« Trust Me, I'm a Rent-a-Cop: The "Bad Apple" Wants to Sell His Story. | Main | Mercury Softball: The Secret of Our Success »
I just got off the phone with Will Shortz, New York Times puzzle editor, and NPR’s puzzle master. There’ll be a Q&A with him in the paper next week—he’ll be in town on Thursday for Portland Arts & Lectures (and to play table tennis).
I’ve had an ongoing disagreement with several people, as to the validity of my technique for working on the hard-as-hell Sunday NYT crossword. Is it acceptable to do research when a clue clearly has a fact based or historical answer? Like today’s 16 Across, “Dodger who threw the pitch Bobby Thomson hit for the ‘shot heard round the world.’” Would it be okay to crack open an almanac (or, who’s kidding, the internets) to find Ralph Branca—or is that cheating?
Erik Henriksen has been calling me a cheater all day, for suggesting this as a viable strategy. Will Shortz, however, didn’t even let me finish the question—he’s obviously been asked this before. His verdict? “It’s your puzzle.”

Um...I don't think Amy's in a crossword puzzle tournament. Right now, anyway (and if she does start tournamenting, she'll now know more trivia to fill in the next puzzle).
How is this different from the massive crossword dictionaries that people use? (Except for being more efficient...)
My own personal technique is to go through all the clues at least twice, and if I'm entirely stumped and can't progress, I will look up one of the fact-based clues I didn't know and see if that gets me un-stuck.
I can hardly ever finish a Sunday one without looking up at least one clue. Someday I hope to cast my crutch away, though.
Yep, that's pretty much what I do. When I'm stuck, instead of tossing it in the recycling, I dig up an answer or two, and go another round. Will had a lot of other advice on unstucking yourself and getting better—without the internets!—so I'll employ his ideas, too.
Will Shortz, however, didn’t even let me finish the question—he’s obviously been asked this before. His verdict? “It’s your puzzle.”
This reads more like- Stop asking me this fucking question right now, than a truly thoughtful response.
Just because you're not in a tournament doesn't mean there are no rules. If you choose to ignore the rules you are a cheater. I used to play Contra with the Konami Code all the time and had a ton of fun. But I knew I was cheating and I was okay with that.
Crossword dictionaries are just as much cheating as buying answers or looking it up on the internets.
And Sundays aren't nearly as challenging as Saturday. Big and time consuming? Sure. But nothing beats a Saturday for the raw obfuscatory genius of the clues.
This is not 'Nam. There are rules.
Any idea where and with whom he's playing table tennis? Is it possible for a schmuck like me to join in on that?
He said he checks the USA table tennis site before he heads somewhere new, to see where people are playing locally.
I look up answers, and I note it on the crossword by using a different color to pen it in. Hey, some of us know who Branca is, others know how the Idaho state motto starts, now I know both! To me, it's about improving, and the amount of red letter entries is going down, so I'm happy.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).
That's like saying "It's your Rubik's Cube" so you get to pull the little stickers off and put them back to solve it.
Just because it's your puzzle, doesn't mean you're not still a cheater.
A better question would be: "If I were to use wikipedia in a crossword tournament would I be disqualified for cheating?"
Answer: "Yes. Because that's cheating."