Thanks for the solve! This was a quite an old puzzle I had made back in 2022, so it's probably quite a bit different than the type of puzzle I would make today haha. Very nice and entertaining solve as usual!
Sayori....great to see you featured!!! Always respect how you set and this is no different! Fabulous variant to showcase! Wonderful job! Happy new year and hope you have been well!!
I did watch both your puzzles, Mark. I was just noting the interesting juxtaposition, as you've often said before on the channel that you don't only want just hard puzzles, that occasionally like shorter ones, just as long as they're enjoyable.
I wish I could see sudoku exclusions like that. I noticed when he was finishing up the puzzle doing that upper right 2x2 area the order he filled the digits was random from my perspective. I have to go through the digits in order to figure out what's missing and where it's allowed to go, but he looked over there and immediately saw where a 6 needed to go.
Loved how the (anti-)logic came together and the seemingly pointless arrow-sums out of the blue suddenly make sense with a warm glow of approval. Enjoyed that a lot - thank you.
At puzzles like these I just want to quote Simone and say "How dare you make me do sudoku at that point of solving?"! I got a few pretty good logical things, got quite a bit of relevant pencilmarks and even a few digits, but then got stuck for like 20 minutes, because I didn't notice 2 simple sudoku things.
I enjoy the variety of short and long videos, corresponding to easier and harder solve paths. Sometimes I like to just watch and enjoy and learn, sometimes (with video lengths
Spent well over an hour on this, only making slight breakthroughs around the high digits - I spotted the interaction between the 31 and 23 relatively soon and ground my way through for ages before deciding to watch the video. Mark immediately recognises the symmetry and points it out... Went back and it was relatively smooth then to finish off, but still around 90 minutes. Interesting that Mark comments he is normally better at low numbers, until he said that I hadn't realised I am normally the other way around!
What a delightful puzzle. This was a watch Mark do it, not a solve one though. The backwards rule would have driven me quietly crazy by forgetting how that works every 2 minutes. Well done Mark. Hope the cough gets better!
For what it's worth, to help me remember the cage rules, I colored the cages blue for low and yellow for high to indicate if they were to be low or high cage totals in relation to the > or
I finished in 90:15 minutes. This was an extremely fun puzzle to do, even though it took me way too much time to focus on the right spots. There is something so cool about these anti rules where clues can't do what they usually do. I really liked the symmetry of the logic and the break-in was so fun to see. I think my favorite part was asking if r3c8 could be an 8. The answer is no as this forces an arrangement in box 6 that forces an 8 into r6c1, breaking the 9 cage as no 1 is available. It is funny, because I spotted this trick before seeing the more obvious step of asking where does 9 go in row 6. That would have made the visualization a lot easier for me. Even though I failed to see the logic fast, I did end up seeing it all and it was so cool. I very much enjoyed this one. Great Puzzle!
See the thing that confused me here was I thought the >7 and >9 cages in column 3 could include a 5, with a repeating 1 in the cage which is allowed by the rules, so I couldn't get to my first digit...didnt think to use both columns and use sodoku math to calculate the digits
Thanks for the content. It's alway funny how you solve very tricky stuff in a few minute for me , but after that I manage to spot basic sudoku stuff that sleep for a long time on the puzzle . And sometime you arrive to solve them after a much more complexe way ^^
Great solve! I saw the video length and thought it would be one I could try, but then read the rules and looked at the grid and my mind boggled and I decided that I didn't have the time to try it this morning. I note that CtC videos only get about 1/20 likes per view. I know it's tacky, but you might want to remind viewers to like and subscribe more often.
Wow, you found the key so quickly, Mark, I was amazed. I won't be trying this puzzle myself, but I did enjoy watching you solve it. Thanks for this video!
There was a full minute of video after "bye for now" so I decided to watch it in case there was a trailer for a Marvel film or something. Spoiler, there isn't. Great solve though!
Because most of the cages are symmetric around the central cell and add to 10×(number of digits in the cage). It's basically a form of Gurth's Symmetrical Placement Theorem, which is that if all the clues exhibit symmetry then so must the final grid. Although the grid doesn't completely conform to the requirements because there are plenty of clues that _don't_ have a symmetric counterpart, enough of them do to force those patterns into the solution.
Fascinating idea. It might be used as an introduction to *wrogn* sudoku, I guess. There have been several great examples of *wrogn.* Some very hard. The most enjoyable for me was by *Jay Dyer,* called _"Nothing is wrogn"_ (the title itself was memorable).
42:07 for my time. That anti-logic felt a bit weird as I had to do some extra effort every time to remember what cages totals actually meant, but this was not such a complicated puzzle once you're passed this difficulty. Rather classic killer sudoku logic but nice all the same.
I can't speak for others, but for me, after watching a 2 hour video from Simon, a short video from you was a pleasant surprise!
always is
Thanks for the solve! This was a quite an old puzzle I had made back in 2022, so it's probably quite a bit different than the type of puzzle I would make today haha. Very nice and entertaining solve as usual!
Sayori....great to see you featured!!! Always respect how you set and this is no different! Fabulous variant to showcase! Wonderful job!
Happy new year and hope you have been well!!
@@davidrattner9 Thanks again so much for the kind words, David!! Happy New Year to you as well, and I hope you've been having a good time too :D
@@sayoribestgirl2378 Beautiful puzzle, I really enjoyed solving it!
@@anickday Thanks for the comment! Glad you liked it!
I did watch both your puzzles, Mark. I was just noting the interesting juxtaposition, as you've often said before on the channel that you don't only want just hard puzzles, that occasionally like shorter ones, just as long as they're enjoyable.
His brain amazes me.
Mark can spew out something like, "This square sees 1, 8, 5, 7, 3, 6, and 9, so it is either a 2 or a 4".
I wish I could see sudoku exclusions like that. I noticed when he was finishing up the puzzle doing that upper right 2x2 area the order he filled the digits was random from my perspective. I have to go through the digits in order to figure out what's missing and where it's allowed to go, but he looked over there and immediately saw where a 6 needed to go.
And without even a pause 😅
Loved how the (anti-)logic came together and the seemingly pointless arrow-sums out of the blue suddenly make sense with a warm glow of approval. Enjoyed that a lot - thank you.
At puzzles like these I just want to quote Simone and say "How dare you make me do sudoku at that point of solving?"!
I got a few pretty good logical things, got quite a bit of relevant pencilmarks and even a few digits, but then got stuck for like 20 minutes, because I didn't notice 2 simple sudoku things.
I enjoy the variety of short and long videos, corresponding to easier and harder solve paths.
Sometimes I like to just watch and enjoy and learn, sometimes (with video lengths
Spent well over an hour on this, only making slight breakthroughs around the high digits - I spotted the interaction between the 31 and 23 relatively soon and ground my way through for ages before deciding to watch the video.
Mark immediately recognises the symmetry and points it out... Went back and it was relatively smooth then to finish off, but still around 90 minutes.
Interesting that Mark comments he is normally better at low numbers, until he said that I hadn't realised I am normally the other way around!
What a delightful puzzle. This was a watch Mark do it, not a solve one though. The backwards rule would have driven me quietly crazy by forgetting how that works every 2 minutes. Well done Mark. Hope the cough gets better!
For what it's worth, to help me remember the cage rules, I colored the cages blue for low and yellow for high to indicate if they were to be low or high cage totals in relation to the > or
I finished in 90:15 minutes. This was an extremely fun puzzle to do, even though it took me way too much time to focus on the right spots. There is something so cool about these anti rules where clues can't do what they usually do. I really liked the symmetry of the logic and the break-in was so fun to see. I think my favorite part was asking if r3c8 could be an 8. The answer is no as this forces an arrangement in box 6 that forces an 8 into r6c1, breaking the 9 cage as no 1 is available. It is funny, because I spotted this trick before seeing the more obvious step of asking where does 9 go in row 6. That would have made the visualization a lot easier for me. Even though I failed to see the logic fast, I did end up seeing it all and it was so cool. I very much enjoyed this one. Great Puzzle!
Good morning from New Zealand!!!
Goodnight from Sweden. It is 00.30 here in Sweden. So it's definitely time for bed!
Håller med 01.00 nu haha
17:19 for me. Shoot, I got stuck at the end because I misread a clue. Skill issue I guess. Great puzzle regardless, really liked the solvepath!
23:06 the famous 1-2-3-4 triple. 😂 But as the motto of the puzzle is to give you hints that do not work, calling 4 numbers a triple might be ok.
Why would Sayori write the inequalities that way? Should not be >7? Why not just make it
I hope you feel better soon.
See the thing that confused me here was I thought the >7 and >9 cages in column 3 could include a 5, with a repeating 1 in the cage which is allowed by the rules, so I couldn't get to my first digit...didnt think to use both columns and use sodoku math to calculate the digits
Good work, thanks. I remember the last Sayori puzzle on CTC and that was excellent. This one wasn't as hard, but still had plenty of meaty logic.
Loved the puzzle. Great solve Mark!
Thanks for the content. It's alway funny how you solve very tricky stuff in a few minute for me , but after that I manage to spot basic sudoku stuff that sleep for a long time on the puzzle .
And sometime you arrive to solve them after a much more complexe way ^^
_"What a clever piece of work❗ [...] and very very worthy"_ (Mark @ 35:29)
Definitely
01:33:57 for me, and even that time required getting a tiny hint from the comments here on the video. Very difficult but very interesting!
I toyed around with cage totals for a few minutes, but going beyond that was beyond me. I have to be satisfied with observing the rest.
Great solve! I saw the video length and thought it would be one I could try, but then read the rules and looked at the grid and my mind boggled and I decided that I didn't have the time to try it this morning.
I note that CtC videos only get about 1/20 likes per view. I know it's tacky, but you might want to remind viewers to like and subscribe more often.
Well done Mark, you made short work of that puzzle
54:14 for me - I got stuck because I made a mistake on one of the cages when I treated the inequality as true instead of false.
Confusing but delightful.
56:22 for me. I'm pretty sure I could've done it faster, but I'm definitely very mentally tired right now.
Amazing solve
Wonderful puzzle.
i like your fast solving.
Resembles a Wrogn variant, but isn't - that neat. Enjoyed the vid.
Wow, you found the key so quickly, Mark, I was amazed. I won't be trying this puzzle myself, but I did enjoy watching you solve it. Thanks for this video!
That's definitely true. I did the puzzle before watching and was much much slower and dumber at the beginning.
There was a full minute of video after "bye for now" so I decided to watch it in case there was a trailer for a Marvel film or something. Spoiler, there isn't. Great solve though!
All the greater thans and less thans are swapped. Doing my head in.
Lately I’ve been doing great in staying below or close to video length. Not this one 🙄 I got stuck and took me a while to progress. 63 minutes 😢
28m 38s
Can someone explain to me why each pair of digits symmetric around the central cell of the puzzle adds to 10?
Because most of the cages are symmetric around the central cell and add to 10×(number of digits in the cage). It's basically a form of Gurth's Symmetrical Placement Theorem, which is that if all the clues exhibit symmetry then so must the final grid. Although the grid doesn't completely conform to the requirements because there are plenty of clues that _don't_ have a symmetric counterpart, enough of them do to force those patterns into the solution.
Fascinating idea. It might be used as an introduction to *wrogn* sudoku, I guess. There have been several great examples of *wrogn.* Some very hard. The most enjoyable for me was by *Jay Dyer,* called _"Nothing is wrogn"_ (the title itself was memorable).
Cunnningly cunning construction. Brilliant and elegantly explained solve.
👏👏👏👏👏
35:02 for me. not a good solve. i wasted a lot of time.
42:07 for my time. That anti-logic felt a bit weird as I had to do some extra effort every time to remember what cages totals actually meant, but this was not such a complicated puzzle once you're passed this difficulty. Rather classic killer sudoku logic but nice all the same.