CancelReport This Post

Please fill out the form below with your name, e-mail address and the reason(s) you wish to report this post.

 

Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

rogerm

6th December 2025, 00:58
A game or two halves, or rather 95% and 5%, for me. I thought I was going to complete this in record time, but was then held up by a couple of tricky parses on right hand side. In fact, if I have 22 (my LOI) right, it’s also not very good, in my view at least. Didn’t know an element of 31, and don’t feel I’ve missed out by not knowing it.
Hmmm, sorry to be a bit of a grouch. Perhaps I’ll find more to appreciate in the daylight.
1 of 37  -   Report This Post

rogerm

6th December 2025, 01:06
Ok, I quite liked 30.
2 of 37  -   Report This Post

geeker

6th December 2025, 01:19
Thanks to Fed.
I had some trouble with this. Despite the presence of a few extreme "gimmes", I took a long time to finish and many clues required long thought.
I'm tired this Friday evening. Might be the fatigue, but I didn't enjoy this quite as much as most Fed (of whom I'm a fan) puzzles.

FOI 4. LOI the combination of 22 and 29 (due to an error in 29 that held up progress).
Can't pick a COD right now, but the long list is: 18, 30, 24, 10, 1 and 5.

22 might be clever...answer is obvious from crossers but I'm not 100% sure of parsing.

Wondering if there's a theme or some kind of feature...two pairs of neighbo(u)ring across solutions contain hidden words, but that could be coincidence.


3 of 37  -   Report This Post

rogerm

6th December 2025, 01:24
Hi geeker
My parsing of 22 is 3,1 inside 2, followed by 1. If that’s right, I don’t think much of it, so I hope I’m missing something.
4 of 37  -   Report This Post

geeker

6th December 2025, 01:29
My parsing of 22 is [(1 inside 3) inside 2], 1.

I'm now pretty confident in it, and one aspect of the wordplay is rather tricky/clever IMO.
5 of 37  -   Report This Post

rogerm

6th December 2025, 01:34
Hmmm, I can’t make your parsing work with my solution (which must be right given the crossers), geeker! I’ll sleep on it.
6 of 37  -   Report This Post

geeker

6th December 2025, 01:37
roger, I'm now questioning my parsing because the "for" would be superfluous.
7 of 37  -   Report This Post

akg

6th December 2025, 01:49
Roger, if it helps any, the clue for 22D appears to reference a brand name of your 3 letter insertion.
8 of 37  -   Report This Post

rogerm

6th December 2025, 01:54
Ah thanks akg, that does help. I was thinking of a different sort of definition by example (which really doesn’t work), and overlooked the brand name!
I like it more (or, grouchily, dislike it less) now!
9 of 37  -   Report This Post

geeker

6th December 2025, 02:04
Thanks, akg and roger. I agree with your parsing...funny that I was thinking about that brand name but struck out because I was thinking "acronym".
10 of 37  -   Report This Post