Comments on: Financial Times 13,239 / Mudd

By: mhl

mhl — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:50:48 +0000

shuchi: thanks for the post – we missed RELIEVO, annoyingly, since I’d seen the word very recently. Excellent puzzle.

On the Paul vs Mudd issue, I agree it’s surprising – I’d always guessed that it was due to most solvers doing the puzzle in the dead tree edition, and a discrepancy between their circulation numbers, but the FT actually has a larger circulation:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/table/2009/oct/16/abcs-national-newspapers

I don’t know where one would get figures on the relative popularity of crosswords in each paper, but the Guardian crossword definitely has its distinct identity and reputation – if I remember correctly, it gets a number of entries to the prize crossword a bit below The Times, which is what you’d expect from the circulation figures if the crosswords were approximately as infamous as each other :)

Of course, there’s also something self-perpetuating about having so many people commenting on each Guardian post here.

By: shuchi

shuchi — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:43:10 +0000

…when so many people respond to Paul crosswords, while at the same time there are only 5 posts so far for a very good Mudd?

I’ve wondered about that too. In general, FT’s comment space is oddly barren when compared with the Guardian’s. Is it because FT solvers are fewer, or quieter, or something else altogether?

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:05:09 +0000

Thank you, both (and especially shuchi for the blog).
I don’t have a Chambers, I am just relying on (several) i-sources, including Chambers. But it’s clear now.

BTW, don’t you (both) think there’s something wrong (or to win) when so many people respond to Paul crosswords, while at the same time there are only 5 posts so far for a very good Mudd?

By: shuchi

shuchi — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:51:29 +0000

Hi Gaufrid

Saw your comment after posting mine – sorry for the duplication!

By: shuchi

shuchi — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:43:13 +0000

HOODLUM (9ac) is a noun, but can the definition “rough” be a noun too. Is there a person you can call “a rough”?

The dictionaries sanction it. Chambers has “rough” as noun, meaning “a hooligan; a rowdy”.

By: Gaufrid

Gaufrid — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:40:50 +0000

Hi Sil
‘rough’ in Chambers is defined as ‘a hooligan, a rowdy’, amongst many other things, so I think it can equate to ‘hoodlum’.

By: Sil van den Hoek

Sil van den Hoek — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:59:07 +0000

No Brummie for us today, but a Muddie.
And a good one it was.
Great surface reading ánd fun in ROE DEER.
A very well-hidden solution in 8ac, where we first thought of “rattle” inside “runner” , with “vertically” as the definition. Knowing that it started with a U, we went for “upright” (but didn’t enter it in the grid).
Smooth clueing in the well-constructed 11ac (ON THE GO).
And in 4d (ETHER), one of our favourites – seen ETHER very often in crosswords, but this one was particularly good.

Only one minor question.
HOODLUM (9ac) is a noun, but can the definition “rough” be a noun too. Is there a person you can call “a rough”?

By: Eileen

Eileen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:22:55 +0000

Thanks for the blog, shuchi – as you say, lots of fun.

In 1ac, I think there’s a reference to the ‘safe’ meaning of ‘peter’.

I had the same thoughts as you about ‘standing’ in 23ac.