and you forgot the 1,9 and the 4 and....Simon is just a sloppy pencil marker and an easily distracted solver.

I was shouting 7's

😁

Made this harder than need be

IKR. Explains how to pencil mark etc and then just doesn't notice the 6.

Yes!!! My main takeaway from this video is to be more methodical in my penciling.

Only penciling confirmed pairs and no other penciling makes it less confusing.

I really love the penciling of 2 squares. There are a few situations where I will do it for 3 (for example, number is missing from 3 squares and they form a triangle 2-3-2). There are harder puzzles that do require you to do complete markings, look up the Swordfish technique for example.

I always find my self pencil marking almost everything, then regretting it once I need to tidy up... Now I'll try to do his advice and see how I do...

Yes, the technique is full of potential. But it will require me to UN-learn the technique that I have developed whereby I only pencil in numbers into a square when they are the full set of numbers that can go in that square. I can solve Easy, Medium, and Hard puzzles almost 100% of the time with my technique, but the Expert level usually leaves me having to guess once or twice. I'll practice this technique and see if it can lift me to the next level.

All expert solver may know it but not everyone who knows it is an expert

I still havent figured out the trick the title refers to (due to a lack of timestamp). All I see (though I skimmed) is regular logic such as "because we have a number here, the number cant be here". Nothing along the lines of tricks like finned x-wings or sashimis, or unique rectangles. Am I wrong to figure that the word "trick" refers to stuff that arent just a rephrasing of the rules (like he figured 3 cells must be any of 3 numbers, so the other two in same row can't be those (which is just rephrasing of how rules say you cant have duplicates on a row))? Or is the trick the placement of the notes, as he mentioned at 3:00 that outer marks are for what a number may be, and center marks are when he is sure it "can only be" (hidden pairs vs naked pairs?)?

@@feha92 Yes.

@@feha92 around 4:40 but he mentions it a few times throughout the video. at least that would be the 'trick' he explained the most

@@adler5653 But that isn't a trick in any sense of the word. It is _literally_ saying "because those rows has a seven, they can't have another". Which is one of sudoku's rules, not a trick.

I don’t erase them , just draw a line thru the false entries

Me, too!

I don't even usually make pencil marks. I use a men. No marks needed.

Me, too. Except that I use a pen and and mark out changes.

I do them in pen.

Jim Kyle If you have a pair of two digits in a box, and you fill in one of the cells, then your focus at that moment should be the box, and the respective column and row. There is no reason your focus should suddenly leave that box, row, and column, and jump to an entirely unrelated part of the grid. It's just messy and it overcomplicates the solving process. And if your video is meant to be educational and not just for entertainment, then you're supposed to teach the lesson as efficiently and cleanly as possible. I think it's completely valid to criticize the fact that he isn't being careful with how he goes about solving these puzzles, and that in turn, it makes it harder for learning viewers to understand the lesson. It's as my parents taught me: do your best, or don't do it.

cant understand and your dialogue is over the puzzle very iratating

GO TO SUB TITLES YOU CAN PAUSE THEM TO READ AND FOLLOW THE MOVES SO EASY YEE

I have found it natural that when I find the number that fits the square, I check for both other places that the number can go, but if I have only one square remaining in a box, a row, or column, then I fill those in as they open up the 'world' so to speak. I realize that you wrote this a year ago so might might not see this, unless you just want to do a simple puzzle to relax, I would suggest that you work a puzzle that you think might be harder that usual for you. As you do it, you will get better and faster at the simpler puzzles. On my MS version after getting used to doing them with a computer, I started doing the expert level and now I do the grandmaster puzzles. I found when I do the daily challenges that I can whip right through most of them as they don't go up that hard. I spend some time daily doing Sudoku as I am 65 and want to keep my brain sharper and to help ward off dementia. :)

Pop ppl ppl ppl ppl

That's clever. My handwriting is pure gibberish, so i might start doing it this way.

I do it that way too

Same same .. then for the definite pairs that he numbers in the middle, I instead, just draw a faint line between the 2 which cancels out all other pencil marks and has precedence. In addition to that, I start with the 1"s and work through to the 9's completing all possible pairs as I go, then repeat. By this time all of the simple ones are solved, then you know you haven't missed any. Sometimes it needs a 3rd and a 4th time

I do mine with a pen. It gets a little messy without being able to erase so I tend to circle the value that is correct when I resolve, 2x2s and 3x3s. I try to be very neat with the pen and only start putting notes in when I get the 2x2s all set up. For the notes (any cells bigger than 2x2), I put them in order 123 at top, 456 in the middle, and 789 at the bottom of the box. Cross out when resolved and circle the final answer.

I do use the dot system as a last resort. If I'm on paper, I prefer to mark down outside the grid what numbers do columns and row miss, I find it faster. If I can't crack it like that, then I'll start putting dots in, but it happens rarely.

I've been doing sudoku for years and somehow never spotted the "x-wing" trick. I think my times are about to improve. also I'm totally calling it "x-wing"

Another alternative can be seen at 12:30. There is also a pair 17 in the first column of the first sector, this allows you to remove both options (17) from the cell that is just to the right of the 2 in the first sector, so that only the 4 option would remain in that cell. In case you didn't understand: There can't be 2 options forming a perfect quadrilateral. The pair 17 is in 3 vertices of this imaginary quadrilateral, so neither 1 nor 7 can be in the last vertex. Otra alternativa se puede ver en el minuto 12:30. Hay también un par 17 en la primera columna del primer sector , esto permite eliminar ambas opciones (17) de la celda que está justo a la derecha del 2 en el primer sector, por lo que solo quedaría la opción del 4 en esa celda. Por si no se entendió: No puede haber 2 opciones formando un cuadrilátero perfecto. El par 17 está en 3 vértices de este cuadrilátero imaginario, así que en el último vértice no pueden estar ni el 1 ni el 7.

Not if you were explaining the reasoning

I'm not the only one noticing that 6 :'v I just thpight he'd bang it out right there and then given that he'd just done the chain of the other 6 and 2 cells Edit: He came back to it and solved himself a nice 5, hooray :v

i don't think my brain would register those as easily. When I write in the actual number, I can stare at the center of the puzzle and my mind instantly sees all the 3's Ive marked. I don't think that would work with simple dots. With dots, I would have to look a the square itself for it to register as a 3.

@@Gnomaana takes about a week or two to learn "dots". With the dot system, some patterns become easier to spot.

for some people that just looks like a bunch of dots that don't form clear patterns

Connor Hamilton same. I find that when you pencil mark along the way, it makes the entire puzzle look much clearer. With too many pencil marks, it’s a little overwhelming and it’s hard to focus.

ROFL!

Oh my god that's what I thought! Sean Lock with Miles Jupps voice.

Too funny. I think Sean would have 1 or 47 more f@*! as he solves it

Hahahahaha love this but Sean Lock wouldve had a lot more swearing

Well... this hits a little harder now. RIP

It took me 25 minutes roughly to solve an easily level Sudoku puzzle and now I can do Easy level in roughly 10 minutes, no mistakes. I did a Medium and that took around 17 minutes.

Once you get better you will be able to do expert puzzles in 5. I do expert on iPad in that time. The iPad version of the game kids helps you. When you click on a number like 1 all the ones highlight. Makes it easier and faster to see other things. Good luck. It’s a great game. Play chess? Find me on chess.com. Greekjanus

I've started doing sudokus a few days ago First I needed 20 min for a easy sudoku Today its under 5 min, its awesome how fast you get better

you doing any better?

How’s it going?

Yes I often use more that 2 number markings. I was thinking the same, maybe limiting to only 2 different numbers is better? These hard puzzles are relatively easy. Have u tried expert puzzles? I'm trying to find expert puzzles and advanced sudoku solving techniques videos.

I can do most difficult ones over 2 hours. Occasionally there is one I outright can't solve. That's happening less often as I'm learning more about the logic behind it

@@Stettafire Is there a universal system for telling which puzzle is easy, medium and hard? I think that's completely subjective. For example, I have an app with 5 levels, and hard (4/5) is not that hard at all, leaving extreme (5/5) to be really hard.

Yeah ... me too; total newbie and now - this much is clear (*winks*) can't say it's embedded in my brain; but it's nicer to follow the work out, knowing this next step beyond "try to number 1-9 in the box and in the lines" This is a great site.

Most of my work is paper. I keep the candidates in the “proper” spots but underline showing the importance

They have now

For the NYT, uniqueness may be a safe assumption, since most better algorithm generators will require a unique solution, but for a random Sudoku or for a tutorial where people will apply the techniques elsewhere, it doesn't really make sense to teach since it won't always hold.

You sort of develop a pattern of what to look at and an eye for coincidences. Some quicker than others. You just have to know what to look for.

I don't understand this 'concepts and tricks thing', be systematic, be logical , few sudokus take more than 10 minutes. This ain't maths, it's logic and if you do logic then the world is your lobster.

Steve Muscato Exactly.

Lol Ha ha ha ha good one

Cannot find any Sudoku puzzles with that excellent feature, which means I sometimes get into trouble.

@@castelodeossos3947 yes I’ve noticed recently I tunnel vision too much into searching for it, resulting in wasted time or much easier clues missed 😂

I did 44:57, but I'm still happy for the same reason :D

@@tiagocarreira99 omg I got almost the same time xD 44:45

He's so dim he's off the scale. The way he does it is just so slow and laborious.

Gordon Stainforth lol hes an extremely skilled sudoku player hes just trying to explain everything logically and go slow for beginners

I was going to point out the same thing - it would have "exploded" the puzzle sooner. But based on how seldom this trick is needed for published sudoku, I wonder how many designers recognize it as a valid trick that can be used by solvers. Which is surprising, because knowledge of it is needed for the design of a valid puzzle. This might be easiest to see from the finished grid, at 17:15. A designer will start from such a finished grid, and remove numbers that leave the puzzle solvable. Look at the positions of the 3 and the 4 in top-right and bottom-right boxes. When deciding which numbers can be removed, and still have only one valid solution, the designer must leave at least one of these four numbers in. (In this case, both were left in the top-tight box.) Otherwise, the solver can find two solutions by reversing the 3's and 4's. But it is always something I look for when I discover a fixed-pair in either one column or one row of a box. And the trick can even be extended in two ways: First, at 15:23, a fixed-pair of "14" was discovered in the center column of the bottom-right box. But it is completes a quadrilateral with a "48" pair in the bottom-left box. This means that there can't be a "18" pair in a similar quadrilateral. (In this case, a 6 already prevents it.) Second, you can't have three complete rows (or columns), with the same filled-in numbers, in three boxes along a column (or row).

I did 20:54 because I messed up something somewhere and had to restart, but I'm very happy. These videos really help. I also got their app and it has tons of very challenging ones :D

I'm seriously unsure if he legitimately took this long or if he was slowing down for instructional purposes. this felt like a very slow pace for him.

@@RaindropsBleeding Yes, I know But still, let me be happy and proud about it !

Why it was 4. Pls tell me.

i was hoping to see examples of x-wing patterns or swordfish strategies, those are all still beyond me.

Some facts

Just as I'm sure you have better things to do than whine about mindless zealots with superiority complexes. Your disdain falls on deaf ears and was every bit as juvenile and unnecessary as the musings of those you seek to shame. .

I'm not even gonna read that whole thing but go off my guy

@@nunyabizness607100% agree. Sounds like a narcissist trying to get other narcissists to fight with. Some people like confrontation.