14 comments on “Inquisitor 1683: Ground Force by Ifor”

1. 

   Hi of Hihoba

   #1 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 10:23

   
   

   I missed the 1212 alternation of the extra letters, but got all the rest. It took quite a while though and quite a lot of Googling. I found the preamble confusing, as you said Ken. You have to be of a certain age to have heard of Whitehall 1212 don’t you?
   Thanks to Kenmac and Ifor.
   P.S. The “pinching” technique works on my Android phone as well, so seems to be pretty universal.

2. 

   Bingy

   #2 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 10:48

   
   

   I consider myself a reasonably intelligent chap but I had (and still have) no idea what “…select the outcome which (in its last appearance in its original form) predated the connection seen in highlighting” means. Why ‘outcome’? I’m afraid this irked me quite a bit despite completing the grid and the highlighting

3. 

   NormanJL

   #3 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 11:37

   
   

   Same as bingy @2 except I didn’t even manage to highlight anything, despite finding the partial quote. Obviously more intelligent chaps and chapesses than either of us did solve but to me the preamble was gobbledygook. Frustration. Oh, that’s this week’s, and it’s done.

4. 

   copmus

   #4 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 11:50

   
   

   I solved a fair bit of this but feel consoled by Bingy and Norman
   I do remember FLAXMAN though-was it NW?
   Thanks for blog.

5. 

   Jon_S

   #5 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 12:04

   
   

   An easy grid fill followed by a frustrating end game was my experience. As noted above Whitehall 1212 is quite… old, and the “outcome” left me baffled and guessing, albeit correctly, at the close.

6. 

   bridgesong

   #6 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 12:16

   
   

   In fact, as the detailed analysis shows, the single letters read TRIPLES FROM EACH ODD ROW, although I only got there with some reverse engineering. The detective quote had me searching Raymond Chandler quotes, and I couldn’t find the James quote in my old ODQ, so had to rely on the internet. Filling the grid was relatively straightforward, but it wasn’t always so easy to identify the letters to be removed, particularly the doubles, where there was often some ambiguity (e.g. at 22 and 30 across, where it could be ec or ce, ev or ve). Like Hihoba I missed the 1212 alternation, but fortunately I am old enough to be familiar with the telephone number and once I had cracked Resnick, it wasn’t too hard to enter Lestrade below the grid.

7. 

   Neil Hunter

   #7 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 12:19

   
   

   I’m afraid I’m with Bingy@2 and Jon_S@5. The endgame reminded me of hiking in mountain; each time you think you’ve got to the top (scrambled detectives, ‘triples from each row’ – which threw me for ages, Whitehall 1212), another crest appears beyond. I didn’t summit.
   On a more positive note, I really enjoyed the grid fill and clueing.
   Thanks to Ifor and Kenmac.

8. 

   drb

   #8 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 12:56

   
   

   All of the above, plus not being from the UK = an incomprehensible endgame after an enjoyable gridfill.

9. 

   David Langford

   #9 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 16:34

   
   

   All thanks to Ifor and Kenmac. I found this fairly challenging but when the grid was full had no trouble “ungrinding” Lewis, Morse and Lestrade; the others weren’t so familiar. It took a while to work out the triples: I’ve read so many old detective stories in which the magic number was called that I wanted to kick myself for not seeing it more or less at once.

10. 

    NNI

    #10 - Tue 2nd Feb 21, 18:15

    
    

    I got LEWIS, MORSE and LESTRADE easily enough, but had to Google to confirm SLATER, and gave up on the last one having tried RICKSEN.
    Also didn’t see the point of selected an “outcome”.

11. 

    DaveW

    #11 - Wed 3rd Feb 21, 16:50

    
    

    Another marathon, as expected, from Ifor but for me a satisfying one in the end, with a few nice PDMs on the way . Like bridgesong @6, some rev eng. was needed to complete the grid fill and the two messages. Internet was needed here, as my ODQ also predates the quote – I really must splash out on a new one. I’m afraid I am just old enough to remember hearing Whitehall 1212 in public announcements on BBC radio, so found the highlights without too much difficulty. I agree that the word “outcome” was mystifying at first but I cannot think of a better way to describe choosing one of the 5 anagrams without revealing too much in the preamble.
    Thanks to Ifor and to Kenmac/elmac.

12. 

    Ifor

    #12 - Thu 4th Feb 21, 14:46

    
    

    As usual, many thanks for the detailed and accurate blog and to those who commented. I’m afraid I can’t agree that the preamble is “confusing” – it comprises a set of clear instructions, the last of which becomes comprehensible once the theme emerges and so provides an intermediate PDM. The bracketed insertion is unfortunately necessary to cover Lestrade’s appearance in modern adaptations of the Holmes genre. And as to “outcome” Dave@11 puts it exactly as I would have done – thank you, Dave. NNI – the other option is to require all five to be written under the grid. Far tidier, I think, to provide an unambiguous selection requirement, as here.

    To end on a more positive note – I’m glad the clue-solving process proved enjoyable!

13. 

    HolyGhost

    #13 - Thu 4th Feb 21, 18:26

    
    

    This certainly was a bit of a work-out, but that’s what we expect from Ifor. I did notice that the types of non-standard clues alternated but didn’t make the link to the phone number, which I remember from No Hiding Place (on ITV in the early 60’s) featuring Lockhart of the Yard.
    For a while, I was a bit mystified by the last sentence of the preamble (“… select the outcome …”) but as Sherlock said “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Except here, LESTRADE wasn’t that improbable.

14. 

    Kippax

    #14 - Thu 25th Feb 21, 13:03

    
    

    Very pleased to finally finish this after failing on possibly every Ifor puzzle in 2020. I had a completed grid reasonably quickly but it then took a very long time to identify the two messages and work out what was required. A lovely PDM when MORSE and LEWIS appeared. The phone number was new to me and it is always nice to learn something via an Inquisitor.

    Thanks Ifor (and no concerns with the preamble here).

Comments are closed.