US Puzzle Championship 2013 instructions run-down

Before I say anything else about the post title, I should give a few words on my absence. In short, the outcome of the Mystery Hunt I contributed to left me very drained on puzzles for months, and I think the first time I’ve constructed anything since then was May. I think I’m finally back on my feet though. Future puzzles from me will soon be appearing at Thomas Snyder’s Grandmaster Puzzles blog. You won’t be seeing much posted at this URL anymore; probably just the occasional post like this one.

Anyways, the 2013 USPC instructions are now online. Here’s a collection of practice material on the various types. Thomas Snyder posted tips for a lot of the earlier types in a series on common USPC types; I’ll be referring to that link a few times.

1. Battleships. Print out the first page of any past USPC to get a feel for what kind of puzzle we usually see in this slot, and also check out the post from Thomas.

2. Corral. Another post from Thomas. Most old USPCs have them for practice. You can also look at the Corral category on this blog. That stretches deep into my archives though, so be warned they might be on the hard side.

3. Masyu. Another post from Thomas (on loops in general). Even if you aren’t a member, nikoli.com has some example Masyus, in case you want a feel for their style. Also check out the offerings from the USPC in 2010-2012 to see what kind of difficulty and style they often construct for this test (usually Extra by nikoli standards). If you need more, Masyu can be found in large quantities on most blogs, like mine or mathgrant’s.

4. Spot the differences. Another post from Thomas. For practice, you really want to do the spot the differences on past USPCs. The kinds of differences you usually see doesn’t change a whole lot from year to year, so just being familiar with what to look for will help a lot.

5. Pentopia. This is Bram de Laat’s type and he has posted a lot of them. This is your best bet for practice. Also check out Thomas’s post on pentomino types. If you run out of Pentopias and need more practice with a pentomino bank in general, you may want to try some of my Statue Parks, particularly those in the pentomino section of the pack. The hardest of these I’ve made require you to know the pentomino bank forwards and backwards to find a half-decent solution, so they should help with becoming more familiar with those shapes.

6. Digi2rd search. Another post from Thomas on word searches. The second word search on the USPC practice test (by Thomas, also can be seen in his post) is probably helpful here, since it trains you to look for words that have been mangled pretty significantly.

7. Sudoku. Not much needs to be said here. The USPC has had a nikoli Sudoku in the test in all the years from 2009 to 2012. Doing those will give you a good idea of what kind of constructions to look for. You’ll notice most of those are cleverly themed, so don’t come in expecting a vanilla puzzle here.

8. Tapa. This is a Serkan Tapa, so check the PDF for the Classic Tapa Contest that ran last year. 15 points means this one will probably sit a bit before the middle of the puzzles in that PDF, in terms of difficulty.

9. Persistence of Memory. Check the Snake Variations Contest at LMI a couple of years ago for one by the same author (Serkan). After that, you can try the four that appeared on OAPC 5.

10. Number Tower. This one seems to be new. I’d be interested if anyone remembers any past spatial visualization puzzles in the USPC or other puzzle competitions. For now, doing a puzzle like Digitile from the 2010 USPC might help you get a bit more used to the shapes of the number bank. Although this puzzle will almost certainly fit the numbers in square boxes, instead of 3 by 5 rectangles.

11. Bombardoku. Those of you more familiar with Sudoku variations might know a good source of practice for this one. I will probably try to construct a preview myself.

12. Pathfinder. See Thomas’s notes on counting puzzles, although this one will probably be closer to a math puzzle. On that note, this math contest problem might make good practice. I suspect that problem is harder than what we’ll get on the USPC.

13. Looper. I know I’ve seen this one before, but I can’t find any examples of it. If you know of any, feel free to drop a comment. In the meantime I might throw one of these together, since it should be a quick one to construct.

14. Tight-fit Tom-Tom. This one is new. I would say to do Tight-fit Sudoku or some of Thomas Snyder’s Tom-Toms (I would certainly not recommend doing “Ken-kens”), but I have a feeling both will be misleading in some ways, as the fractions can change the game a lot. This is another one I’ll look into constructing.

15. Star Battle. We haven’t seen this type on the USPC before, despite how commonly it shows up on lots of other tests and WPCs. Thomas’s new blog has a nice sampling of very nicely constructed ones.

16. Kakuro Cards. Somewhat new, although the idea of a Kakuro variation on the USPC is not. Check Thomas’s post on Kakuro and variations first. I think this one is not as a big of a concern, and there’s three likely ways that the suits will change the game here:
a) Do good bookkeeping from start to finish.
b) Be on the look out for two sums which both want a particular number if you still have empty spaces of the same suit left in both sums. That’ll give you an either-or to work with. Bonus points if the sums cross.
c) If this isn’t enough, look for a group of high sums or a group of low sums that all use lots of copies of the same suit. You can only use those suits’ high and low numbers so many times.

17. Follow-Up. I know I’ve seen something like this before, but I don’t remember where. Anyways, either that example is awfully hard or this one is going to be tricky. Another one I’ll look into trying to make a preview of in advance.

18. Duello. I think this one is new. If you know any programming, you may want to do some brute forcing before the test for this one to see what rows and columns can possibly look like (without accounting for empty spaces).

19. Siamese Fences. They’ve broken it into two grids so that it can go black and white, but this is exactly the Colorlink type that I first posted forever ago. I’d encourage you to try some of those since there’s a lot of nonobvious tricks and patterns that come up in this type.

20. Thermo Skyscrapers. See Thomas Snyder’s blog for some Thermo Sudoku and Skyscrapers practice. These are two types that give the constructor a lot of freedom, so I’d recommend doing some from the same author to get a feel for what might happen on the test. The only puzzles I know that combine these are some inequality skyscrapers from WPCs, so I can’t post them. This is one that may be worth constructing in advance, albeit low priority since this much material already exists.

21. Ambiguity. This appeared in OAPC 8 under the name Rehber (edit: without the backwards/forwards choice. But I think those are still unique even with that rule). If you finish those and feel you need more practice, it may also be worth doing +-1 from OAPC 7, which similarly has you enter a word in an irregular fashion in every contiguous row and column of the grid. It’s kind of scary that they make this one the last puzzle on the test, since the type itself is not too difficult.

If you have any other sources of practice, or tips, or types you’ve constructed, feel free to comment.

About these ads

7 Responses to “US Puzzle Championship 2013 instructions run-down”

  1. Scott Handelman Says:

    Rehber puzzles had you write the words from left to right or top to bottom. Ambiguity allows writing backwards as a possibility making it more, umm…ambiguous.

  2. Dan Katz Says:

    Thanks for calling our attention to ColorLink; I did a few of the simpler ones this morning, and there are definitely some techniques I’m glad I picked up now rather than on the clock.

    The tough decision for me is going to be whether it’s worth the time to superimpose the grids in two colors; I think I’m likely to solve much more effectively once the puzzle’s in that form, but copying the numbers over in a hurry may be treacherous, and extracting the answer submission even more so.

    Number Tower should be interesting; if the numbers go as high as 6 (and don’t skip any), the “top” of the six will probably have to be shortened or missing, as otherwise it’s indistinguishable from the 5. I constructed a 1-to-7 stack puzzle that I’m politely going to keep to myself, since I’d be surprised if the test puzzle is very different than what I put together.

    Also, the PDF version of the Tapa set you linked to unfortunately seems to have been removed for some reason.

    Best of luck today (though I think I need more luck than you do)!

    • MellowMelon Says:

      I had similar thoughts about Number Tower, with how there’s little space to make such a puzzle if the numbers look like they do in the example. I’m keeping my mind open for the bank to be a little bizarre there.

      The Tapa PDF still works fine for me.

    • Dan Katz Says:

      Since the championship is still open, I will not say whether I ended up superimposing the grids for solving or not.

      I will say that I chose poorly.

  3. Dave B Says:

    Had a couple thoughts w.r.t the Tower (a few options for the shape of the 7) Must be missing something based on the point value – doesn’t seem to be too many options – but I’ve been surprised by what pops up in the past. Thanks for the links – particularly to Bram’s pentopias which I’ll now try and probably regret. Good luck all.

  4. Scott Handelman Says:

    I don’t see how the Duello on the test wasn’t broken. Either that or I’m extremely dense.

    1. There has to be a 5 in the bottom left corner to go with the 5 in the 8th column.
    2. The other 5 in the first column must be in the 1st or 3rd row. If it’s in the 1st row, then there are an odd number of numbers in that row, which can’t be. So it must be in the 3rd row, and everything not marked in that column is a number.
    3. The other 3 in that column must be in row 4.
    4. So what can the top left number be? Not 1, because the place where the other 1 would be is taken. Not a 2 because that would leave two numbers right next to each other, and the numbers can’t be 0. Not 3 (already taken). Not 4, for the same reason it can’t be 2. Everything else is too high.

    So…what am I missing?

    Note: An email conversation shortly after comment was first made mentioned that 0s were allowed. -MM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 62 other followers

%d bloggers like this: