November 06 2010
Cup Holders
They were off, but you were on. Our best Storm in the new premises, with almost 100 entries from an august smatter of some ten clue-mongers. Congratz.
From the get-go, let me applaud dg’s box trifecta (his epiphany to aim for Tawrrific) which in the end nobody could fully salvage. Other clues were almost dandy but fell at the final hurdle, pulling the wrong rein, so to speak. One glitch was an iffy signpost, like Mauve’s pudding, or SK’s sweep. Almost brilliant. Which means not quite brilliant enough.
Yet these nine thoroughbreds – on the other hand – are good for glory.
MAKYBE DIVA: Perhaps about end of trek, keen to go back [JD]
MEDIA PUZZLE: Shut up store; gave everyone’s capital back [dg]
ROGAN JOSH: Back nag or horseplay [GymBunnies]
JEZABEEL: Poke about American speakeasy and Cockney lowlife [Mr X]
DORIEMUS: Save us from sins, Reverend Spooner [GymBunnies]
VINTAGE CROP: Prime cut [Mauve]
TAWRRIFIC: Brutal raw friction, no less [SK]
AT TALAQ: A non-drinker like a Qantas pilot? [SK – best in the field]
AMERICAIN: In race I’m a champ! [LR – with some DA intervention]
Photo finish this week, with newcomers GymBunnies beaten by SK’s nostril, due to the kapow pedigree of that AT TALAQ. Fine event – not just wondrous, but tawrrific [sic]. Siya next Storm.
Comments
Mauve — 08 November at 11:58AM
Yes, and like golf, cryptic anagram pointers are a game of inches.
I take your point about pudding which is an inch beyond the acceptable likes of stew, soup, pie, mince, brew, cocktail, etc.
Likewise sad, upset, worried, flustered are fine, but disconsolate is an inch (probably two and a half feet) too far
if I may be so bold as to treat your site as a forum DA, what are some other inch-too-fars?
PS, DA: loved your use of pilloried photographer on Saturday - I for one drove straight past it
SK — 08 November at 01:59PM
Agree with Mauve. Likewise, I thought "sweep" got over the line when I used it as a signpost, but on reflection it was probably wasn't quite clean enough.
Mauve — 08 November at 02:25PM
Maybe it's just because it starts off like "swirl" but when I saw "sweep" in your clue SK it immediately suggested anagram to me. When I think about it logically though (logic being the enemy of course) it does seem like an inch-too-far.
It's funny how sometimes just the feel of a word is enough. "Sad" for instance. Logically "sad" is hard to defend, but it just feels anagrampointedly correct.
DA — 08 November at 02:45PM
One of those eternal debates, Mauve: which words suffice as signpost?
I wouldn't mind 'sad state of...', but sad by itself is pushing it, despite your argument's merit. Sad-looking? What about distraught? That seems sounder, but it's a fine line.
In the end I fell against pudding and sweep, all the while prepared to concede that another 'crossword editor' would embrace'm.
I recall LB was fond of 'enough' as a signpost, which in hindsight, doesn't measure up. But that was the setter (and house) style, and we solvers accepted it.
Mauve — 08 November at 03:22PM
I see "sad" a lot and have never understood its logic, other than the "He's a mess" - "He's sad" correlation which is a bridge too far, I would have thought. Synonym yes, pointer yes, but combining the two is a stretch. But I'm so used to it now that I accept it in the setter-style way you mention DA.
But what's the thinking behind "enough"?