Puzzle Description:

Redbirds! Get those bats going! sorry, but the Cardinals are in the playoffs y'all...

#1: Joel Lynn (furface1) on Oct 6, 2013

nice

thanks JL! :)

Hey, batta, batta! Nice idea, fun solve.

Congrats to your Cards Kurt,hope they go all the way.:)

I really like the puzzle. Someone rated this moderate lookahead. Does one tiny bit of smile logic at the end count as ML?

BTW, after I finished up, I gave the ball red laces. Really makes it pop!

yes, one tiny bit of smile logic counts as ML. as does one lil instance of an easily seen el. red woulda looked cool!

thanks y'all!

pls, could anyone be so kind and explain to me, why edge or smile logic are higher logic methods then the line or color logic! It's a very simple thinking. I always said from 1999, when we (few of experts) published an analysis of "grafilogic" (that's an old name of paint-it-black). We showed that has got an exclusive LOGIC.
In this case I guess it's easier make a checking software, but the LOGIC isn't a question of easyness.
Usually I start solving whitout clicking but searching "edges" instead of "big numbers". It's efficiency is much better.

Found to be solvable with moderate lookahead by jan.

well, there are several classifications on here. it definitely cannot be solved with only line or color logic, so the next step up on the list is "moderate look-ahead".

I also look at edge logic in corners often times before searching all available line logic. to each their own...what's easier to see for some isn't always the preferred method for another. whatever makes ya happy

Suppose you had a sheet of cardboard with a slot one line wide and you solved your through that piece of cardboard. You'd move the cardboard around to look at different rows, and rotate it to look at different columns, but you'd never look at more than one row or column at a time, and never remember anything you saw before the last time you moved the cardboard. If you can succeed at solving the puzzle that way, then I call it "line-solvable".

Line solving is generally the first trick beginning puzzlers learn, and many never move beyond it. Most puzzles published are line solvable. Some web-sites, like Griddlers.net, don't even allow puzzles to be published unless they are line-solvable. Many puzzle solving program only do line solving - looking at the world through a slot is a very computery thing to do.

But line-solvable puzzles are not necessarily easier than others. Sometimes line solving requires finding one extremely non-obvious dot. Things like edge logic and smile logic can often be easier. That's why I have separate categories for "Difficulty" and "Solvability".

So the "Logically solvable with moderate lookahead" is an indication to solvers that they may have to think outside the slot. Of course, many of us like the fancier solving techniques and use them whether we need them or not, so the distinction is not terribly important. I might not bother to make it if the computer wasn't able to identify line-solvable puzzles automatically. Those puzzles can be identified by computer, and the uniqueness of the solution can (almost always) be identified by the computer. So the only thing we need humans to decide about are "moderate lookahead" or "deep lookahead".

Separating these categorizations from the Difficulty ratings is also useful because a lot of users routinely guess when solving puzzles. So they are likely to give an easy rating to a puzzle if "picture logic" makes it easy to guess, even though finding a logical proof of what the solution is might be quite difficult.

The system is not perfect, but it's better than the old system.

Awesome!

I thought it would be a comet, until I got to the stitching. :)

Cardinals fans: my friend's grandson, Gordon Graceffo, was drafted by the Cardinals and is now a pitcher in their minor leagues. He's doing great! Watch him.

Goto next topic

You must register and log in to be able to participate in this discussion.