Financial Times 16,543 by BRADMAN

16 comments on “Financial Times 16,543 by BRADMAN”

1. 17 doesn’t work: only 1 aitch in the answer.

2. Indeed, must be a mistake that went unnoticed.

3. Should have been ‘front of church’ — very sorry!

4. 17 works with ce for church

    

5. Really enjoyed this apart from 17. I’m afraid neither Bradamn (sic) or Oldham comments work. Yes it is an anagram if you replace CH for “church” by CE but the clue specifies an inclusion. Using front of church for C leaves the second E unaccounted.

6. Perhaps 17 should have been serape not seraph to make up for the missing E.

7. Was in a bit of a rush when I posted @5. I think I should add that I particularly liked the wordplay for PRAETORS and NOISETTE. Also liked the clued for EACH but my favourite was the novel way for clueing setters’ favourite cat, the OUNCE.

8. whenever i encounter church in the word play of a clue, i keep both ce and ch in mind–i use ch for church first and if that does not lead to a solution  i try ce for church of england–in this case it worked–and i see no indication in the clue that the c and the e need be adjacent, just mixed together with the letters of seraph–you need to be patient not pedantic

9. … but the answer (to 17dn) is EPARCHIES which is the plural whereas the definition is the singular – ‘diocese’.

   Also, we thought 20dn was a bit unfair with no indication that a KINGLET is an American bird.  And we couldn’t make out what the numeral 2 was for in 23ac.

   But we liked ESTHER and PRESTO, together with the ‘reverse engineering’ element on the clue for OUNCE.

10. Thanks Bradman and Turbolegs

    A curate’s egg for me which brought on a second error for the week.  There were some clever clues such as the compound anagram at 7d and being able to reverse the phrase at 1d and keep a good surface reading.

    However thought that there were issues with:

    17d (both the plurality of the answer / singularity of definition and the mess up with the word play (jjcato@8 it’s not being pedantic – the clue clearly states to insert ‘church one’ into an anagram of ‘seraph’ – the issue is not ‘church’=CH, it is the anagram of ‘seraph’ that is the error));

    loose definitions in a couple of clues (‘part of car’ and ‘a wet creature’);

    thought that A TOI meant ‘your’ not ‘you’ in French (clever idea in the clue though);

    could only find the economic stimulus meaning for REFLATE. RE-INFLATE was the definition to ‘blow up again’;

    and the clumsy instruction with 27a (agree with TL’s parsing, but the fact that he had doubts with it supports the case).

    They weren’t showstoppers because I was able to solve all of these clues.  Not so for writing in SOBEIT instead of ROBERT for the clever clue at 9d.  Had landed on the ‘Bob’s your uncle’ phrase but just got it wrong.

    Finally, the puzzle continued my education in new terms, as this setter typically does, with RICER, EPARCHIES, SALISH and HELLBENDER.

11. My bad … retract the A TOI comment – missed the definition as ‘for you’  (little embarrassed face !!).  It is much too early in the morning over here.

12. A slow grind but now without joy — liked EACH and PRESTO as well as OUNCE once I understood how it was derived. My GK would never include EPARCHIES regardless of how tight or loose the cluing was. Thanks to both.

13. The wrestling over wordplay in the comments is almost as chewy as Bradman’s offering which I enjoyed over several sittings. To which I would add that ‘à toi’ is ‘to you’ not ‘for you’ but can mean ‘your’ when expressing ‘your turn/go’.
    Also, I thought 27ac could just as easily have been ‘dicer’ (last thing needed). Really liked ROBERT among numerous others. Didn’t know 23ac, HELLBENDER, for which I was suspecting an ‘erer’ ending, or EPARCHIES.
    Thanks to both BRADMAN and Turbolegs for the entertainment.

14. turbolegs – sorry to bother you at this late date, but I’m only doing this puzzle now. Can you please explain the number 2 in the 23a HELLBENDER clue? It seems entirely redundant to me, so I think I must be missing something obvious. Thanks.

15. Hi Cellomaniac,

    I am not sure. My best guess is that the reference is to Elizabeth II rather than Elizabeth I. The former had the royal cipher as E II R which in crossword world passes as ER (clued usually in reference to queen, royalty etc). I don’t know for sure and the parsing as in the blog seemed to work without the ‘2’.

    Regards,

    TL

16. Thanks, Turbolegs. It does seem completely redundant. Neither the clue nor the solution needs to distinguish between good Queen Bess and our current monarch (mine, too, in Canada). At least I don’t appear to have missed something obvious.

    Cheers,

    CM

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.