www.argio-logic.net

Argio is a great site and we can look forward to a good competition every week here. And there is a lot of variety too. I thought let me share some views on them (not from a criticism point of view but from a constructive viewpoint):

(1) Contest and Roulette: I do not think both look much different now. I know the difference between the two - in one you carefully select grids according to the points and in the other, it is the luck factor which chooses the grids. But should both of them co-exist, or just one would be fine? These are definitely the oldest competitions around on your site and are popular too.

(2) Headshrinker: Personally, this is my favourite. Recently, we have seen a lot of easy grids appear on this contest, which is the only thing I did
not like. Always look forward to this one.

(3) Classics only: I am not a fan of classics, never was. But there may be others who like it.

(4) Hybrids: I, for some reason, am not liking hybrids. And the grids used in hybrids are almost the same set everytime - 2evenodd, offset, knight, untouch, nonconsecutive etc. For me, it becomes too much to solve too many such grids at a time - maybe this is a problem specific to me. But I just checked and the average participation for hybrids is ~51 which is significantly less than your other competitions. So there are others too who are giving hybrids a pass. I am unsure if this should be a regular competition or not.

I would be happy if any of the above comments helps Argio improve further in some way.

Thanks, Rajesh
I share many of yours points.
I wish other users could express their point of view in order to improve, if possible, our site.

As Rakesh says, this site offers an opportunity to participate in a sudoku tournament every weekend, which is great!

From my point of view, the biggest area for improvement is the number of points assigned to each grid. It often does not reflect the real difficulty of the grids.
For example, the grid "4 box" has often the highest number of points, but is clearly not the most difficult of the contest, and is often solved by many players in under 10 minutes. It would be interesting that some players test the grids before the tournament and that the points awarded are reflecting their timings and comments.

From my point of view, 2h30 is a bit too long for a tournament. I would prefer a period of 2 hours.

The tournament Headshrinker is interesting, but times (and ranking) are almost anecdotal to me. The important thing is to find a logical path that allows me to solve each grid, especially the hardest, it makes me grow. It is very rare that I conceded to an hypothesis to save time. As Rakesh says, sometimes there are too easy grids to deserve the "label headshrinker".

I like hybrids grids. Here hybrids come from 2 "classic twins" grids, which is perhaps not the hybrids I prefer. After 4-5 grids, It becomes difficult to stay focused and sometimes, for a few seconds, I do not know what grid I'm trying to solve.
Hybrids grids I prefer are a mixture between a classic twin (nonconsecutive, antiknight, 2even2odd, queen, untouch,...) and a variant with other clues (diagonal, killer, jigsaw, consecutive, skyscrapers, outside, frame, 4 box or anything else).


Fred

I will definitely take note of your comments and try all my best to improve.
This will take some time to find some solutions.
I can give immediate answer to some comments:
contest time
many times i thought to reduce the time, but I reached the conclusion that it is not so important.
what is the difference if the user X finish the tournament at 270 points in 2 hours or 300 points in 2:28
on the other side many second level players may have their satisfaction to reach the maximum in 2:30, no matter if the best has closed in 1:20

pre testing the grids
I can't test the grids because I'm very bad in solving
I used the daily solvers times as system to evaluate the difficulty of the grid, realising that they are not reliable
Pre-testing is good only if the test is done by a champion, like in the other international contest.
I don't know who I can ask.
I prefere that champions play the contest rather then testing it.

here the average solution time of first 10 solvers.



as a consequence the relevant points will be rescheduled as follows

Found and corrected a bug in the "Neighbours" generator.
The bug caused the wrong evaluation in the grid of the last headshrinker (solved in 2:42)

I wondered why the anti.knight was always resolved with fast times.
the answer was because the generator was limited to elementary situations.
I have now modified the routine.
how do you evaluate this grid?

tosto, ma senza tentativi. Solo ragionamento, come piace a me (alla fine tutti quei 4-7-9-1 che si intrecciavano, mi hanno dato molto da pensare, ma la sequenza giusta si riesce a trovarla)
Risolto in una ventina di minuti (10 prima di pranzo, 10 dopo)

Fred76 ha scritto:I like hybrids grids. Here hybrids come from 2 "classic twins" grids, which is perhaps not the hybrids I prefer. After 4-5 grids, It becomes difficult to stay focused and sometimes, for a few seconds, I do not know what grid I'm trying to solve.
Hybrids grids I prefer are a mixture between a classic twin (nonconsecutive, antiknight, 2even2odd, queen, untouch,...) and a variant with other clues (diagonal, killer, jigsaw, consecutive, skyscrapers, outside, frame, 4 box or anything else).

I wanted to write exactly the same thing about how I felt after 4-5 grids. Otherwise, the views on hybrids are very nicely put, Fred. And I would agree with it.

rakesh_rai ha scritto:

Fred76 ha scritto:I like hybrids grids. Here hybrids come from 2 "classic twins" grids, which is perhaps not the hybrids I prefer. After 4-5 grids, It becomes difficult to stay focused and sometimes, for a few seconds, I do not know what grid I'm trying to solve.
Hybrids grids I prefer are a mixture between a classic twin (nonconsecutive, antiknight, 2even2odd, queen, untouch,...) and a variant with other clues (diagonal, killer, jigsaw, consecutive, skyscrapers, outside, frame, 4 box or anything else).

I wanted to write exactly the same thing about how I felt after 4-5 grids. Otherwise, the views on hybrids are very nicely put, Fred. And I would agree with it.

I understand, I will study something
in the meantime for the next I could propose

2even-Offset
2even-Queen
Knight-Nonconsecutive
Knight-Untouch
Nonconsecutive-Untouch
Offset-Queen
X Frame
Killer Diagonal
Iso Mini Killer
Rossini Outside
Jigsaw Consecutive

gabriele ha scritto:I wondered why the anti.knight was always resolved with fast times.
the answer was because the generator was limited to elementary situations.
I have now modified the routine.
how do you evaluate this grid?

Nice grid, I liked it !

I solved it in about 9 minutes

Fred76 ha scritto:Nice grid, I liked it !

I solved it in about 9 minutes

thanks Fred,
your solving times are very usefull to me
I hope to submit to your evalaution another hybrid in a short time
I'm working at outsisde+anti diagonal

Hard grids !

22 minutes for the outside anti-diagonal and 18 minutes for the skyscrapers anti-XV.
Good hybrids, I like these combinations

Fred

solution for outside anti diagonal
https://www.argio-logic.net/guide/hybrids.php?p=outsideantidiagonal

solution for skyscraper anti XV
https://www.argio-logic.net/guide/hybrids.php?p=skyscraperantixv

I test the Antiknight grid : 5 minutes to solve it.