| View previous topic :: View next topic   | 
	 
	
	
		| Author | 
		Message | 
	 
	
		BrendaS
 
 
  Joined: 08 Jan 2006 Posts: 3 Location: Canada
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:58 pm    Post subject: Mar 17 very Hard | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				I am stuck at the following:
 
 
XX2 479 6XX
 
647 85X X9X
 
X9X 61X 4X7
 
 
874 XX1 569
 
253 986 714
 
961 547 832
 
 
7XX XX8 X4X
 
X3X XX4 X7X
 
4X6 795 3XX
 
 
Can someone help?
 
 
Thanks,
 
Brenda | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		Steve R
 
 
  Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 289 Location: Birmingham, England
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:02 pm    Post subject: Mar 17 very Hard | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Hi, Brenda
 
 
The only places for 5 and 6 in box 9 are r7c9 and r8c9. This means that the 8 in box 9 occupies row 9.
 
 
Taking account of this, there is only one place for 8 in row 8.
 
 
Steve | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		BrendaS
 
 
  Joined: 08 Jan 2006 Posts: 3 Location: Canada
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:59 pm    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Thanks Steve,
 
 
It looks so obvious now.
 
 
Brenda S. | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		jabejochke
 
 
  Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 21 Location: Reading
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:25 pm    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Sarah and others,
 
 
Steve’s insight and/or approach I don’t have.  He makes it so obvious.
 
 
I recognized it differently.  In processing box 9, I saw a 56 hidden subset in c9 at r7c9 and r8c9 which contained candidates <1,5,6,8> and <1,5,6,8> thereby eliminating the ‘1’s’ and ‘8’s’ in those cells hence: 
 
 
Ø	creating paired ‘8’s’ in box 9 at r9c8 and r9c9, which in turn
 
Ø	eliminated the other ‘8’ in row 9 at box 7 – r9c2 – which 
 
Ø	meant that the only ‘8’ in box 7 must be at r8c3
 
 
Again, I wish I had Steve’s insight – it would be a lot faster.  As importantly, his response gave me a totally new way to think about  and look for  ‘hidden subsets’.
 
 
Jack | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		TKiel
 
 
  Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 292 Location: Kalamazoo, MI
  | 
		
			
				 Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:46 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			 
			
				
  | 
			 
			
				Jack,
 
 
  I think you recognize it the same way, you merely describe it in a different manner. | 
			 
		  | 
	 
	
		| Back to top | 
		 | 
	 
	
		  | 
	 
	
		 | 
	 
 
  
	 
	    
	   | 
	
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
  | 
   
 
  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
  
		 |