Comments on: Guardian Quiptic 640/Beale http://www.fifteensquared.net/2012/02/20/guardian-quiptic-640beale/ Never knowingly undersolved. Wed, 22 May 2013 00:36:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Derek Lazenby http://www.fifteensquared.net/2012/02/20/guardian-quiptic-640beale/#comment-183558 Derek Lazenby Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:42:32 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/?p=40784#comment-183558 Did this on Thursday. Araucaria was not much harder!

]]> By: crosser http://www.fifteensquared.net/2012/02/20/guardian-quiptic-640beale/#comment-183427 crosser Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:11:30 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/?p=40784#comment-183427 Thanks Pierre and Beale.
I spent ages trying to fit ‘ERE’ into 17a as I already had a couple of Es crossing.
I agree that 5d is rather dubious.
Yes, it was a bit hard for a Quiptic, but there were some good clues. I particularly liked ‘ADVOCATE’ and ‘FIRE DOORS’.

]]> By: Robi http://www.fifteensquared.net/2012/02/20/guardian-quiptic-640beale/#comment-183193 Robi Mon, 20 Feb 2012 12:59:42 +0000 http://fifteensquared.net/?p=40784#comment-183193 Nice puzzle, but I agree that it seems pretty tough for a Quiptic.

Thanks Pierre; I didn’t parse MONEY FOR OLD ROPE and ADVOCATE correctly. In 21, (i)s unacceptable for ‘OFF’ seems OK to me. In my opinion, the surface would have been poorer if the ‘s was left out. I also think that RIP-OFF seems alright – from Merriam-Webster: ‘a usually cheap exploitive imitation.’

]]>