Subject:      PCWC #43 Results
From:         matthew@cs.wellesley.edu (Matthew Merzbacher)
Date:         1995/06/21
Message-Id:   <MATTHEW.95Jun21165814@gazoo.cs.wellesley.edu>
Newsgroups:   rec.puzzles.crosswords

Welcome to the results for PCWC #43.  Chris Rimmer won the contest with
a very high 87% score given to the mineralogical gem:

    Mineral veins contain a trace of gold deposits (6)

At press time, I have not established who will run the next PCWC, but keep
an eye out for it -- coming soon to a newsgroup near you!

Before we get to the clues and comments, I have a few comments (and
responses to comments from the judges).

Yap Yok Foo sent me an article he wrote about the clue writing
competitions.  I will post that article as a followup to this message,
along with my comments on his article.

We had a nice set of entries (23 of 'em) to the contest, but only 12 people
took the time to judge.  Please try to take a few minutes to judge others
work, even if you don't comment.  Note that you don't have to score every
entry - just the ones you want - unscored entries will not be punished (or
rewarded).

I was disappointed that nobody came up with any &lit clues, especially
since there are some obvious variants on the double definition:
	Houses made of sticks! (6)
(or perhaps "Beaver houses made of sticks! (6)").  Anyhow, the submitted
clues were very nice.

Here are the comments from the judges:

Good word. Not as many double definitions as I expected.
I didn't know the definitions of loges and lodes, so I marked
down clues which used them accordingly. This is probably harsh as
so many people used loges, its probably my lack of vocabulary. But
I figured that if it is, enough people will mark the clues up.

A good word for a competition, which provided noun and verb targets
for cluers.  A couple of indirect anagrams, near-indirect anagrams,
and double definitions made it in (these received low scores).

After the long-winded, convoluted, tortuously contrived and unsolvable
clues for the last two  competitions, it is refreshing to see short
elegant clues. However, the  parochial approach is still evident (eg 
using d, old British penny for cash; using Dodges for caravans?) People,
please remember that this fraternity of cluers are from all over the 
world. Think global.
Marking system 25+25+25+25=100 for Brevity, Wit, Surface & Technical

The French seems to figure quite often in the clues for obvious reasons.
Some of the clues were very nice, though some were too contorted and
hardly makes any sense. Surprisingly, ED for Editor figured only once.
On the whole, a deceptively simple word,but not really easy!

I'd prefer longer words in the People's Clue Writing
Contest, to give us, the people, a little more scope
for variety.  Too many cabins and wild dogs this
time, to say nothing of all the indirect anagrams.
No one tried "registers" as a definition... can't blame
that on the moderator.

[ I admit an attachment to using small words for cluing contests,
  but your point is noted.  Of course the likelihood that I'll ever
  win again is... -- MM ]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1st place (score 87.32%) - clue 8
From "Mr C. Rimmer" <crimmer@liverpool.ac.uk>

    Mineral veins contain a trace of gold deposits (6)

Votes (normalized): 50 71 75 78 87 87 100 100 100 100 100 100

Nice clue.

'Lodes' certainly isn't a word I'd use everyday. And a trace of gold = G
is far from obvious, but it does make the surface very nice.

A good clue with a sound surface.  I especially like the noun-verb
duplicity of "deposits"

Very smooth reading ; but how legitimate is 'trace of gold' for G ?

Nice surface, painless clue!

If there is such a convention re:trace is first letter, then nice.
More cryptic if mineral is done away with. Would be much nicer, with play
on atherosclerotic deposits, etc...coming to mind! Or how about this...
"Veins with trace of gold deposits" ..'with' a fair container indicator here.

Clever, topical.  Someone may quibble about the tense of "contain"
throwing off the purity of the cryptic reading.

A solid clue

I don't see "deposit" = "lodge".  Too passive.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

2nd place (score 78.05%) - clue 14
From Evan Whitney <evan@scd.hp.com>

    Settles down in box seats  (6)

Votes (normalized): 20 50 56 70 71 80 90 100 100 100 100 100

Good clue. Best of the 'box seat' crowd.

Good clear, concise surface, and I'm starting to think that loges is in
common use, so the winner for me.

I'm not extremely fond of the definition, but otherwise an extremely
sound and economical clue!

Beautifully crafted. He must have a really big BUM. 

No indication that the first letter of 'down' should be used.

Not too happy with getting "D" from down. Needs further indicator! Otherwise
can  we use UP to get a U ??

Adequate.  A little less boring.

settles, in this sense, is transitive, while lodges is
intransitive; otherwise quite good

-------------------------------------------------------------------

3rd place (score 73.00%) - clue 17
From lee@ehiltd.dircon.co.uk (Lee McGinty)

    Do legs drawn badly look like sticks? (6)

Votes (normalized): 57 60 65 67 70 75 78 86 86 87

The surface is pretty good, nearly excusing the unorthodox anagram 
indicator.  I'm somewhat concerned about the "cryptic grammar."  Some
tend to read the clue as "[The PHRASE] Do legs [anagrammed] look_S_ 
like..." rather than "[The LETTERS in the phrase] Do legs [anagrammed]
look like..."  The question form of the surface is a limitation in that
regard.

Good surface and it makes sense. You'll agree if you see my drawings. 

It certainly is an unusual anagram indicator but it's original and 
the surface reads nicely.

Very nice! The question mark is most apt. I love clues with punctuation
marks! And BTW, I think puns have a place in cryptic crosswords!

Pretty good; the contestant has already pointed out the
weaknesses.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

4th place (score 63.82%) - clue 16
From ditran@orca.gov.bc.ca (Di Tran)

    G.E. sold fuses for quarters (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 20 50 60 61 64 67 80 100 100 100

'Fused' would be a better anagram indicator.

Fuses as an anagram indictor? And as far as I am aware, General Electric
are more usually abbreviated to GEC. Very obvious anagram too.

An adequate clue.  The double entendre of "quarters" as the definition
has scanning problems, and the anagram fodder is a little obvious.

You assumed correctly. Nice use of fuses as anagram indicator.

The surface is fine, but "fuses" is not a good anagram indicator.
"Fusing" to me indicates a melding, but not a mixing.

Great, top marks.  "Fuses" is a reasonable anagram signal.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

5th place (score 59.74%) - clue 21
From Clay Colwell <eris@bga.com>

    Sticks piercing end in veins (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 20 25 43 44 60 60 80 89 96 100 100

The construction works, but the surface is stale.

Technically sound but alas, poor surface 

Veins on its own is too obscure.

Nice clue. That's what they do in Practical Venupuncture 101, is it ?
Or maybe, Vampirism Made Easy.

Not a clue for the squeamish, but very well done.  I think
needles go into only one vein at a time, but actually I'd
rather not think about it at all.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

6th place (score 58.05%) - clue 19
From "Jason Y. Kim" <jykim@imssys.imssys.com>

    Initially, egyptologist sought after obscure gold wedges (6)

Votes (normalized): 17 30 50 56 57 60 67 69 70 74 90

'Obscure' is a poor anagram indicator.

I think the initial letter device is best used for one letter in the 
answer or every letter in the answer, particularly for a word like 
LODGES which affords so many cluing possibilities.

This is obscure alright 

Very nice

Obviously hedging ( searched v. sought ). 'Initially' shouldn't be made to
double duty! Better if plural "Egyptologists" used and some other indicator
used to get the first E and last S. What indicator? Search me ! :-)

I don't like "initially" clues that run over an arbitrary
number of words.  "Egyptologist sought initially" would be
better because it's delimited by the beginning of the clue.
"Obscure" is less than ideal.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

7th place (score 54.47%) - clue 7
From EnigmaGB@aol.com

    Catches quarters (6)

Votes (normalized): 10 11 21 40 50 65 67 80 83 86 86

Uninspired double defn.

Best double definition.

The only thing good about this clue is its brevity 

Nice

"Catches" is a little misdirected. "My nails caught in his
sweater."  "Lodged in his sweater" would be something else
again.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

8th place (score 53.12%) - clue 13
From bobg@cullen.demon.co.uk (Bob Gregory)

    Housing deposits (6)

Votes (normalized): 10 11 43 50 50 57 57 60 67 80 100

A slightly better double def'n

Fairly good double definition but the surface seems somehow wrong with the
plurals

Short simple and sweet double definition

Adequate but boring

I don't see "deposit" = "lodge".  Too passive.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

9th place (score 49.37%) - clue 3
From Peter Horne <horne@saturn.caps.maine.edu>

    Wild dogs found amongst the French cabins (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 14 50 56 57 64 67 70 80 86

Not really amongst.  More like partly amongst and partly after.

I thing it harsh to use amongst to indictate 'indirect anagram' but the
letters of the second word are in order.

Another perfectly acceptible "the French"-"DOG anagram" clue.

This clue is flawed : L (DOGS) E 

Simlar to but technically better than 1.

Adequate both in cryptic and in meaning.

Best of the dog clues

-------------------------------------------------------------------

10th place (score 49.33%) - clue 5

    Behold -- some French have $1000 dwellings (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 33 33 43 50 50 63 64 70 87

'des' = 'of the' according to my French-English dictionary

Adequate clue.  The slight obscurity of "des" is complemented by the 
instinctively obvious "$1000 = G"

It is always tricky when handling  languages other than English as one cannot
take the same liberty. According to my copy of Harrap's, 'de' is a
preposition (equivalent to 'from' or 'of'), a link word and a partitive
article. So to equate DES with 'some' is only correct in very uncommon
situations. The usual meaning id DE is still 'from' or 'of'. Besides,
Harrap's defines some as 'quelque' not 'des'

'Have' isn't a very good container indicator

I see, I see! No francs, huh.. hence the Revolution?

Hrmm.  More French.  The "$1000" screams "G in the cryptic!", too.
It just doesn't sing.

Good, but "des" is not quite simple enough French to be
crosswordese.  The solver might be generally well-read,
and even fluent in other European languages, without
knowing the French word for "some".

-------------------------------------------------------------------

11th place (score 49.11%) - clue 15

    Some bills (e.g. dollars) are returned for investment (6)

Votes (normalized): 20 20 30 33 44 57 57 61 63 71 83

Where did you find this definition?

The hidden word works, but I don't understand the definition.

Well crafted except for the rather dodgy definition 

Pity because it's a good idea but the definition isn't accurate.

Don't like "for investment" for the definition.

I'm not thrilled with that definition (what is the frequency
of such usage?).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

12th place (score 47.89%) - clue 18

    Humble dwelling-places for fifty wandering Venetian rulers

Votes (normalized): 0 0 14 29 33 53 61 64 70 75 75 100

Indirect anagram

Since when do rulers live in humble dwellings? The large number probably
accounts for the fact that Italy has so many changes in government.

Poor surface reading...too contrived..Can't picture this at all!
Are these Doges from 50 'concertina-ed' paraLLeL Universes ,caught in 
a Time Warp? And, whatever happened to their gondolas? Humble, indeed!

Obvious Roman numerals *and* obscurity.  Ugh.

Nothing in the surface to compensate for the indirect anagram.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

13th place (score 42.68%) - clue 20

    Cabins built of French logs (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 29 30 36 50 65 70 90 100

Don't find "built" a good anagram indicator

Good clue. Not a wasted word, every one works to justify its existence!
French logs? Obviously, designer-cut!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

14th place (score 41.77%) - clue 9

    Certain fraternal organizations dole thousands of dollars out (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 20 29 29 43 50 56 60 74 100

'Certain' is not needed
'Out' is very poor anagrm indicator

I'm not at all happy with thousands of dollars = GS and then it is
an indirect anagram anyway. Out is fine though as an anagram indicator, no
need for such explanation

The word 'certain' is intrusive and I am not sure 'thousands of dollars'
is G'S.
The convention for apprentice is L and for apprentices is LL not L'S. 

Definition rather clumsy

There is no real need for "certain" here and the "out" is redundant as "dole"
is "give out" Better if anagram indicator like "misguidedly" used before
"dole" Like: Fraternal organisation misquidedly dole thousands of dollars
Better,no?

That usage of "out" puts me out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

15th place (score 41.28%) - clue 1

    Motels for the French with weird, tailless dogs (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 20 21 25 43 50 56 56 57 57 70

Why dog*s*? Why not just weird dog?
'With' is a weak container indicator.

I don't go with 'with' as a containment indicator. To me it means
after.

Fairly routine approach.  I think the "tailless" maneuver (as opposed 
to settling for "weird dog" e.g.) is an unnecessary confusion which 
doesn't particularly enhance the surface.

Badly conceived as the French definite article(m) is LE (singular) or  LES 
(plural). So why use the plural and then cruelly cut off the tail from
the poor dogs

The surface reads nicely but "with" doesn't clearly indicate that  
'the French'(LE) is part of the anagram.

Nice...but the dogs are no doubt mutants resulting from the nuke fall-out.
Another good reason to stop the nuclear tests!

"For" is extraneous (minor quibble), but the surface meaning
is much too Kafkaesque (major quibble).

Can't tell whether the motels have the dogs or the French do.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

16th place (score 41.17%) - clue 11

    Embeds in cottages

Votes (normalized): 10 11 17 36 40 50 50 56 57 57 70

Uninspired double defn.

What on earth would someone embed in a cottage?

Good double definition except for the intrusive 'in' 

...and debunks in the morning, I presume.

Adequate but boring

In such a short clue, a flaw like "in" is more evident.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

17th place (score 38.08%) - clue 12

    Is stuck in Israeli airport with a couple of Germans and a Soviet (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 10 11 28 29 33 43 60 75 83 86

Is stuck = lodged, gets stuck = lodges
Very obscure reference to Israeli airport

'is stuck' isn't a valid definition of lodges. LOD is obscure, S for
Soviet doesn't work; Soviet leader would.

"Is stuck" doesn't quite cut it for LODGES.  And "Soviet = S (as in 
USSR)?  Maybe S is a legitimate abbreviation for "Soviet," but the 
cluer's rationale make it sound like "Your" is a valid clue for Y
as in XYZPDQ!

Gee, I never knew a couple of Germans = GE. I hope he has a good
crossword to occupy his time since he doesn't know German nor Russian. 

This one is so cryptic that we should immediately call upon the 
services of a professional codebreaker from one (or perhaps all 
three) of the countries mentioned!!

Nein! Nyet!I have a feeling, tense-wise, defintion doesn't click.
Also,politically not current . And as far as I know a German couple is Herr
and Frau :-)

LOD too obscure

Good for frequent flyers, too hard for the rest of us.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

18th place (score 35.43%) - clue 22

    Editor logs spell-checked chapters (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 7 22 40 43 50 50 70 71

Show me a spell-checker that will go from edlogs to lodges.
weak def'n.

Nice attempt at originality, but still even when spell-checked indirect
anagrams are bad news as far as I am concerned

The anagram indiccator and definition are clever, but converting "Editor"
to ED for anagram fodder is too close to being indirect.

I like this very contemporary clue 

Clever, but definition too vague

Ah, a gem..a Masterpiece!...Lexicographers and Crosswords historians will
note the first use of spell-checked as an anagram indicator ( can anyone
verify this? ) And the definition of chapters for lodges is
brilliant,IMNSHO. Deserves a 10...But I pass on this. 'Tis mine.<broad grin>

I'll give you plusses for creativity, but there is no way that any
spellchecker is going to offer LODGES as an alternative for EDLOGS.
Points off for the indirect anagram as well.

A problem in the surface.  What you log, I think, is the
*time* spent with the chapters.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

19th place (score 32.11%) - clue 10

    Resort hotels entice 450 to leave the front of caravans (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 7 17 22 25 28 30 47 52 57 100

Apart from the surface being meaningless, I don't thing the -450 thing
is at all fair (although you get some marks for attempting to be original)

Sort of a clever construction, but it needs work.  First, I don't 
like "caravans" (lowercase C, no "for exapmple" indicator) as a clue
for DODGES.  Next, "entice...to leave" is kind of a stretch to 
suggest "subtract."  

Since when has 'caravans' come to mean DODGES ? And why should the 
front of caravan be D ? You lost me. I think this clue is tortuously 
flawed.

You have to be a mathematician to solve this one!

Too dodgy for me! If not for the explanation, I wouldn't have a clue! :-)
If cluer meant caravan for a group of travellers, then the singular
suffices! Then, who is to know front of it, is front of Dodge?

CARAVANS -> DODGES is much too forced and obscure.  "450" shouts
"Roman numeral here!"  True, it is a cleverer usage.

I would never get dodges from caravans on my own

I don't expect this one to finish in the top XV.  I admire
"caravans", though; I was trying them, and also "darts",
but couldn't find a way to behead them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

20th place (score 31.91%) - clue 6

    Outbuildings without cash become little boxes

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 11 20 22 29 35 43 70 73 80

Where's the cryptic definition? You've only told us how to get from one
word to another cryptically.

This a clue for the word loges, not lodges.

Is this actually a clue for LOGES?  The cluer didn't include a letter 
count so it's hard to tell.  The surface is somewhat weak.

d = old English penny ; as this clueing group become more 
internationalised, I frown on the usage of an old British coin 
to mean cash.

Are we privy to some economic truism here! :-). And "d"for old English
penny is rather old hat, old chap! Outbuilding is outhouse is privy!

The clue word is LODGES, not LOGES.  The "old English penny" is too
obscure, as well.  The surface reads nicely, though.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

21st place (score 29.89%) - clue 4

    Sell tailless dog, wild in small residences (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 11 21 22 29 30 39 43 50 53 60

Rough surface

What's with all these indirect anagrams? And the surface reading is gibberish
too.

This is just too close to being an indirect anagram (I can't say for sure;
I haven't ethically decided when the "moment of indirectness" begins).
The clue is average--hardly worth risking indirectness.

Surface doesn't do anything for me

Poor surface reading. Not to mention,some lodges are big.

Hmmmm...lots of dogs in these selections...I can't help but read this more
as cluing SEL[DOG], where only DOG is to be anagrammed.  And I know of 
no dogs living wild in apartments (*going* wild, perhaps)...minor quibbles,
admittedly...

Awkward reading.  Are these dogs tamed in large residences?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

22nd place (score 21.69%) - clue 23

    Marched, slipped, slogged, missing 1,000 motels

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 10 17 20 21 22 29 33 43 65

why is 'marched' there?
would be better as 'shuffled, slogged missing 1000 motels' but still 
not so good.

Well what's the Marched for then?

What is the function of "Marches"?

He marched in vain.  $1000 is a grand and even the use of G to represent
a grand can be questioned; let alone allowing the use of G to represent
1000.Flawed.

You've explained everything but 'marched'??!!  

Marched would have been acceptable to improve the surface reading if
only the rest of the clue reads well! As it is, seems like the
incompetent Lost Patrol from "Crock" the comic strip is at it again.
Betcha, they missed the fort, too!

"Marched" is completely extraneous, and the surface is, well, not
very evocative of nonsurreal events.

The old PCWC chestnut, deciding how much worse "1000" is for
"G" than "$1000".  Somewhat worse, say I.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

23rd place (score 15.60%) - clue 2

    Rearmost seating in theater boxes is where one might find beaver (6)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 29 30 50 50

Where's the 'd'?

Good construction but strikes me that that's a very bad place to
find beavers. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Oops.  I assume it was an honest mistake.

The cluer has made a terrible mistake, confusing his d and his g;
resulting in LOGESG which does not anagramise to LODGES. This clue should
be disqualified.

Don't want to be pedantic but, in my dictionary, LODGES itself 
means theatre boxes??

Daringly risque! I like it but then "Where's the Dee"...
Maybe: "Initially, derrieres in...." <lascivious grin>
Nice try at being tongue-in-cheek (oops!) but ...no D ,no score

Ow!  The surface meaning is deliciously naughty, but the cryptic is wrong
(you've clued LOGGES!).

Whoops!  Well, we've all come close to submitting similar
goofs.  Too bad, it was on its way to being a nice R-rated
clue.  Perhaps
Rearmost maid in theater box 's where one might find beaver (6)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

BONUS CLUE:

    Land over dump: good, easy, safe quarters! (6)

Votes (normalized): none

Quite a clever bit of construction but the surface is bumpy. 

Impressive. But wouldn't a question mark work better because a landfill is
far from safe, nor good? Just a thought!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

BONUS CLUE:

    Some singers (e.g., Dolly) returned settlements (6)

Votes (normalized): none

Clever construction again (same author as 24?)but I think the cluer
should use the definition in the singular since many lodges at a locality
make a settlement.  

A settlement might posibly already have many LODGES in it. So why the
plural? Otherwise Dolly and singers nicely used!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

BONUS CLUE:

    Mines containing a bit of gold tend to attract mountain folk. (6)

Votes (normalized): none

Technically sound but I feel the definition tends towards the obscure i.e
this clue is probably unsolvable. 

Mines for lodes which are vein-like deposits,- not!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

BONUS CLUE:

    Deposits of value to hold thousand-dollar rooms (6)

Votes (normalized): none

Another technically sound clue with a teeny weeny complaint about the
definition rooms subset of lodge and lodges subset of settlement

I feel uncomfortable with "deposits of value". I think "Deposits"
is enough since lodes are already vein-like deposits,usually of value!
Even then rooms for lodges doesn't quite cut it. Why not cabins?
(preferably 27) of French logs ;-)...and an acceptable filler(needed)
So...we get:
Deposits needed to hold thousand-dollar cabins (6) ... Better, no?

-------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
Matthew Merzbacher				matthew@cs.wellesley.edu
Assistant Professor				  	  (617) 283-3152
Computer Science Department			
Wellesley College				Yo ho ho!