I like number 5. :o)

Well, as I remarked at Dan's place not so long ago, I think that cryptic clue games have been all too frequent -- one every couple of years or so would be enough for me. Just a personal view. One possibility that might be good would be to move away from tube stations and find some other theme -- players' names?

[Blob] Thanks for the clues. Working on them, (could take a while!).

[cryptic game] There hasn't been one since I've been around (but know that's really not that long), not sure how it would work, or if I'd be any good at it, but Bring It On!!!!

I'm still enjoying it for the time being. And I, too, am crap at cryptic crosswords. I got a book on how to work them out, but just couldn't be arsed. They just make me want to scream

WHY WHY OH WHY!!!

[snorgle] relaxation [CdM] I would argue no theme. Why must there be a Greg Rude-eskying theme? We've never had a general crytic clues game, as far as I'm aware.

I wonder if there is any way to post a grid to use? The actual grids are pretty standardised, so drawing them up might not be too hard.
[Lib] I'm disappointed by The Guardian's move too, but not surprised - most of the other newspaper web sites charge for the actual news, which the Grauniad has refrained from doing. And The Times has been charging for its crosswords for years now (and, IIRC, rather more than 25 quid a year).

Not only did I get the BB winner right, I got the exit order spot-on too. Not managed this before... I've got lots of shares in the winner, but that's not necessarily the one who gets most press coverage. Anyway, we can shut up about it now, and those who don't care can re-enter the discussion.

rab]of the remainig housemates I am pleased that Cameroon won as he is so unlike any other winner and tomorrow will be a bad day for the bookies who had backed Ray and Scott. No doubt there will be post mortems. I disagree with those in the Sun and the Beeb who say the series only saviour is sex to spice things up, and the public overwhelmingly voted for Cameron 'no sex before marriage'. I would like to see the telephone vote inceased to the top four nominations up for eviction to give the public a wider choice, and for the BB warnings to have an effect on the whole group.
The Celebdaq has gone through a couple of very strange weeks and it has been hard to keep the interest up whilst the rules changed. Hopefully we are over the worst and the game will improve again. Speaking of which this weeks table welcomes Doris_Newbold and the waves a sad to ISayPorter, and if Chalky or evil_edna think I'm going to let them antwhere near the No 1 post, all I can say is ... pah

[Inkspot] Aha! You have reckoned without my cunning plan. Seriously though, I haven't a clue what has occurred regarding rule changes over the last couple of weeks. I enjoyed the scramble to the top to achieve a knee-capping and a green boxy thing, and I am currently attempting to do it again, although there doesn't seem to be much in the way of ruthless and opportunist trading options. By the way, the MCLeague table attached to my portfolio tells a somewhat different story to yours. As the administrator, do you have insider information? teehee

Cameron was no surprise at all - the bookies had him at 1/9 to win for most of the week. He was the biggest favourite the 4 series have ever had. I think the main reason was, like last year, the two good-looking young men in the house split the 14-year-old girly vote, leaving the outsider with a fighting chance. They also have entirely contrasting personalities, just like Alex and Jonny. I too disagree that only sex can spice things up. Au contraire - only arguments can. The producers tried too hard for a sexy bunch this year, with the result that the only good task was painting the horse costumes, so we could watch it dry.
Last year, Graham Norton commented: "The public have played a great game this yeat, as they've kept all the interesting people in." Did the public collectively think "Right, we'll do the exact opposite this time for a laugh" or something? If it were up to me, I'd have knocked off Cameron in Week 1. And left in Anouska, Fed, Sissy and Justine for Week 9. If Lisa were in at the start, things would've been different too. And I was secretly hoping that last night, BB might say "As a final surprise for the housemates, we're going to let Jon win regardless of how many votes anyone else gets." Now that would've been a great TV moment!
BTW, has anyone ever observed what a racist programme BB is? As soon as any black housemate's up for eviction it's a lead pipe cinch they're going. EG. Anouska, Gos, Lee, Adele, Narinder, Amma, Dean. It's almost as bad as how sexist it is.

[Dunx re "Griddle"] I've got an idea too, "Collective Consciousness Cryptics" where we all post a word at a time, make up a cryptic clue and then solve it, before fitting it into the grid. Won't that be great?!

Can I just remark how absolutely fabulous relaxing into a hot bath after a day walking in the hills is? Normal service will be resumed after a collective sign of pleasure.

[Inkspot] Cheers for the charming announcement of Doris' arrival. Sorry to hear that I Say Porter has left. Was this voluntarily, or has he disappeared again? I hadn't noticed his name missing from the table, although I was puzzling over how Doris could move in but there were still seventeen of us...

I can go to bed happy in the knowledge that I have brightened Breadmaster's day with ...so help me God.

What's all this bollocks about?

Just in case you can't figure it out, try something a little more intellectually challenging.

[Bob the dog] OOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOOOOOh!

[Btd] Um ... Didn't you actually just insult all of us, rather than John? *scratches head in puzzlement*

Just venting spleen - no insult intended. Sarcasm does not travel well on the internet - I should know this by now.

Actually I've been thoroughly enjoying the virtual poppy plastic!

I have to say, I'm seriously impressed by the rapid conversion of a soupçon of an idea in 'So Help Me God . . ' into a full-blown smorgasBoardgame of delights. Bravo all.

I've hidden all the answers and explanations in the source, for those who want guidance on crypticity.

Paying guest loses a fringe (6)
Vermin back in best Armenian families (4)
Mates in turmoil giving off vapour (5)
Tune on the radio ? (3)
WHERE THE EXECUTIONER'S AXE FALLS ? (5,7)
Food comes back as American time period (7)
Born in Little Rock, Arkansas - grew up in Colorado ! (7)
Darn fire is rubbish - more heat than light ! (5-3)

Cheers Blob. The mystery of No 7 is revealed at last.

I'm not convinced about the soundness of either no 5 or 7 - unless I'm being really dense. Is the second word of 5 clued by anything other than the orthography? Also the 5th word of 7 is not just redundant but destroys the clue.

[rab] By orthography I take it you are referring to the capitalization, in which case, yep, that is the main clue - and is pretty much an accepted method of cluing - as is using punctuation in non-standard ways. The wording of the clue of course refers to the thing that the axeman's victim's head rests upon.
Arkansas ? What's wrong with that - that's where Little Rock is.

[Blob] Well... the executioner is probably a matter of taste - I take the view that you notionally downcase and depunctuate the clue so that what's left tells you what to do. Others disagree, suggesting that if you use 'Bath' in the middle of a clue, it would have to refer to the city as opposed to 'bath' which is a tub. The only way to properly introduce ambiguity is to use it at the start of a sentence. But I'm not that extreme.

On the other hand the Arkansas clue breaks at least two rules. Firstly the definition is not "Little Rock, Arkansas grew up" but simply "Little Rock grew up". And then, if we're being pedantic (which we are), it really ought to be "Little Rock grown up". The second rule is that the definition should never come in the middle of the clue, always at the start or the end.

Everyone has their own stance on what is acceptable and what is not. I consider myself a moderate compared to Ximineans like Don Manley (whose Crossword Manual is well worth a read). However, you might consider me onerously fascist for these opinions.

I entirely agree that the definition must be either at the beginning or the end, not in the middle - but I was referring to the place Boulder, in Colorado ... so "in Colorado" is at the end as required. The Little Rock growing up was the cryptic clue, and the Arkansas for completeness, suggesting a place to be looked for. Even if you objected to this inclusion, spurious words are allowed if they do not fundamentally change the meaning, and I don't think it does.

[rab]I presume you now get the "capital" part of No.5 - as in death (literally head removal).

I think we'll have to agree to disagree about "spurious" words which I believe have no place in a crossword clue. This extends even to articles - the distinction between 'a', 'the' and an unmarked word can be huge in a crossword clue. But this is not really relevant to my beef that "Born in Little Rock, Arkansas - grew up" is not a suitable definition (even a cryptic, subsidiary definition) of "boulder". I accept it's cute that there's a place in the US called Little Rock, and a big rock is a Boulder, which is also a place in the US. I reckon one might be able to make a satisfactory clue out of it. Sadly, I don't think this one is it.

I expect now for you to reveal that it was taken from a Times puzzle...

[Blob, re capital] No, I only get the block part. Could you explain?

O.k. I'll admit that maybe the Boulder one was tweaking the nose a little, but I deemed it sufficiently obvious not to cause a problem in solving it - I've seen a lot dodgier ones anyway.

With regards the capital one : The executioner's chopping board was known as the block capital (admittedly perhaps only poetically) as it was the block on which capital punishment was "executed".

[Blob] Poetry is fine - I can live with my ignorance.

I reinstalled win2k on my laptop tonight. In the space of ~45 minutes between installing the network driver and a firewall, I was hit by a worm. Sometimes I wonder why I bother.

[Nik] This is pretty much exactly why I'm tending to install non-packaged Linux distros; something like Gentoo encourages you to choose exactly which services to turn on rather than the (for example) Red Hat approach of turning everything on and assuming you will remember to turn everything off before you attach your box to the net.

And I never attach my box naked to the net.

I still don't 'get' cryptic clues. Oh well.

[Dunx] I'm coming to the end of the process of making the box dual boot with Gentoo. I'm not sure how long Linux'll last on my desktop this time; I don't get along with it for such purposes. I try again once every few months, when MS release a 'fix' that, for instance, breaks all the media codecs, requiring a reformat.

I'm getting an idea for a game in which players have to make up meaningless technobabble, and the next player has to interpret it as meaning something utterly mundane and non-technological. Not sure where this is coming from...

Breadmaster] Divergent entropy?

[Btd] A group of people unable to decide which Chinese restaurant to go to.

[flerdle] Without banging on too much about it, cryptic clues are really good fun when you get into them - both solving and setting them. Those eight I did were just quickies off the top of my head, so not terribly good examples (as pointed out by various people) - but a really neat clue is a joy to behold.
The basic premise is that the clue is in two parts : The definition and the clue (or wordplay). The definition is a direct reference to the word(s) in question - most usually a synonym, but in the case of names for example it might just be "he" or "she" to signify a male or female name. Also "in (country)" often means that it is a reference to a town/city in that country.
The definition must always either be at the beginning or the end of the clue. Occasionally it is the whole clue, with the crypticity wrapped in the way it is phrased.
The clue part is the interesting bit - this is where a second, indirect reference to the word is made. Here are the main ways that the cryptic part is formed :

• Double definition (a second definition for the same word - though with a different meaning)
• Anagram
• Embedded (the word is in there, usually split between two or more words, but running consecutively)
• Reverse embedded (as above but running backwards)
• Homophones (... sounds like ...)
• Exclusion (removal of specified letters or words)
• Concatenation (joining words together)
• Inclusion (one word placed inside another)
• Puns (word play that suggests the answer)
• Representation (Roman numerals, chemical symbols etc)
• Any combination of the above

I bet I've missed something crucial; but if we did have a game then we could maybe explain each clue as it is solved to help cryptonewbies.

[ferdle] There are a certain number of rules to help solve cryptic crosswords. The word is always defined, usually at the beginning or the end. If the clue is two words long then its usually a double definition (example, office desk (6) = bureau). Ignore all punctuation. Another good hint is to find anagrams. words like 'scrambled', 'mixed', 'blended', 'confused' and many others besides (and some are rather obscure and I don't get them). ~Solving one of Blob's clues (I hope nobody minds, it is an easy one!) STEAM is the soultion to number 3 (anagram hinted by the words in turmoil). I'm still at the early stages of learning. I find it helpful (and frustrating) to attempt crosswords with a friend, who is rather good and happily explains clues when I don't get it. Working a crossword back with the anwsers can also be useful. Is that helpful or just more confusing or not what you wanted? If you want to find more rules and hints how to slove then visit www.guardian.co.uk and go to the crosswords section and there is a page dedicated to 'how to solve' things.

[all] Ummm, little miss untechnological strikes again. How do I do hyperlinks?

btw, sadly the guardian's page only tells you how to solve cryptic crosswords. If only it was a 'How to solve anything' page.... All of life's mysteries could be solved. Like, why is belly button fluff ALWAYS blue?.......

Previewing my move meant I didn't notice/wasn't alerted to the fact I had been simuplosted. Blob's explaniation is far more eloquent than mine! sorry!

Foreign words are often used - but generally only tiddlers, such as "The French" for LE or LA (possibly LES), or "With German" for MIT.

[Lib] I did the same just now. ... And of couerse I meant "knew" not "new"
[Lib again] How to do hyperlinks :
<A HREF="www.thisisthesite.com/thisisthepage.htm">This is what I want it to say</A>

Thanks Blob. Testing my new found hyperlink skill to send ferdle to this aforemetnioned page.

I'll bear in mind that when previewing you're not alerted to a simulpost. Before I can make the necessary changes though, I'll need to sort out my laptop's hard disk because it has various versions of different pages that are stored on a range of servers. At the risk of upsetting the Breadmaster I think I'll need to work out how to set up virtual servers in apache to solve all my problems (notably, the DNS name of my laptop changes according to which network I connect it to).

Meanwhile, the cryptics. I can recommend two books. One is 'Cryptic Crosswords and How to Solve Them' (published I think by Chambers - you can search Amazon for example). The other is Don Manley's Crossword Manual, linked to above. The former is better for jumping in. Basically it lists the devices, and then gives some graded puzzles, with the amount of help diminishing as the book progresses. My main gripe is that the authors do like (a) to show off how clever they are; and (b) literary allusions rather than give you practical advice to clue-solving. Manley's book is much more thorough, but as he treats things more from a historical perspective, you'll find yourself dealing with Victorian mindbenders before getting into the cryptics proper. However, this book does offer an insight into the mind of a setter, which is invaluable.

One thing I dislike is microclassification of clues. Since pretty much every clue involves a combination of devices the only classification is:

• Single definition: usually cryptic, or relying on a pun.
• Double definition: what it says on the tin. One definition might be more cryptic than the other.
• Definition + device: where the device is basically a set of instructions that tell you how to make the desired word.

Because you normally have two indications to the solution, it's very rare that there's any ambiguity in the clue. Although the definition could be as vague as "country" the chances are the device points only to one possible country. In that sense, I find cryptics easier than quick crosswords. On the other hand, the range of words used is often wider, so that makes it harder again.

My all time favourite clue was suggested in an excellent book I read on cryptic crossword solving.

GEGS (9,4)
Answer:(Highlight to reveal hidden text)scrambled eggs*

[BtD] Which featured in a particularly good episode of "Drop the Dead Donkey" if I recall correctly.

[rab] Yes, Cryptics ought to be easier than "Quick" crosswords really, as you're getting two clues in one. Doesn't really work like that though - coz. firstly it could be either end that you're looking for - plus the definition itself is not necessarily straight forward. For example (again off the top of my head, so not necessarily too good), Great Persian holds quiet land (6) might be the cryptic clue, whereas the quick would probably be along the lines of Island country (6). The difference being that whilst the Quick is too vague to be able to pinpoint the country in question - it does not require you to know anything about Persians - and points you to the land being required rather than the Persian himself.
Re GEGS, that was my Dad's favourite clue too - and he told me about it, ooh, thirty years ago - so it's quite an old one.

[Blob] This, of course, it what makes one puzzle "easier" than another in my book. For example, whilst the Everyman crossword (Observer) has a tendancy towards irritatingly vague clues, it doesn't a great deal of "general" knowledge - it's helpful to know the odd place name, or big names in various fields but nothing too out-of-the-ordinary. Contrarily, the Private Eye crossword is billed as "difficult", but I complete it about as often as the Everyman (an "easy" crossword). This, I think, is largely because the allusions are generally related in some way to the magazine (Brenda and Brian, for example, refer to the Queen and Prince Charles respectively) rather than to some obscure ode written by a 17th century poet I've never heard of. Horses for courses. I would like to be able to do the Times, or an Arucaria, but doubt I shall ever be able to scale such heights.

[Blob, again] I find that, with practice, and if you're used to a particular setter's style, identifying the definition part of the clue can be fairly straightforward.

[Blob, Lib, et al] Thanks for that, will look over it properly in the morning. Did I mention I never learnt how to play chess either? But don't feel you have to explain here :-)

Just returned home - so it's good to catch up with the cryptic chat. I attempt the Times crossword most days but can only usually complete with the aid of some very clued-up chums and has become part of our 'early doors' at the pub ritual. Coincidentally, 'GEGS' was also a favourite of my Dad, bless 'im - and brings to mind his almost child-like enthusiasm for the infamous 'HIJKLMNO [5]' clue.

[flerdle] Right then - there are 16 pieces on each side - 8 pawns ..... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
[rab] I certainly agree that you get used to certain setters' styles. No doubt about it. I'm afraid I have to admit that the cryptic I do regularly is the, ahem, Daily Mail (my wife's choice, honest) - which I actually rather like (the crossword that is, not the bloody paper) - some of its clues make my Boulder, Colorado one look positively officious by comparison. I can normally rattle it off in about 20 minutes - but every now & then, I get a setter who's on a completely different wavelength (or planet) and it takes me ages.

[Chalky]Not seen that one before - What a truly excellent riddle, initially !

[Blob] So it's new to you? Out of interest, how long did it take you to solve it?

[Chalky] Just before Blob answers, I've seen it before doing the rounds as a dingbat at quiz nights.

Ah - dingbats. That poor relation. Puzzles for the masses. Well, at least it keeps a classy clue 'alive'. Incidentally, the craze for dingbats - something else that the .. erm .. estimable Daily Mail has to answer for?
dingbat [U S slang]n. something whose name one has forgotten, or does not want to use: a foolish or eccentric person: a tramp: money. Adj. [Austr. & N Z coll.] daft, crazy. [Austr. & N Z coll.] the dingbats: delirium tremens.
Such provenance says it all.

Not too long - the brevity of the answer (just five letters) meant it had to be some clever way of reading the clue, so I just read it to myself in several ways and got there in a minute or so. But that's not to say it might not have taken me a while - perhaps I've seen something similar before, dunno.

O (4,6)

Dunno 'bout Martha's. I got the HIJKLMNO one pretty much immediately when I saw it, but it was in the Cryptic Crosswords and How to Solve Them book as part of a special feature on weird clues, so my mind was already pointed in the right direction. One that I saw in a Grauniad crossword, and don't actually think is that great a clue (for reasons I'll explain later) is "K (7)".

[MF] That one is my favorite clue. :-) I was reading down through the game and was about to post it, until I saw that you had got there first. Although I think the clue should actually be
O? (4, 6).
And here's a clue mentioned in the Sandy Balfour book that I recently reviewed at Orange, which although not perfect, you have to admire:
Bust down reason? (9).

Stop putting damn clues and no answers! Some of us are thick, you know!

Would that be (Highlight to reveal hidden text) full circle ?

Round number.

How about open letter?

Can't get that one - not enough letters for Potassium...

[rab] If it's Rufus, this must be Kelvins - if it's Enigmatist, I haven't got a chance :o)
No-one's got mine yet, and I don't think the "?" helps at all. Like HIJKLMNO, there's no definition involved.
As for "Bust down reason", I know this and I wouldn't've got it in a million years. At least, not without some letters.

Is O (4,6) like v (6,2,7) ??

Oh and is K Weekend?

Boolbar] I thought the same - but wouldn't the clue be in lower case, if that were the case? [MF] I'm still flummoxed by the 'O' clue but have a hunch it's more to do with numbers than letters.

What, Middle of Kelvins or something? Sadly no. Well done on K though.
[Chalky] Yes and no. Unhelpfully.

The Weekend one reminds me of one we had on Cryptic Stations which was e This was Mile End - though I, like Chalky was put off by the capitalization - and was looking for a "head" or "top" answer.
[MF] I thought Raak had got O - you're saying not ?

Nuts - that "head" was supposed to be hidden.

Crosswords are generally filled in in all upper case, so I think "K" is valid. For "bust down reason", would this be something to do with not wearing a bra? I can't think of a 9-letter way of expressing that though.

Maybe lactating?

Boolbar - you are correct on this one. But the reason I dislike it is because (a) it's ambiguous - the answer could just as easily be bookend; (b) there's no definition, purely a device; and (c) even as a device it's flawed because it's not indicated (e.g. with the phrase "to a setter"). These "inverse clues" are becoming more prevalent, but I don't think they're big or clever.

[Raak] That is true. You can make up several answers that match some of these clues - like O (4,6) = Come second. My 'v' is much the same, but is a famous schoolboy joke.

[Raak] There's a simple way of expressing bra in 9 letters it's brassière. But apart from the bust bit, I can't see why it should be the answer.

[Bb] Centre of Gravity, ha ha. No, mine isn't the start, end or middle of anything. Or the second. Or even "a letter in the word 'open'".
[Blob] I said not when I said "No-one's got mine yet".

[MF] Too direct a clue there, Martha ! ;-)
Quick joky one : çontrol mechanism (6,6)