Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

How could 35SE be HAST? I don't see that jumble anywhere in the relevant excerpt between the two surrounding jumbles. Mind you, my brain is so addled from looking for jumbles that I could have easily missed it.

I'm quite puzzled by that preamble reference to resolving an ambiguity. I have the highlighting and I cannot see any ambiguity that hasn't already been resolved by the excerpts. I didn't have to change anything to get the correct milestone, so have I been lucky and opted for the right choice out of two possibles without realising there were two possibles?

5SE gave me endless grief. There's another more obvious possibility that recurs throughout the texts where that clue is jumbled. To anyone who hasn't yet finished, if you run into problems in that area of the grid check 5SE carefully.

35SE has RAST as a possibility. Obscure, but in Chambers.

Thanks. I can see that now. After demeter's post I was looking for HAST as an alternative, so overlooked that.

I think I'm up the creek somewhere. I thought I had found 32SE in Grimshaw and criticisms but for the life of me I can't find its third appearance in the first excerpt. What I've got also makes 34SW look impossible. A nudge would be appreciated.

i have moe and ovist .... but they may well be wrong!!

Up creek indeed. For first instance check line above Grimshaw.

It looks like you have the wrong word for 32SE. Its first occurrence in the first excerpt is in the third word of the title.

Thanks all, back to the drawing board.

Still struggling to understand the semicolon. Why is it telling me there is a missing word between jumbles when there is no asterix to suggest I need that word?

the ones with semi-colons don't use letters from missing words - they are from jumbles between them....
eg in the 1st paragraph 14NW comes from the jumble foR MORE Than which is between 26NE devotees and 21SW listener