Listener 4281: Sporn By Hedgehog

[AHearer]

A very straightforward numerical. I was surprised at how few candidates there were for some of the number patterns, giving very clear entry points to the puzzle. Thanks, Hedgehog, for not taking up as much of my weekend as usually goes into a numerical!

[starwalker]

I'm with Scorpius on this. Thanks Hedgehog - I may not like numericals all that much, but that is hardly your fault.

[perseverer]

I wouldn't say this was one of my favourite puzzles but I feel you first of all have to admire anyone who manages to construct a numerical with a unique solution. Also for those who were complaining that you just looked up a list of primes and squares, the answer is obvious - don't. Work out possibilities for yourself as the grid fills up.

[dr b]

I thought this was fine; nothing wrong with a numerical that doesn't take all weekend. I disagree with "if you can't say anything nice...", otherwise why have this thread? I think it is possible to say something not nice, more nicely, though. I don't think it's reasonable to NOT consult a list of prime numbers - are we really supposed to work out the primeness of a number "from scratch" every time? That's just busy work.

That exhausts the list of things I care to think about on a Sunday morning.

[Contrarian]

There is something inherently problematic about the inclusion of a relatively small number of numerical puzzles in the Listener series.

If the puzzles are supposed to be crosswords (which are, arguably, verbal by definition), then what are they doing here? And if the puzzles are supposed to be based also on numerical reasoning, then why are there so few of them?

So it is unsurprising that the numerical puzzles are a source of discontent. The non-numerate types would wish them away entirely. The numerate types would probably like more of them, and feel resentful when, having waited 3 months for their 'special' puzzle, find that they can complete it in half an hour.

[Oyler]

As you probably know already Contrarian the first listener numerical appeared on 27th April 1932 so they have a long pedigree. As for completing it in half an hour I wouldn't be resentful of that fact. There's always The Magpie!

[jim360]

The only three certainties in life are death, taxes and people complaining about Listener numericals every three months or so.

[Philoctetes]

There is much that is puzzling in the community represented here. One can pour scorn on a numerical that can be completed quickly, yet brag weekly (by implication of the "Friday Club") of being able to complete a verbal crossword quickly. One can put a post saying "Simple verbal but the construction was exquisite", yet also say that a numerical was too simple, so never mind the construction. Personally, I feel there are too many puzzles based on (to me) obscure science and engineering, while many too few based on Classical music or the ancient world; I suspect Jim might have a different view. But variety is, as they say, the garam masala of existence.

[perseverer]

For those who may not be aware of it, the Listener site includes a monograph by (the late) Derek Arthur - Viking - on solving mathematical puzzles, in which he discusses the case for including these puzzles in the Listener series, as well as providing a lot of guidance on them. From listenercrossword.com follow links to Source Materials, then Mathematical Puzzles.

[jim360]

Actually I don't, really. I enjoy crosswords that rely on stuff I've never heard of before -- it's a good way to learn something and broaden my horizons. It would be a shame if people not so familiar with science were to dislike a puzzle just because they don't like Science. I mean, heck, it's a crossword, after all!

[Woot]

Fair enough, this was an easier numerical puzzle, in the same way that last week we had a relatively straightforward standard crossword. We can’t have really difficult puzzles every week - it would discourage new solvers.

Perhaps, rather than having 4 pure numerical puzzles each year, a logic based puzzle could be included - similar to the Poker puzzle last year.

[Cathyhuns]

I'm with those who like this puzzle. It wasn't that difficult to complete but I can see that it would have been difficult to construct with a unique solution.

I'm one of those people who much prefer the numericals. Mostly I find the verbal crosswords impossible. Many years ago my mother used to do the Listener and they used to be simpler (like simple Misprints or Playfair) and not with preambles that are so obtuse you need a degree in verbal reasoning to even work out what you are supposed to do.

[Cagey]

I agree with those that thought that this was a good numerical. I did not consult any lists to complete, but instead worked through the primes by calculator, which did not take too long. Enjoyed it. It did not take too long, but I have never done a puzzle clued in quite this way before (and that is the only standard by which I judge these puzzles).

In response to some previous comment or another. By luck I have stumbled across a long list of words that has been conveniently ordered by some system or another. By looking at the patterns of letter within them I am often able to work through and fit them into word puzzles jigsaw style, with (almost) no logic.

[Cagey]

Oh, almost forgot...
Thank you too Oyler, enjoyed yours too.

[tristram37]

I would like to thank Hedgehog for producing an entertaining numerical puzzle that I could actually do. We are not all maths wizards - I'm certainly not - and I thought this was an unusual idea well presented.