Jeff Chen’s New York Times crossword, “It Goes Both Ways” — Nate’s write-up
07.14.2024 Sunday New York Times Crossword Puzzle
– 22A: CD CASE DIVIDES AC/DC [Rock group clashes over album art?]
– 36A: PACER’S SELFLESS RECAP [Humble postgame summary from an Indiana basketball player?]
– 63A: KLAUS, ACT CASUAL, K? [Slangy request to a German to play it cool?]
– 74A: NARC IN A PANIC RAN [What happened when the bust went sideways?]
– 99A: SEUSS IGNITING ISSUES [Headline regarding a children’s author controversy?] – He certainly has done that!
– 118A: IRISH SIDE DISH, SIRI [Voice-activated order for cabbage or soda bread?]
Today’s themers are long palindromes, hence the puzzle’s “It Goes Both Ways” title.
Overall, I guess I struggle with both the why and the when of this theme. The long palindromes are neat, though I think I’d expect at least one more thing tying them together these days. And, aside from the reference to Siri in the last clue / themer, there’s nothing that would stop this exact theme set from running in a puzzle decades ago.
The KLAUS, ACT CASUAL, K? themer felt like a bit of a stretch, and I could not parse NARC IN A PANIC RAN for the life of me (for the longest time, I was questioning whether Narcina Panicran was someone’s name!), so I was quite surprised when the completed puzzle was marked correct. I think I couldn’t get past the idea that the “bust” that went “sideways” was referring to a statue-type bust falling over. Perhaps if the clue used a word like “robbery” instead, I might have gotten closer to parsing that theme entry. Did anyone else struggle with that one? At the very least, the themers being palindromes made them a bit easier to fill in and solve, which helped with the overall solve time – I’m guessing some folks will appreciate that.
Meta note: I know I can be a bit of a sourpuss when reflecting on some of these puzzles, but I guess I hope for (expect?) more from one of the preeminent Sunday crosswords and from such a solid and established constructor. That said, some of the palindromes were certainly neat, so I’m hoping this felt like a fun and interesting puzzle for many of you. Let us know what you thought about the puzzle in the comments – and have a great weekend!
PS – If any of you will be at the Boswords 2024 Summer Tournament next Sunday (7/21), please say hi. I’ll be there!
Evan Birnholz’ Washington Post crossword, “Captain Obvious, Poker Expert” — Matt’s write-up
Evan Birnholz’ Washington Post crossword, “Captain Obvious, Poker Expert” solution, 7/14/2024
Captain Obvious returns, this time with a series of card and gambling goofiness.
- 25a [“___? That means you got good cards”] A GREAT DEAL
- 35a [“___? Then those cards will be in a neat little pile”] STACKING THE DECK
- 49a [“___? Those have higher cards than weak ones do”] STRONG SUITS
- 66a [“___, you’ll need to win some back to keep playing”] WHEN THE CHIPS ARE DOWN
- 85a [“___, and I’ll be able to see those cards”] TIP YOUR HAND
- 101a [“___? Then that shirt would explain why we have only 51 cards”] ACE UP YOUR SLEEVE
- 113a [“___, and you’ll risk losing all your crops”] BET THE FARM
I wouldn’t enjoy three of these in a row, but they come seldom enough that it’s always nice to come back to this idea when Evan does it.
Notes:
- 26a [WA, CO, or Waco locale] USA. A bit of a groaner, but I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it when it clicked.
- 60a [Alvin who was the first prosecutor in American history to win a conviction against a former president] BRAGG. In retrospect, and from an unreasonably crossword-centric lens, this was well timed to fill the gap of Fort Bragg’s name change to Fort Liberty.
- 78a [___-Loompas (chocolate factory workers)] OOMPA. I’m surprised to see this get a helping parenthetical, but I guess the source material is aging.
- 108a [“Click” actor Sean] ASTIN. Having not seen the movie, I’m lost if it’s anything but Adam Sandler, and grateful that the correct answer was one of the first Seans that came to mind.
- 69d [Risk factor?] ARMY. As in the board game “Risk”
- 115d [Pollin who owned the Washington Capitals] ABE. A nod to the paper’s region, here. I’m not sure ISOBAR and STREWS are the friendliest crossings for a possibly unfamiliar name, but the down entries in this corner are all pretty straightforward, I’d say.
Sam Koperwas and Jeff Chen’s Universal Sunday crossword, “Uh, Right”—Jim’s review
Theme answers are familiar phrases that feature a word with an added “uh” sound at its end. Spelling changes are made as necessary.
Universal Sunday crossword solution · “Uh, Right” · Sam Koperwas and Jeff Chen · 7.14.24
- 21a. [*Hairy situation?] CILIA QUESTION. Silly question.
- 38a. [*Feature of a trick joint?] SNEAKY PIZZA. Sneaky Petes. *Grumble* This one requires the phrase “Sneaky Pete” to be pluralized which is uncommon. This one should be SNEAKY PITA or SNEAKY PEETA. The clue is overly cute as well, requiring the solver to infer that “joint” refers to a pizza place.
- 46a. [*Red giant probe?] “WHY THE BIG RUSSIA?” “Why the big rush?”
- 63a. [*”Did you hear that my idiot husband is building a giant boat?!”?] “I HAVE NOAH COMPLAINTS.” “I have no complaints.” Good one.
- 84a. [*Pushing up 89-Down, perhaps?] WORKING THE FLORA. Working the floor.
- 92a. [*”Eye hope you see the humor in this” and others?] CORNEA JOKES. Corny jokes.
- 113a. [*Zoo crew that’s for the birds?] MYNAH SWEEPERS. Minesweepers.
Solid theme with humorous entries, though I wish the one was replaced or altered to avoid the plural. The theme entries are consistent in that each one requires a wholesale change of the word in question into something completely different.
Looking at fill, highlights include FBI AGENTS, SHUT-EYE, SLAPHAPPY, and TÉA LEONI. Most likely trouble spot is the crossing of TASHA Cobbs Leonard and SHOHEI Ohtani, even though the H makes the most sense.
Clues of note:
- 70a. [Retiring, in a way]. ASOCIAL. “Retiring” as in going to bed early? Seems like a stretch to clue ASOCIAL this way.
- 91a. [Grounds for legal action?]. ESTATES. There are a number of clues that push the limit in this puzzle, but I like this one quite well.
- 69d. [Fool, in British slang]. PRAT. No problem with the clue, but I’ll note the word primarily meant “buttocks,” hence the term “pratfall.”
3.5 stars.
NYT–not even done…painful….hate to be negative but it must be said.
Maybe next time! When you have to retrace your steps….ugh…
ugh…sorry not a fan maybe next time…just painful
Sorry a dup…and now a trip…smh!
A dud, IMO. The palindromes were strained and not funny. As Nate said, what’s the point?
OTOH, Narcina P. Anicran would be a pretty cool name. Maybe George Lucas will steal it for Stars episode 537.
NYT: The goofy palindromes didn’t bother me as much as some of the punny themes do.
But I’m a bit annoyed with myself that I didn’t immediately come up with TOM Buchanan. We not that long ago watched the 1970s version of “The Great Gatsby” and the Baz Luhrmann version on consecutive nights, and I’ve read the novel at least twice. Should’ve been a gimme. Balls.
I’m with you there. While I agree with other comments that the themers were awkward, forced, not funny, whatever (and maybe I’d have liked them more if I personally liked to speak of ‘K and going wideways), at least it’s workmanlike, which is more than I can say for several recent NYT Sundays.
Tom Buchanan was instantly recognizable for me. He’s certainly Gatsby’s antagonist. While most cheat sheets use the word more generally to describe him, it’s really up to each reader to sort out the reader’s reactions to the book’s many broken dreams and outright cheats to escape them. Fitzgerald is way too complex for heroes and villains.
My apologies to anyone offended by the last word of my comment. I have no idea what I meant to type, and I should have paid more attention to what I posted.
Haha… I thought “balls” was the perfect level of cursing for missing TOM :-) Maybe you meant “nerds” like Liz Lemon on 30 Rock?
I made a personal record today for a Sunday NYT at 18:43!
Nice! Me too! The palindromes really made the themes easier to get.
I thought it was the best puzzle yet! So creative. Must have taken awhile to construct. Bravo!
NYT: I’m generally a fan of Jeff Chen’s puzzles – but this one, not so much. Completed the top third of the puzzle (two themers), and decided I wasn’t interested. Pretty cool to come up with all those long palindromes, but not my cup of tea.
One of the downsides of the NYT puzzle-solving streaks (and any similar streak-tracking by other puzzle publishers) is that it encourages people to finish puzzles they’re not enjoying. Congratulations on not being so wedded to your streak that you finished it anyway.
I solve the crossword in AL, using crossword scraper, so I don’t have any information (other than what’s in my head) about streaks, and I skip a lot of Monday puzzles anyway, so that would probably screw up my numbers. The NYT seems to impose the “statistics” on me for Wordle – though it’s messed up a couple of times and dropped streaks it shouldn’t have. But I do find the histogram of how many guesses I take to solve the puzzle kind of interesting.
1. It looks like I’m in the minority, but I liked today’s NYT a lot. I enjoyed each of the palindromes and was impressed that the creator was able to get so many long ones.
2. I feel like I need to head to detox after all of the alcohol and pot references in today’s LA Times crossword. I counted at least seven clues that could potentially stump a teetotaler.
3. Captain Obvious is always a favorite.
NYT: Funny how a word can evoke different things in people. I thought drug “bust” when I saw the word, statue never crossed my mind. (Sometimes that’s my problem when solving.) The puzzle was okay; I finished it pretty quickly for a Sunday. You want palindromes, listen to Weird Al’s “Bob” or just look up the lyrics.
The NYT Sunday puzzle is on a downward trajectory. If there is a single three-letter bit of crossword dreck Jeff Chen hasn’t used, feel free to enlighten. This was a horrible solve.
NYT agree with Nate’s comments, especially the themes being strained. When puzzles like this get published I wonder a couple things. Did the editors just say, “Jeff’s a great constructor and didn’t really evaluate it?” If they accepted this puzzle, how bad are the other Sunday submissions or was it Jeff’s name that carried this?
It’s worth noting that commenters here seem to have different standards than solvers in general. Comments at the Wordplay blog are overwhelmingly positive. Several declare this to be their favorite Sunday of the year. There are a couple of “meh” out of a couple of hundred comments.
I’m not saying I agree or disagree with either view, just that I find this polarization interesting.
Well put!
(replying to Martin there, to be clear…)
I agree,perhaps the solvers who thought this was a great puzzle are relatively new to the game. IMO this was not up to par, too many stretches and trite short fill.
Re WaPo – just my own personal opinion, but Captain Obvious just didn’t work for me this time around. Usually, Captain Obvious clues are the literal meaning of the phrase, but that literal meaning has nothing to do with the actual meaning (e.g. this week “STACKING THE DECK” has nothing to do with “a neat little pile”).
But, except for A GREAT DEAL, the phrase in each of the theme answers this week has its origin in card games. And so for the other phrases, when Captain Obvious tells us what the phrase means in the context of a card game, he is literally telling us the origin of the idioms – i.e. STRONG SUITS, TIP YOUR HAND, BET THE FARM, and to a certain extent WHEN THE CHIPS ARE DOWN and ACE UP YOUR SLEEVE.
It seems to me that these clues were a little too obvious, even for Captain Obvious.
WaPo: Evan’s clue & answer for 119A cracks me up. “One with many joint accounts”, and the answer is “Stoner”, lol! (BTW, puzzles that inject humor while also educating me are my favorites!)
Really enjoyed the Sunday WaPo and LAT … both in the sort of “Captain Obvious” oeuvre. I was wondering, though… is there a reason the Sunday LAT doesn’t get reviewed as regularly as the others?