                    PCWC54:  Final Results

Hello, all; I hope you're having a nice Leap Year.

The winning clue was the sporting effort from Bob Gregory:

    England's opener in a replay arranged for 1996, perhaps (4,4)

Bob pre-declined to moderate PCWC55; second-placer Tom Deneau
has, um, elected to accept the mantle of moderating responsibility
His clue was:

    When left and right hold each presidential primary and vote for 
    someone! (4,4)

This round of the contest was characterized by a phrase which
seemed to be somewhat more difficult to clue.  This seems to
have spurred a wealth of voters (15 voters for 18 official clues)
and a cornucopia of commentary.
 
Since I couldn't seem to get the scoring software to work
with the "17.5" that I'd labelled the last clue in the second
version of the ballot, I very carefully renumbered the incoming
votes so that clue is now "18" (and bonus clues renumbered
correspondingly).

Here's the complete list of clues, comments, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I had trouble with this word when cluing.  Now to see about the judging...
Downgrades for poor definitions, as that was the hardest part

I found this hard to define without being too obvious.  Minor deductions
for the "1992, for one" type clues.  Big deductions for the erroneous
definitions (clues 15-17); as nice as the surface was, this seemed like
cheating (granted, it may have been an oversight).  I also was not fond
of people using "time" to get YEAR -- seemed a bit unimaginative.

I thought this was one of the better words we've had in a 
while for the PiCkWiCk.

Sorry, no time to add comments.

This phrase obviously posed quite a challenge, going by the poor
quality of many of the clues.  Heck -- I didn't even come up with
a clue that I thought was fit to enter, so the worst of these was
better than mine no matter how harsh my criticisms.  

The definition was a difficulty for some clues ... one
trap was to write something like "quadrennium", from which
the solution pops out too readily.

A nice variety of clues. Entries with dates without indication of
example were marked down. Otherwise, I enjoyed the selection.

The chosen word to be clued was great, and the moderator is
a truly wonderful and gifted person.  (Hey, you never know
when he's going to have to break a tie with your clue...)
I was impressed this time at the number of clues with very
smooth surface readings, especially since the target phrase
LEAP YEAR seems to admit of only one interpretation.  However,
as is often the case, many of the smoothest-surfaced clues
were defective in construction.
I was pleased by the relatively low turnout of clues this
time, for two reasons.  As a voter, I could take the time to
produce decent comments on each one.  Unfortunately, I then
accidentally wrote a copy of the ballot posting itself on top
of the file containing them, and proceeded to send it off to
the moderator as my ballot... oh well.  Anyway, the second
reason was that as an entrant, I faced less competition!

LEAP YEAR produced a lot of difficulties for the definition halves of the
clues.  The definitions by example, often using "1996" or "2000," were
the most accurate, but they were still weak IMHO.  When cluers tried to
get too clever they often defined LEAP YEAR inaccuartely by disregarding
the "years that end in 00" exception.  I'm surprised more entrants did
not exploit the "Spring" = LEAP and "Spring time" = LEAP YEAR
possibilities.

I was disappointed in the low number of quality clues.

The overall quality of the definitions is quite poor. One of the
main faults is giving an example of something, as a clue for that
thing. Unless the example is well-chosen, it is unlikely to be a
satisfactory definition.

On the whole a tough word to define, so good
defn's get extra marks. Every fourth defn's were
marked down, as 1900/2100 etc. aren't leap years.

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

1st place (score 74.45%) - clue 13
From Bob Gregory <bobg@cullen.demon.co.uk>

    England's opener in a replay arranged for 1996, perhaps (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 29 50 56 70 74 75 75 78 78 78 80 88 88 100 100

A nice cricket metaphor (thanks for the explanation).

more UK-ese... I like!  nice construction.  does the surface lack a verb?
an "is" before the "in" wouldn't have hurt the cryptic.  obvious def.
decent clue.

Good clue, but nothing extraordinary.

One of the better 'example year' clues.  It just didn't grab me,
I'm afraid.

Really superior surface and perfect flow from cryptic to
definition.  First place, from a US voter.

Got a sympathy vote considering England's atrocious performance
in the Subcontinent at the moment. Besides I liked it. 

See remarks under #3 about this type of clue.

Howzat ! (is this how you say it?)

I'll take your word regarding the surface--the construction is fine.  The
definition is accurate but weak.. "1996 perhaps" can refer to a lot of
things.

Solid anagram+ clue with a believable surface. Just a little long. "Perhaps"
works here in the surface, but not too well in the definition.

Apart from the definition by example, this is a solid clue with a
pretty good surface reading.

A nice delivery from no. 13 :-)

A solid clue.  Runner up in my ballot.  And me an American who
doesn't understand cricket.  Or rather I understand it all
right, I just don't see how anyone can stay awake during it.:)

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

2nd place (score 68.88%) - clue 15
From Tom.Deneau@amd.com (Tom Deneau)

    When left and right hold each presidential primary and vote for 
    someone! (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 6 20 35 50 57 67 71 75 81 83 89 100 100 100 100

A masterpiece, except for the extraneous "someone".

i like these involved cryptics, and this one shows much thought.  the only
problem is that the def. is incorrect, which *should* result in a "0" for
this clue.  however, median marks for the effort.  i suspect this clue
will do better than it should, which would be unfair to those who racked
their brains to come up with a decent, non-obvious def.

A bit stretched to be a great &lit, and the charade's a bit
convoluted, but other than that...

This one, though long, appeals to me more and more every time I look
at it. (This may have something to do with the fact that presidential
primary season has already started, and grows more and more tedious
with each passing day.)

This clue would have scored better for me if I knew more about
US politics.  I don't, so it didn't.  Sorry.

Valiant effort at an &lit; it works reasonably well, but I
have to quibble:  a YEA is rarely if ever a vote for
"someone" but rather approval of a question.  And why
not capitalize Left and Right?

A vote for each element of the charade - all 5 of them - and one 
for luck

In most clue types, a long clue is a bad one.  With an &lit, a long
clue was probably extra-hard to construct.  This lengthy &lit is
almost flawless, and the clear winner for me.  The "almost" is that
the primaries are every 4 years, but leap years not always so.
I hope people don't vote it down as parochial; surely everyone
knows about the primary system that they have in the US.

Very clever indeed; spoilt only by "vote for someone = YEA"

The surface is long-winded, vague, and inaccurate (presidential primaries
should be held in the year 2100 which is not a leap year!)  "Vote for
someone" = YEA is weak.

I have to rate this clue fairly high just for effort! 

I like the construction of this clue, although I have my doubts
about `vote for someone' for `YEA'. Excellent surface reading.

my winner.  Though there is a minor flaw: "for someone" need not
be in the clue.   "Vote" on its own can signal yea.

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

3rd place (score 66.68%) - clue 3
From wald@math.uchicago.edu (Kevin Wald)

    For example, 2000 quietly sneaking into Yale are busted (4 4)

Votes (normalized): 29 30 33 55 60 63 68 76 77 78 80 85 100 100

In general, I don't care for charade-anagrams, but this one is direct
enough to overcome my bias.  I'd spell "two thousand".  Nice indirection
of 2000 as a number vs. a year.

nice construction.  a surface you'd only find in a cryptic.  one of the
better clues.

All 2000 have breasts?  Weird surface.  Mention of Yale
gets automatic demotion from me--I'm a Harvard boy...

None of the clues which used a particular year as an example for
the definition really grabbed me.  This was perhaps the best or
second best of those.  The surface is OK, but dull, and the
cryptic part is fine.

The "for example" fitting poorly into the surface is the
only slight problem.

How can 2000 sneak anywhere. Are they the maidens after the rep
in clue 17.5?

Clues #3, #7, and #13 each use the construction of anagramming
some letters and then inserting a fragment of one or two letters
more.  I think this is significantly uglier than a straight anagram
clue.  But it does allow more flexibility to achieve a better
surface reading; all three of these clues succeed in this regard,
and I'll give them high scores.  This one is the nicest, I think;
I like the "quietly sneaking" both in the cryptic reading and
for the image of 2,000 people "sneaking" past a police officer.
Fourth place for this, with the others just below.

Technically correct but the surface is a tad off

An okay construction and surface.  Defintion by example isn't great, but
it's satisfactory.

Good anagram+ clue with a surface that evokes an interesting picture.

Using examples as definitions is poor. However, given that the
anagram + P is fairly obvious, the setter might get away with it.

Very sound but not inspiring.

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

4th place (score 65.23%) - clue 2
From matthew@ella.mills.edu (Matthew A. Merzbacher)

    Plea: spy near beheading, needs an extra day

Votes (normalized): 22 25 30 50 50 60 67 76 80 84 86 89 95 100

I hardly recognized my own clue when I saw it.  Is that a good thing?
Anyhow, abstain.

IMO, best of the bunch, although the def. suggests an adj. for an answer.
not clear that "beheading" applies to more than one word, but that's fine.
odd surface.  Still, top score for the imaginative construction, and a
great def.

Bad surface, obvious anagram

Reasonable definition, OK surface, lovely original cryptic part.
Easily one of the better clues.

An unusual acrostic method. I liked it.

I don't usually like clues requiring an operation to be applied
separately to each of several words, but the wonderful transformation
of PLEA SPY NEAR to LEAP YEAR makes up for that.  This clue would
get a second-place score after #15 if not for the defect that "needs
an extra day" ought to clue a verb, maybe an adjective in a pinch,
but certainly not a noun.  I'll give it a close third, being #14 also.

Clever construction and sensible surface

Nice idea for a clue, but the construction needs work.  The triple 
beheadment is clever but I don't think it is adequately indicated.  Also
"needs an extra day" sounds like it is defining a verb.

Interesting construction, but the multiple reference of "beheading" is 
obscure.

I rather like the beheading of the three consecutive words, but 
given that this is a relatively uncommon form of clueing, I think
that the very weak definition could have been a little clearer.

A nice start, but surely leap years have an
extra day already and don't need another?

Multiple beheadings a cute idea but syntax a bit garbled. 

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

5th place (score 59.58%) - clue 4
From msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)

    Early ape evolved now? (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 13 14 40 41 50 65 67 67 70 72 75 80 83 97

"now" isn't much of a definition.  Perhaps "by the 29th" would be fairer.

heck, we could use "now" to define the day of the week, right?  I really
like this clue but the def kills its credibility.

Great clue, but you can use it only a quarter of the time.

Sorry, but 'now' is a horrible definition!

Loses a bit now.

Sounds like a Yap clue; short simple & sweet

Sound anagram with a sharp surface.  "Now" is weak because it is rather
vague for a definition and limited to the time of this contest.  

Sound anagram, indicator & I even like the "now" definition (even though your
clue will be obsolete in about 10 months!). Surface doesn't make sense, 
however.

A nice simply constructed clue, but the definition is again too weak.

Definition not very good

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

6th place (score 55.97%) - clue 18
From SAILORJOHN@delphi.com (John Hakemian)

    Maiden's opportunity: A Yale rep unattached (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 19 25 35 44 50 50 55 63 64 70 75 78 100

I like the Sadie Hawkins motif, but I think it should be slightly
less obscure than "Maiden's opportunitiy".  "A Yale rep" sceams
"cryptic fodder!", if not "anagram fodder!"

go for it!  adequate anagram clue.

I don't know about this.  Why would you marry a Yale
rep?  A Yale grad, maybe, but a rep?  A guy who couldn't
even find a job outside the admissions office?  C'mon.
(Blatant pro-Harvard man in me adds:  well, you wouldn't
really want to marry a Yale grad, either).

Unexciting, but better than most.

Have no idea what "rep" (representative, tie, repertory
company??) is doing here.

Good, but not very inspiring.

"Unattached" is not much of an anagram indicator.

Somehow I find the definition suspect
Ah so! You sell keys ?

Another allusion the the woman's proposal custom--I guess I've just never
heard of it.  I cannot figure out why "unattached" was chosen as the 
anagram indicator.  It doesn't suggest letter rearrangment very well, and
it jars the surface of the clue.  With a different word, this could have
been a great clue!

Sneak some Wonder Bread into the dough?  Weak definition & surface.

OK, though I don't think much of unattached as an anagram 
indicator.

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

7th place (score 54.60%) - clue 7
From Dave Eggleston <de5360@csc.albany.edu>

    It will take extra time for team's nucleus to break in new player (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 29 33 38 38 44 50 50 50 50 58 67 75 76 76 85

Way too indirect.  You have a charade with an anagram and another
charade.  Also, I don't see how the nucleus breaks in a player, and
"team's nucleus" should be 'a'.  To get "ea", you need "team nucleus".

clue #8 had the better def, but i think this def fits into the surface
better.  "to break" and "in" separately are acceptable container
indicators, but i don't know about "to break in".  "new" isn't the best
anagram indicator.  BTW, this is my clue.  all of the parts are flawed,
but i think the whole makes it above-average in this batch.

Not bad, but too complex.

Too complicated for simple me.

This is virtually the best surface in the bunch.  But
many many things besides leap years take extra time.
Commenting on these clues, for example.

A bit longwinded. Maybe the player has to be shortwinded first?

See remarks on this type of clue under #3.

Very clever construction; is this yours, Kevin ?

The construction is adequate, but "team's nucleus" ??!

Don't like definition; too wordy; convoluted clue with fair surface.

Again, a poor definition. I would also quibble with the use of `to
break in' as a container indicator.

Nice cryptic, poor definition.

Even though "extra time" could refer to overtime, the clue would 
still read better as "It takes an extra day..." .  And the "in" 
seems extraneous.

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

8th place (score 54.35%) - clue 8

    It provides an extra day for the Confederate general to meet the Frenchman, 
    as reported. (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 13 17 18 25 30 57 59 60 61 70 70 78 80 89 89

I'm a sucker for surface and homonyms, and this has both (along with
a good definition).  However, I think you've cheated on the homonym,
since you put a charade indicator (to meet) in between two distinct
homonyms.  Also "Frenchman -> Pierre" can be improved.  Perhaps something
like:  ... extra day for General Trudeau report

so...someone *did* go for this homophone.  not bad at all, though "to meet"
seems extraneous in such a construction (as opposed to a charade).  Best
def *by far* -- unlike clue #2, this suggests a noun.  I suspect this clue
will win.

The as reported sounds really out of place, and the
Frenchman=Pierre is a big stretch

In my dialect "leap year" (/li:p ji:r/) does not sound sufficiently
like "Lee Pierre" (/li: pjEr/) to justify the homonym.

Quite a good surface, definition is OK, like the homophone.
Unfortunately my knowledge of the US Civil War would prevent
my from solving this.  A shame you should suffer for my failing,
but life is tough.

So Pierre is the name of the prototypical Frenchman in
the English-speaking world.... perhaps so.  Easier for
us to pronounce than Jean or Francois.

I like this one. Is it historically correct? Did the French 
intervene in your civil war? I know we Brits did, we needed the
cotton.

The surface reading is great, but so is the cost it was bought for.
The soundalike with the P transferred to just before the Y is nicely
ambitious, but in this case unfortunately wrong.  Lee-Pierre sounds
like LEAP YAIR, not LEAP YEAR.  In addition, "the Frenchman" is
hardly sufficient to suggest the particular name "Pierre"!

I like this, Monsieur

Really cute homophone, although "Lee Pierre" doesn't have quite the same
pronunciation as "leap year" IMHO.  "To meet" is superfluous to the
construction.

But I got "Lee-Claude"; Your homophone is not accurate in any dialect.

The only criticism of this clue would be the surface reading of `as
reported' at the end. Perhaps `reportedly' would read better.

This stretches the limits of homophonic clues unduly.

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

9th place (score 49.27%) - clue 11

    Delayed march ?  (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 12 20 23 25 30 51 63 65 100 100 100 100 100

A lovely pun, but you still need a cryptic half.

great pun -- with a definition this might have been a winner.  the trick
is fitting both into a surface that makes sense (and suggests the "other"
meaning of "march".)

An actual complete cryptic clue would be nice.

Where's the definition?  Which is the cryptic bit?  What's with
the funny punctuation?  Who cares?  Easily the best clue.  Lovely.

My favourite. Accurate and totally misleading.

Severely defective; March and march are different words.  Ironically,
all that would have been necessary to fix it would be to reverse the
two words in the clue.  I'd've given it a decent score then, but it
would still have been killed by the voters not yet weaned from puzzles
where punny-definition-only clues are prohibited.

Beautiful idea; should have developed it instead of leaving it hanging

I thought this the cleverest (and briefest!) of all the clues.  
Just hope there's nothing wrong with it structurally speaking.

Nice pun.  It needs a wordplay half for PCWC.

I didn't find the cryptic part.

A near excellent clue. The only complaint is that the word
positioning leads to March being without its capital letter. I'm not
sure that `March delayed? (4,4)' which has the appropriate capital
reads as well.

Tough one to call.  I can appreciate the brevity, but the 
extended month does not strictly define the leap year.  Still,
high marks.

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

10th place (score 48.87%) - clue 17

    Adulterate a pale rye every Fourth (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 10 13 22 30 33 40 45 50 50 56 56 60 65 77 86 89

Good defn, but the rest needs to be adulterated.

third incorrect def. in a row.  unspectacular anagram.  odd surface.

Is this the same person who's already cut a rye in half and
in thirds?

I would have liked this a lot more if I could've seen more
meaning in the surface.  Maybe I'm just missing something.

Once adulterated, it should stay adulterated.  No need to
repeat so regularly.

Is this a US custom on Independence Day? Good clue, but give a 
good malt anyday.

The definition is very weak, and the reference to the Fourth is
quite US-specific.

I'll drink to that, adultery or no adultery

My second favorite; sound structure, and pretty good surface 
clue.

Weak definition.  The surface is a bit puzzling--does "pale rye" refer to
a type of whiskey, and if so, how can it be adulterated?

Inferior definition

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

11th place (score 48.79%) - clue 10

    Spell of ladies proposal makes a lay peer dizzy (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 0 14 27 30 33 33 42 50 53 56 60 63 65 70 86 100

"lay peer" screams "Anagram!" to my American ears, but perhaps it
screams "MP" or "Lord" to others.

custom is new to me -- perhaps too obscure?  i didn't deduct for this 
because i saw it again in #17.5.  "a lay peer dizzy" lacks subtlety.
still, great surface, and that coming from a Yank!  :-P

I've not heard of this particular tradition.

After a couple of readings, I got to really like the surface of
this clue.  In fact, I was going to give it equal second placing.
I just wanted to check on 'lay peer', because I'd never heard of
one.  So I checked the OED, Collins, Brewers, and Pear's Cycloped.
The nearest I could find was 'lay lord' which is a peer who isn't
a lawyer.  Hmmm...so I was about to mark you down when I realised
that the definition had no bearing on the solution at all.  Duh!
Good clue -- don't mind me.

Grammar, grammar.  Leaving out apostrophes is not
befitting a Lord.

The spell was somewhat overcast, methought

In the surface reading, the ordinary plural "ladies" is wrong and
should be replaced by the possessive singular, "lady's".  But in
the cryptic reading, the phrase implies ladies in general, so the
possessive *plural* is wanted, and the next word should be plural
as well: "ladies' proposals".  Thus the surface and cryptic readings
do not use the same words, as they must, but were made to look the
same by misspelling them both!  This is not scored last only because
clue #1 is even worse.

And I thought only Win95 is capable of multi-tasking
Hey "lay peer" can nearly be a homophone for the answer
Is "lay peer" an oxymoron ?
Is "lay peer" a College rag challenge to bed Di or Fergie ?

A little awkward on the surface, but liked originality of 
definition.

I'm unfamiliar with the legend referred to in the definition.  I think the
double meaning of "spell" makes the clue more confusing than clever.  

Def'n reference is accurate, but only vaguely suggested by the words used.
Even with your explanation, your surface shouts "Anagram! Anagram!"

I am beginning to despair of the setters' abilities to write clues
which define the answers. Ladies may propose marriage on the 29th of
February, not the whole leap year. Otherwise this is a fairly obvious
anagram.

A good try, though "ladies" should appear as a 
possessive.  

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

12th place (score 42.51%) - clue 16

    Medley relay has wire service coverage and gets initial exposure when
    the Summer Olympics occur. (4,4)  

Votes (normalized): 6 24 25 25 30 30 36 36 42 56 63 67 68 90

Lovely

another incorrect definition.  "medley" doesn't seem to fit the surface,
and two insertions (into an anagram, no less) is a bit awkward.

Too long.

Nice surface, but too ornate.

Not a bad clue, but too complicated for my taste.

Containers with two distinct insertion points are usually
too complicated for me.

Even longwindeder! Lost out 'coz Manchester failed to get the 1996
Games (or 2000) :-(

Too complicated, and there have already been four cases where a leap
year *or* Summer Olympics occurred but not both in the same year.

Lovely imagery; but a tad too convoluted 

The multiple container makes the construction sloppy.  I don't think the
definition is accurate, e.g. the Summer Olympics, humankind willing, will 
occur in the year 2100 which is not a leap year.

Your container indicator more typically works in the reverse of your intent.
Very convoluted.

There is nothing wrong with this clue --- it is quite professional
---  but equally there is nothing to mark it out as being special.

mine.  I won't vote, though I quite like it.  A bit long I 
suppose.

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

13th place (score 40.54%) - clue 14

    Two thousand, perhaps, go forward in time? (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 0 6 10 13 17 24 35 35 44 55 63 86 90 90

I like this double defn.  Maybe "jump forward in time", but still, very
nice job!

another LEAP+YEAR clue.  see others for comments.

Great clue.

I think I would get 'leap a year' from this, and need the 'a'
removed.

Why "perhaps" in the definition?  Your calendar will tell
you it's a leap year for sure.

Do they do this to escape being busted?  A niche in time saves Stein.
Anyway, very nice use of a tricky definition.  Second place.

Nope, the definition is not on

Uninteresting double definition.

Don't care for "perhaps" as an indicator of an example, when 1996 is
_certainly_ a leap year. Don't understand the cryptic part.

The use of `Two thousand, perhaps' as definition is weak. Also,
`go forward in time' does not really imply missing a year out.

time is not a definition for year (again).

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

14th place (score 40.03%) - clue 5

    Distribute pea layer in 1996, for example (4,4).

Votes (normalized): 0 13 21 25 30 33 40 42 50 50 50 55 56 60 76

Here 1996 serves as a year in both the surface and the defn.  It would
be nice if you could hide it (see clue #3 about the Yalies).  The surface
is inscrutable.

far too easy to solve, and the surface is giving me nightmares.
IMO, not every sentence can have "for example" tacked on.

Don't like the surface.

Maybe the surface has some subtle meaning that simply escapes me?

A poor surface. Mind you I had home-made pea soup last night for
the first time ever - it was delicious - was this the recipe?

No real surface reading.

Surely "in" is extraneous. Surface does nothing for me

"Pea layer" sounds a little contrived.  "1996, for example" is an adequate
but not outstanding definition.

You got an accurate anagram. Too bad it didn't make any sense for a surface.

Another example as definition, but again the anagram is obvious so
the setter can get away with it.

What in the world is a pea layer?  And why should it be
distributed?

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

15th place (score 39.00%) - clue 9

    Springtime in the quadrennium? (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 0 13 14 19 20 30 30 38 39 60 64 65 67 89

I don't think it needs a ?.  Also, "time -> year" is direct, which
weakens the cryptic.

slightly inaccurate def, and i'm not too hot about *any* of the
spring=LEAP + YEAR clues.

Shaky definition.

A quadrennium is a period of four years. A leap year is a period of
one year, albeit one of a sort that only occurs once every four
years (roughly).

I wanted to like this -- I really did.  But quadrennium is the span
of four years, not something that happens every four years.  It's
like using 'day' as a definition of 'three o'clock in the afternoon'
because three o'clock happens every day.  Almost excellent, instead
of most excellent!

I recognised the "?" but thought the definition a bit weak.

There's a flaw somewhere

I'm not sure how one is supposed to derive the once-in-four-years 
occurence (leap year) from a four year interval (quadrennium).

Another "springtime". "Quadrennium" is the interval, not leap year itself.

I would argue with the setter's explanation of quadrennium as the
definition.  Quadrennium means an interval of four years. A leap year
occurs every four years. A better clue here might have been
`Quadrennial springtime? (4,4)' which is both tighter and to my
ear/eye more suggestive of the punny answer.

time is not year.  

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

16th place (score 37.91%) - clue 12

    When the winter's long, the year begins with spring.

Votes (normalized): 0 10 17 22 24 28 38 40 41 45 49 50 50 56 100

You could lose both 'the's and be fine.  Using "year" like this is
too direct for me.  Lastly, winter isn't really longer on Leap Year,
since it starts a day later (or, Spring comes a day earlier).

hey, here in the atlantic states, *every* winter is long!  surface makes
little sense.  the construction is solid, but "year" appearing in the
clue itself isn't all that "cryptic".

I always like my clues.  And, hey, not an acronym!

Unexciting but acceptable clue.  Except half the solution (year)
appears in the clue :-(.

Neither the weather nor the time from solstice to equinox,
give a darn whether there's a February 29.

The year was not encrypted.

This is rather parochial.  Not only does it assume the northern
hemisphere, but it also requires the seasons to be based on
fixed dates of the year rather than the solstice and equinox.

Coming from the tropics, I have always thought that no matter how long
or short or how cold or mild, winter is always followed by spring.

Definition is okay, but not great.  The explicit use of "year" makes the
clue rather inelegant.

Good def'n; another "springtime"-type clue, but with "year" used directly,
I didn't score it even as high as those clues.

Poor definition, includes `year' in the clue, not much hope.

I wasn't tough on the the, but I was on
clueing year year.

Well the extra "the" doesn't help, though it doesn't kill the
cryptic.  Using the word year in the clue spoils it more.

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

17th place (score 29.91%) - clue 6

    It is time it's springtime (4,4)

Votes (normalized): 0 0 10 11 13 14 20 30 30 32 33 41 44 70 100

You use "time" to mean "year" twice.  That's a no-no, which is a shame,
since "Spring" -> "Leap" is a nice piece of wordplay.  I'm not sure what
the surface means, Gary notwithstanding, but that's forgiven in a clue 
with so many similar words.

i wish it were!  filler is forgivable as a link, but "time" being used
twice for "year" isn't all that great.  the general definition is
acceptable, but i prefer the clues that gave a little more.

Really don't like year=time.

Another horrible definition, I'm afraid.

I had too much time with this. Or an overspill of thyme from above?

"It is time" hardly qualifies as a definition of LEAP YEAR.

Sympathy vote for the Northern Hemisphere from Sunny Malaysia
My son in UK also reported a harsh winter

"It is time" as a definition for LEAP YEAR doesn't make much sense, 
although I appreciate the sentiment of the surface considering the weather
of a few weeks ago!

It is time to come to the aid of your _solver_, if he encountered this clue!

Defining `leap year' by `it is time' is hopeless.

Lyrical, but makes no sense at all.  The definition does not 
define, and the cryptic makes no sense.  Time does not define
year, though this weakness is shared by other clues.

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

18th place (score 4.66%) - clue 1

    Reptile is shocked on his birthday.

Votes (normalized): 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 16 30

This isn't a cryptic clue, though it is a clue and is cryptic.  Even
for a conventional crossword, this would be too difficult, methinks.

Even in a pun x-word, this one would be a stretch (and a real toughie!).
I don't feel it meets the criteria for a cryptic, especially since it
lacks a straight def.

The cluer should deduce that readers do not possess, to use the
Sailor's favorite expression, ESP.

Without the explanation I would never have understood this clue.
How can a year be a birth*DAY*?  Sorry, but I didn't like this
much at all.

No, the Leaping Lizard is actually an alligator
taking part in a gala parade in New Orleans.
So the answer is "MARDI GRAS".

I just did not understand the allusion is this clue. 

This is not what we mean by a cryptic clue.

The only obvious thing about this clue is that it is obvious only to the
setter. Sorry, unsolvable for my small brain.

I did not deduce what the clue's explanation said I should (perhaps my
deduces were wild).  This isn't really a cryptic clue of the type
expected in the PCWC--I'm not sure where such a clue would be expected.

With apologies to Orphan Annie, this one rates not even an "Arf!" from Sandy.
It is NOT obvious the birthday falls on "Leap Year", which is 366 days, not 
one.

This is more than a little contrived. A birth_day_ is not a year.

Err, run that by me one more time. Now run it
by me again, nope still don't get it.

I love a joke clue as much as the next person but this was too
obscured for me.

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

19th place (score 0.00%) - clue 19

    Spring, spring, e.g. * 4, and one in four spring, e.g. * 4's.

Votes (normalized): none

My original idea for this was "spring spring spring spring
spring [defn] (4,4)", to be decoded as follows:
spring - leap
spring spring spring spring - four seasons - year.
but I couldn't come up with any good definition that would fit.

Obscure, unsolvable, and technically wrong (unless under the Julian
calendar), but very pretty all the same.  In short, the perfect
bonus clue!

It's so weird that I can't understand it

Is this the New Math?

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

19th place (score 0.00%) - clue 20

    What Gregory proclaimed: Spring, you first of all Romans (4,4)

Votes (normalized): none

Well, Gregory didn't exactly *proclaim* leap years.

Definition not rigorous enough and the surface did nothing for me

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian C. Spollen                          | Internet:bcs@sc.harris.com
Harris Electronic Design Automation, Inc. | I express my opinions, not Harris's
Fishers, New York 14453                   | "Taste makes Waist"