Australian Crosswords

English can be a frustrating language, what with its multiple ways of expressing the same thing, many meanings and word forms for the same “word”, and countless variations of spelling and pronounciations. Of course, it’s most of these things that allow cryptic crosswords to exist – without synonyms crosswords simply wouldn’t have been invented. I especially like pure “luck”, when words are joined to make a completely unrelated word (like A BAND ON) or when one word is put inside another creating a magic new word. Such is the case in this crossword with 1-down, where FLESH gets put inside RIOT giving RIFLE-SHOT. It’s a joy when something like this is spotted, because it doesn’t happen that often and I know a straightforward clue construction is in the offing.

Recently a friend contacted me wishing to reconnect with cryptic crosswords. He’s in his 40s and has dabbled with cryptics for extensive periods during parts of his life, but a stint overseas took him away from those he used to enjoy solving with. A renewed focus led him to me, as he searched the internet for help on Australian cryptics.
We met for coffee and discussed some recent Stickler Weeklys after going back to basics about clue structure the importance of identifying the definition by spotting likely wordplay elements. During our discussion I said something about setting that I don’t think I had realised before: “A setter generally looks for the simplest construction when making a clue, that is, the most obvious construction to the solver is probably the right one”. There are numerous ways to make clues hard, but intentionally making clues convoluted is not usually an option a setter takes. A solver’s first instinct on how a clue works is probably the right one, and if that doesn’t pan out, the second one is almost always going to get the job done. An experienced solver is one that has learnt the most likely way to work out a clue.
Inexperienced solvers tend to overthink things as the average clue can contain a multitude of solving possibilities, but, as the setter tends to follow the easiest construction path, they can be sure the most likely construction is probably the right one. A setter can exploit this, of course, but in subtle ways, not in ways that make a clue unnecessarily difficult.

Recently cryptic crossword setter John Halpern (aka Paul in The Guardian) ran the London marathon in a time of 5 hours 57 minutes, or about 13 minutes a mile. This was a marathon with a difference: at the start of every mile, John was shown a new word to clue by a volunteer, based on a grid designed by a crossword-setting colleague Richard Browne (aka Imogen) that John had not seen before. This was all about raising money for charity. With the aid of an Apple watch, John recorded his thoughts and clues on the run, with the aim to clue an entire crossword by the end of the race. It’s really hard to explain just how difficult this would be, as John had no references, lists of indicators, or anagram generating software – it all had to be done in his head. He would also have to keep a mental note of the types of clues he’d constructed to ensure a well-balanced crossword at the end. All amazingly difficult, but let’s not forget he was putting his body through physical torture at the same time!
A few concessions would have to be made. The words in the grid would be picked especially for the event, giving John the best chance of coming up with viable clues. For instance, if John didn’t know the meaning of just one of the answer words, the whole thing’s a bust. Imogen no doubt picked wisely to ensure this wouldn’t happen. The bit that’s most difficult is joining definition and wordplay as seamlessly as possible, usually only doable with lots of choices that multiple references give you. Without those, options are limited and roadblocks appear. It would be fascinating to hear John talk about what went through his head as he ran.

Read about John’s effort here.
Have a look at the actual crossword here.
Sneak a look at the blog of the crossword here.
To complete the picture, John’s fundraising page is here.