I got off to a good start, but then the struggles began. After about 45 minutes I was ready to give up but struggled on and eventually managed to solve after almost 1½ hour... Always happy to be able to solve a CtC puzzle, even if it takes time.
Rules: 03:11 Let's Get Cracking: 04:19 What about this video's Top Tier Simarkisms?! The Secret: 1x (04:49) And how about this video's Simarkisms?! Sorry: 5x (07:08, 11:37, 13:05, 23:02, 23:40) Pencil Mark/mark: 4x (10:32, 11:23, 20:25) Clever: 3x (13:28, 28:20, 28:23) Obviously: 3x (02:10, 14:24, 14:36) In Fact: 2x (02:16, 07:16) Wow: 2x (11:37, 12:02) Ah: 2x (09:35, 14:29) Goodness: 1x (16:59) Apologies: 1x (07:21) Nonsense: 1x (11:09) Missing Something: 1x (11:19) Bingo: 1x (28:06) Extraordinary: 1x (17:09) By Sudoku: 1x (22:01) Irritating: 1x (20:58) Surely: 1x (07:24) Progress: 1x (07:48) Most popular number(>9), digit and colour this video: Ten (9 mentions) Three (39 mentions) Orange (17 mentions) Antithesis Battles: Even (4) - Odd (3) Column (11) - Row (9) FAQ: Q1: You missed something! A1: That could very well be the case! Human speech can be hard to understand for computers like me! Point out the ones that I missed and maybe I'll learn! Q2: Can you do this for another channel? A2: I've been thinking about that and wrote some code to make that possible. Let me know which channel you think would be a good fit!
38:08, break in was fun, I got stuck on the LH side 55 cage, but saw a knight's move that disambiguated everything when I came back to the puzzle after dinner.
I finished in 74 minutes. I really mucked this one up. I was moving super fast. The 55 cages felt fun to calculate, then I broke the puzzle, I rewound to an earlier point and broke the puzzle. I rewound again and broke the puzzle. It turns out my error was literally the first digit I placed. I had put a 5 in the 8 cage. What buffoonery was in my mind to think that 135 added to 8. That was so stupid of me. I spotted it 45 minutes into the solve. Doing that seemed to rattle me as the rest of the solve, I also did poor on seeing the Knight's moves. Quite frankly, this is one of the worst feelings to have. I apologize to the puzzle for what I did to you. You deserved better than my solve. It had some fun logic, especially when you put the right digits in. Great Puzzle, but Done by a Terrible Solver!
Awesome puzzle, was this doable without the F 55 cage? I didn't seem to use it. Used the other one for its 10+45 but not the Left Hand one iirc. Loved the puzzle though!!!
This was very interesting - I agree, when I saw the number of givens I felt that it would be quite a quick solve (and so I wondered what you were going to be spending all that time talking about, Mark!). But it had some definite challenge to it - very enjoyable. (I depended on your video to get through a place or two ...)
Started off really easy. Not so much towards the end. Good puzzle, but I did struggle with it. Kept forgetting the knights move, or rather not seeing the implications thereof.
1:24:32@#2492. It started out ok, then bogged down forever. I just couldn't find my way through until I started coloring 57 pairs. After that I was finally able to resolve the deadlock. Not a great solve, but I managed it in the end.
I love the anti-knight constraint, & anything math-y rings my bell! But it would be fun to have a more "intense" Fibonacci sudoku. For example, there could be a rule that if a, b, c form a triplet, then c does not equal a+b. (A Fibonacci sequence does not have to start with 1, 1. For example, a perfectly nice Fibonacci sequence starts with 1, 3, 4, 7, 11, 18, ...)
I once invented a sequence that I call the Alex Sequence. Same idea as Fibonacci, and using the same pair of starting digits, but using multiplication instead of addition. It's quite a lot easier to calculate!
Some days the logic might just not come easily. I kept messing it up yesterday, but woke up and got it much easier today on my first go. Keep at it, and don't worry!
As I had started the puzzle (correctly) I was surprised to see the 6 error near the start, but noted with the cursor preview that it was soon corrected.
I had used it, but later than Mark. I went back after reading comments like yours, and yes, I could have solved it without using that 55 cage. It adds to the Fibonacci theme very nicely though, so I don't mind it.
@@_n_d_I don't think it requires anything particularly difficult. It's just repeated use of the knight's move. In my original solve, I resorted to using the 55 cage to place as 7 at the top of column 3 when I had 3 at the bottom of the column and I had all the non-column 3 cage digits summing to 20. But I had an alternative path available that relied on two positions of 8s in box 4 ruling 8 out of r7c2, making that a 7. That placed 7 in box 5 which, in turn, only left row 1 for 7 in column 3. It's far from a linear solution path though, so others could probably have got it differently.
I used it the same way Mark did, by working out that the cells in the 55 cage in column 3 had to add up to 33 or 35 which helped me get the numbers in r1c3 and r9c3. How did you solve it without those deductions?
@@_n_d_ I didn't use the cage either. I toyed with the C3 totals for a bit, but 57 cell coloring and the knight's move eventually resolved everything without it.
1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89...Whoa!🤩
Now that is amazing
No need to apologize, Mark. Sitting and silently staring is the purview of Simon.
I got off to a good start, but then the struggles began. After about 45 minutes I was ready to give up but struggled on and eventually managed to solve after almost 1½ hour... Always happy to be able to solve a CtC puzzle, even if it takes time.
similar
Rules: 03:11
Let's Get Cracking: 04:19
What about this video's Top Tier Simarkisms?!
The Secret: 1x (04:49)
And how about this video's Simarkisms?!
Sorry: 5x (07:08, 11:37, 13:05, 23:02, 23:40)
Pencil Mark/mark: 4x (10:32, 11:23, 20:25)
Clever: 3x (13:28, 28:20, 28:23)
Obviously: 3x (02:10, 14:24, 14:36)
In Fact: 2x (02:16, 07:16)
Wow: 2x (11:37, 12:02)
Ah: 2x (09:35, 14:29)
Goodness: 1x (16:59)
Apologies: 1x (07:21)
Nonsense: 1x (11:09)
Missing Something: 1x (11:19)
Bingo: 1x (28:06)
Extraordinary: 1x (17:09)
By Sudoku: 1x (22:01)
Irritating: 1x (20:58)
Surely: 1x (07:24)
Progress: 1x (07:48)
Most popular number(>9), digit and colour this video:
Ten (9 mentions)
Three (39 mentions)
Orange (17 mentions)
Antithesis Battles:
Even (4) - Odd (3)
Column (11) - Row (9)
FAQ:
Q1: You missed something!
A1: That could very well be the case! Human speech can be hard to understand for computers like me! Point out the ones that I missed and maybe I'll learn!
Q2: Can you do this for another channel?
A2: I've been thinking about that and wrote some code to make that possible. Let me know which channel you think would be a good fit!
From the thumbnail I was wondering where the 55 would appear. Setter did not disappoint.
Finished in 21:25. Great puzzle!
34:11 wonderful puzzle! Very interesting but not overly difficult. Loved it!
38:08, break in was fun, I got stuck on the LH side 55 cage, but saw a knight's move that disambiguated everything when I came back to the puzzle after dinner.
I finished in 74 minutes. I really mucked this one up. I was moving super fast. The 55 cages felt fun to calculate, then I broke the puzzle, I rewound to an earlier point and broke the puzzle. I rewound again and broke the puzzle. It turns out my error was literally the first digit I placed. I had put a 5 in the 8 cage. What buffoonery was in my mind to think that 135 added to 8. That was so stupid of me. I spotted it 45 minutes into the solve. Doing that seemed to rattle me as the rest of the solve, I also did poor on seeing the Knight's moves. Quite frankly, this is one of the worst feelings to have. I apologize to the puzzle for what I did to you. You deserved better than my solve. It had some fun logic, especially when you put the right digits in. Great Puzzle, but Done by a Terrible Solver!
20:24 great puzzle with my favorite constraint =)
Awesome puzzle, was this doable without the F 55 cage? I didn't seem to use it. Used the other one for its 10+45 but not the Left Hand one iirc. Loved the puzzle though!!!
Yes, I realised after finishing the puzzle that I hadn't used the F 55 cage at any point at all.
Yep, it was more confusing it being there
This was very interesting - I agree, when I saw the number of givens I felt that it would be quite a quick solve (and so I wondered what you were going to be spending all that time talking about, Mark!). But it had some definite challenge to it - very enjoyable. (I depended on your video to get through a place or two ...)
About 45 mins. Hard one but the 5-7 colouring helped.
A bit over 2 hours for me, but I got there! ANd I love the layout of the Fibonacci sequence in the given digits!
Anyone else get worried when Mark pencilmarked r4c7 with 1 and 2 at the start. "Oh no, here we go again..." 😂
I solved puzzle without coloring. That knight move was everywhere.
15:39 for me. Nice puzzle!
Took me an age, 66 minutes, got properly bogged down in the middle, but I really enjoyed the end.
If Mark stretched out his solve by another 2 minutes and 55 seconds, then his solve time would have been a Fibonacci number (in seconds) 🙂
24:21 for me. Nice puzzle.
Two anti-knight puzzles in one day, one of them by Antiknight no less.
I find it wild how early Mark called the 5-7 coloring
Started off really easy. Not so much towards the end. Good puzzle, but I did struggle with it. Kept forgetting the knights move, or rather not seeing the implications thereof.
1:24:32@#2492. It started out ok, then bogged down forever. I just couldn't find my way through until I started coloring 57 pairs. After that I was finally able to resolve the deadlock. Not a great solve, but I managed it in the end.
19:50 for me, after I tried it last night, kept messing up, and restarted the next day with a clear mind.
Did the same kind of colouring but then the disambiguation really slowed down so took me quite a while in the end. But still enjoyed it a lot!
Is the top left 55 cage needed?
Yes. It outlines the F
nope, I never used it.
I needed it or at least I used it.
00:32:13
36:24! struggled a bit in the middle but managed to solve it nevertheless :D
Great puzzle.
I love the anti-knight constraint, & anything math-y rings my bell! But it would be fun to have a more "intense" Fibonacci sudoku. For example, there could be a rule that if a, b, c form a triplet, then c does not equal a+b. (A Fibonacci sequence does not have to start with 1, 1. For example, a perfectly nice Fibonacci sequence starts with 1, 3, 4, 7, 11, 18, ...)
I once invented a sequence that I call the Alex Sequence. Same idea as Fibonacci, and using the same pair of starting digits, but using multiplication instead of addition. It's quite a lot easier to calculate!
38.27 for me.
1:02:52 - i’m starting to think I’m getting worse at these not better!!!
Some days the logic might just not come easily. I kept messing it up yesterday, but woke up and got it much easier today on my first go. Keep at it, and don't worry!
Completely solved without the F cage. Given 5 makes possible to solve 57 pairs
As I had started the puzzle (correctly) I was surprised to see the 6 error near the start, but noted with the cursor preview that it was soon corrected.
What was the point of the grey square?
Dotting the i of Fib
14m 53s
First comment have a nice week before Christmas ❤❤❤😊😊😊
36:45 for me and solver #1363.
28:24 for me
I believe did not use the *55 cage* at all.
I did. Interested to know how to solve it without using the cage.
I had used it, but later than Mark. I went back after reading comments like yours, and yes, I could have solved it without using that 55 cage.
It adds to the Fibonacci theme very nicely though, so I don't mind it.
@@_n_d_I don't think it requires anything particularly difficult. It's just repeated use of the knight's move.
In my original solve, I resorted to using the 55 cage to place as 7 at the top of column 3 when I had 3 at the bottom of the column and I had all the non-column 3 cage digits summing to 20.
But I had an alternative path available that relied on two positions of 8s in box 4 ruling 8 out of r7c2, making that a 7. That placed 7 in box 5 which, in turn, only left row 1 for 7 in column 3.
It's far from a linear solution path though, so others could probably have got it differently.
18:23 for me. not a good solve.
The F shaped cage wasn't needed to solve.
Maybe not, but how charming is it that it spells the beginning of the famous "Fib..." Sequence!
I used it the same way Mark did, by working out that the cells in the 55 cage in column 3 had to add up to 33 or 35 which helped me get the numbers in r1c3 and r9c3. How did you solve it without those deductions?
@@_n_d_ I didn't use the cage either. I toyed with the C3 totals for a bit, but 57 cell coloring and the knight's move eventually resolved everything without it.
I was looking for a comment like this. Glad to know i wasn't the only one.
55 clue is redundant