Listener No. 4438 Can't You Do Division? By Oyler

[Contrarian]

Thanks Oyler for another brilliant puzzle.

Is there any way we can access the original puzzle from 50 years ago?

[Encota]

I haven't got the hang of the new Answerbank user interface yet and accidentally created a parallel thread. Great puzzle - thanks Oyler!

[crosswhit99]

Yes, a very nice twist on Sudoku, thanks Oyler

http://www.listenercrossword.com/Years/Y1967.html

[u10]

Old puzzles like the one by Rhombus can be accessed via the Listener Historical Archive.

[crosswhit99]

Also of use for this one:

http://www.algebrahelp.com/calculators/number/factoring/

http://oeis.org/A036744

[BMACMAC]

Like Encota, I had trouble locating this thread. I've just made a start on the puzzle, which is an interesting idea, although at present I'm finding it a bit laborious.

[Contrarian]

But, crosswhit99, that archive doesn't provide access to the puzzle itself, does it?

[Oyler]

Contrarian email me at [email protected] for more info.

[Contrarian]

Thanks Oyler. I've emailed you.

[starwalker]

After a couple of weeks of hot sun and cold beers, coming back to a numerical was always going to be a bit of a downer. Fortunately, once I got into the swing of it, it gradually came together nicely. Many thanks, Oyler.

[u10]

The original puzzle by Rhombus was much harder with no hints given and without the nine digits in each row/column to assist in reducing options. Also in those days there were no calculators or internet factor producers. By the way, can I recommend Oyler's crossnumber monthly - great variety of numericals to keep you going between the Listener offerings.

[s_pugh]

Astonished myself by getting through this with no help required, other than a huge amount from the algebrahelp site kindly posted by crosswhit99 to whom I am deeply indebted. I still hate these numeric things as even having finished it I have no idea how I should have solved it as presumably there must be a logical way that doesn't require the use of spread sheets, calculators etc.

[icynorth]

Thanks Oyler, but I didn't find this as challenging as other numericals in the recent past. There was an easy route in to it, and when I got to the sudoku stage, it was all over in 15 minutes.

I do appreciate the skill that goes into these puzzles - this one was just too accessible.

[sunny-dave]

Well I've ground through to a correct grid - whilst I'm in awe of the construction and clueing, I can't say it was a particular joyful process.

I had to restart from scratch a couple of times - I suppose that's my real beef about numericals, it's virtually impossible to backtrack and regroup once you've strayed from the straight and narrow.

Thanks though, Oyler - it has kept the old numerical logic circuits in my brain from furring up.

[crosswhit99]

Well done s_pugh, you are very welcome.

The original 1967 puzzle can be accessed via the Listener Archive, a free 2 week trial is on offer here:

http://gale.cengage.co.uk/product-highlights/history/the-listener-historical-archive.aspx

[Philoctetes]

I spent ages baffled as to what the way in could be. Then came the "doh" moment and the rest just flowed. Pleasant fun rather than intense workout

[BMACMAC]

An ingenious and well constructed puzzle. I had to have two attempts: overlook just one possibility, and it might only become apparent when you reach an impasse much let on. A bit laborious, but rewarding when you finally reach the end. Without the Sudoku element, I think I might have given up. My primes table only goes up to 60000, so checking a 6 digit number is prime can take a lot of work. However, I found an online checker, which gave instant results.

[olichant]

Bringing up the rear, here - took me a while, but I enjoyed the way it came together in the end. Like others, I cheated slightly (if cheating it be) by focusing on the perimeter at the start. On which note - is penholodigital a real word?!

Thanks, Oyler.

Right, back to the tussle with Encota's numerical in this month's Magpie (highly recommended, as always).