Starting with 1a – I don’t would never think of “sway” when clued by “rule”. Influence, maybe, or a tricky definition of some of its other meanings. 2a. “Ramp” would never have occurred to me, although I see it in Chambers online, got the answer via onelook and checked letters. Had to look up far too many things for various reasons. Researching the stomachs didn’t even give me the check for the long clue, since there are a few related words. At least the ink one I was able to deduce from some checks and the wordplay, then found it redirects to invisible ink at wikipedia. Too many whines to list, really. If a word is obscure, the wordplay can’t require knowing yet another obscure word (“moly”, to me anyway).

I knew what I was supposed to do to the badger, but not knowing what the “tail” letter (or letters) was that was hacked off just exhausted the brain.

I’m with NeilW, Median, and Sil on this one – if I had printed this out on a Saturday and it took until Wednesday using all tools I can think of, I would think that fair, I expect the prize puzzles to be very taxing. Odd that I can remember a few of the Reverend’s that weren’t.

Well, that’s me done complaining, thanks for the monumental effort on the blog, Eileen, and Araucaria for the untimely challenge. Please, next time you put this much effort into a puzzle, whisper to Hugh “psst, this one is very hard, save it for Saturday”. Cheers.

I put Breathes in for 10 across. Its an anagram herb and teas and breathing could be described as a process of seperating gases. I like it more than the real answer actually! Certainly didn’t help me with the rest of the puzzle.

Sorry for the delay – I’ve been out on a lovely evening ramble, followed by an excellent pub meal.

Thank you for sharing that. I’d be interested to know if you receive any response but the relative difficulties of the puzzles is not one of my main causes for concern – one of them being the lack of response to comments!]

Hi Sil

“This was Araucaria on top form”.

I agree! – and I can say that now, at the end of the day. Having established a reputation as an avid Araucaria enthusiast, I do try, now, early on, to curb my enthusiasm – to the point, last week, I think, of overplaying the part of Devil’s Advocate! I really enjoyed this, despite – and perhaps I don’t really mean that [it's nice to think he can still pull one over us] – having been foxed by 24ac.

“You unraveled THE BEST OF BRITISH LUCK! We didn’t, we gave up.”
That’s a luxury afforded to bloggers only ‘in extremis’ [v 24ac] [as you now know!]

20dn was my first entry, too, so, you can imagine, as it was the penultimate clue, I was, as the blogger, fairly desperate by then! [And I'm more used to 'Latin' in its 'usual' meaning]

Hi mismanager

Back to 24ac

Thanks for the suggestions but I’m now totally convinced! I think I’ve been incredibly dim about this clue today. Even after accepting Gaufrid and Robi’s explanations, I still couldn’t really get my head round it – it seemed the wrong way round, somehow – then RC Whiting came along with his musings / explanation and it all made sense [but then, Proteus-like, still kept escaping me until I really tied it down]. It’s so simple really! : the saying is, ‘Two’s company’, i.e two = company, so two twos must = CO CO. What on earth took me so long?

Hi Carrots

Your comment arrived while I was typing this. In my post-pub state, I can’t possibly start a whole new discussion now so must just say I’m sorry you didn’t enjoy it – as I said, I did!

Good night all!

It may be apologia on my part, but I don`t think this was anywhere near Araucaria at his best. There was little wit, ironed surfaces or AHA! moments, all of which are the GOM`s signature.

Bravo Eileen! You unraveled THE BEST OF BRITISH LUCK! We didn’t, we gave up.
Bravo Araucaria! I am not always keen on your liberties, but the one at 1d (SHOT) was outrageous in the positive sense of the word. Because of the cheeky wording. I’d wish my mind would still work like this when I’m 90.

Nice to see the use of ‘Latin’ in 20d (our first entry HAD A GO)being different from what it usually is, here meaning “relating to Spanish, Portuguese or Italian people” – spot on.

I think 13d (DEVASTATE) needed a Question Mark.
But the crossword as a whole deserved an Exclamation Mark ! (sic)

I’m an experienced solver, happy to have a go at all Guardian cryptics. I’m usually successful if I persist, especially when I use my copy of TEA software. These days, I think I’m a pretty good judge of the level of difficulty of the puzzles you publish.

…

I support your apparent policy of having cryptics of different levels of difficulty – it widens the appeal and, over time, helps solvers improve their skills. However, I can’t spot any pattern in the degree of toughness, apart from often having relatively easy Rufus puzzles on Mondays (to encourage novices who have spent ages on a puzzle at the weekend, when they have had more time?). It seems fairly random, even with the Saturday prize puzzles which, on occasion, I find easy.

…

If I were in your shoes – editing the puzzles for the Guardian (not a magazine for crossword enthusiasts) – I think I would reserve the most difficult puzzles for Saturday, when solvers have the incentive of a prize and (perhaps) more time. Like you, I’d start most weeks with a relatively easy one and vary the level on Tuesdays to Fridays.

…

Any comments?

No reply so far. I’m not holding my breath. Sigh.

You’re absolutely right, of course.

I found parts of this very hard. I had to guess and check 10a and 23 (in this case had to search ab+ I’m afraid but was running out of energy and, I’m afraid interest, by then).

I messed up in the NW. I put in ‘oracle’ for 9a and that sank me with 2 down! I kept thinking it must be one of the ever recurring ‘bra’ words.

I liked several clues inc. 11a, 13a, 18a, and 1d (sorry!).