Listener Crossword No 4368 -- The Name Of The Game By Harribobs

[jim360]

The preamble was enough for an early PDM, although I've not actually played the game properly before. Then it was a relatively speedy gridfill before I nervously attempted the endgame, dreading the randomness that was going to be a pain to check. In retrospect, I should have thought that our setter would have been more careful to ensure a proper finish, and so it proved.

Well done Harribobs, and a fine debut even if it was over fairly quickly.

[logophile]

This game sure is hard to play
I'm gonna lose it anyway
The losing card I'll someday lay
So this is all I have to say.......

[icynorth]

I was initially convinced what the preamble was indicating the solution to be - it fitted the elegance, the puzzle title and everything - but having researched a little more into the original terminology of the game, the concerns listed above are quite reasonable, and I don't see how the editors could say one solution is more correct than the other.

[jim360]

I've not submitted yet, so I still have time to decide which is the better solution to try. I think the intended one has to be the neater outcome (for what would be the point otherwise of constructing the start position in the way it is done?) but I also agree that technically the instructions don't match with that intended solution. I would be inclined to submit the neater outcome with a note to that effect. But if either isn't accepted then it would be a shame.

Main thing to watch out for is that everything else is correct, though... single-bit errors have cost me too often in the past!

[Scorpius]

Submitting the G2 grid seems to me a risky gamble. Firstly it's harder to spot errors in the shading because it's irregular; secondly, it's difficult to consider an apparently random arrangement as the intended solution, and solvers risk being marked wrong because they have rejected an obviously appropriate and neat outcome in favour of chaos; lastly, solvers submitting G2 grids are likely to be in a small minority, so risk being marked wrong on 'the great and the good' principle.

When the solution is published, if it's G2, then G1 would have to be shown to indicate the stage that gets to G2. Placing the two side by side and saying G2 is the right solution would look bonkers.

[starwalker]

I have to say that I didn't care much for this. Unlike others, I found some of the clues rather tricky - probably a wavelength thing. But, I feel that it lets itself down by the problematic preamble and instructions.

[EAChaplin]

If you read the archives of these threads you will discover a tendency, particularly from those with expert knowledge of the theme, to take a step too far. This is plainly the case here and what to submit is obvious as pointed out by Scorpius

[British_Olympics]

G2 submissions may well be in the minority Scorpius, but as that is what the message instructs us to provide my flabber would be completely ghasted if they are not accepted. I do agree with Justin and Mark that it would probably be wise to add a covering note if only to alert the marker that there has (probably) been a problem.

[EAChaplin]

This is a perfect example of what I meant. To the average solver finding the required start cells is step one and the second generation is highlighting the obvious. This technical stuff about seeds and starting at zero then G1 G2 etc., is beyond most of us - a step too far.

[Mysterons]

Guys, please lighten up - it's only a game and, after all, life's too short ;-)

[British_Olympics]

Fair comment, though if G2's required then surely life's two short ?

[Scorpius]

I don't see that there's anything in the puzzle that obliges us to think that the state represented by the first part of the hidden message is the state before G1. Perhaps it is G1. Considered in that way, anyone submitting anything other than the one representing the title will be marked wrong.

[jim360]

Well part of the instructions do specify that the position after the grid fill is to be considered as the initial state, so I think there is a very strong case for the pedantic arguments above. I'm still going with what I think to be the intended (ordered) solution, though.

[crosswhit99]

I think you are probably right Jim - the first word of the extra information is a synonym of 'seed' so to assume that it begins at G1 seems much less logical. Consensus here seems to be that this isn't a deliberate trap for the unwary so the marking will presumably depend on whether JEG is informed of the ambiguity - your note will hopefully do the trick !

[perseverer]

As a little footnote to the discussion, if you read the Cornell University article on the game, it states that the initial pattern is the first generation, so there is not universal support for the start being zero.

[British_Olympics]

Though if you do need a definitive answer on the identity of G1 you could take a look at the original article in Scientific American, October 1970, also available on-line.

[Scorpius]

This will probably be my last word on the subject. The marker, John Green, will sometimes consider the setter's intention to settle an issue of ambiguity such as the one raised on this forum. Look at things from the setter's perspective. Does anyone seriously believe that, having engineered a very clever grid in which order magically emerges from chaos, the setter wouldn't want that achievement on display?

[logophile]

Yes, and given the Name of the Game, Didn't They do Well ?

[EAChaplin]

If you haven't yet posted your entry, please heed the sound advice offered by Scorpius. If you think including a note explaining your reasons will affect the result, good luck with that as they say.

[icynorth]

It's such a shame to see it spoil a fine puzzle. It could have so easily been avoided by changing the plurality of one word (as was suggested above) and the ordinal value of another.

[crosswhit99]

... and more generally why not routinely include an indication in the preamble of the total number of cells to be highlighted ? This is common practice in many advanced cryptics, would not have detracted from the solving experience and would have quickly resolved this ambiguity, which has clearly been overlooked by both setter and vetter. I agree with others, a note explaining your reasoning would be wise if you do decide to submit G2.