Here's a new not-too-hard variety cryptic from Steve Mossberg: https://squarepursuit.com/2021/04/28/sq ... omment-148
Steve characterized its difficulty as 1.5 out of 5, so I dared to try it online. That's not my usual variety cryptic practice, which involves lots of erasing. But I found this one to be very enjoyably do-able online; what the required alterations involved became apparent fairly quickly.
Square Pursuit: "What'll It Be?" -- April 28, 2021
- ChrisKochmanski
- Posts: 2187
- Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:51 pm
- Location: Saline, Michigan
- Richard B.
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Sat May 16, 2020 1:58 pm
- Location: upper west side, NYC
I actually found this harder than the typical C&R offering. The clueing was not as easy for me.
Also, there’s a lot going on, IMO. You have to solve the clue, and then see if it fits with the crosses or has to be anagrammed before entry. Lots of work!
Also, there’s a lot going on, IMO. You have to solve the clue, and then see if it fits with the crosses or has to be anagrammed before entry. Lots of work!
- RPardoe
- Posts: 736
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:09 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
I always find it takes a puzzle or two for me to get used to a new setter (and their cryptic style).
Certainly felt a younger and regional vibe to some of the clues here.
As for the puzzle itself, I got lucky in that my first entries were all entered as normal before I hit the first word to be adjusted per the instructions.
Sussing that out quickly led me to the gimmick as well as the missing word at 17A.
Certainly felt a younger and regional vibe to some of the clues here.
As for the puzzle itself, I got lucky in that my first entries were all entered as normal before I hit the first word to be adjusted per the instructions.
Sussing that out quickly led me to the gimmick as well as the missing word at 17A.
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 1:08 pm
Thanks to Chris for posting this one. I agree with both Richard— this one was not easy for me, either — and RPardoe — in cryptics especially, all setters have a style that takes some getting used to. I was def not used to Steve’s. Cluing 2D as a “power ballad,” I thought, was a stretch, but fortunately the wordplay was fairly straightforward. I also found 26D problematic. Maybe I’m shoo my age. Again, thanks to Chris. If you keep posting Mossberg, I’ll keep solving. Or attempting to.