I’ve done 1800 NYT puzzles, and can honestly say I have never enjoyed a puzzle less than this one - and the poker one was pretty annoying! Just not for me at all- I hope others get more pleasure from this one than I did.
@Julia I'm at 3,060 and couldn't agree more!
@Julia: Agree. The Cinderella "clue" is just inexcusable. I don't have a total by pieces, but it's over fifty years solo and a few before that helping/filling in for my father. (I got dogies, IRS, and half of the the oreo one before Revealing Cinderella, and that's when I DNF, in case anyone's keeping records. Also, still crushed about the acrostic, as long as I'm unburdening myself.)
I swear most of the difficulty on Sat nowadays comes from how annoyingly vague the clues can be. Absolutely terrible. If I have to guess and check multiple combinations of words just to find one that kinda sorta maybe works ish? I'd rather just look up the answer.
@Ernest Patience, young grasshopper. What you find "absolutely terrible" is what makes a good NYT Saturday the gold standard of puzzledom. All the answers work perfectly fine. You just have to see how they do. And you may learn a few things you might not have known before. Doing puzzles like this one certainly teaches you to think in all directions. That's what I--and a lot of experienced solvers--like about a puzzle like this. You may grow to like this kind of puzzle. Or maybe they're not for you. But in that case, I consider it too bad for you.
@Ernest Ignore Steve L. A lot of the longtime commenters here are condescending and find it impossible to give even the lightest criticism of any puzzle. To hear Steve L speak, you’d think that Joel Fagliano has risen to Will Shortz status in an incredibly short time. What’s more likely? That all these puzzles are absolutely perfect and the NYT can do no wrong, or maybe that the editing has been a little less clean since the long celebrated editor has taken a break? These weekend puzzles have been harder, often in a less enjoyable way. I’m waiting for the puzzle that has a bit too much obscure Gen Z trivia so that the veterans here can admit it.
@Ernest I am right there with you. So many of these clues would be much better if they just added a word. "Didn't shrink"? I dunno, grew? Expanded? What do you want from me? "Didn't shrink from," would have been so much better. "Oh, now I get it, it means rose up to a challenge." Nobody, and I mean literally *nobody* would say, "That person didn't shrink the challenge. He dared to do it!" It's literally a misdirect because the clue is intentionally incomplete to get you on the wrong track. The fact so many of these puzzles are ending up this way is truly maddening.
I still don’t understand some of the clues/answers. I like a challenge, but some of this cluing was beyond obscure. Tough, and not in a good way.
I like a challenge, but this wasn't enjoyable. A calling card is a talisman left behind, not an idea. Guards keep order, but they are not "order." It is not, as some commenters suggest, that I wish to have easier puzzles. I used to be able to depend on precision in the cluing and I am disappointed.
@Mary Hudson — Thank you for articulating my biggest issue with this puzzle. I love clever wordplay in crosswords, but today wasn’t it — maybe because there was no theme to build around.
@Mary Hudson I raised an eye, too, at PALACEGUARD. However, re: BIGUPSET… my understanding is that a calling card is/was something you presented when you “came to call.” You gave your card to the servant who answered the door, who then presented it to the person you wished to visit. In that context, it seems to me that it works as a clue here. A Cinderella team announces its presence with a BIG UPSET. (Related: how about them Gophers playing for the WNIT championship today? Sure, it’s not the Big Dance, but they’re tearing it up! SKI-U-MAH!)
@Mary Hudson Order, noun: a group of people united in a formal way Calling card: broadly, an identifying mark Definitely misleading clues, but it's Saturday.
Lots of commenters are arguing about whether this is a good or bad puzzle. Please let me offer an answer. My standard is this: WHEN YOU GET THE RIGHT ANSWER YOU SHOULD KNOW YOU GOT THE RIGHT ANSWER. When I look at BADTHING, all I can think is “really? Surely that can’t be right?” The clue might as well be “Death in the family “ or “Syphilis” or “An itch you can’t scratch”. All of these are bad things, just as much as a demerit, or more so. So I’m left wondering “If the answer is BADTHING” why is “Demerit” the clue?” Therefore, this is a bad puzzle.
@Petrol My only comment is that one bad clue doesn’t necessarily make a bad puzzle. This had a couple for me, so I thought it was borderline, and I respect the people who hated it—just pointing out that almost every puzzle has at least a few clinkers but can rise above it. I admit BADTHING was probably the poorest clue I’ve seen in a long time.
Yuck. Got it done. But no fun at all. No real aha moments. Do I really need to know another version of Oreo? Or a region in Afghanistan that's one letter away from a place in the South Pacific? A lot of esoterica IMHO.
@Henry Su, Thank you. Glad to see another adept solver who got it but didn’t enjoy it.
This was next to impossible and not fun at all. Many many crossings with far too esoteric clues in both directions. Entire quadrants unsolvable. Only got about halfway through before I caved
Nothing wrong with a hard puzzle, but this one was way, way beyond a typical Saturday NYT puzzle. I spent over 2 and a half times as long as my average. This is too much for me. This passed "This is fun" many, many minutes ago, and I ended up well into "This is annoying" territory. Joel, please stop making the Saturday puzzles so hard. Some may welcome this change, but I think the comments are showing that things have gone too far in the hard direction.
@BB Don’t try the Saturday Stumper.
i wish to add my voice to those who felt this was a strange and sadistic puzzle. Some of the answers made little sense and were just not satisfying. Puzzles like this one are enough to put one off crosswords for a while.
@Asher Don’t try the Saturday Stumper.
Sorry to be negative, but I disliked this puzzle. There was no joy in Mudville for this lady right here. I knew it would be a challenge — a welcome Saturday morning activity. This one, though, had so little I could suss out. So it’s a me problem? Yes, probably. However, I am not sure if other constructors will have us face UHOHOREO and the like in future crosswords. Yesterday’s puzzle was great — I didn’t have a single lookup, yet the synapses were firing left and right! I hope tomorrow’s puzzle is long, complicated, fun and challenging. Ok, I’ve set down my tiny violin 🎻. Thanks for your patience. Obrigada
@Pani Korunova commercial from 2003: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3fR1YjekE" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3fR1YjekE</a>
Trash. Nothing satisfying about the difficulty of a well constructed Saturday. Just loose references, ungettable to the sharp solver, purely for the ego of the constructor with his thesaurus and Google searchbar, crawling through obscurity for the enjoyment of no one else. Quality has been noticeably and drastically discouraging for paying Nyt members in Will’s absence.
Seems official. This comments section has been overrun by folks who would like the NYT Xword to become a questionnaire with occasional wordplay or a slightly more difficult version of the Parade magazine crossword. This sentiment became much more prevalent once the pandemic started and many newer solvers took up crosswords, with a surprising number expecting, demanding even, instant proficiency. It was most strongly voiced with respect to Thursday puzzles. And then Sundays. Now, it’s Saturdays . . . I find it disheartening but in the words not of Yogi Berra, It is what is and if it wasn’t what it is, it would probably become what it is anyway. I know I paint with a broad brush. Some long-time solvers who like difficult puzzles just didn’t like this puzzle and many newer solvers actually loved it. But the bottom line for me is a comments section that has lost much of the joy and pleasure it once yielded. Still a lot to love about it, but for me at least, a lot to make me want to keep my distance.
@Puzzlemucker I know this probably wasn't your intent, but you make it sound like you're upset because the plebes came out of the woodwork to try the thing you once loved and you're disappointed that the comments section isn't filled with the same ten people every week going, "Wow! What an amazing exercise! Bravo to this constructor for his deliciously tricky cluing!" If more people are trying the puzzle, that is a GOOD thing. If lots of people are complaining about the puzzle, that is also potentially a GOOD thing. Maybe for far too long the puzzle was too insular and catered only to a small, dying audience. Now that more people have tried it, they've voiced opinions that you otherwise wouldn't hear because you were too busy giving yourselves self-congratulatory feedback about how smart you were. I'm not trying to stir the pot too much, but I do want to point out how some of these comments read to someone with tons of solving experience but less than a year under his belt of doing the Times. Stop trying to close the doors to the country club or you won't have a country club left. Like someone further down said, I'd love to see what some longtime solvers would have to say if the next Saturday puzzle was filled with Gen Z trivia and terms coined in the last 5 years. Bet most of the comments would be about "kids these days..."
@Puzzlemucker no one is expecting instant proficiency. If you actually read the comments they're asking for fairness and decent editing.
The answer for 1 Down, "Bad Thing", is probably the clunkiest NYT crossword puzzle answer I've seen.
@Boodles A ? type of clue would've been good for that one instead of trying to clue it straight given how many things are.. well, things. It's my only criticism of an otherwise good puzzle.
Not fun at all. Clues are far too obscure - and I still don’t understand some of them. South East was the only quadrant I could do without help from the column
@Chris I agree. Far too hard. Saturday’s puzzle is always challenging, but it’s not fun when you don’t get enough answers to solve some of the crossing clues.
@Chris If you ask about the ones you don't understand, someone here will be happy to explain, usually and hopefully without snark.
Knew it would be tough when I saw Byron’s byline. A 3-breaker. Caitlin has said everything I might and better, and frankly my brain is mush. As Barry said, Now that was a Saturday puzzle! I am delighted that Saturday puzzles lately have been true tests of fortitude and lateral thinking. I know many will not be, but please keep ‘em coming.
@Puzzlemucker thanks for voicing another opinion!! I learned a lot, I only got a handful of answers completely on my own (This lil Texan got DOGIES right off and I was proud of that! ) but I enjoyed the breakthroughs. I often shy away from Saturdays but I’m happy I did this one and I hope we see more from this constructor!
That was tough, which is fine, but not fun, which is not. Felt like a blind date with a clever nerd who is believes he's the smartest person in the room and doesn't care if you don't like him.
@Anna E. Oh snap! But maybe your nerd is a marlin fisher while the rest of us are unambitiously fishing for guppies. Have you considered that? 🤪
Oh, there is so much going through my head about this puzzle, but I’ll edit it down to three items. • When I see Byron’s name atop the grid on a Saturday, it’s time for me to set my brain to Zen mode. Let me explain. In the style of yoga (Ashtanga) that I practice, I find that there are certain difficult poses and transitions between poses that I just can’t do if I try too hard. But if I shut my conscious brain off and let it go still, success follows. That is, I cede control to my mysterious inner world. That is how I have to approach a Walden, and it helps greatly. • I know that a BW Saturday will have world-class twisted cluing, where, when the answer hits me I want to stand, bow, and shake my head in amazement, bathed in pleasure. Places it happened today: [Pictures where people are headscarfed?] for ZOMBIE MOVIES, [Dodger’s foes, for short] for IRS, and [Can’t we all just git along?] for DOGIES. • Sometimes the cluing and difficulty hide what is always a feature of a BW Saturday: freshness. There is always a wealth of answers that have never appeared in the NYT puzzle’s 80 years. Today there were 11, including IT STINKS, NEED I SAY MORE, RUN PAST, and ZOMBIE MOVIES. Byron, you really don’t need to put your name atop your puzzles, as they have your personality shining throughout. IMO, Crosslandia is deeply richer for your puzzles, with their wit and challenge. Thank you for making them, and for an outstanding outing today!
@Lewis Quick note to let you know that over here, we're grateful for your reliably clearsighted, cheerful and informative take on the NYT crossword puzzle. You're helping to make the world a better place. Quick question: do particular puzzles ever remind you of specific asanas? Does the completion of a challenging puzzle ever warrant a corpse or child's pose? Thanks again.
Wow, what a puzzle. I started doing the NYT crossword in 2021 and, in addition to keeping up with the new daily puzzles, have been working backwards through the archive. I got to a point in 2015 when I felt like the difficulty level, especially of Fridays and Saturdays, became consistently higher. This puzzle felt like one of those tough pre-2016 archived puzzles and I really enjoyed the challenge.
@Aaron Cheers! Wait til you hit the 2000s. I’m going to pick a Saturday at random and give a clue/entry just for a taste. “Unexpected turn of events, as in a literary work” PERIPETEIA And from the same puzzle: “Rich mine or other source of great wealth” / GOLCONDA, crossed with “Scolding wife: Var.” / XANTIPPE and “Mob rule” / OCHLOCRACY (12/29/07) That puzzle took me twice as long as tonight’s and I had to use “Check puzzle” to complete. Not unusual for that time period. Glad you appreciate the challenging puzzles, even though you are relatively new to crosswords! I wish more newer solvers adopted your attitude.
@Puzzlemucker I, too am working my way through the archives, and there are long stretches where I get to Saturday and just cringe. I'm not quite sure why people get so upset about a hard Saturday. I think it shows that for a long time they were eased up. But for any solvers who feel the last few Saturdays have been an aberration, no, no! Saturdays are supposed to be hard! The hardest day of the week, in fact. If they are "too hard to be fun," then don't do them! I don't personally enjoy that feeling of my brain twisting into knots, but when I finally get the Aha Moment and the knot spring-releases, what joy! I want to still be able to think and reason in thirty-five years when I'm 100, so bring on the Saturday brain exercises!
@Aaron I agree with you, I've gotten back to May 2018 in the archives and the Saturdays are much harder. This absolutely felt like one of the older puzzles.
Now that was a Saturday puzzle! Thank you, Byron. NEED I SAY MORE? ..................
Three Saturday stunners in a row. Loads of aha! moments due to clever but solvable wordplay. I don't get the 'obscure' arguments - this is one where you need to tilt your head and squint harder than normal. And since when does time correlate to fun? It took you longer, you worked harder; but therefore it wasn't fun? Who cares if it busts your average when the puzzle is this good! This is another that makes the subscription worth it.
@Withnail I don't like looking at a puzzle for too long. It makes me frustrated, and when I get too frustrated, I'm going to just look something up. I've noticed I'm the same way with video games. When I play a game, if I get stuck on a hard part, I'll usually give it the old college try, but if I'm just getting absolutely nowhere, I'll look up what to do in a guide. I don't have fun if my progress is stopped for too long. I may even drop the game if it just becomes a slog of bad boss fights, extremely repetitive gameplay, or constant Moon Logic puzzles. Some people relish the challenge. They'll sit there and stare at it, thinking through all of the possibilities in their head, and they'll try numerous things. They get an endorphin rush when they finally solve it. I don't. My frustration only increases when I see the answer and how inane or crazy it was. I'm not likely to think something is clever. I'm more likely to think, "Why didn't you clue that in a way where a typical solver would have any chance of solving it?!" and feel bad afterwards. Neither way of solving is wrong, per se. It's just different personality types. Some people are okay trying on their own in an escape room and failing because they took too long to solve "that one puzzle." They'll come out of it saying I was great. I would come out of it saying it was awful and poorly designed. If I was in danger of running out of time, you bet I'm asking for a hint and excoriating the room online.
Lots of commenters here talking like a through-and-through tough puzzle like this is something new, due to Joel's editing. Well, today's puzzle is nothing new. As Caitlin mentioned, this is Bryon's 69th NYT Saturday puzzle, and they are ALL like today's. Try any of 'em, and see if this is not true. Nothing new here.
@Lewis Agreed. If I believe According to my stats at xwstats.com, several of Byron Walden’s Saturday puzzles took me over three times as long as the average Saturday. The man just knows how to write devilish clues.
@Lewis 100%. This was a really tough one, and I’m definitely a member of the “my brain is mush” club. But the clueing feels great to me in retrospect (albeit devilish, as Eric H says)…with the sole exception of “bad thing”, which I’ve already ranted about in another response. It’s obviously fair game for other people to feel differently about the puzzle…but I find this constant stream of “everything’s going to hell in a hand basket with Will Shortz out of the office” comments annoying and, frankly, toxic.
@Lewis Admittedly, many of us newer solvers are experiencing whiplash going from Shortz' style to Fagliano's. While it's entirely probable that this puzzle would have been hard under either editor, it's a lot easier to scapegoat Joel because the entirety of the puzzles' difficulty and cluing has been a mess for weeks now. If this is indicative of a typical Bryon Walden puzzle and not the editor steering the clues into insane misdirection and lying territory, then I'm just going to skip them or turn on autocheck immediately in the future. I derive no joy from solving a puzzle where I'm swearing at an answer every few minutes.
One day in the future, if the editors continue to listen to the complaints about puzzles that puzzle, I imagine someone saying, "What happened to the NYT crossword? It used to have a reputation for being a struggle and fun to do." I'll point them to todays Wordplay column. This is what happens when they try to offer something challenging.
@Nancy J. It all began when a certain columnist proclaimed "Anyone can do the NYT crossword". I want a Saturday NYT crossword that not anyone can do. Otherwise, it's a dollar store compendium crossword; the next thing up from a word search puzzle.
Having made my way through most of the comments, I just want to say: Just because a puzzle is challenging doesn’t mean it was good. And just because someone says they didn’t like the puzzle doesn’t mean it was too hard for them. I completed it, without lookups, in a tad over forty minutes (double my Saturday average). I did not like it, for reasons I spent 1450 characters explaining in another post. I am glad that other solvers enjoyed this one — if everyone had disliked it as intensely as I did, we would really have to wonder about the editors! But please please *please* do not say that the only people criticizing the puzzle are those who found it too hard, or suggest that anyone that didn’t like it simply wasn’t up to the challenge.
@Nat K giving you the reco because 1) you detailed your reasons for disliking it elsewhere, and 2) I agree, there are legitimate reasons for criticizing almost any crossword. I rarely do so here, but there are certainly ones I like less than others. I just don't like it when folks drop "worst puzzle ever" and then walk away.
@Nat K yes, and I'll add that it's possible to avoid condescension when people ask for an explanation after having solved the puzzle and still don't "get" an answer. Having trouble with what seems to have been an especially difficult puzzle for a lot of commenters here doesn't mean that one is completely ignorant about how these puzzles work and in need of a virtual lecture on cluing.
I for one enjoy the recent bump in weekend difficulty. Not every puzzle needs to be a mind-musher but the 8 minute Saturdays were getting a little disconcerting, and dare I say boring. I am 100% in favor of making the NYT Xword a puzzle for everyone, which I think Mr. Shortz has done a commendable job accomplishing. I'm just also of the mind that completing the Saturday NYT should still mean something. Lord forbid I have to start doing the Harper's cryptic to satisfy my need for challenge...
Honestly the only reason I suffered through this one — and I did get it, without lookups, although in double my Saturday average — was to earn the right to say the following: IMHO, this was a terrible puzzle. I like to be challenged. This was just aggravating. As Byron writes, he gave us the terms to describe it: MEDIOCRE. IT STINKS. It landed with a THUD. Start with the NW corner. If BAD THING is not green paint, I don’t know what is. One of the worst entries in memory. BIG UPSET is almost as bad. The clue for 17A would have been brilliant for HORSES. But DOGIES is completely and needlessly obscure. I gather from Google (after the fact) that it must refer to a 1934 song. 1934!! Are you kidding me? UPTRENDS? Not. A. Thing. Do I care who created Python? No. Finally: a PINT is not a “Cup alternative.” It is two cups. I understand that clues are not definitions, but this one is simply and plainly wrong, because it refers to measurements — which by definition are not “alternatives” for each other. Even if you stretched and said that PINT was standing in for a glass of beer, it doesn’t make sense. You don’t have a “cup” of beer, or of wine or any other alternative to beer. NEED I SAY MORE? I have avoided the chorus of people criticizing Joel Fagliano. But this puzzle is making me rethink that stance. If this puzzle isn’t a case of poor editing, I’d hate to see what is.
@Nat K If I go to my local ice cream shop, I can order a cone, a cup, or a pint, referring to the container they put it in. The pint container does not contain double what the cup does--it depends on how many scoops I order for the cup. Some cups can contain almost a pint (quantity wise). I agree the clue was devilish and it was one of the last I got because I was certain the answer was CONE.
@Lynn, Thanks, but I am not persuaded. You have certainly identified a case in which a “cup” might refer to a quantity other than 8 oz. But a PINT never refers to anything other than 16 oz. And even at an ice cream shop, a cup and a PINT are very different things. I love ice cream, but I have never gone into an ice cream shop and wavered between ordering a cup and ordering a PINT. The former is for immediate consumption — the latter is for putting in the freezer and eating later. I realize that yes, someone somewhere has probably viewed a cup of ice cream and a PINT as alternatives. But if that’s the justification for the clue, it’s even more of a stretch that I imagine. The test of a good clue is not “Can I dream up some tenuous *ex post* rationalization that lets it make sense?” Again: I got it. I solved the puzzle. But I still think this is simply poor cluing and absentee editing.
Saturday is back, baby! This is the 3rd one in a row that put up a real fight, and I hope they keep coming. Dodger's foes for IRS at 25A, Cinderella's calling card for BIG UPSET at 3D and Black heart? for SHORT A at 40D were downright diabolical clues. The SW was the last to fall for me. I never heard of azimuth (50D), and to me, it looked enough like bismuth to convince me that it was oRe. Not knowing SEACREST didn't help. I finally saw TORA after I got BORA, and that finally moved things along. Thank you, Byron. This was a real workout, which is what Saturday should be.
@Nancy J. Yes to all of this. Glad we made it!
400 comments! I shoulda gotten the jumbo size popcorn. Certainly I enjoy some puzzles more than others and this one didn’t quite hit the mark that I hope for on a Saturday. But I’m happy to say that I’ve never hated a puzzle or felt hostile toward the constructor or the editors.
@Cyndie Me neither. It baffles me and makes me wonder what type of person does. Is it because they feel it's a personal attack on their intelligence? Do they hate people who are smarter than they? Have they been falsely given overconfidence in their abilities through their life? I have questions.
@Cyndie Here's my theory. There's something about being able to successfully complete a puzzle that can make you appreciate both your memory and your awareness of the world around you. Even when played alone, crossword puzzles can be a social experience in that the player is in touch with both past and current zeitgeists. When a puzzle has too many obscure or oddly phrased hints it can make you feel like an outsider. People generally don't like that feeling. Hence the anger.
@Cyndie I agree completely. I don't get the anger at all. I thought, "Gee, I sure wasn't on that particular wavelength," but then I moved on to the Bee so I could get my genius redeemed.
Finally a tough Saturday similar to older ones in the archive. Happy to keep the streak going. One thing I’ve noticed in the comments is the expectation that one needs to “know” obscure trivia as a puzzle solver off the top of one’s head. I do not think this is the case. In some cases, I do (eg GUIDO today as I’m a python programmer), but most times it’s a combination of putting together a lot of incomplete information tidbits (crosses, knowing it’s a name, common letter combinations, etc.) and digging it out of the brain because you’ve heard it or seen it once or twice. This is what makes this fun and challenging for me.
@Mike M Exactly! If I had to rely on things I "know" I would never be able to complete most puzzles. Sometimes, like today, I can almost (literally!) feel the synapses firing as I try to wrap my brain around the clues. I think a lot of the people who have trouble with puzzles like this could do them if they had a little more patience.
Are people really complaining about clues with misdirection/word play? What the heck has happened to this comment section? The "aha" moment that comes with figuring out a tricky clue is one of the best puzzle solving moments there is.
@george For some people, this is true. For others, that moment is less of an, "Aha!" and more of a, "What the ****?! Are you ****ing serious?! How was I ever supposed to get that?!" So YMMV.
I hated this puzzle! I like challenging clues when the reveal elicits that amused aha; these all landed with THUDS. I even contemplated ending my 1827-day streak so I wouldn't have to finish it...
@LisaK I had a different experience than you, but love your comment. I've been there. Well, haven't gotten to 1827 yet, but have had that reaction recently.
@LisaK, Congratulations on that streak!
The grammar is often awful. For example "Dodgers' foes" is solved with "IRS". So he used a plural clue (foes) on a singular answer (IRS). You don't say the "IRS question me" (plural form) - you use the singular verb form "the IRS questions me."
@Holly I had the exact same thought. You could point out little critiques in the cluing throughout this puzzle that absolutely upped the difficulty (unfairly). Combination of terrible editing and an extremely esoteric solve, today.
@Holly The "singular with singular, plural with plural" rule does not require grammatical agreement. It should be obvious that the IRS is not just one person. !!! !!!
@Holly That one tripped me up, for sure. I thought it might be MPS chasing draft dodgers, because that's a proper plural, rather than subtly implied.
Agree with others that the balance of "huh?" clues to "oh wow that was clever" clues was off on this one. I don't mind a difficult Saturday, but this wasn't one of my favorites.
I enjoy a hard puzzle that take considerable thought (and kudos to those that were able to finish this one) but I did not enjoy this one. I did not enjoy the multitude of vague clueing with various possibilities for answers that didn’t clearly tie with the clueing. There is usually a satisfaction in realizing what the answer actually is and how it ties to the clue (and how if I had considered it longer I might have gotten it), but I did not get that feeling of satisfaction for many of the answer today. Just a “huh, who’d have thought of that.” But again, kudos to all of you that were able to get through this one without lookups. A big DNF for me today.
That was tough, but rewarding. Please keep the difficult ones coming!
Cup is not an “alternative” to pint. A pint is 2 cups. Totally agree with the clunky clueing.
@East Canuck, Indeed. I had the same complaint. You might even say it was a BAD THING.
East Canuck, "Alternative" does not mean "equivalent." Think of how much you'd like to have. Also, a cup and a cone are alternatives. How would you like your ice cream served? Clever clueing. ....................
If Will Shortz won't be able to edit (wish him the best of health) soon or any longer, please find someone else who can continue in his style. Have been doing the NYT XW since circa 1975 so not new. This cluing was dismal, uninspired and not in keeping with the typical patterns.
@Midwest maybe we can find someone with Eugene Maleska’s style.
Adding my voice to the many many comments from people who are unhappy with this and the recent run of crosswords. A hard crossword is not necessarily a good crossword. I got BADTHING and a bunch of other clues and I repeatedly thought “surely that can’t be the right answer!?” After a while I gave up and checked. I had them correctly, but they didn’t seem right. There’s no joy in solving a bad crossword. I hope Will Shortz will be back very soon!
Fun and challenging; just the right level of difficulty for a Saturday. Loved it!
*Deeep breath…wipe brow with cool rag…* I just spent over 80 minutes ( which somehow doesn’t feel like so much, now) on that most puzzling puzzle. Every clue was a puzzle. Crosses were puzzles! Even some (apparently) correct answers puzzled me! It reminded me of my son’s 5th grade teacher. Everyone waited, fearing the classroom assignments in August, because 24 unlucky kids would get Mrs. M. She was tough. She told these 10-year olds what she expected, and held them to it, no exceptions. She wasn’t a fun teacher. But when my son told me she had shredded his friend’s homework because there was no name on it, I asked, “Wow…isn’t that pretty harsh?” He said, “ No. She told us that was the rule. So I always remember to write my name on my papers. It’s fair. “ I come here to be challenged. Sometimes, I get an Agard or a Weintraub and it’s a fun challenge. Sometimes, it’s just tough. I wasn’t giggling today. But nearly two hours later, I got the gold star and the happy music and I did it fair and square. So, are NYTXWs getting easier? Uh, nope. Loved the grueling challenge. (And so very glad it’s over.) Thank you.
Did not finish because the clueing and answers were so oblique. Normally I have fun with the Saturday challenges, but this run of nonsensical clues/answers has taken away the reason to even try the puzzle.
@Scott K Don’t try the Saturday Stumper.
Caitlin's contortions to cast the cluing as "elegant" doesn't do the trick. A "demerit" solves as "bad thing" only if "waternelon" solves as "big food."
@Carl Adler ‘Demerit” solves a BAD THING more directly than your comment suggests. It can mean a fault or flaw. It’s true that many of the clues solved slightly askew. But they did solve.
This was not fun at all. Vague clues to nonsensical answers. It’s ok to have a few of those things if the crosses are doable but when the whole puzzle is filled with those clues it is infuriating. This is another constructor that is too busy trying to make an unsolvable puzzle to try and prove their intelligence. You want to show intelligence? Make a clever puzzle with answers that people actually have heard of…
@Darren Which answers have you never heard of? I had never heard of UH-OH OREOs, but that was certainly gettable from the crosses. I have a vague idea of who Ryan SEACREST is and needed a lot of crosses to get that answer. I found this puzzle to be quite clever. Sorry you didn’t.
@Eric Hougland I should have said that better. Answers that are mysterious… Can’t they all get along - DOGIES?, think envelope YES? Did a song -CHEAPLY, White Russians - CZARISTS?
I came for some help but stayed for the comments.
Deciphering obscure is not necessarily fun. Deciphering clever can be. This was not fun.
@Ιασων There were many sub-par clues. What I have learned is that I am now supposed to sing their praises.
@Ιασων Precisely. Obscure only in service of (quote) "chaotic evil", not for cleverness or a fun game. Liking hiking up a hill with no view at all.
That was ... AWESOME!!!! I started solving this last night, and got the entire grid filled out after some indeterminate amount of time (after about 1.5 hours I usually turn the timer off, so I can pretend that I'm a fast solver). My motto is never surrender at night, because I don't know, then, what I will know in the morning. Turns out that a HOTECOOK is not a thing (but last night, I'd convinced myself that a HOTE COOK might be an expert in HAUTE CUISINE). Similarly, BOPTHING sounded like it might be a demerit, PONIES might have to git along (didn't Matt Dillon always say "git" to his horse?), and PIABUS was either a show stopper or a Peoria transit vehicle. In the morning, after a few neural miracles, that music *never* sounded so sweet. Thank you so much, Mr. Walden, for making my Friday, Saturday, and, to be honest, the entire weekend!
@MP Rogers "Never surrender at night" is a great motto. Putting a puzzle down and coming back to it is one of the best strategies for solving. Glad it worked for you this time! PS If you come up with things like HOTE COOK and BOP THING and PIABUS, they're not usually words you didn't know. They're probably wrong...
@MP Rogers The puzzle shows up at 9 p.m. where I live, so I always do it at night - but not last night! I opened it up, filled in a handful of squares including BAD (but not THINGS) and PABST and DOGIES and some other stuff that turned out to be wrong, and realized my night brain was not up to the task. I follow your CREDO and usually have a tolerably easy time in the morning. Not much was easy today but I finally got it done. Phew.
I miss Will Shortz.