There were clues with imprecise or unnecessary words. In 10, 'Muhammad' is inconsistent with a lack of Cassius: 'Clay or Ali?' might be punchier? In 14, 'plug'? Or 'plug in'? Only the latter I think applies to connecting a power supply and this would not fit the surface reading, so perhaps the underlying idea may need to be approached with new word play; the 'lacking' only works at a stretch, in my view.
One-and-a-half points each to 32, 39, 51, 53. Imaginative.
Two-and-a-half each to 37, 43. Ditto…accurate and amusing.
To pick a winner, 50, 4 points. The surface reading is fun and hangs together with interesting use of words. For me, 'admitting' just improves on 'admit' as it removes the clash with the imperative 'Spin'. Fussy stuff. |
Rather too many multiple definitions, I thought, none of which was sufficiently special to clinch it. I gave 5 points to clue 17, simple but effective. 4 points to clue 43, which is clever, though the subtraction of SHIN via a finite verb jars. 3 points to clue 32, for neat use of the alternates in 'sprung'. 2 points to clue 2, for a brave attempt at an &lit. And 1 point to clue 40, where the juxtaposition of the high-register 'papa' and the vernacular 'not half' jars.
I'm very surprised that nobody used 'toy' as a definition, even among the multiple defs. I was expecting lots of 'toy engines' etc. |
I begin by eliminating ten clues: – 17,18,19,20,21,22,26,27,44,&54 all citing 'clay' as a definition. Pug2 is not clay, but clay (or loam – see Oxford Concise) ground and worked with water as a rendering medium, etc. Were it valid, 'limestone', for example, would be a valid definition of 'Portland cement'.
Since most of those clues are double/multi-def. entries (others are 7,8,9,14,16,33,49 & 56) and I am not inclined to favour them anyway, my approach matters not a jot. I make an exception for 23 which has hidden depths – you will see hundreds of pugs (pug2) at a greyhound meeting, perhaps even the odd famous pug4. Sighting a pug1, in any of its guises other than a 'nose' would be a champagne event. 'when stopper's left out' is a subsidiary needing some adjustment in the other 'clay' clue (27).
When the clue-word has many meanings, clues having cryptic definitions are especially problematic. I question 2 (The solver has to find a synonym for 'assertive' , deduce that 'that' is a quality of 'me' and not a definition, and all before applying the subsidiary indication – fatal flaws in a highly polished and inventive entry), 52 (Desperate – its whole appears to define the tracker (authority?) rather than the verb), 4 (I see the subsidiary, but the remainder might be a reference to a pug's squat face? – only guessing), 24 (Willy is not a definition, he's an instance of pug – this needs to be flagged), 32 (when the subsidiary is discarded the remainder makes no sense, essentially because this is another attempt at an &lit), 40, 41 & 50, the last four having other faults. They are:- 32 does not flag the 'obscure' definition used, (echo 45, otherwise perfectly acceptable), 40 has a padding problem, ("'s"), 41 does not indicate initial letters, unless 'small' is to be taken for this purpose. Either way, the def. is adjectival and none is listed in C. Finally, 50 overlooks the spin/spun problem.
Miscellaneous quibbles with others:-
6,25,28,29,31,34,35,36,43 padding in varying degrees, 10 back-to-front, 11 'not on'='less'? 39 vague def. 42 PU = 'up' up, not 'pick' up, 55 indirect subsidiary, 49 & 56 simple 2 def. clues spoilt by waffle.
My votes are:
23 I have sung its praise above. 4 points
30 A brilliant and prescient rebuke to the 2-def hordes, suggestive of a very superior pooch 4 points
38 Very fine surface and subsidiary. May perplex a few voters. 3 points
47 Clever use of 'to a standstill' (= up) & apt parsing (Gee up Rev. Audrey?) 2 points
1,3,13,48 Good efforts – half point each |
