this is the thread where we complain about the new york times crossword puzzle

lori petty was in yesterday's i think

Of course, I never got around to it.

BASTARDS!

the new york times crossword is NOT "cryptic" in the way that UK ones are, it's a synonym puzzle, and it's very strictly constructed, essentially each clue could replace its answer in a sentence and still be grammatically correct

one could draw inferences about cultural differences represented by these respective x-word hegemonies and possibly parlay it into a tiresome article for the nyt magazine, or an actually interesting one for the guardian

the nation used to run a cryptic crossword on its back page, i suspect it still does.

we could also talk about what kind of person the nytimes crossword imagines its solvers to be, and complain about that, which would delight me

I've never gotten even half of a Saturday puzzle.

Is it also true that the puzzles increase in difficulty as the month progresses?

The Atlantic Monthly (right? not Harper's?) runs cryptics by Ravathon and Cox, who are hands-down the best cruciverbalists in this country.

I've never heard anyone talk about them getting harder as a month progresses, though. What do you do when the end of a month is on a Tuesday? Seems like madness.

I can do Saturdays about 33% of the time but it takes a few hours and usually a breather in between solving attempts. I am bringing some for my x-country train trip tomorrow.

Did they want the correct letter Ø in the answer?

Not a hard puzzle today but one answer is tricksy - not as tricksy as Wednesday's infamous SHADETREE.

All the theme answers (but one) share a theme, but they do so while also making sense. The last one breaks the pattern. Spoiler: The other ones have revealers elsewhere - "TRIPLEA" about an answer that already has three As in it. Or "FIVEO" about an answer with five Os. But 118A only works after you apply the revealer "ZEROG" to it. I knew I was right on all the downs, so I had to look very carefully at "OINOINONE" until I saw "going, going, gone."

I will say that it's definitely one where it helped me to solve it methodically in order - top to bottom - rather than hopping around.

yeah i didn't like how the last one stuck out

It's possible that 2022-vintage Shortz is feeling stung by the criticisms that the puzzles used to be harder. I dunno.

For me it's a voluntary leisure activity. So far I am okay with the occasional dud or something that didn't quite work. Because: Overall, NYT has consistently brought me a thing that I don't mind doing with my brain. Like, every day for decades.

I do the mini crossword, and a couple of days ago one of the answers was UPBIG. I wondered if it was US slang, but the internet doesn't seem to agree. The clue was "winning by a lot" or something like that.

"Winning up big" and "win up big" throw up a tiny handful of google results and just googling "up big" returns (a) a lot of stuff about the Union Pacific Big Boy train (b) "big up" (c) sentence fragments etc.

I fee as if I'm missing something. The internet hasn't erupted into an uproar so it's obviously not that weird. But it baffles me.

it's something you would say in a colloquial conversation but not something you would necessarily ever say in writing. "are the patriots winning the game?" "yeah, they're up big" or "did you guys finish that monopoly game last night?" "nah, we quit and went to bed. i was up big." you'd only use it in relation to winning but "winning up big" or "win up big" aren't ways in which it would be used. it's an inelegant clue no doubt & i don't think you should feel bad for not "getting" it but i think minds of the sports inclined would know the phrase

up big is an often used phrase to count winnings and to big up the home team

'up big' does not have a life of its own as something repeated frequently. it's merely a case of the puzzle creator coming up with a phrase they would like to use in their puzzle because it fits nicely, imagining how it has plausibly been used from time to time in real life, then basing a clue on that supposition.

well no, it does have an independent life of its own. jordan and dan s have literally just explained it!??

So I wasn't hallucinating. The odd thing is that the mini crossword is generally easy. Upbig seemed to come from nowhere.

I felt for a moment as if I was a German spy trying to blend in with English people, except that I was an English person trying to think like someone from the United States. Thank gosh I never applied to MI6 to become a spy. I would have given myself away almost immediately. "Aiieee! mainer gams est brennen" or whatever.

I'm still puzzled by the mini-game where you have to match pairs of shapes. There doesn't seem to be a catch. You just match pairs of shapes. There isn't even a time limit.

well no, it does have an independent life of its own. jordan and dan s have literally just explained it!??

jordan and dan's explanations both cited a further context that would make explicit an element missing in the clue. Also "big up" is most certainly not the same as "up big" as a standalone phrase and it gets used in a completely different way.

"further context that would make explicit an element missing in the clue" - this is how crosswords work - they all have elements missing in the clues - otherwise it wouldn't be a puzzle, it would be a mechanical box-filling exercise

"big up" was an excuse to make a joke, playing on the words, not an example of a phrase with the same meaning

and now we're all caught up!

‘THE[NOUN]’ is bad but perhaps, occasionally, necessary; you sure as hell can’t use it twice in the same puzzle

‘doesn’t wax’ ≠ WANES ffs

That’s a good clue

most things that wane do wax or have waxed. most things that simply 'don't wax' could are in a perpetual steady state that also never wanes. in terms of logic, it's a horribly formed clue. in terms of most crossword clues' sheer blasphemy-worthy cussedness, it is only a bit worse than average.

If anything you should complain about them platforming a Billboard clickbait list

really?

Pretty cringe, no lying

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/inside-the-new-york-times-big-bet-on-games

You know, I've had a NYT subscription through work for years, but it didn't used to include the crossword. For a year or two, I ponied up for an add-on crossword subscription, but eventually let it lapse. So I haven't really been in the habit of doing it at all. (The only crossword I've regularly done in recent years is the one on the back page of The New Yorker.)

Then, a few weeks ago, I decided to download the NYT Games app because the mobile site kept pushing it to me when I played Wordle every morning. Which is when I discovered that now I *do* have free access to the crossword! And not just on the app. So I've been enjoying getting back into it.

I'm still puzzled by the mini-game where you have to match pairs of shapes. There doesn't seem to be a catch. You just match pairs of shapes. There isn't even a time limit.

You match elements of pairs, right? When you select two shapes with at least one matching element, it removes those elements, but you only get one point however many were removed. So in order to get a perfect score, you need to plan ahead so you are only ever matching pairs with one element in common.

I think the bad things about this app and its games can be summed up by the fact that the subtitle for wordle is “untangle terms”

otm

there are so many extraneous and useless words and i hate them

Good morning. New puzzles are waiting for you.
(at other times of day it displays even worse things about ‘winding down’)
Crack the clues in today’s puzzle.
Fill the grid with answers. Ready?
Untangle terms
Group words
Connect characters
Match motifs
Decode digits
Go fuck yourself

you are being interpellated as an extremely basic aspirational dimwit

wtf

that is bewildering

Sucks

I still don’t think that makes it “modern.” The puzzle column seems to imply its “colloquial” but those words don’t mean the same thing to me

It’s not worse than that twee “story” but it is very lame

Okay today has some major mindfuckery.

I filled everything in fine and was like, "huh?" Then "oh HELL no." Then "whoa."

Yeah v elegant

it's like a sfw version of the freud nyer one

what a great puzzle. probably shouldn't have started in the middle

ffs lads

Synonym found after deleting half the letters of EXHILARATE

Pulitzer-winning author whose name is found in nonconsecutive letters of “page turner”

i mean i’m sorry that james AGEE is inevitable fill several times a month but try harder

for all of the grid embellishments, that puzzle was kind of dull in general.

57A was brutal clue and answer.

not really a complaint, but it’s weird to go six years without ARHAT then get it on back-to-back days

I learned it from the NYT Spelling Bee!

a. bass guitars are not required to have FRETS
b. wtf @ STENOG

okay lol at today’s 61A

breaking my streak at 670 : /

Weekend puzzles seem too easy lately. Can't tell if this is an editorial shift or just due to randomness.

although connections today was really weird. even looking at the solution i couldn't square what they were trying to do

There’ve been a couple that were so ingenious recently that I looked around the room to find somebody to whom I could express my excitement and satisfaction— thinking of the “ten ants” one a few days ago

I don't solve in print but ngl this would probably have ruined my day too

https://www.vulture.com/article/new-york-times-crossword-error-reactions.html

kinda want to see the best efforts tho

I do the Sunday in the magazine on paper and this broke my brain after a rough workday

I thought the title "nuclear fusion" could explain why all the numbers were in the wrong places. the actual puzzle was a great toughie though

I did the online version of that nuclear fusion puzzle, without errors, and HATED it so much. I can’t remember any recent crossword I’ve disliked more.

Anyways, I have a running personal joke that I’d name an nyt crossword thread “ORCAs with EPEEs” so thought it was funny that yesterday’s puzzle had both of those words