WaPo Meta by Evan Birnholz: SHUFFLING THE DECK

[oldjudge]

This Sunday’s WaPo has a meta by Evan and for the first time I can remember it wasn’t the equivalent of a week one, at least not for me. I had to stare at it for a few minutes before I saw what was going on. Unless you are a WSOP groupie you will undoubtedly have to look up the list of prior main event winners.Otherwise, great puzzle with a nice Aha moment when you epiphanize (I just made that up, I think).

[Cindy]

Solved

[BethA]

Enjoyed it! Definitely had to look at the list.

I keep wanting to send in my answer, but I guess this one doesn’t have the option of winning a mug or anything… please correct me if I’m mistaken!

[dudeski]

Same here. Fun puzzle.

[ChrisKochmanski]

Enjoyed!

[hcbirker]

Very fun!

[oldjudge]

No prizes, although it would be nice if the WaPo had their own “trophy”. The cost would be minimal, Evan only does a handful of metas each year, and the publicity would more than cover the cost. They wouldn’t even need to order new mugs. I’m sure the paper has a supply of mugs now and Evan could just sign the mug in sharpie as the prize. What da ya say, Evan?

[ebirnholz]

Hi all, I've been procrastinating on joining this forum and here's my first post. Thanks for solving.

No prizes, although it would be nice if the WaPo had their own “trophy”. The cost would be minimal, Evan only does a handful of metas each year, and the publicity would more than cover the cost. They wouldn’t even need to order new mugs. I’m sure the paper has a supply of mugs now and Evan could just sign the mug in sharpie as the prize. What da ya say, Evan?

It's not me that you have to convince. Several years ago, I asked my editor if there were a way to set up a contest for my metas like the WSJ does, but it was shelved because it meant they would have to get the Post's legal team to draw up, review and revise contest rules. That would have been a fairly sizable project for them that would have taken at least several weeks, and they just didn't want to spend the time to do it. I can always bring it up again, and I realize the WSJ has their own template for contest rules, but I wouldn't count on this changing soon and I'm in no position to run a contest like this independently.

In the meantime I'd mentioned to a couple of folks at AmuseLabs earlier this year that it might be fun if they can build in a field on the Post's website where solvers can submit meta answers just to see if they got it right, but I don't know how long that would take or how high-priority that is for them when they have several other projects on their hands.

Anyway, I'd like there to be a Post contest one day, but even if there isn't, I hope you'll still take the time to attempt the metas I write and share them with friends if you like what I did. Heads-up that I'm writing another meta that should appear in the Post in a few weeks.

[woozy]

Fun. Kind of a nice (and relaxing) change of pace to assume everything will be harder and there will have to be more to have it been just exactly what you thought and no more.

So... I guess there is nowhere to submit or way to verify the solution. (Although with the list it is a 100%)

[Toast]

Solved! Thanks for the fun meta puzzle. (And thanks for letting us know about it.)

[Schmeel]

Solved.
Really good puzzle - thanks!

[higgysue]

That was fun! Thanks Evan!

[boharr]

Clever and fun as always.

[hcbirker]

Fun. Kind of a nice (and relaxing) change of pace to assume everything will be harder and there will have to be more to have it been just exactly what you thought and no more.

So... I guess there is nowhere to submit or way to verify the solution. (Although with the list it is a 100%)

You can find the solution here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/evan-birnholz/

[woozy]

You can find the solution here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/evan-birnholz/

From the link:

My personal knowledge of professional poker players is fairly limited — off the top of my head I know the names....

Um... if one knows any names you can't claim your knowledge is limited. If you can name as many as !FIVE! I'd say you are a world class expert.

[MMe]

You can find the solution here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/evan-birnholz/

That link shows up *before* you complete the grid, when really it should show up in the "Info" dialog after you do. Evan, can that be fixed?

[ebirnholz]

@woozy:

Um... if one knows any names you can't claim your knowledge is limited. If you can name as many as !FIVE! I'd say you are a world class expert.

Lol, I wish that was all it took. I can name a lot more than just five NBA players, but I'd never call myself a world-class expert in basketball trivia ... just a lifelong fan. My knowledge of professional poker players is surface-level knowledge at best.

@MMe:

You can find the solution here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/evan-birnholz/

That link shows up *before* you complete the grid, when really it should show up in the "Info" dialog after you do. Evan, can that be fixed?

Which link? The one to my Post blog? I don't think that ever shows up before you complete the puzzle; it should only appear in the congratulations message once you've filled the grid out correctly. Or did you mean the link to the list of WSOP Main Event winners? If so, I put that link in from the start because I wanted solvers to know that it's okay to look up potential meta answers if you don't know them; a lot of infrequent meta solvers have the impression that needing to look anything up in a meta is "cheating."

[MMe]

Sorry Evan, I wasn't quite accurate. The link DOES show up when you finish the grid, but of course that's NOT when you're done with the meta (unless you're e.a. or Jangler). So when *I* finish the meta, I find myself hunting for the blog link, and I think I can't find it without re-opening the puzzle app and getting the finished-grid congrats dialog again. If I'm right about that and not just confused again, it might be good to put the link in the "Info" thing.

[ebirnholz]

@MMe:

Ah. I can see if AmuseLabs can put that link to the blog in the Info section, but for now I'd either just bookmark it or (if you forget) just Google my name and Washington Post, and it should be one of the first hits that comes up.

[BarbaraK]

Hi all, I've been procrastinating on joining this forum and here's my first post. Thanks for solving.

No prizes, although it would be nice if the WaPo had their own “trophy”. The cost would be minimal, Evan only does a handful of metas each year, and the publicity would more than cover the cost. They wouldn’t even need to order new mugs. I’m sure the paper has a supply of mugs now and Evan could just sign the mug in sharpie as the prize. What da ya say, Evan?

It's not me that you have to convince. Several years ago, I asked my editor if there were a way to set up a contest for my metas like the WSJ does, but it was shelved because it meant they would have to get the Post's legal team to draw up, review and revise contest rules. That would have been a fairly sizable project for them that would have taken at least several weeks, and they just didn't want to spend the time to do it. I can always bring it up again, and I realize the WSJ has their own template for contest rules, but I wouldn't count on this changing soon and I'm in no position to run a contest like this independently.

In the meantime I'd mentioned to a couple of folks at AmuseLabs earlier this year that it might be fun if they can build in a field on the Post's website where solvers can submit meta answers just to see if they got it right, but I don't know how long that would take or how high-priority that is for them when they have several other projects on their hands.

Anyway, I'd like there to be a Post contest one day, but even if there isn't, I hope you'll still take the time to attempt the metas I write and share them with friends if you like what I did. Heads-up that I'm writing another meta that should appear in the Post in a few weeks.

Welcome to the forum!

Do your puzzles use the same software as Pete Muller's mini crossword suites? Those let you enter the meta answer and tell you if you're right. A virtual party whistle and glitter shouldn't require any lawyers and would be nearly as much fun as a very small chance for a mug.