Asher B.

I didn't like this puzzle very much. I found the theme clunky. It did not aid my solving nor make me grin so much as delay my solving and make me frown. don't always solve in some linear across fashion, so getting an answer like "POMELO" didn't make sense even knowing that something was up with the "ME." I thought I was meant to imagine the "ME" sliding down and out of the word. I now get that word is meant as a recipient of the ME from above, but I didn't know that at the time. Having written some notes in this space in the past, I feel it necessary to provide responses to questions I strongly suspect will be forthcoming. FAQ: Q. If you didn't like it, why are you writing in? A. A philosophical question. Why does anyone write in? I suppose to seek community and validation. It is not my view that the only sentiments worth sharing in this life are support and glee. Q. Would you like me to explain the puzzle, because obviously you didn't really get it? A. I didn't say I didn't get it, but if you need to explain it, you do you. Q. Are you just a hateful grump? A. No. Q. Do you ever like any of the puzzles? A. Yes. Q. Isn't this little FAQ of yours a straw-man argument, positing that there are those who object to your not liking the puzzle when in fact no one cares? A. Very much not. Every single time I've written in to this column, I have received multiple responses effectively asking all of the above. Q. Why don't you ever write in saying positive things? A. I do.

..... anddddd..... I'm done!!! A mere eleven hours later. Phew. Sweat pours from my brow, my typing fingers shake, I'm dehydrated and weak, I've neglected my friends and loved ones, I'm a pale shadow of the man I was when long ago I began solving this puzzle. It woulda gone faster but for some stupid reason I didn't memorize who was Grand Duke of Luxembourg until 2025 and now my regret is keen. I'm so weak right now. Send good wishes and a saline drip. PS. I think the term might be "deserted island," not "desert island." Meaning when one asks "What ten albums would you take with you ..." they mean to live on a deserted island, devoid of others; not on an arid one. But I quibble precisely because I just learned this tidbit a year ago myself. Back when ol' Henri was still Duke. The correct answer, by the way: Sgt. Pepper, Pet Sounds, Quadrophenia, Dark Side of the Moon, Blue, Zep 1, Legend, Astral Weeks, Rumours, CSN debut album.

That was the hardest thing I have ever accomplished on a Tuesday.

I hated it. I accept that other people liked it. Opinions differ. I won't try to talk you out of yours if you offer the same courtesy. I already know that Thursdays often feature the rebus gimmick. Would that it were not so. When I learn that E stands for I or vice versa or some other who-cares gimmick, I am left annoyed, not entertained. There is no a-ha! feeling for me. It's more a feeling of everyone else knows something I don't; yet when I do find out, I don't feel rewarded, I feel annoyed. A crossword is a word puzzle that I find entertaining. It's a fun game. I don't wish to play another hidden game at the same time. When I am playing tennis, if you offer me a chance to play chess at the same time, it's not more fun. It's annoying and distracting. Now, in my view, some gimmicks such as a clever Sunday idea can be quite fun. The difference is that they offer some kind of logic as to why they exist. Put another way, a joke has to have two meanings, not one. A good Sunday puzzle has three, a third way of combining what is said. A rebus like this is just a hassle. There's no clever reason for the gimmick. Violating the rules of crosswords should be done for a purpose. Why are we spelling "Diet" in two ways? I don't know. Why? By the way I'm having a nice day and would appreciate not being ad hominem attacked as a grump. Maybe, just maybe, I have an opinion worth considering. I appreciate the editors taking this into consideration.

That was the fastest I've ever solved a Saturday puzzle. I know that my personal accomplishments are incredibly important to you, so I won't go on at length about the wildly clever strategies I employed in solving the puzzle. I know that you can't afford delay as you rush off to inform your friends and pets about the miracle that has been visited upon you all on this day. I do understand that you'll want to laud and praise me at great length, so I am leaving room for comments below. But please note that I cannot respond personally to every comment. I receive a great deal of correspondence and while yours has great merit, someone else will get the job. You know how that goes.

At the nexus of 41 we find "Forest" and "fire," bringing to mind the terror in Los Angeles. I imagine that many solvers are like me, using the crossword in part as a place to get away from the world's harsh realities. Certainly the editors steer away from controversy and calamity, and that seems right to me. But the real world is real, and will make itself known. Let us note its unintended appearance here, turn a kind thought toward others in need, and perhaps send some aid, and finish solving the puzzles. All the puzzles.

I wanted to say that woks are more for stir frying than deep frying in my neck of the woods, but I started asking myself since when do woods have necks and soon enough I was constructing a puzzle myself, entirely in my mind, a Sunday, 21x21, with a complete theme and many many clever moments and was about to mentally submit it, until I reached the very last square and couldn't make it wok.

I spent 10% of my solving time on the main part of the puzzle, and 90% trying to spell "babaghannouuouszh," which, as it turns out, is not the correct spelling.

One of my all-time favorite puzzles. Is it possible that I have, now and again, been that person who pencils in a few halfway right answers in an in-flight magazine, and then loses interest in order to gaze longingly at the snack cart? No. I've never done that, not at at all. You're thinking of someone else.

It's not that the gimmick is too hard. It's that it doesn't match my expectations. A basketball defender does not expect the player with the ball to shove them out of bounds as hard as possible, even though that would gain advantage and is quite legal in sumo. The gimmick was too hard relative to expectations. It's a Wednesday. I'm in pajamas. Gimme some idea that something fishy is going on. Usually there's an across supporting hint.

I do almost nothing but watch NBA basketball. No one ever describes a point guard (or anyone else) using a hop step. Here are some terms I'd choose for a point guard's crafty maneuver before that, although admittedly many are not seven letters: CROSSOVER, STEPBACK, BEHINDTHEBACKPASS, EUROSTEP, EURO, GOINGTHROUGHTHEFIVEHOLE, PASSFAKE, WRONGFOOT (verb), BOUNCEPASS, HESI, and I'll think of some more once I've recovered from my fainting at this terrible clue.

Dear Will Shortz: Dude. Dude, can I just have a puzzle that doesn't require me looking up addenda and holding the grid up to the mirror and getting out a cryptography manual? A Sunday puzzle with clues and responses and a gentle little clever gimmick? Today's puzzle is an absolute brick wall to me, and I've been solving the NYT for 40 years. Eugene T. Maleska would have never perpetrated such torture, I can tell ya that. The phrase that appears in the composer's bio is quite telling. It says, "Good puzzlemakers are always pushing boundaries." Wait. Why? What's wrong with the old boundaries? I think that editors of puzzles get bored and so do super sleuths, but they are not the only audience here. Sure, I've always enjoyed a gimmick, but not if that gimmick is too much work. After all, it's already a challenge to find out what the answers are. That's what I enjoy doing when I sit down in the morning sun with my morning tea and my radish-tofu smoothie. I know that some solvers enjoyed today's puzzle, and can anticipate that they land on the other side of the innovation question. To them I say "EXEUTI MII FROY LATA GHERKIN." They'll figure it out. Dude, for the rest of us, can you just give us puzzles we can spend our mornings on, not our souls?

Fans of my solving -- and they are legion -- will be delighted to learn that I finished this puzzle faster than I have ever finished any Thursday puzzle. I'm down to a record fourteen seconds personal best for Thursdays. Obviously the Monday times are quicker, six seconds is my PB; but there were some hitches today with the rebi and all. I think that it's time to start an admiration society of me. I wouldn't be the one to suggest it, I'm too modest for that, but I'm putting it out there in case someone with organizational skills and nothing but time on their hands wants to take up the challenge. It isn't easy. You'll have to manage the many thousands who want access to interviews or just time spent with me. Be strong. It puts me in a reflective mood: for a long time I wasn't really sure what the purpose of the internet is, at least for me -- or what the purpose of a comment section in general or this NYT crossword comment section might be. Now I know that the point of the whole thing is for others to boost my fragile ego on flimsy grounds, with no evidence to support my dubious claims. That's right, isn't it? Have I misunderstood?

Well, that's 44 hours I'll never get back.

It is simply the case that some of us like crossword puzzles where the idea is to find the words that meet the definitions; and some also like some gimmick that sacrifices the integrity of the noble grid for the benefit of some wordplay or pun. I like to think of myself as in the latter group, but the gimmicks have to be both clever and reasonably understandable from the clues. In my view there is simply no reason for me to think that "steal a kiss" means "the referenced words have an X that shouldn't be there but put it there anyway." It's not as though there is some existing cultural reference point. To steal a kiss is indeed a thing, and an X as a signoff kiss is indeed a thing, but putting the two together is like saying that dogs have fleas and schoolchildren like to flee after school, so ... I don't know, maybe the dogs should scratch the kids. I am therefore with heavy heart tendering my resignation from all crossword solving with the New York Times. Having given this decision a great deal of thought, it is final and I will not yield to any coercion or inducement. That is my final word, a personal ban on doing the crossword for the entire rest of the day. I'll see y'all tomorrow. XOXO

Impressive. If you told me to make a 15x15 puzzle that includes THATTRACKS, NEZPERCE, STREETTACO, THESEUS, BUCKETLIST, INHOTWATER, and BABYBOOMER, I'd say that with that level of optimism in my skills, you're about eight speeds shy of a ten-speed.

"Braina?" "Losaes?" Another crossword that drifts too far for my taste into the realm of "the gimmick is more important than the puzzle's integrity." I get the gag. It's not that compelling a gag, but it's fine --- IF the resulting words mean anything. I cast my gaze upon my completed puzzle and ask "What are these absurdities and how did we all get here?" It's a tragedy from which I may not recover,and it only seems to be a trend that is growing. I weep for the children, for tomorrow and tomorrow's solvers may face grids with no meaningful words at all, yet a really solid gimmick. This will lead to the breakdown of civil society and the erosion of table manners. Can we not just eliminate some of these overly gimmicky newfd puzzles? Now you're thinking "An error was made, surely 'newfd' is not a word." Ah, but you're forgetting the gimmick. See how it feels??? Ha.

OK. I solved the whole puzzle. I read the article. I read some of the comments. I have only the vaguest idea of what this was all about. However, the sun is shining and my dog needs a walk. Hoping for future crosswords that aren't so clever that I am forced to conclude that I'm not.

I don't understand how the response to "A resident of Muscat" is "Romania." Or "Crooner Mel" leads to "Stormed." That makes no sense at all. Not only do the answers make no sense, they aren't even in the right part of speech. I know, I know, it has something to do with the "offsides" gimmick. But what it has to do, I can't figure out. And here's the kicker: it's not worth the effort to find out. My critique is not solely or specifically of this puzzle . It's the NYT and its constructors moving in the past decade to prioritizing the gimmick over the integrity of the puzzle. It's fantastic if there's a clever gimmick. I love that. But when the finished puzzle looks like nonsense and I -- a 40 year solver -- have to read the comments section to find out what tedious logic led to this illogic, I think we've lost the plot. I like NYT puzzles. I like playful clues and themes. But contorting the whole puzzle into some forced gimmick that gives no satisfaction once solved is counterproductive. I'm supposed to feel good, satisfied, a bit proud of myself when completing the grid. Instead, on days like today, I feel disinterested and annoyed, as is no doubt evident in my tone. I get that. I love starting off the day with the NYT crossword puzzle. So please -- just provide crossword puzzles worthy of the name, and not some peculiar idiosyncratic logic that just makes it less fun.

I don't think the knee has anything to do with what Beckham bends. The point of the expression, as used in the film and in soccer in general, is that given the right force and at the right angle, a soccer ball will bend in its trajectory during flight. Good players can take advantage of this to curl the ball around defenders and into the net. So "Bend it like Beckham" means "Kick it in a curve."

What do we hope to gain by writing some words about the daily crossword? For me, it's sometimes an impulse to provide feedback on aspects of puzzles that I find objectionable, in the no doubt vain hope that someone at NYT will listen; or that at least someone else will say "yes, I share that objection." Whenever I have posted such a critique, I face now-predictable responses: "if you don't like it, you're incompetent." "You are too gloomy." "Only positive comments are welcome." "You don't *get* it." "You are in the minority and therefore not worth hearing from." Disheartening. Like being in a family, saying that you don't like the meatloaf, and being told that don't have the wit to understand meatloaf, so go live somewhere else. (The dish, not the musical artist) Today, I am hoping for better. Any respondents: please consider that disagreeing with my position does not mean I deserve a lecture in the history of crosswords or the nature of Thursdays. My objection is, once again, that the NYT has moved in the past decade to gimmicks that cost too much in terms of puzzle integrity. A completed puzzle with "WTVEWEHERE" "WLESERKS" looks utterly absurd, as though the emperor is wearing no clothing and we're not allowed to say so -- because this is all justified by the "laugh lines" key. It just isn't, for me. There are lines, I'm supposed to substitute "ha"when I see one. Got it. It's still absurd. The integrity of the crossword is being sacrificed to an unfunny gimmick.

Look I made a hat???? I get that someone out there or perhaps many someones know the reference, and many more once learning of it find it somehow instructive or inspirational. I find it one of the all time great let downs. I didn't exactly labor my utmost to solve this puzzle, but I was hoping for some sort of payoff I could relate to. You made a hat. How tedious. Now, I know the online world. If you say something you find true and express your positive regard for it, you get love back. But if you express something true and express a negative view of it, you get ad hominem attacks and calumny. I am resigned to this fate, fire away.

Choose ONE of the following response. Mark your response clearly on the answer sheet. 1. The crossword puzzle today was _________ A. Clever B. Something I solved without help C. Something I needed help with. D. Not clever even after learning its purpose E. A waste of time. I. A and B II. A, B, and E III. A, C, and a circled letter of some sort IV A, B, C, D, and E. V. Ambient music pioneer Brian

I suppose I'm the only one who, when clued "Like leatherette" four letters, instantly puts in "warm." Or maybe I'm not. If you know, you know.

I've been trying my hand at puzzle construction for some time now. I have to admit that Ms. Ziegler is faring better than I, for now. However, I'm a much better dancer.

There is a convention in crossword solving that has long irked me and today you have the pleasure of learning of my irk. I'm speaking of a clue such as: -- What's heard exactly twice in a lifetime? -- This is outright cheating. Any educated adult, nay, teen, knows that "lifetime" or "a lifetime" ought to be in quotes. The idea that I am meant to look for letters of the alphabet rather than things heard in an actual lifetime is simply a bridge too far to carry, to mix a metaphor for all who wish to buy a bridge. Of course, it would be rather easy to solve if the clue were: -- What's heard exactly twice in "A lifetime." What to do? 1. Live with my irk. I am no fan of this solution. 2. Change the convention. Big fan. 3. Don't clue "LONGI" lest you risk my wrath.

As a Jew, I have always felt a bit odd about having a rye named after me. I don't take severe umbrage, it's not that big a deal, but it's a cultural oddity that is on the outskirts of offense -- or maybe not. What say you? It's more like "Eastern European Rye imported more by Ashkenazi Jews in the early part of the 20th Century,, but certainly not exclusively by that group," which I think would be a great way to list it on the deli menu. If you ever dunk an Oreo in anything, you and I are through. Just eat the thing. It doesn't get dunked. I will accept separating it into sections or licking off the white part, but heaven help you if you start dunking. In milk or anything else. We aren't animals.

My enjoyment of this puzzle was entirely tempo Rary.

I imagine this may have been said, if so I apologize, please don't make me scroll an additional 12 minutes: Wouldn't Moriarty have taught "maths" rather than "math?" I admit I haven't read Sherlock Holmes lately. I find mysteries tedious. Except this one. What did he teach, when spelt in the original?

Set my all time fastest Monday time. I don't know why anyone would care, but such is life in a social context. We want others to see our lives, or approve of them. But I do suppose I could manage without letting you know. Food for thought.

I tried to see what would happen if I fed ChatGPT crossword clues. I gave it the clue and the number of letters. Here are a few of its first tries. After 288 easy hours of solving, I completed the task. Curious and masochistic, I decided to see if ChatGPT would do better. In each case I gave it the clue and number of letters. The first results: Look to give nothing away: UNHINTING European city on the Bay of Angels: NICE Film genre exemplified by “The Thing” or “The Fly”: BODY HORROR Like some fixations: ORAL It gets folded and pressed: NEWSLETTER Split in two: RENT Posts on Insta: ADS This proves something, but I don't know what. That's why I'm asking all of you.

Hi NYT it's me again with the anti-gimmick rant that my fans have come to love so. Reviewing: a thing I look for in a crossword puzzle is for the clues ... to match the answers! I'm weird and old-fashioned that way. As previously ranted in this space, to my mind the puzzles have in the past decade more and more come to sacrifice logic and readability for the sake of some gimmick that doesn't work and isn't fun or funny. Not just to me, but to all those who agree with me, and we are a quiet but growing number who are gathering pitchforks and planning to meet in the village square should this continue. A flipped bird, Yay, that's SUCH an AMAZING idea. Now all I have to do is take the letters that appear in the gray areas, which spell out a type of bird, and flip them and then -- well, actually, no. The puzzle actually appears to mean "a scrambled bird." So that's a fail. But even if it worked, there's something incredibly disheartening about reading the completed puzzle and being forced to say, "Ah, FALLCRANHES, that's the word I was going for." I already know that some view these puzzles as amusing or worth the challenge, but I have challenged them all to duels at dawn. Assuming -- and it's a fair assumption -- that I emerge victorious, will the NYT PLEASE resume posting puzzles that are either: A. Straightforward yet entertaining, with no gimmick, or B. With a gimmick, but it's so clever and well thought out that any sane solver would caper with delight?

VanderWhatNow? I was well on my way to a mediocre solve time when I encountered that one. Never heard of it. Later Googled it. Or, I'm not sure. I typed it in some search spot and it might have gotten Googled, or gotten AI'd. The distinction escapes me and frankly I don't wish to be asked. You know what I'm talkin' about? You post a question and receive a prompt back -- "Would you like the answer straight up or an ***AI ANSWER****" and you go, uh, I just want to know what I asked, that's why I asked it. In old Bavaria, they used to draw water from a well, of course, not having modern technology. But sometimes the pump in the well would fail. Then one member of the family, perhaps the young milkmaid, would asked what do do when the pump fails and another member, usually the patriarch, would get defensive and demand that no one worry, and assert that there is nothing to do "Van der pump rules!!" You're welcome.

I feel like I woke up a bit late and the culture changed while I was dozing. "plop art?" "lifestyle creep?" "bean butter/ butter bean?" I have apparently been living under a rock. But in good news, I was able to compose an amusing riddle in my head to which the answer is: "Lifestyle creep." The problem is, I can't tell you the prompting question in a family newspaper. You'll have to derive your own from the news.

I dunno -- is that theme really of suffficient cleverosity to merit a Sunday puzzle? Take books and -- get this -- put them where books would go. Replacing the space where books of the Bible go with books from not the Bible. Coulda at least done movies or song titles or wisdom gleaned from Bazooka Joe comic strips. I give the theme cleverness a 4 out of 11 and the execution a 15 out of 17. For more information on the scoring system, send an SASE to Will Shortz.

Today I learned that "Unexpected upsides" can work successfully as a clue to both "silver linings" AND "serendipities." I was tempted to enter the latter but it proved not worthy of some downward crosses. Still, one doesn't often see 13-letter-long synonyms.

I can't accept PET as a family member. I have a dog. Nice doggie. Loyal, friendly and true. I have a family. Not always that nice, friendly or true, alas. But that doesn't mean a dog is a family member. I wouldn't really wish that on her, anyway. My dog has a family. I am not in it.

When composing a comMENt such as this one, I don't RANdomly insert words that straightAWAY don't fit, and I preFER if THE puzzle didn't HILLSeither.

It's probably been said but I don't feel like scrolling: isn't "Human" Australia's largest carnivore? Bigger than a dingo I'll say that much.