Listener 4225 Innings / Outings By Mohawk

[tenflags]

With seemingly no-one yet posting I thought I would have some fun as I have not started a thread before.

Some clues a lot trickier than recent weeks given the varying clue options etc., I'm only about half way through but think I have the game now but a long way to go before I can calculate a score .. time for bed.

[olichant]

Not an easy challenge, but what a good one - and what fine, devious clues. Many thanks, Mohawk.

Incidentally, Mango have given a very interesting setters' blog on 27 at Listen With Others. Very much worth a read, whether you were snookered or not. (Apologies for inexcusably poor pun).

[emcee]

All done and a definite step-up from the previous two puzzles. I particularly liked the final step (the altered entries).

[Mesnilpat]

I've not had much time for this one, but have enjoyed it so far. House move now imminent so I doubt that I shall get much time from now on. We are off to France for a few weeks, sans internet so, a bientot - et bonne chance tout le monde.

[aldanna]

Got the game and the rules (!!), but I don't think my identification of the types of clue is good enough to enable us to do the end part.

[perseverer]

Took a long time for the penny to drop about the alterations, but as has been said, quite unambiguous once you do see it. Another very clever grid construction. My quibble, if any, would be about the surface reading of a number of the clues.

[upsetter]

We are sure that we have entered the score in accordance with the rules without managing to pair off the 14 with any great confidence

[Scorpius]

A tricky puzzle on an unusual theme. Clues were an enjoyable challenge but I have a few niggles and there are one or two bits I don't understand.The average word length is much lower than normal and I'm surprised at the lack of regional indicators in a few clues, in breach of current editorial requirements. 32 gives me a letter that makes no sense in the hidden message. Substituting a letter that does make thematic sense appears to leave a faulty clue.

I have 7 thematic pairs, but one of them is definitely not in Brewer's, which I have scoured for alternative pairings.

As for the endgame, apart from one entry there are so many possible options for changes that I don't see where to begin. I fear I won't finish this one.

[tilbee]

Scorpius, I think 32 is fine. Since you can clearly identify the required letter from the rest of the message I would recommend that you use this to check for a slang definition within BRB.

[perseverer]

Scorpius -32 is OK if you read the clue a certain way.
If I am talking about the same missing pair as you are, it is (sort of) in Brewer's near the beginning of the relevant article, and (again sort of) also under the earlier in alphabetical order of the pair. Googling the version we need suggests it is a fairly common occurrence,

[tilbee]

I also noted that one of the thematic pairings was not listed with the others, but it does have its own separate entry in a slightly extended form.

[contendo]

Perseverer - I think Scorpius is referring to a different pair, which is in my 1981 edition but in the 19th it's only listed under the first word, not in the text under the group heading.
As for me, I'm stuck at the final stage, making no sense of the final eight

[Scorpius]

Thanks to tilbee, perseverer and contendo. I see 32a now. My error was seeing 2 words as a linking phrase, when they are part of the wordplay.

I was aware of one thematic pair being abridged, as it were, but I had in mind another pair, which I'd found on the internet and now, thanks to contendo, I've found in Brewer's (mine is the 17th edition) under a separate heading. I feel that's unfortunate and merited some preamble warning.

At least I'm not in any doubt about the pairings and the final scores, but whether I see what changes to make is an open question. I do see a couple of changes giving an important word. Will press on.

[TheBear69]

In the version of Brewers that I found on the Internet, five of the pairings are together under the same head word; the other two require further search.

Anyone else agree with me that the definition in 34a is not quite right?

[Scorpius]

A close look at the grid revealed what to do. All works out very nicely and unambiguously.

I think Mohawk can be forgiven the lower average word length. The grid cannot have been easy to construct with so much thematic material. Quite an achievement.

[Philoctetes]

When a reference work is cited in the preamble, should we not be expecting it to be the latest edition? I have not yet started hunting for pairs, but I would feel pretty miffed if they were not in my recent Christmas present.

[tenflags]

Yes you have to look in more than one place in Brewers (18th Edition at least).

All good fun, clever and the best of the year ... so far.

[jim360]

Quite a slog, to say the least. Eventually everything started to come together, helped perhaps by some generous checking, but a nice theme. I'm not familiar with the game but do play related ones. And who knows, maybe they will pop up at some point in Listeners too?

[Stavrolex]

Well I found that really enjoyable, with a few pleasing PDMs. I doubt I would have been able to match the pairs without Brewer as there are quite a few real life permutations. Quite a feat of construction, and a very nicely done end game to reflect the scores (which surely must have been done in previous puzzles?). I don't see a problem with the (adjectival) definition at 34ac, and I thought all the clues were very fair. Many thanks to Mohawk for the finest of 2013 so far.

[dr b]

Not very foreigner-friendly this week. I have a full grid, message, and with Bear's Brewer's link have found 6 pairings. But, since I have no idea how scoring is "conventionally expressed" anyway, I think I'll just call this a moral victory and go watch football.

[crosswhit99]

I can sympathise with you there dr b, and agree that 6 of the pairings seem to be in the main article - just add the obvious 3-letter building to the URL:

http://www.credoreference.com/entry/brewerphrase/

"Conventionally expressed" refers to the 'proper' version of the game - try googling "scoring in (second word of message)"


34a is defined in Chambers as "the use of ..." , so I suppose "using ..." is just about OK Bear.

Never played this game as a child - might try it out on the way to work tomorrow !