Cryptic Contest II - Final scores posted

[Zag]

That's the point of an &lit clue. With an ideal one, the full text of the clue is the definition, and the full text of the clue is also the wordplay. My favorite one that I've written is Just holding up! (10) for supporting -- 'sporting' (just) holding 'up'. The wordplay indicator is the primary word in the definition. The only problem with Criticized debater! is that the definition reading has this completely extra word in it.
_________________

[DejMar]

A common problem with using anagram indicators is a failure to use one in the right manner. For the clue Unusually tough monster (5) , the indirect anagram indicator is "unusually". The word "unusually" is an adverb. An adverb modifies a verb, not a noun. Though "tough" is often an adjective in an English sentence, if we were to parse the clue, it is used syntactically as a "noun", as it is the object being supposedly modified.

A verb, or verb phrase, can also be used as an anagram indicator. An adverb + verb combination can work as an anagram indicator.
Though I do not say it is impossible to have an adverb as the sole element as the anagram indicator, it would be a rare case in which it would be appropriate.

[3iff]

As I'm new to writing cryptics, it's very possible that some (or many) of my clues might not be 'pure'. If that's the case then I would not be offended in the least if my clues were not rated.

After the round is over I'd very much appreciate a critique of my clues so I can weed out the bad or illegal ones.

At least now I know that I shouldn't be voting for them...

[DejMar]

[novice]

[Vagrant]

[novice]

[Suspence]

I wonder how the reverse-solving affects the scores. I have a feeling that it does more than we'd think.

Also, DejMar = MatthewV?
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[Quailman]

[Zag]

Hi DejMar! Welcome to Grey Labyrinth! We're always happy to have new people here. If you're a serious puzzle fan, you'll fit right in and you likely will be surprised to find people who can blow you away with their puzzle creation and solving ability.

[Suspence]

Not sure if others noticed it, but the reason I mentioned it was that DejMar's title said "MatthewV" this morning. It now has returned to "Icarian Member".
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[DejMar]

I have no idea who MatthewV is.

Yes, I am new to the Grey Labyrinth. I do like puzzles.

A reply to novice's reply to my post regarding syntax: the "surface reading" of the clue does seem grammatically correct. It is in the parsing of the clue where the words should remain syntactically correct. This is where the example clue failed. "Unusually" is not a good anagram indicator. Adverbs are not designed to modify or designate an action on or of a noun. Though words may be nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc., the collection of letters is a noun. A good anagram indicator should therefore either act as an adjective or verb in the parsed clue - not as an adverb. For the example clue, "unusual" may be considered a better anagram indicator,

[novice]

Thanks DejMar, I get what you're saying now. And welcome to the GL!

[Zag]

[Quailman]

I don't see a problem with the surface read of Unusually tough monster(5). There's still the indirect anagram, but in this case 'tough' is an adjective, and adverbs modify both verbs and adjectives. As for the wordplay, the letters of the synonym, hardy, are to be represented unusually. Maybe an adverb wouldn't work in every situation, but it's better than 'criticized'.

[DejMar]

I will agree that criticized is not a good anagram indicator. The definition of criticize has no meaning that I recognize that indicates the letters of the object word need re-arranging, except in an indirect way. Usually one will try to correct a fault, but this is not necessarily so.
castigated would be a better anagram indicator. Yet, it would not correct the flaw in the cryptic pun.

[Elethiomel]

I'm starting to look forward to seeing DejMar's clues.

[Suspence]

It's happened!!! (I always thought it might). Two users have submitted the exact same clue!!!

My thought is to list it once and award any points to both. Everyone good with that?
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[Thok]

[novice]

The resentful partial judges can look at my clues now. (4)

[novice]

[Suspence]

[Elethiomel]

I don't think that's unfair. It's also an opportunity for others to award more points to their opponents than strictly necessary.

[Suspence]

Wait - this seems too simple to work, maybe there's something I'm missing - we can allow the voter to vote for that clue in that one instance, if they feel it's worthy. The other writer will get the points, but they will not.

How's that?

EDIT: Of course, no one will know which clue is the duplicate one, except for the writers.
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[novice]

[Scurra]

Just to revert to the previous argument for a moment - I was one of those who awarded high marks to the "criticized debater!" clue. I certainly didn't have issues with "criticized" as an anagram indicator; although it's true that it wouldn't appear on common lists, it does have a reasonable interpretation as such, especially in the context of a crossword clue - I hadn't thought of the word in that way before but I do now. And I thought that the whole phrase worked just fine for the definition, but reading this thread I can see how certain entirely valid interpretations might consider it to be highly unsatisfactory. I guess that's why it's good to have multiple judges in a contest like this...

I have a couple of entries in the new set which I suspect will fall into the same camp - that a specific strict interpretation might consider them to be invalid or flawed. We shall see.

p.s. Ixnay to the indirect anagrams.
_________________
_{still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon}

[DejMar]

I, myself, would like to say one more thing about the clue Criticized debater![/i I thought it was clever in its attempt, and, though, in my opinion, [i]crticized was not a good anagram indicator, it was an acceptable one. The clue did fail in that the cryptic pun was not a definition of berated, but only the first word of the clue was. Again, this only failed marginally. With only marginal shortcomings (though I do consider them failures), the clue was acceptable, and - though I didn't consider it GOLD, was medal-worthy. [Not to say some of the other unawarded clues were not medal-worthy.]

[3iff]

[DejMar]

An example of indirection - outside of anagrams, I present the following:

A tailless cat with the tip mostly having undergone evolution (4)

I am curous how you each would judge such a clue.

Answer to the clue is:
MANX: a tailless cat
APEX ("the tip"), APE (most of APEX) having undergone evolution becomes MAN

[Elethiomel]

Heh, I think that clue is extremely unfair. The only way to make sense of it is to see the answer first, IMO. And even then, I'm not sure I would have been able to understand the clue without your additional explanation.

[DejMar]

I will agree, esme, the clue is a bit unfair as a stand alone clue.

The unfairness of indirection, in my opinion, is where no "hints" to the word is given other than the clue itself. I've worked many Cryptic Crosswords that included an occasional clue that involved indirection. But due to good puzzle creators, the answers to such clues could be discovered through cross checking them with letters to answers provided by other clues. This is not the case for stand-alone clues.

[DejMar]

I apologize esme and Elethiomel, the reply was to Elethiomel's post.

[Thok]

Clues sent. Hopefully none of my clues will be as controversial as Criticized Debater!

[Suspence]

A friendly reminder that clues must be submitted by Monday evening, so just a few days left.

Here's the list of participants. I've crossed out all who have submitted already:

1) 3iff
2) novice
3) Zag
4) Amb
5) Jack_Ian
6) Vagrant
7) Elethiomel
8) Scurra
9) Thok
10) groza528
11) esme
12) Dej Mar
13) Published crossword clue

We've got some really good clues so far, IMHO.
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[Scurra]

I will get back to tuning them and expect to submit once I've got the Questions for Answers out of the way...
_________________
_{still Quiz Olympiad champion. Must get a life.
New definitions: COFFEE - someone who is coughed upon}

[Elethiomel]

I sent mine a while ago. It's in my sent box.

[Amb]

My entries are submitted. I think I prefer my clues from last time though. Guess we shall see.

[Amb]

[Jack_Ian]

Sending in clues now. A little rushed, so don't expect much.

[Suspence]

I'll be finishing up the compiling of the clues today. I hope to have everything posted here by later this evening, or tomorrow at the latest.
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.