDOMEN
ABDOMENS
ABDOMINA
ABDOMINAL
ABDOMINALS
are all acceptable, but
ABDOMINALLY
is not. I know this makes the list as a reference seem quite sketchy, but given the extra conditions I just outlined it is a reliable reference.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Feb 2, 2008 3:54:35 AM
Hi guys! I've been stumped on this puzzle for weeks and am wondering if anyone here can help me out.You are the smartest bunch of people I know. :-)
All I know is that I need to decode this and that it has something to do with "paint". (This is also how the spacing appears in the puzzle)
64 670 670 174 2470 244 284 2870 2836 5336 534 5370 596 5970 8470 844 596 10670 1154 12370 11939 11139 129701294 14170 1524 15270 16070 20270 18470 1844 1654 2024
Posted by: Paula | Feb 4, 2008 10:47:28 AM
Oops - typepad changed the spacing. There should be an extra space between numbers 6&7, 12&13, 17&18, 26&27
64 670 670 174 2470 244 284 2870 2836 5336 534 5370 596 5970 8470 844 596 10670 1154 12370 11939 11139 129701294 14170 1524 15270 16070 20270 18470 1844 1654 2024
Posted by: Paula | Feb 4, 2008 10:52:16 AM
So you mean there is a double space between 244 and 284? Maybe each number encodes a letter and each group separated by the double spaces is a word. The 129701294 seems to stand out.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Feb 4, 2008 6:54:55 PM
It looks like you can split each number into two components. Each number ends with 4, 6, 36, 39, or 70. The remaining remnants of the numbers then form a generally ascending sequence, although that sequence does descend at certain points. I'm pretty sure "129701294" should be "12970 1294", unless concatenating the numbers is supposed to signal something like a hyphen in the decoded message.
Posted by: Alan Lemm | Feb 4, 2008 9:29:14 PM
Alan>It looks like you can split each number into two components.
Ah, yes. Now graph it! I can't quite understand the word though...
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Feb 4, 2008 10:51:23 PM
Oh, OK, I see...
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Feb 4, 2008 10:56:45 PM
I too thought the numbers were some sort of co-ordinates for a graph. Haven't worked it out yet.
Posted by: Toni | Feb 5, 2008 8:42:46 AM
AHHHHHHH -
Thanks guys. I knew you were the right people to ask. I had already identified the 70's and the increasing sequence but was stuck in the thought of assigning alpha values to the numbers. Never tried to graph...
Posted by: Paula | Feb 5, 2008 9:35:21 AM
I just figured it out. Anyone else?
Posted by: Alan Lemm | Feb 5, 2008 12:26:04 PM
Jackie Chan, 1998 :)
I'm dying to discuss progress on AlphaCube, so if anyone wants to compare scores (not answers), send me an email.
Posted by: seanriddle | Feb 7, 2008 10:28:02 PM
Received 4/08 today. Hidden Contest, and "Spliced Films", creative contest involving overlapping movie titles (interestingly, documentaries and tv movies disallowed, but not made for video or porn....); 11/07 Running Mates results.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Feb 10, 2008 5:11:40 AM
I found enough of the Hidden Contest to say I found it, but I'm still debating on how to adequately complete the task. Good luck.
Posted by: Sean F | Feb 20, 2008 3:47:46 AM
Uh, oh. I forgot there was a hidden contest, and already ripped out pages for my students. Oooohhh...that's not good.
Posted by: Scott | Feb 20, 2008 11:28:13 AM
I too, have found the hidden puzzle. but don't know how to complete it...I give up. I'll just wait on the answers to be published.
Posted by: Konali | Feb 27, 2008 8:43:53 PM
Konali, Keep in mind that finding the Hidden Contest is usually the "hard" part. Once you find it, the interpretation is often broadly accepted. I just haven't figured out how ridiculous my entry will be. Good luck!
Posted by: Sean F | Feb 28, 2008 3:41:16 AM
Since I bought the magazine, I've carried it around everywhere I go staring at the grid. I don't think that page is legible anymore. The rest of the magazine...just like new...LOL! I think I will take a stab at the regular contest. Seems like fun!
Posted by: Konali | Mar 1, 2008 6:20:14 PM
Games online contest 16 solutions are posted. It all seems quite arbitrary...How do you know to pick those series? Did anyone get this right?
Posted by: Ross | Mar 3, 2008 10:58:41 AM
I was able to get the correct answer to online #16 -- you did not have to guess what the simpler sequences were going to be, just recognize them from factoring B and looking at C. But I did not receive a response...
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Mar 3, 2008 8:54:50 PM
I, too, was able to get correct answer to online #16 at the last minute (on 2/29!), but given that I was a #15 winner, I don't expect to receive a "you're a winner" response this time around.
Posted by: Sean F | Mar 4, 2008 10:59:13 AM
The AlphaCube contest is now over.
My grid had only 23 names. I was hoping to get about 25.
Posted by: Laurie | Mar 4, 2008 11:44:08 AM
Laurie- I got 24 names, 167 total letters. Three others emailed me saying they got the same.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Mar 4, 2008 11:21:12 PM
Just curious -
Did anyone use programming for Alphacube or did you do it by hand?
Posted by: Paula | Mar 5, 2008 10:28:45 AM
>Did anyone use programming for Alphacube or did you do it by hand?
Yeah, programming again...it was a fairly easy problem for programming.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Mar 5, 2008 2:44:33 PM
I still use the pencil and paper approach.
I would appreciate if someone could post the 24/167 grid.
Posted by: Laurie | Mar 6, 2008 4:49:09 PM
The May GAMES and GWOP are in the mail.
GAMES has the editors' picks for the I.D. contest from December, which drew 320 entries. New contest involves colored squares in a 15 x 15 grid, you are to find the two largest rectangles that contain the same color pattern.
GWOP reports 1,224 correct entries ("PIECES OF EIGHT") for their November Octogon Contest. New contest is a "Hedgehogs & Worms" puzzle, like that in April Games.
Helen Chao of NYC won t-shirts in both contests.
Posted by: Jeff | Mar 6, 2008 7:42:17 PM
Laurie-
I also tried paper and pencil, but my PC beat me.
Here's my solution: http://www.datalytixllc.com/alphacube.html
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Mar 6, 2008 10:27:21 PM
I was also a runner-up in the ID contest and I'm very curious to see what the Grand prize entry was ...
Gary Disch
Posted by: Gary from Canada | Mar 7, 2008 9:28:24 AM
Is anyone working on Online #17? I've ended up with one left-over letter string and the instructions state there shouldn't be any left over. My solution works otherwise, and gives me a three-word solution.
Did I miss something?
Posted by: susy | Mar 8, 2008 7:49:10 AM
Susy, I just worked through online contest #17 and ran into the same problem. I've written to GAMES about it, but I know I won't be the first to bring it to their attention. We'll have to see if they'll revise it online, especially since there's so much time before the April 30th deadline. Good luck to you.
Posted by: Sean F | Mar 8, 2008 11:33:02 AM
Got the same here, but I wonder if the leftover sequence can be included in one of the answer words as a variant spelling. We're probably all looking at the same web pages near the top of the google results.
Posted by: jim miller | Mar 8, 2008 9:47:08 PM
They took out the extra sequence. (Whew!)
Posted by: Ross | Mar 10, 2008 10:29:19 AM
I'm getting a "snazzy Games t-shirt" for being a runner-up in AlphaCube. I'd prefer the $500; I've already got 3 Games t-shirts (all black).
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Mar 10, 2008 2:32:07 PM
Just got the notice that I'll be getting a snazzy T-shirt as well. From emails after the fact, my grid was essentially the same as Sean's, but rotated and with irrelevant letters permuted. Would be nice if the mag started branching out into XXL shirts, but I'll take what I can get.
Posted by: Dave S | Mar 10, 2008 6:13:59 PM
I too got a "runner-up" confirmation for the AlphaCube contest today. Anyone know who the winner was, how many state/province names spelled out? My entry was 24. I actually found three fairly different 24-name options, so I sent in the one with the most characters, but it wasn't quite good enough, I guess!
Posted by: Ken Caviness | Mar 10, 2008 8:29:37 PM
Online Contest #17 update -- I received confirmation from Wayne (Editor at GAMES) that TCH was irrelevant and has been removed from the list of letter strings. Thanks again, Susy, for questioning it -- you were right!
Posted by: Sean F | Mar 10, 2008 8:35:15 PM
I'll lay down $10 that the winner of AlphaCube is Jesse Kolman of Goodyear, AZ.
Posted by: jim miller | Mar 10, 2008 9:01:00 PM
I wonder if anyone can tell me which issue contained the "Double Cross" chapter in Mike Selinker's ongoing PuzzleCraft series (now up to #41!). I suspect it was a few years back, and I can't find the issue.
Double Cross is such an elegant puzzle type, with the trivia and grid each helping the other as they materialize; I want to play around with designing one. Bob Lodge based some of the best contests on difficult Double Crosses. (How about another, Bob?) A huge challenge it must be to employ clues which are somewhat internet-proof. In college (c.1993) I remember exploring the library to solve contests like those, and the Matchagrams (with 40 answers pairing into near-anagrams)... Does GWOP still do that one?
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 11, 2008 4:03:24 AM
Online puzzle done. That one was easy...(RELAtivELY)...
Bring on the Madness!!!!
Posted by: Paula | Mar 11, 2008 1:24:05 PM
The Double Cross was Puzzlecraft #8 from December 2004.
Posted by: Laurie | Mar 11, 2008 8:15:29 PM
Has anyone tried Scribe (a game published in Games July 2007, pages 68-69, with tic-tac-toe-like squares and "glyphs")? Is it fun? Challenging? Any comments would be appreciated.
Posted by: msh210 | Mar 12, 2008 12:12:08 PM
Kevin, what a coincidence, I have been working for the past few months on a puzzle I am calling Ultimate Double Cross, which I think like Ultimate Calculatrivia might warrant four stars! I intend to submit it to GAMES when it is finished, which may be another month or two yet, and IF they deem it publishable (it is quite long!) I would request they hold off until fall so it might be possible for teachers to use in classroom projects, as they have some of my past puzzles. At the rate I'm going it wouldn't likely show up much sooner anyway.
My UDC puzzle is not intended to be Google proof, in fact might be very difficult to solve without the internet. Without giving anything away, I can say it differs from others in that the 300-letter grid is not numbered sequentially, but instead the answer list is numbered in order (leaving the grid a scramble), and additionally most of the 29 answers are not shown in letter blanks, leaving their length unrevealed, except you are told the number of letters is a multiple of 3! Only every 5th answer is shown the traditional way, (accommodating answers NOT 3x letters long), and also revealing the total number of letters in each cluster of 4 "hidden" answers.
Then the real kicker--the completed grid is a CRYPTOGRAM, so it is next to impossible to work in two directions! You just have to find all the answers and then fill in the grid. As you might imagine, working it out through the sieve of a crypto key was very challenging, but I have finally crossed the hurdle of "is it even possible" and am now fine tuning clues. As with many of my puzzles, it is rife with ZIP codes, maps of U.S. counties (remember your tour through Texas?), and very heavy cross-referencing of other clues.
If it is too much for GAMES (I think it would take 5 or 6 pages, at least!) I would eventually make it available here, but I am in hopes they can see fit to do it as a special section, or whatever. First I have to finish it, though.
Still no computer at home, so I hit the library daily and save to a thumb drive!
Posted by: Bob Lodge | Mar 12, 2008 6:48:29 PM
Is anyone else drooling over this? After some of the more recent contests, this would be a welcome challenge.
Maybe a year for the entry deadline?
Posted by: Jay Winter | Mar 12, 2008 7:21:26 PM
How can such evil sounding things be adapted to the classroom? (Although some guys in my class spell words like they were crytograms.)
Posted by: Scott | Mar 13, 2008 8:19:16 AM
Scribe -- I have not tried it, but looks interesting. If you'd like to try a game with me, you can challenge me on Richard's PBEM server:
http://www.gamerz.net/pbmserv
my userid is mmammel
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Mar 13, 2008 1:33:00 PM
To: GAMES Editors (and I know you're out there keeping tabs on these discussions)
Re: Potential new Bob Lodge contest
Please seriously consider fast-tracking Bob's Ultimate Double Cross contest for publication in either GAMES or GAMES World of Puzzles. Some of us have been anxiously waiting for this ever since Ultimate Calculatrivia. We truly enjoy the mental exercise that Bob's contests provide. Even if it seems lengthy, just devote a "special section" to it. Thank you for your consideration.
NOW, just tell me when it will be published and I'll try to get a week off from work . . . .
Posted by: MartinD | Mar 13, 2008 2:51:42 PM
Oh yes, Bob, I remember... I remember every detail. The Germans wore gray, you wore blue. If it's December 1941 in Casa Blanca, New Mexico, what time is it in New York?
Always loved those Zip codes and curious geography. This new one sounds like an elephant of a contest. Yikes, you've removed the back-and-forth aspect... That was a fun thing in tough Contest doublecrostics, where taking a stab at possible words in the grid can lead to "eureka" moments in the clue answers. But no matter -- we're eager for your next sadistic challenge (our reputations are on the line, after all :).
(And thank you, Laurie, for the Puzzlecraft info.)
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 13, 2008 7:46:31 PM
Happy Pi-Day Friday everyone!
Posted by: Paula | Mar 14, 2008 9:40:34 AM
Mmmm...delicious mathematical goodness! Thanks, Paula!
(My room at college is also 314 so I have lots of fun with that as well)
Also, you're making me salivate with that upcoming puzzler, Bob--and good luck with creating yours, Kevin! That's one thing I've always wanted to create but never could put the time and proper effort into. Keep us posted!
And, yay, March Madness! Can't wait for more challenges there, and I most certainly self-avowed to send in a bracket regardless since I think last year's champion won on account of some very shrewd guessing, haha.
Posted by: Mike | Mar 14, 2008 3:39:16 PM
FYI, below is my 24/167 solution to the AlphaCube contest. It's the best I found, either by hand or with a Mathematica program I wrote. So far, apparently no commenter in this forum has mentioned having a better solution, but none of us got the first prize. Therefore either there is a better solution or the actual winner got his/her answer in first. Does Games Magazine eventually get around to announcing the winner's name and the winning answer?
P D Z
Q N T
C U G
H I M
S A O
V E W
X 2 F
K R L
B J Y
24 state/province names can be spelled using this grid:
ALASKA, ARIZONA, ARKANSAS, FLORIDA, HAWAII, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KANSAS, MAINE, MARYLAND, MISSISSIPPI, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, NEVADA, NEWJERSEY, NEWYORK, NUNAVUT, ONTARIO, OREGON, QUEBEC, UTAH, WASHINGTON, WYOMING
Total letter count: 167
Submitted by:
Ken Caviness
Incidentally, I did keep beating my record, finding better and better solutions. I had a 24/163 all ready to mail in the day I found this 24/167 solution!
Happy puzzling,
Ken
Posted by: Ken Caviness | Mar 20, 2008 11:58:39 AM
Ken,
You should expect to see the AlphaCube contest winners announced in the July issue, on sale about a month from now.
Posted by: Jeff | Mar 20, 2008 1:11:27 PM
Interesting that Ken C.'s 124/67 for AlphaCube is very different from Sean R.'s - about 6 states different. It seems a little implausible to me that a best score, down to letter count, could allow that much variation - intuitively it seems like there would need to be a higher score with less or no variation. Mark M. stated "very easy" problem for programming, but I don't think he said what his result was.
Posted by: jim miller | Mar 21, 2008 9:19:56 PM
Jim-
Mark told me his score was 24/167, but I didn't see his cube.
Another fellow sent me essentially the same solution as Ken C.'s. I was also very surprised to see that it matched in words/letters while being substantially different from mine.
There's quite a bit of variation possible due to lesser-used and unused letters that can be swapped around, as well as trivial rotations. And if you "push the cube over", you get answers that look completely different but are actually the same. My program found several of these variations, but not the one with different states.
None of us checked out all the permutations, of course, so there is a possibility that there is a better score than 24/167, but I think the odds are low. There are at least 5 of us that wrote different programs that all found 24/167, which I think is a good indicator that that's the best possible score.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Mar 22, 2008 1:56:20 AM
Interesting, ok.
Posted by: jim miller | Mar 22, 2008 10:23:50 AM
Anyone else work Mystery Cross III from the March issue? Entries had to be in by April 1. The instructions were a little unclear: "The four letter word reading down near the upper right is the answer to the contest." But "To enter, mail your completed grid". So why have a one-word answer if you have to mail the entire grid? I thought their hint gave it away too easily.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 2, 2008 11:18:50 PM
Sean,
I gambled that GAMES would feel obligated to accept either kind of entry so I only sent the one-word answer on a post card. That's usually all they ask for in a contest like this anyway. If they decide to be hardliners on it, I'm out of luck but it's difficult to imagine anyone coming up with that one word without having solved the whole grid.
Posted by: Jeff | Apr 3, 2008 3:51:22 PM
Mystery Cross III...I found the hint, which I thought was a big giveaway to the theme of the puzzle, fairly quickly.
It was odd that they asked for the entire grid when the only 'answer' needed was the four-letter word.
To be on the safe side, I sent in the entire grid.
Has anyone received a "Congratulations...you're a winner!" letter from GAMES??
Not me...not yet anyway..;-)
Good luck to all!!
Posted by: Toni | Apr 8, 2008 8:33:34 AM
The July issue is in the mail with results of February's Alphacube contest. "The majority" of 555 entries had the maximum score of 167. Grand prize winner was Guess Who of Guess Where, Arizona.
The new contest involves connections among actors and films. Cover: Eyeball Benders. Feature article: Scrabble in 28 languages.
Posted by: Jeff | Apr 16, 2008 7:41:39 PM
Congratulations "Jesse" from Arizona, for winning the Grand Prize on Alpha Cube!
Also, congrats to Sean Riddle and Mark Mammel (and all the others) for winning Tees!!
Posted by: Toni | Apr 17, 2008 9:24:02 PM
Re Alphacube results:
Prediction from March 10th come true. Here we go once again with him. I congratulate everyone who got the best score, and not particularly Guess Who, who extremely likely is spending a lot of money on postage to tilt prizes in his favor.
I've argued often before, but I really, really wish GAMES would finally diminish this odious facet of their contests, at least requiring entries to have unique mailing addresses, a fairly easy step for GAMES to implement and requiring more hassle for entrants to circumvent. People have only so many friends and relatives willing to accept mail and checks for them, a small enough number that it might make entry box stuffing not worth the while. Everyone who used their brains and/or computer to find the best result deserves equal shot at the winnings. These contests shouldn't be about who has the most spare money for postage.
The majority had 24 states, unstated how many had 167 tiebreaker.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Apr 18, 2008 2:35:53 PM
Jim-
You should get a T-shirt for your prediction!
I agree with you about wishing Games would limit entries. I admit I sent in 2, and considered sending more, but I was lazy. A postcard is 26 cents, so 500 entries would cost $130, for a likely profit of $370. It would be great if they could print a unique ID number in each issue, so at least people would have to buy multiple issues to enter more than once.
Contest Results said that Doug Larson determined that 24/167 was the highest possible score, but the letter from him that they printed did not say that. It did say that there are 48 trivial permutations of 98 distinct solutions, for a total of 4,704 solutions. It's interesting that 96 of the 98 distinct solutions use one word list and only 2 use a different word list.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 19, 2008 9:41:14 PM
Don't forget to subtract income taxes from the $500. GAMES requests your Social Security Number for the grand prize, so the IRS can easily track contest winnings.
It would be interesting if GAMES would publish how many entries were sent in by the grand prize winner. If the grand prize winner sent in the majority of the entries, the majority of entries would automatically have the best solution.
Posted by: Laurie | Apr 20, 2008 1:02:40 PM
>Contest Results said that Doug Larson determined that 24/167 was the highest possible score, but the letter from him that they printed did not say that.
Right, he certainly did not provide a proof in his letter. Not even a discussion of the method used - some kind of exhaustive search I guess. I did not attempt an exhaustive search at all, so I did not determine if my score was the highest possible. I sent in only one entry, my usual strategy is to send in 2.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Apr 21, 2008 8:54:46 AM
Laurie-
You are correct- depending on your tax bracket, your net will be smaller. But I'm sure you can write off the postage you spent to win the prize, and only pay tax on the profit.
I agree that it would be very interesting for Games to print the number of entries and the number of unique entrants. The only time I remember seeing that detail was a few years back when the contest (as well as I remember it) was to predict statistics about the contest itself. Someone weighted it in their favor by sending in a bunch of entries.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 21, 2008 3:22:59 PM
Does anyone have the deadline and mailing address for the recent Games contest regarding movie titles? I didn't pick up a copy of the magazine, but if I recall, the rules were: a chain of 4 movie titles (where the last N words of Title X were the same as the first N words of Title X+1. Funny descriptions limited to 12 words?
Any corrections to my assumptions about the rules, and answer the first question would be greatly appreciated.
Posted by: Tom Holmes | Apr 23, 2008 12:17:50 PM
Tom- The April issue had "Spliced Films" - "create new movie titles by combining real titles that overlap". Deadline is May 1, address is Spliced Films, Games Magazine, PO Box 184, Fort Washington, PA 19034. Sounds like you got the rules right- you wind up with 3 descriptions (one for each pair you spliced). No shorts, documentaries, TV movies or movies unreleased as of 4/1/08, but straight to DVD, film festivals and foreign language films are OK.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 23, 2008 6:36:15 PM
Sean, expenses related to entering contests can only be deducted as miscellaneous itemized deductions, which are subject to a 2 percent floor. It is unlikely that someone would be able to deduct postage for entering contests.
Researching this was like taking tax research class all over again.
Posted by: Laurie | Apr 23, 2008 6:43:32 PM
Laurie- D'oh- good thing I didn't try it! How does the gambling industry get better treatment? You can write off gambling losses (up to the amount of your winnings) not subject to the 2% limit. So the government would rather have me go to Vegas than win a Games contest?
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 23, 2008 7:00:55 PM
Viva Las Vegas!
The gambling industry has powerful lobbyists. They make money from the gamblers and need them to stay in business.
Most people will enter contests and sweepstakes because they have put relatively little money (with some exceptions) into their entries.
Posted by: Laurie | Apr 23, 2008 7:34:45 PM
Thanks for the info on Spliced Films, Sean. One clarification -- the 3 created movie titles have to be linked, correct? If the first title spliced "Dirty Dancing" and "Dancing Lady" to make "Dirty Dancing Lady", would the next movie have to splice "Dancing Lady" with another film title, or does the next one begin with "Lady" and splice together two other films?
Posted by: Tom Holmes | Apr 24, 2008 12:13:47 PM
Tom-
"...one or more words at the end of one title must match the first word(s) of the next title..."
Their example was Free Willy, Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory, Factory Girl and Girl, Interrupted. Their 3 new titles were Free Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory, Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory Girl, and Factory Girl, Interrupted.
Posted by: seanriddle | Apr 24, 2008 7:16:44 PM
Jim Miller..."Prediction from March 10th come true. Here we go once again with him. I congratulate everyone who got the best score, and not particularly Guess Who, who extremely likely is spending a lot of money on postage to tilt prizes in his favor."
Jim..how often has "Guess who" won the Grand Prize??
My suggestion to GAMES would be to limit the number of entries per person, say 10 or 20, so that everyone has the same odds of winning. And if they did make a limit, contestants would find a way around that, too.
Any contestant, like myself, who solves GAMES contests, after working long hours researching the web, and other reference materials, and using my fingers for counting...deserves the right to be included in the drawing as much as anyone else who solves the puzzles. So must I spend a hundred dollars on postage to get in the running?
If the rule of accepting multiple entries is being abused, then GAMES has to make some new rules.
*******************************
On another note: Has anyone received a "Congratulations on winning Mystery Cross III" notice from GAMES????
The magazines have been arriving so fast, I've been working on three contests at the same time! [Deleted at commenter's request]
Posted by: Toni | Apr 26, 2008 5:22:31 PM
Another way that GAMES could address this issue is to limit the number of times per year that any contestant can win a grand prize. For instance, if they limit to one GAMES first prize and one GWOP first prize per year per person, others might have a chance more often. They already have to keep records of the money winners for tax purposes, so it should be simple to do.
Posted by: Susy | Apr 26, 2008 8:43:56 PM
Susy, your solution of limiting Grand Prize wins sounds like the fairest way to handle this situation.
It appears, from the posts here and in the '07 thread, that Jesse has won at least 2, maybe three, Grand prizes within this past year!
Hopefully, GAMES takes your suggestion into consideration.
Posted by: Toni | Apr 26, 2008 11:39:02 PM
I realize that this is not strictly on topic, but I thought some of you might want to know that Will Nediger is the constructor of today's NYT crossword (June 10th's in syndication, I think), and it's a real beauty.
Posted by: Craig K. | Apr 29, 2008 9:04:42 PM
Toni- no congrats for Mystery Cross III here, although I think I got the right answer (http://datalytixllc.com/games/mysterycrossiii.html) But I only mailed 2 entries :(
Also no t-shirt yet for AlphaCube :(
I'll wait 'til 5/2 to discuss the hidden contest!
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Apr 30, 2008 11:39:23 PM
Sean, that's what I got for Mystery Cross III...and I too have not received the coveted letter.;-( (Do you think "Jesse" is back for another win??)
The Hidden Contest:..I was told where it was hidden, so to be fair to that person, I did not submit an entry. But I would like to get in on the discussion tomorrow.
You'll get your shirt, Sean. Sometimes it takes a few weeks.
Posted by: Toni | May 1, 2008 10:47:05 PM
Okay, Sean..it's the 2nd of May...so, was there a definitive answer for the Hidden Contest (found in "Hidden Words" grid)?
I read it as 'send us a hat', 'send us a die', 'send us a tic-tac-toe'...and numerous others..even "send us a contest"!
Was there an answer? Or was GAMES just curious about the variety of (legitimate)answers we'd uncover? And then all acceptable answers would be thrown in the hat for the draw.
Posted by: Toni | May 2, 2008 8:23:01 AM
Toni --
I couldn't really decide on the answer -- my best read was "You have found the hidden contest send us a video"...hmmm. I did not send anything.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | May 2, 2008 1:46:48 PM
I believe the preferred answer was, "send us a tic-tac-toe grid," which could be easily fulfilled on a postcard and is GAMESian by its very nature.
I cannot imagine, however, that GAMES will not make allowances for anyone who went to the trouble of sending a cat, a video, a state, etc.
Posted by: Jeff | May 2, 2008 2:31:36 PM
After thinking I would send multiple entries for the Hidden Contest, I finally opted to send the grid of letters where the contest was found (Wild Card, Hidden Words) based on the message, "You have found the Hidden Contest. Send us the Hidden Contest." I'm still curious to know if there really was one intended message with explicit instructions, but my intuition tells me that isn't the case. As long as you found it and submitted something (perhaps as ridiculous as "divot" or even "shaved idiot"), it would be acceptable. We'll see...
Posted by: Sean F | May 2, 2008 2:33:53 PM
I guessed that the puzzle was in that grid on the basis of being able to spell "hidden contest", in adjacent letters. But, I too, was stuck after "send us..." and wondering 'how do I send a cat video?' Perhaps just writing a url on the postcard would suffice.
I like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0ffwDYo00Q
I finally found that the "Wandering Why" puzzle just below the grid has the instructions for the contest. Just start at the top center square (the "Y") and follow the directions ("the wandering") to move from square to square. That is how I came up with "tic-tac-toe grid".
Posted by: Bart | May 2, 2008 3:31:34 PM
Toni-
Sorry, I was busy this morning and didn't have time to post. Bart posted the same solution I got, although I actually got interested in the compass directions first. I thought that putting the grid and the directions on the same page was making it too easy, but now it doesn't sound like it.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | May 2, 2008 8:14:35 PM
A new GAMES online contest has been posted. It's the same concept as the "Stars Crossed" contest in the July issue, but with more question marks.
Deadline is June 30.
Posted by: susy | May 2, 2008 8:20:45 PM
Wow...this is the other Sean, who completely overlooked the compass directions! That was mighty clever of GAMES. Kudos to Bart, Sean Riddle, and anyone else who was observant enough to solve it as intended. Well, I guess that squashes the creative entry idea! There's always next year's April issue...
Posted by: Sean F | May 2, 2008 9:49:13 PM
Well, that settles the question of what to send. Nice going, BART!!
Clever little puzzle..and solution. A nice variation on the Hidden Contest.
Good luck to all you guys!..and gals! Hope you all win tees!
Posted by: Toni | May 3, 2008 8:10:50 AM
The new online contest #18 is up and running on the Games website.
Posted by: Alan Lemm | May 3, 2008 4:54:49 PM
August 08 Games came today, and a new skill contest after a long drought! I won't spoil it, but I'll point out that the dictionary of reference for it is M-W Collegiate 11th, rather than the venerable M-W 3rd Unabridged.
This I'm dismayed by if it is the new default, because I believe it will make Games' word skill contests considerably easier, given the vastly reduced number of words. That, combined with the fact that the M-W 11th raw word list (or something approximate to it) is easier to obtain and thus will enable word-crunching programs to be written by a larger number of people, will have the effect of creating more %^%#&!@ ties, even by unique entrants, and that's the thing I like least about most of Games' contests now. My hunch is that this is mainly an effort by Games to jack up contest entry rate, by using a more readily available dictionary, but I think this will also dilute the challenge and interest of the contests.
Still I'll give it a shot this time. Maybe this contest is sufficiently complex so as to make the reduced lexicon a minor factor, though, looking at the challenge, I can sense the black hand of simulated annealing hovering nearby.
Posted by: jim miller | May 23, 2008 9:23:07 PM
Another, more hopeful thought occurred to me after I wrote the above. Again without trying to give the contest away - it might be that using the full M-W 3rd Unabridged for this particular contest would make it too "easy" in a way, so Games made an exception this time. Logological challenges similar to the one outlined in the contest have been attacked extensively by hand and by computer for many years, and usually the widest possible lexicons are used to maximize the results. Since the general problem is so widely studied, limiting the challenge to a more restricted lexicon might be the best way to make it fresh, and to make it harder in the sense that fewer words to work with mean more strained interconnections for a more middling result, but one harder fought for. If M-W 3rd were used, additionally, contestants might be able to copy, with slight alteration, those established results from similar challenges and have a great score with almost no work.
Posted by: jim miller | May 23, 2008 10:00:53 PM
Also nice feature article on history of Games contests. Taxonomy of 5 contest types is presented, similar to one used here in previous discussions.
Posted by: jim miller | May 24, 2008 4:48:21 AM
> I can sense the black hand of simulated annealing hovering nearby.
Muahhhahaaaa. Actually I don't know how well that approach will work with this one, I'm trying some more basic approaches but there are too many possibilities to try all combinations -- a difficult problem.
I don't see any wordlist for MW 11th, I'm just using a generic one and I'll have to check any words in a solution. Using the unabridged dictionary will definitely make it harder -- the more possible words the larger the search. I'll have to think up an intelligent design for a search or my program will not be able to compete with humans.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | May 24, 2008 2:42:16 PM
Adjective inflection acceptability: for example, is YOLKIER good for this contest? YOLKIER doesn't appear in the print edition explicitly, nor online explicitly, but if you search for YOLKIER on m-w.com onlne it takes you to the entry for YOLKY, indicating that the online dictionary understands YOLKIER and thinks it's a good word. This is not true for many other multi-syllable adjectives, such as BOUNTIFULER/BOUNTIFULLER - in this case, the online dictionary doesn't take you anywhere except to a disambiguation page.
So are adjective inflections like YOLKIER, not explicitly listed though clearly understood by the online dictionary, acceptable according to Games' rules for this contest? My guess is no, but I will probably write to Games about this.
Posted by: jim miller | May 25, 2008 1:36:21 PM
If you browse the dictionary
http://www.merriam-webster.com/browse/dictionary/y.htm
You will see yolkier listed, (but not bountifuller), so I would think it is acceptable.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | May 25, 2008 9:32:38 PM
Good point, and I agree it should be acceptable from the standpoint that of course the dictionary recognizes it. But I'm afraid the introduction of the online M-W into the contest rules is going to create a lot of confusion, because of new ambiguities created about the meaning of "listed", and the unaccounted-for differences between "browsing" and "looking up", what is "explicit" vs. "implicit", etc.
Posted by: jim miller | May 26, 2008 1:29:58 AM
Checking the online dictionary: almost every acceptable word is listed in the browsing section, but a FEW plurals are not: ex. "babysitters". "babysitters" is not listed in the browsing section unlike most plurals but if you search for it, it will bring you back to the "babysitter" entry.
Problem: there are some entries missing. If you browse, you can see "backfired" in the browsing section but if you click on it, it will say 'not found'. (And yet list "backfired" as a suggestion).
Posted by: Mark Mammel | May 27, 2008 11:27:16 PM
Did anyone notice that the "Jeepers, Peepers" puzzle is a cheap duplication of the same puzzle from December 2005? I hope this isn't a sign that the magazine is running out of ideas...
Posted by: Paula | May 28, 2008 10:00:23 AM
To answer your question, Paula, the problem isn't ideas but submissions: they've had a deep shortage of good new stuff coming in their mailbags for years. A lot of their regular contributors have stopped sending things in, while others only submit infrequently (for various reasons, that's the camp I landed in, I'm embarrassed to say, although I'm trying to get back down to brass tacks again). Add to that the fact that Kappa Publishing really has no idea what they have in Games, thinking that it's just a shiny version of the other puzzle collections they put out, which means they don't push for advertisers or provide the personnel or resources they need to make the magazine great again. The end result is reprint upon reprint upon reprint, which is fine for the recent or casual reader, but a bit frustrating for those of us who've been reading slavishly since the Carter administration.
To everyone reading this, I say the following with all sincerity: if you've created a puzzle, Send. It. In. Even if you think it's not good enough, submit it. Everyone here is here because they're fans of Games, and it's the fans who are going to to save it, because the fans who are devoted to creativity, invention, challenge and quality. The folks on the editorial staff still stand by what they're doing (Wayne Schmittberger has been there since time immemorial), but if they don't have the material, they can't make the magazine. At some point, they're going to run out of stuff to reprint. I'd give my eyeteeth to see everyone here take the energy I've seen everyone show in solving contests both in the magazine and on this site, and pour them into making the sorts of puzzles we fans like to see and that the editors are dying to receive.
And trust me: it'll be good enough. If your work here is any indication, you can bank on it.
*dismounts soapbox*
Posted by: Adam Fromm | May 31, 2008 3:47:25 PM
Ye gods, I really need to copy-edit my rants before I hit the "post" button....
Forgive the grammatical screw-ups, which are legion. But do take the words to heart. This is something I feel so strongly about that I'm willing to babble in public over it.
Posted by: Adam Fromm | May 31, 2008 3:51:02 PM
I'll take your word for it as an insider, but I honestly haven't noticed much reprints in the magazines. Do the Pencilwise puzzles get recycled and I'm just not noticing? They have a Classics series, but that's obvious and it doesn't even appear every issue.
I've had puzzle ideas of my own and I'll keep your words in mind.
Posted by: jim miller | May 31, 2008 5:42:33 PM
Jim, there are at least 7 pages of reprint material in the Pencilwise section of the current issue, all marked "From the GAMES library." (Note also 5 pages shopped out to Conceptis.) The use of reprints in the color pages (three pages in the preceding issue) is more recent and more troubling.
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 1, 2008 7:46:24 PM
I've been publishing in GAMES now for over 25 years and, on occasion, I've had puzzles reprinted in the "From the GAMES Library" section. However, in the May 2008 issue, I had two puzzles reprinted--neither of them were listed as "From the GAMES Library."
In the mid 90's GAMES slashed their pay rates in half, so it's not surprizing that the quality and quantity of constructor contributions dropped off. Nor is it surprizing that GAMES then must resort to more and more reprints. (I should add that contributors get nothing when their puzzles are reprinted.)
Posted by: Gary Disch | Jun 2, 2008 10:03:16 AM
Very interesting. Was surprised to see Mike Shenk's byline on another puzzle, so maybe a safe bet that's another unlabeled reprint. I wonder how many puzzles I've done twice without realizing...
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 2, 2008 2:21:40 PM
Correction to previous post: Will Shortz, not Mike Shenk. Even more unlikely.
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 2, 2008 10:37:26 PM
Yikes. I had always thought "From The GAMES Library" meant that the enclosed puzzles are backlog stuff, not that it meant they are reprints. That's disturbing news, and it goes to show how bad my memory is and/or how little of previous puzzles I've done.
I discovered today that for 50 quid a year or 5 quid a month, one can get access to all the Times of London puzzles - cryptics, occasional acrostics, sudoku, and other logic puzzles, printable or online - and to an archive of cryptics going several years back. This includes the Mephisto and Listener barred challenge cryptics.
Posted by: jim miller | Jun 3, 2008 1:59:56 AM
I love cryptics but I cannot do British ones to save my life. There's just too much insularity in construction (in both US and UK cryptics) because they rely on popular culture. Plus I've been raised on no indirect anagram, few nounal indicators and no overlap between def and wordplay (other than &lits!, natch). Whenever I see a British book of cryptics (which of course far outnumber the limited number of US style I can find), I shrink back, which is a shame because they truly produce the best solving experience I've had short of a Bob Lodge Calculatrivia-type puzzle.
Posted by: JmSR | Jun 3, 2008 6:44:54 AM
Anyone do the Color Match contest from the May issue? That's the one where you had to find the 2 largest matching rectangles out of the 225 colored squares. Unlike contests like AlphaCube, it's pretty easy for a computer to do an exhaustive search and find the best answer. I came up with an area of 25.
Posted by: Sean Riddle | Jun 3, 2008 11:40:33 PM
Hi Sean R.
Me! I solved it (area 25) without programming; easy enough when you have an artist's eye for color, shapes, and patterns.
The 25 area number seemed low, and not a typical total for a GAMES contest, so I continued searching for a larger area, up until a few days before the deadline. When I couldn't come up with a larger match, I assumed I'd found the solution.
I foresee lots of entries on this one!(IF..25 is correct.)
Good luck all!
Posted by: Toni | Jun 4, 2008 4:57:16 PM
It's exciting to hear of insiders views, like Adam and Gary. Do you really get the feel as an insider that the editors are desparate? Tell us more!
Posted by: ross | Jun 5, 2008 8:26:49 AM
OK, to help the cause I am working on a couple of puzzle ideas for submission. If anyone would like to "beta test" them, send me an email.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Jun 11, 2008 12:10:25 AM
Well. I just finished the U.S. Puzzle Championship test and I did pretty terrible. I seem to have a heck of a time with puzzles where you have to draw the loops in the square grids. This year 5 out of 20 of the puzzles were just that.
I think that next year I might use the strategy of doing more of the high point word puzzles. Actually, my best bet would just be to practice more. If only there were more hours in each day...
Despite no chance of qualifying, it did give me a pretty good 2 1/2 hour adreneline rush.
Anyone else compete?
Posted by: Paula | Jun 14, 2008 2:40:03 PM
I did better than I did last year on the USPC, but nowhere near championship level. If I got everything right that I submitted, I got 130 points from 8 different puzzles. And since the deadline, I've solved two more of them.
I can usually get most of them over time. I just don't have the proper skills to do them rapidly.
Posted by: MartinD | Jun 14, 2008 6:37:10 PM
Assuming I got the correct answers for the puzzles I solved and entered them correctly on the answer page, I got 185 points, which means I probably failed to qualify again this year.
Posted by: Alan Lemm | Jun 14, 2008 8:42:45 PM
Well, I thought I was going to get 95 points this year (which would have been a personal best -- sad, I know), but I spaced off at one of the numbers on Black Pearl and forgot to turn (Paula, I feel your pain!), so assuming everything else is right, I'll get a measly 85 points. For the past few years, I always start with the Word Search with the missing 5x5 grid as a confidence builder, so when I solved it in under 5 minutes, I was feeling pretty good. Then, after getting Battleships, Sudoku, Sum Figure, Arrow Ring, Double Feature (all 10 differences), and Titled Weights (stumbled into that answer), I hit a wall and couldn't score any other points (even though I thought for certain I had Black Pearl). I never stand a chance on the 30-, 35-, or 40-point puzzles, so I usually don't get to spend much time on them. The best I can do is try to improve my focus on puzzle-solving as well as my score each year. I still enjoy the challenge.
Good luck to anyone else who might actually qualify. I'm curious to see the results. (Alan, I would imagine that 185 will put you close to or among top 25, right?).
Posted by: Sean F | Jun 19, 2008 2:33:34 PM
By the way, did you happen to notice that 2009 registration is already open? Good...plenty of time to practice...yeah, right.
Posted by: Sean F | Jun 19, 2008 2:37:26 PM
Practice seems to be important with these logic puzzles. But where to get more of them to practice on? Sudoku, Kakuro, and even Battleships (in GAMES and other publications) are readily available. GAMES runs periodic pages of some of the other types, such as other Japanese puzzles, but not reliably enough to have a practice regimen. The USPC usually seems to have heavy emphasis on the loop-creating puzzles, as someone else pointed out, but those are hard to come by.
There is a beautiful Dutch logic puzzle print publication called Brein Brekers which has many of these, and I believe it is published monthly or 8 times per year. I got a copy last time I was in Belgium, and I've seriously considered inquiring from them what it would cost for US delivery - pricy I'm sure.
Does anyone have pointers to websites or prints good for USPC logic puzzles?
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 21, 2008 1:09:53 PM
CrossHex: I was doing some checking in the library to see how the M-W online dictionary compares to the printed Collegiate dictionary.
For the question about "yolkier" is seems unacceptible by the printed version, it is NOT listed under the main entry of yolk. The online version did not list yolkier under the main entry, it was just listed in the browsing by letter section. I guess it was listed in the browsing section so that people can find words that might be used even though they would not be acceptable by GAMES.
I looked at the rule about words listed in the Addenda only --- er, the Collegiate dictionary has NO Addenda! I guess that rule is easy to follow.
What about lists of boldface words under a prefix entry? For example under "out-" there is a large list of words such as "outachieve" which is not listed separately. I guess those are acceptable?
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Jun 23, 2008 5:43:51 PM
I agree yours is probably the best interpretation of the multi-syllable adjective rules, for the simple reason that the contest rules accept both the print and online editions, but it would be impossible to deduce "yolkier" to be acceptable using the print edition alone - the acceptability of it only shows up by using a search feature of the online edition (and of the standalone software edition, which I have - in fact, in the software, if you search for "yolkier" you're taken straight to the entry page for "yolky", even though that entry doesn't explicitly specify the comparative).
My query to the GAMES editors on this issue went unanswered. It's obvious to us that such words are acceptable to M-W, and it's regrettable that they are excluded from an already vastly reduced pool of acceptable words in order to accommodate the Collegiate version of the dictionary.
Prefix lists: I would agree with you also on these and call them acceptable. For years, when M-W Collegiates were used by competitive American Scrabble as the source for words 9-15 letters in length, a rule had to be made about the prefix lists, and they were also classified as acceptable words.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 26, 2008 3:31:45 AM
Wow, That Thomas Snyder is unstoppable! I just saw that he recorded the first-ever perfect score. How does he do it?!
Congrats to you, as well, Alan. I wasn't too far off the mark in thinking that your score would make the top 25.
Congrats to everyone else, too. Sorry if I didn't recognize your name on the list.
http://wpc.puzzles.com/gr8/results08-full.htm
Posted by: Sean F | Jun 27, 2008 3:09:08 PM
Low scorer was Tommaso Portaluri from Italy, with 2 pts. That's a record crying out to be beaten, and one I can probably handle.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 27, 2008 8:10:28 PM
That record's already been shattered. I remember seeing negative scores in past competitions.
Posted by: Alan Lemm | Jun 28, 2008 2:11:43 AM
The September issue is in the mail (street date July 16) with results of the Hidden Contest from April. There were 88 entries but only "tic-tac-toe grid" was accepted as correct. They also got some "cent"s as entries.
The winning entry for the creative Spliced Films contest was My Fair Lady/Lady Sings the Blues/The Blues Brothers/Brothers in Arms.
New contest is a programmers' delight, entering the 32 federal entities of Mexico into a grid.
At least nine pages of reprints.
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 28, 2008 7:46:48 PM
Is it true that everything which is labeled "From The GAMES Library" is a reprint, or are just some of those items reprints? In particular, I'm talking about the "Motley Stew" section in Pencilwise.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 29, 2008 2:01:02 AM
Great news on the new Mexico stuffer. Skill contests in two issues in a row, wow.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 29, 2008 2:03:15 AM
Well - I'm even more disappointed than I originally felt. I submitted two of my solutions to USPC incorrectly, resulting in a score of 70 rather than 115.
I was so excited about having solved the "Dot Triangles" for 20 points, and then to discover that I transcribed an O as a D when I typed in my solution...UGH. Definately an off year I guess.
Maybe next year...
Posted by: Paula | Jun 30, 2008 10:09:21 AM
Looking at Mark's comments last week about words beginning with ''out-'', I was reminded of a long-ago GAMES contest which required one to find words containing state USPS abbreviations. It turned out that there was apparently NO word in the entire Webster's 3rd containing the letter pair TX. However, I had a friend at that time, a co-worker who was a marvelous wordsmith, and when I challenged him to come up with a word with TX in it, he immediately thought of ''outxerox'', as in an office competition of prowess with a photocopier, ''My secretary can outxerox your secretary!''
I once asked the same fellow if he could think of an anagram that went from one syllable to three syllables, and he instantly responded with MOORE and ROMEO!
Posted by: Bob Lodge | Jun 30, 2008 7:04:50 PM
I remember that in the results for that contest (ALAKAZAR) it was noted that an entrant had tried the coinage JETXENE, based on JET, a mineral, and -XENE, a suffix appearing in Web 3:
-xene n combining form [F -xène, fr. Gk -xenos stranger, fr. xenos] 1 : substance rarely associated with (such) a mineral 2 : intrusive mineral of (such) a character
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jun 30, 2008 8:07:58 PM
I'm so excited! I just got my Sept. issue and saw my name as a T-shirt winner in the last hidden contest. Finally, after years and years of entering GAMES contests! I regularly read this blog but this is my first time posting. I've read on this blog that it takes a long time for the shirts to get sent out. Can't wait!
Posted by: Elizabeth Stall | Jul 2, 2008 7:08:31 PM
Congrats, Elizabeth!
And thx for reading. I need to come up with something to do here for the late summer. I'll think on it.
I may have an interesting movie quiz soon.
Posted by: JmSR | Jul 2, 2008 7:10:36 PM
Congratulations, Elizabeth, and kudos for your perseverance. As one long involved with GAMES, both as a contributor and as a contestant, I can vouch that they have been traditionally slow but sure, having waited up to a couple of months for either a won T-shirt or a check for a contest. But they always came through eventually! In the case of T-shirts, one time they were simply out and had to wait for a new supply, but in that instance they did sent me a note explaining the delay.
Posted by: Bob Lodge | Jul 3, 2008 3:58:08 PM
Regarding Jim Miller's question:
You're right; not everything labeled "From the Games Library" is necessarily a reprint from the magazine. It may, however, be a reprint from another one of Kappa Publications other releases, which I think is where the unattributed Motley Stew stuff is coming from, especially if it's of a puzzle type that was popularized elsewhere and no name at all is attached, even in the fine print. (Most of the puzzle magazines Kappa puts out are about on the level of Penny Press or Official Publications.) I think what the whole "Library" thing comes down to is, "Is this a puzzle we have to give full attribution and payment for?" I do know they do everything in their power to give credit, but when dealing with the sort of anonymity that comes with the buyer's-market-level publications that make up most of the newsstand space, that's not always possible.
Posted by: Adam Fromm | Jul 6, 2008 8:50:14 PM
After Adam's soapbox, I went to work on creating some puzzles. I've submitted one puzzle and have not heard back about that one. But I collaborated with Gary Disch on a Contest idea and heard back that they do want to use it! It is tenatively scheduled for the November issue. It is a word puzzle, but unlike CrossHex, there is one definite answer.
Posted by: Mark Mammel | Jul 10, 2008 5:50:08 PM
Partial answer to my question above about where to find USPC logic puzzles to practice:
http://www.conceptispuzzles.com/index.aspx?uri=info/product/page/1
Mostly Sudoku, but various of the magazines have slitherlinks and other logic puzzles.
It's kind of neat to see all this puzzling available around the world. But I'm still mystified why Sudoku is suddenly considered the king of puzzles.
Posted by: Jim Miller | Jul 12, 2008 1:16:32 PM
On a similar note, the Riddle-Dee-Dee from the September World of Puzzles is reprinted. Does anyone remember the original publication date? It was in Games some time in the 90s, later I think.
Posted by: Disappointed | Jul 13, 2008 10:27:55 PM
Congratulations, Mark and Gary! It's terrific that GAMES is using your contest idea! I'm looking forward to working on it. I hope your success invites others to explore their creativity.
Good luck!!
Posted by: Toni | Jul 14, 2008 2:31:52 PM
I think I may have posted this link before, but there is a cool "puzzle hunt" getting ready to start (August 5) at www.cluechaser.com
I think you all would find it very enjoyable.
Posted by: Paula | Jul 18, 2008 2:32:32 PM
Hi again. It has been a while since my last comment because I'm not really much of a joiner. If I could surf the web completely anonymously, I would. That being said however, here I am.
I was going to start with some old news, but I'll start with some new. The September 2008 issue of GAMES World of Puzzles has been out for about a week. The special section is a variety of picture logic puzzles. The contest is called "Middle: Impossible". It is a 25-by-25 crossword with 9 highlighted 3-by3 areas. The middlemost one is surrounded by black squares so you cannot use intersecting entries to figure it out. There are 4 crossword-length entries that are the message to figuring it out.
I do not know if I have said too much about a current contest since this is my first real entry.
I am glad that this site is here, and I will try to be more frequent in my comments.
Thank you for having this site.
Posted by: Lou | Jul 23, 2008 7:21:20 PM
That's awesome, Mark! Congratulations, and welcome aboard! Looking forward to seeing it.
Posted by: Adam Fromm | Jul 24, 2008 9:15:32 AM
Post a comment
Commenters please note: do NOT discuss ANY contest information for a currently active contest outside of what is printed in GAMES magazine.
