That classic wasn't too bad. I found a few things before you did. Thanks for showing a classic. Its been so long since I've done one. The first puzzle was pretty cool too. I'm not used to doing math this early in the morning
Oof. I did just fine with the mathrax puzzle, solving it in 8:44 (conflict checker off), but I'm so horrible at classic techniques that the other puzzle kicked my butt a bit! Did manage to finish it in 16:51 (conflict checker off), but found myself challenged the whole way through! Still, both great puzzles, many thanks to BremSter for presenting them!
i've queried solves before only to be corrected, but I found that this broke at the very start - I assumed that the 4x quad should contain a 14 pair diagonally opposite a 28 pair - but this breaks as soon as you find the unique 58 pair in box 1 - 8s in rows 3 and 4 break the quad. I had to watch the solve a little to find the way. Can someone please explain why a 2-2 pair is permissible when the constraint is 4x? There are no other such inconsistencies,. the solve proved easy enouh if you follow the rules.
Mathrax can be confusing. It's easy to read the "4x" as that needs to be the multiplier, whereas it should be read as 'this is the result from this operand'. That is why two 2s work. I hope that this helps.
8:43 for the first one
9:56 for the second one. I am solving a lot of classic sudoku so this one was pretry ok for me. Thanks! 😊
The first puzzle I did without watching the video and getting any hints! WOOO!
That classic wasn't too bad. I found a few things before you did. Thanks for showing a classic. Its been so long since I've done one. The first puzzle was pretty cool too. I'm not used to doing math this early in the morning
Oof. I did just fine with the mathrax puzzle, solving it in 8:44 (conflict checker off), but I'm so horrible at classic techniques that the other puzzle kicked my butt a bit! Did manage to finish it in 16:51 (conflict checker off), but found myself challenged the whole way through! Still, both great puzzles, many thanks to BremSter for presenting them!
2, 4, 6, 8 a puzzle that requires you to bifurcate!
15 min for me.
i've queried solves before only to be corrected, but I found that this broke at the very start - I assumed that the 4x quad should contain a 14 pair diagonally opposite a 28 pair - but this breaks as soon as you find the unique 58 pair in box 1 - 8s in rows 3 and 4 break the quad. I had to watch the solve a little to find the way. Can someone please explain why a 2-2 pair is permissible when the constraint is 4x? There are no other such inconsistencies,. the solve proved easy enouh if you follow the rules.
I think its because 2x2=4
Mathrax can be confusing. It's easy to read the "4x" as that needs to be the multiplier, whereas it should be read as 'this is the result from this operand'. That is why two 2s work. I hope that this helps.
@@keithmower921 Thank you. I still think that 2-8 is a possibility under this rule.
@@ol1ver49 I'm somewhat new to Mathrax, but I think that 2 & 8 would only work if the clue was 4÷
13 mins