#597 - "Solving in Pairs"
- Jacksull
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:23 pm
- Location: Scottsdale AZ
I thought I had backsolved this one but I couldn’t make a connection. When I gave up on the backsolve, it all became clear.
Jack Sullivan
- Jeremy Smith
- Posts: 971
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:45 pm
- Location: Tampa Bay area
Thank you, Barbara! Thinking of things that way, it quickly becomes a 100%-er. I actually had the piece that seemed “just a little off,” and discarded it. When will I ever learn that something that blatant would never be a red herring in Gaffney world?BarbaraK wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2019 5:28 pmI believe you're in the same place I was. You need to be sure you're not overly limiting things. Some stuff I assumed was part of the meta was in fact just coincidence in the first couple I came across. When I broadened out a bit, I found the rest of the pieces. Then it turned out that what I needed to do with them was not exactly what I'd expected either, but it all came together beautifully.Jeremy Smith wrote: ↑Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:58 pmYes, I’ve found three seemingly promising things, and then crashed into a wall. I’ve also used several extensive resources to find someone fitting the description in the answer to try to backsolve. A famous someone, born in 1953, I would definitely be familiar with. Makes me think those three things I found are red herrings. I’m amazed that some muggles solved this within minutes. I’m stumped on a week 2—sheesh!
- bhamren
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:15 pm
- Location: Urbana, Ohio
I was hung up also over some the were so clearly part of the meta and bupkis. Then I saw it after a closer look. Back solving didn’t give me any clues. I was surprised at how many people are born in 1953, though.
- JJD
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2019 9:13 am
Like always, I’ve found some amazing coincidences in the clues and entries, and between them.
- joequavis
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:29 pm
- Location: Windsor, Colorado
Beam me up! I was determined not to lurk on the forum until I had solved...though there's almost never spoilers, there are usually very subtle hints in language people use that either exclude or confirm a particular strategy.
My perfect month is still in tact! (Still going for my first one)
My perfect month is still in tact! (Still going for my first one)
- Thurman8er
- Posts: 393
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 3:05 pm
- Location: Fresno, CA
- joequavis
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:29 pm
- Location: Windsor, Colorado
I wonder if we found the same amazing coincidence...let's compare notes tomorrow
- Jacksull
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:23 pm
- Location: Scottsdale AZ
I thought I had backsolved this one with the famous puzzle pair Henry Rathvon and Emily Cox. But I could not link them (or their nickname HEX) to the pairs in the puzzle. After spending too much time trying to find a 1953 DOB for them, I went back and found REGIS.
Jack Sullivan
- BarbaraK
- Posts: 2592
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:37 pm
- Location: Virginia
Given the title, when I saw Hobbes and Teller on the first row, I had their partners in mind before I even got to their theme answers. Once I saw them though, I started expecting all the theme answers to start with a name and assumed that the initials of the grid partners - H, T, and the rest - would spell the meta answer. Obviously that didn't work.
Another pass through the grid and I noticed Oates, thought of Hall, and decided the names in the themes didn't have to be at the beginning, but I was still expecting them to be together. I even looked at Ginger, thought of Fred, so close but it just doesn't work because of that extra I.
When I did notice that the theme answer names were all in a complete word plus one letter, that fixed my "who can ?TH?O possibly be" problem too.
Another pass through the grid and I noticed Oates, thought of Hall, and decided the names in the themes didn't have to be at the beginning, but I was still expecting them to be together. I even looked at Ginger, thought of Fred, so close but it just doesn't work because of that extra I.
When I did notice that the theme answer names were all in a complete word plus one letter, that fixed my "who can ?TH?O possibly be" problem too.
- joequavis
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:29 pm
- Location: Windsor, Colorado
One coincidence I found - I noticed several clue pairs with identical words (Portrayer in 20A / 16D; Spice in 45A / 74A, etc.) Thinking these linked clues were part of the meta-chanism, and noting a year called out in the meta clue...16D: Kent portrayer of 1978 (Reeve) --> linked to Cesar Romero (portrayer) --> Cesar Romero portrayed Christopher (Reeve) Vincente in 1978. Looked for similar links in the other clue pairs, but of course fell short.
- JJD
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2019 9:13 am
Ugh, I never saw the extra letter in each word.
I did find the Ginger Spice > Geri
And Miranda Hobbes was played by Cynthia Nixon, and there’s a Nixon clue.
Teller got me to the “tell a tale” clue
I even backguessed Regis, but never saw the connection.
I kept looking elsewhere, especially because there were 3 words in YE SHALL FIND.
I did find the Ginger Spice > Geri
And Miranda Hobbes was played by Cynthia Nixon, and there’s a Nixon clue.
Teller got me to the “tell a tale” clue
I even backguessed Regis, but never saw the connection.
I kept looking elsewhere, especially because there were 3 words in YE SHALL FIND.