ACPT: The Numbers (2011)

This year I downloaded the full-version, extra-deluxe, double-the-cost version of the scores spreadsheet (thanks Doug Heller for making it available!) which has for everybody not just the points they scored but how they got there (wrong letters, wrong words, minutes on the clock). Granted they will still be making corrections (one of my errors was inexplicably un-highlighted, so I know there's at least one correction to make), but I can have some more confidence in my formulas. Maybe I'll make some pictures. (If you have some requests for pictures, then let me know.)

655 people were there for at least one puzzle, so my current 59th (after making above correction) will still put me in the top 10%, so at least I didn't reach my anti-goal. I missed all of my actual goals though (11500, B finals, and/or no mistakes, which when it comes down to it are pretty much the same goal at this point). The puzzles themselves definitely had a broader difficulty range, but skewing harder rather than easier (much unlike last year). I felt there was only one real clunker (#6; sorry Maura, but don't lie to me in the blurb: those puns were neither names nor from tomorrowland).

Puzzle #1: median score 1130 (corresponding to finishing correctly with 8:xx on the clock); 84% solved this correctly. I finished with 12 on the clock and 1230 points, which was conveniently enough also the top score in the room for this puzzle.
Puzzle #2: median score 870 (the puzzle proper, with no bonuses, is 890 points, so this is equivalent to one blank square with no time on the clock); 38% solved this correctly. I finished with 17 on the clock and 1465 points; top score was 20 on the clock and 1540 points.
Puzzle #3: median score 1390 (corresponding to finishing correctly with 4:xx on the clock); 50% solved this correctly. I finished with 19 on the clock and 1765 points; top score was 25 on the clock and 1915 points.
Puzzle #4: median score 1135 (corresponding to finishing correctly with 9:xx on the clock); 73% solved this correctly. I finished with 15 on the clock and 1285 points; top score was 17 on the clock and 1335 points.
Puzzle #5: median score 380 (corresponding to getting 38 correct words during the time limit); 12% solved this correctly. I finished with 13 on the clock, but 2 errors, and 1155 points; top score was 21 on the clock and 1595 points.
Puzzle #6: median score 1715 (which is not a score you can get to by finishing correctly, but still requires finishing with plenty of time -- one error and 19:xx on the clock is the easiest way to get there); 55% solved this correctly. I finished with 22 on the clock, but 3(!) errors for only 1695 points; top score was 25 on the clock and 2035 points.
Puzzle #7: median score 1670 (again requires an error -- two errors (in one word) and 12:xx on the clock will do it); 32% solved this correctly. I finished with 32 on the clock, but an error, for 2155 points; top score was 37 on the clock and 2475 points.

Looking at this, that means the median solver (well, the median ACPT solver, at any rate) finished five puzzles (but made errors on two of those) and couldn't get through #2 or #5. In fact, going through gives the following almost-but-not-quite "completion" statistics (presumably this doesn't count people who finish in the last minute, as they will have a 0 for their time-remaining just like people who didn't finish. Arguably this is a flaw in the scoring but I doubt it's at the top of anybody's priority list):
Puzzle #1: 632/653 97%
Puzzle #2: 327/653 50%
Puzzle #3: 436/652 67%
Puzzle #4: 575/651 88%
Puzzle #5: 113/651 17%
Puzzle #6: 617/651 95%
Puzzle #7: 424/616 69%

As you can see puzzles 1-4 all had no more than a 15% "oops!" rate, in terms of the difference between percentage finishing and percentage being all correct. It was rather closer for puzzle 5, probably because of so few finishers (113 finishers, and 81 people correct). In contrast, the "oops!" rate for puzzle 6 is 40%, and for puzzle 7 37%. How much of that is fatigue, and how much to the quality/trickiness of the puzzles is a little hard to get at. (For comparison purposes, last year's "oops!" rates:
Puzzle #1: 13%
Puzzle #2: 19%
Puzzle #3: 16%
Puzzle #4: 18%
Puzzle #5: 4%
Puzzle #6: 24%
Puzzle #7: 24%
so a little larger for the beginning puzzles, and smaller for the last two.)

Things, ACPT and otherwise, in handy bullet format

• First good omen of the trip: when I arrive at LaGuardia and put my MetroCard in the machine, I have more money on it than I thought meaning I don't have to put any money in for the weekend.
• Second good omen of the trip: when I step outside, there is a bus already there.
• Early check-in worked again despite me not bothering to tell them, so hooray for the Brooklyn Bridge Marriott.
• Nap time! before the mingling (or in legal terminology "loitering").
  
• The loitering was made more difficult by the fact that the rent-a-cop seemingly couldn't decide where we weren't supposed to be, so every so often he'd clear us out of wherever we had congregated from the last time we moved. Eventually he did decide that we shouldn't be in front of the escalators or around the big table in the lobby, although by that point we were numerous enough that there was always someone in front of the escalators or around the big table in the lobby.
• Although by that point it was dinner time. This year I wandered off with Peter Gordon et al for Indian food and a very good chicken tandoori (which was not the only item of the menu that I was sure to recognize when it arrived, as they also had kebabs).
• Friday night festivities. I don't know (and I doubt that Wz will ever tell) the paid attendance here; my not-very-good estimating sense guesses 250. I was surprised how many people were there while still maintaining a sworn conviction that they didn't like cryptic crosswords, since the main event was a US/UK cryptic crossword tournament -- not that they had never done them, but that they had done them and didn't like them.
• For the Saturday main event, I do what I always do, which is get there a fair bit early, sit two seats in from the aisle, and see who shows up. This year I was around two rookies, an retiree who has been doing puzzles for a while (and was actually more of a cryptic fan, as he had entered many (and won several) of the English newspaper puzzle weekly contests) and who came back for Sunday, and a younger office manager from Brooklyn, who didn't (but insisted she was having fun on Saturday).
• I made many errors (as in six or so) over the last three puzzles (5,6,7) ranging from "understandable" to "I wasn't even thinking of that letter how did it get in my puzzle", which made for a very disappointing day all told.
• There was a one-act crossword-"themed" play presented, that had originally been done for some sort of playwright's playhouse/community theater organization in upstate New York. My reaction at the time was negative. Upon further review, I guess that any one sub-piece of the play was good; however, they were all mutually inconsistent so stringing them all together led to a not-very-good sum total.
• And then there was the "ACPT-zing [pronounced 'amazing'] race", which was a puzzle fest put together by Pliska'n'Chaneski. It appeared to be a very amazing piece of work, although I had volunteered to be a "judge", also known as "Canada", so I only got to see a very small portion of the thing as it happened. It was fun to see people looking for some flag they didn't really know (like Tanzania, or Nigeria, or the Marshall Islands), realizing that I was a country and scooting around to see my flag, and then saying "Oh. Canada." How they made a national anthem out of that I'll never know.
• Speaking of, I thought being a country would be rather restful, but I was just as excited as the players were watching them scurry around.
• The variety show was certainly varied, with a blues theme.
• The B finals had a really very interesting finish -- you should go look for it to watch.
• Dan smoked through the A finals as expected.

Riichi GMT Round 4

And we end not with a bang, but with an anguished cry of despair. I managed to pay for six of the first five hands, since my I-really-shouldn't-do-this-but-I've-lost-the-last-five-hands-and-this-makes-my-hand-able-to-go-out discard gave two of my opponents mahjong, and in RCR they both win. I had a couple good hands towards the end, but it was far too little. I managed to come in last at the table, even losing to the player who wasn't even there. Ugh.

Riichi GMT Round 3

A lot of self-drawn, a lot of dealer winning and keeping the deal -- in 50 minutes and 12 or so hands, we never did get all the way around as dealer once. I won the first three (two as dealer), then there was a draw, then my RHO won six in a row (five self-drawn so that we all had to pay) and was the winner by far. Still, two points, and I've now moved to the right side of the middle to 17th place.

Riichi GMT Round 2

Ooh now I'm upset. I managed to forget to declare riichi on the first hand (and didn't feel like letting my winning tile go by so I would get the chance on my next turn), so +3200 turned into +1600 right away. Building up a 17000 point lead in the first three hands felt great, though. But then I paid a couple big hands, and was down by a lot. Then I won a big hand back, but I was down 900 points with a minute on the clock and then I was upset again. (I ended up down by 4900 since the last hand was drawn and there was only one tenpai player which we all paid 1000 points to.) Third place at the table, so only 1 point puts me right at 19th of 36 players at halfway.

Riichi GMT Round 1

It's still really weird to me to play 50 minute rounds, rather than the traditional 90 minutes. Had a fair few good hands this go round, and actually won three without discarding for any, which for me is an exceptional go of defense. The last one was a really quick win with about :50 on the clock to get back into second place after East had self drawn a mangan hand, so two points so far.

A parable

This is actually mostly a true story, so in order to actually have a parable I have perhaps exaggerated some bits. So all apologies to those named.

When I was first doing a job search way back when in '05, one of the places I applied was Benedictine at Atchison, KS, which has a combined math/computer science department. They posted the job opening on MathSciNet (which is where I found it), probably out of habit, as the field they were desiring was pretty strongly computer science. Nevertheless, there was the ad, I was strongly interested in teaching/SLAC institutions, and I knew I could deal with KS, so off went CV and teaching statement. They followed up with a phone interview along the way, and then not much happened for a while. Sometime in early May as I recall (I believe it was just after the end of classes, although that was a bit vague for me then since I was doing no teaching and obviously no classes that semester) I got a call from the Benedictine sister who was the department chair (and committee chair). The general gist of the phone call was "We've been reviewing your file, and the committee feels that you're a solid candidate. However, we really need someone with a computer science background that you don't really have; you overlap too much with the current faculty. Since you're the best, closest-fit candidate we've had so far, several of the faculty feel we should be bringing you in; however, the overall opinion of the committee is that we will not pursue you as a candidate at this time, and trust that God will provide for us with someone who is a better fit.

However, should August 1 come around without a more viable applicant, we will revisit your application at that time." Needless to say, I didn't wait for them until August 1.

Here endeth the lesson.

A Saturday in August pt. 2: LPIIITGPG

Thoughts about the tournament itself -- and note that you can get the puzzles and assorted accoutrements from Ryan and Brian themselves.

• Definitely a good spread over on the snack table, not to mention the obligatory pickles. I tended to stick to the classics though: Oreos and Chex Mix.
• I wander into the building just as the person working the check-in computer apparently managed to convert the spreadsheet into Klingon, or something. Once we worked out that undo on a Mac is command-Z instead of control-Z, we're back in business.
• I am handed a a stapled packet and an index card with "Linens" on the back, in that distinctive font that makes you immediately add "& Things", which was the point. It was not completely clear to me whether the spreadsheet assigned me that index card, or whether ALZ picked it at semi-random, not that it really matters.
  
• I wander around to say hi to various people who are there and people arriving. I am convinced to add four extra nametags that say "FEIST Feist feist feist" back-and-forth on my shirt.
• Not as many people as I expected were wearing the official T-shirt also. Brian was actually rather surprised that I had it on, I think.
• I initially sit on the right-hand side of the room at a green table, and do the warm-up crossword on the table. This activity illustrates the unsuitability of the green tables for this sort of activity, and I thus move over to a more sturdy table, ending up next to Al Sanders.
• Al and I discuss (for the first time of several) the quirks/strategy for the LP scoring system. Since all the scoring is relative to position and not to time, this has the effect (which appeared to be borne out during the day) to "compress" time for the easy/ish puzzles and to stretch it out for the harder puzzles. That is, you might be losing five points every five seconds or so on puzzle 1 as people turn it in, but for a hard puzzle there might be a minute between people turning in puzzles, so you only lose five points a minute instead. Al's main concern is that you no longer have "free" time to check your puzzle, since someone might poach you in that time you spend checking, rather than guaranteeing yourself a time bonus as long as you hand it in before the :00. I wonder, but don't bother asking since it hopefully won't affect me, how they'll handle scoring for people who don't finish during time. I am amused at the idea of a one-puzzle showdown as a tiebreaker.
  
• A couple late-comers sit down at our table, since our table still had some extra chairs. They will find out later just how much trouble they're in.
• Puzzle 1: started with a game of "Ryan says" (i.e. Simon says, but it was Ryan doing the saying). He gave out clues like "Ryan says 20-across" and the others on stage did 20 across. I may have been the only person in the room not writing down the answers, because how hard is it to remember four phrases and besides it felt like cheating. And after all there were "regular" clues in the puzzle as well (so you can still do this puzzle at home, kids!) Otherwise it was a pretty ordinary puzzle, which in itself is pretty extraordinary. I end up handing mine in about half a minute behind Al, who was first in the room on that puzzle. I ended up fifth in the room, and correct, for 2080 points, which actually puts me in fourth place at this point (20 points behind Al) since Francis Heaney turned it in second but had an error. Sometime around this point, Doug Peterson becomes our table's assigned judge, since we have two big-hitters plus Jesse Lansner who finishes top-20 on most puzzles.
  
• Puzzle 2: Brian did the explanation for the puzzle, which disappointed me because really that's Ryan's thing. Everybody was a lot surprised when he said it was 11x11, and then came more explanation: it was a double-def puzzle, so you had two clues with the same answer and you put that answer in the location in the grid that was the sum of those two clue numbers. I always enjoy this type of puzzle and although it took me (if I remember correctly) 8:30 to do, that was good for second in the room, beating Al next to me by six seconds, and 2095 points (which would be my best finish of the day). At this point overall, I am now tied for second with Jeffrey Harris, 15 points behind Al.
• Puzzle 3: This puzzle is announced as 25x11, which brings a collective "now what?" to mind. There are also pictures involved, and as you may have guessed just from that, you had to caption the pictures to get the long answers. The pictures made no sense, and in fact it is impossible to generate two of the three answers just from the pictures, but that turned out okay since there was an alternate way to get the answers. My least favorite puzzle here, mainly because of the "can't actually do the puzzle the way it says to do it" aspect. I finish eighth in the room (and eighth overall) on this puzzle. My being a minute or so behind Al on this puzzle is only worth five points though, as no one finishes between us.
  
• Now comes lunch. I end up with Arnold Reich, Jon Delfin, Al Sanders, and Thomas Weisswange at the Jackson House diner. I discover the downside of my habit of just putting money into my pocket -- my recent ATM acquisition didn't make the transfer into my wallet, so all I have is plastic. Fortunately everyone else was paying in cash so it all worked out.
• We reassemble for the post-lunch game, at which I did surprisingly poorly. The late-comer sitting at the end of the table tells me how in awe he is since I solved that last puzzle so fast! I am forced to tell him I wasn't even the first person to finish at the table; apparently Al is far enough away that he's out of his peripheral vision when he's solving. They announce the top five overall, with Al in second now and myself in third, ahead of Joon Pahk and Ellen Ripstein.
• Puzzle 4 is announced as "like the bitch-mother ACPT puzzle #5, except harder". This is not met with a great deal of enthusiasm. There is a definite gimmick to the puzzle, immediately obvious when (for instance) there is no 1-down, which I inexplicably screw up at the beginning (hint to home solvers: the gimmick is not word wrap). I see many people finishing ahead of me and my hopes dim. I end up finishing 11th in the room, although scorewise I am 8th, since there were three people with errors (including Al, who was rather despondent when returning after the puzzle finished). Not that I know at the time, but this therefore only puts me in 4th place, ten points behind Ellen and Joon tied at 2nd.
• Puzzle 5. I joke to Al that after the last puzzle debacle, my goal is three minutes. We are warned that there will be rearrangement of the room, so (a) everybody should leave when they are finished and (2) take everything with them when they go. This puzzle is announced as 25x17, which is met with more incredulousness. The gimmick is far more hidden this time, and I literally didn't understand the title until I started writing this paragraph. Here is where reality may deviate from the official standings: unless I managed to change and then forget completely about doing so, I left one wrong letter in the grid which wasn't noticed by the judges (when doing crosswords in general, and especially when moving fast, I tend to use rather stylistic A's: one stroke up-and-to-the-right, one stroke down-and-to-the-right, and then one stroke back-and-to-the-left-halfway-up. If you as a judge are expecting to see a P in that square, even though every other P in the grid looks normal....) I finished seventh in the room, although both of the top two finishers (to wit, Francis Heaney and Al Sanders) finished with an error, so officially I had the fifth-best score on that puzzle, 15 points ahead of Ellen.
• Outside, we had one last push on finding your partners for your index card ("Things" had wandered past my table before puzzle 3, so we were already set). Patrick Blindauer had created a truly marvelous puzzle in four parts (not only did we have a partner, but we were also part of a larger "team" -- in addition to Linens & Things, there was Barnes & Noble, Abercrombie & Fitch, and Crate & Barrel. We each got a piece of a puzzle, which then got combined with everybody else's to form a final answer. Amusingly, Orange (who was Fitch, or maybe Abercrombie) failed to read that bit at the top about "needing other people to interpret 17-across" and by the time we got to her had turned her puzzle into a cube. I believe our group was the first to finish (or nearly so) which won us either admiration or jealousy, depending. Patrick said he was worried that no one would solve it, but I believe every group got it.
  
• At this point, they had pretty much finished grading. I noticed they had the clock set at 5 minutes, which I assumed was somebody not listening. First they announced the local division finalists. Then something like "before we can announce the express division finalists, some unfinished business: we have a third-place tiebreaker". They call Jon Delfin and myself up (getting chants of Feist Feist Feist Feist, although the back-and-forth wasn't quite there yet). When we sit down, he holds out his pencil and I hold out my hand; first we shake hands, then I grab my pencil and we do a little mock-duel with the pencils, which entertained us and hopefully entertained the audience as well. They handed out the puzzle, counted us off, and the clock started. The upper left gave me a bit of trouble at the start, but the lower right proved my downfall -- if I had two words to choose from, I chose the wrong one; if I had two conflicting words, I chose the wrong one. I finished the thing in 4:25 or something like that, which isn't horrific but it was about double Jon's time. So I got to go back to my seat (after a bow and another chant of Feist Feist Feist Feist) while they set up for the finals.
• OMG the express division clues.

All in all, it seems pretty clear that R&B wanted/asked for interesting and unusual puzzles, and that's what they got. That was a bit of a recurring comment: "Can you imagine what would happen if the ACPT did this?" It was rather a surprise (I didn't attend the first two, but my understanding was that the puzzles were not quite as out there), but a pleasant one. The mix was pretty much right on, I think: two normal crossword puzzles, but with some inventive clue things (1 & 3); one puzzle that had a gimmick, but one that's not unexpected (5); and two puzzles that can definitely be classed as variants (2 & 4). Great puzzles, a great atmosphere, and all around a great time.

A Saturday in August

*The day starts rather inauspiciously, as the airport lot I am accustomed to parking in now has signs saying it is "short term" parking, meaning I decided to park rather further away.

*I decide (because it is 7am) that I would like the $49 upgrade to "front-of-the-plane" class, thanks.

*I am momentarily awestruck by the fact that they have completed the construction in the terminal and there really are now a concourse A and a concourse B. I almost start taking pictures, and then realize where I am.

*I end up in three different seats: my ticket is for 2D; however, my neighbor in 2F has a youngster sitting in 2A, and I agree to swap so they can fly together. Then my new neighbor in 2C brings his son up from coach, and I agree to move again (this time to 1A).

*This group of AirTran attendants was rather lackadaisical: the captain had to come on the intercom to remind them to finish their pre-flight cross-check instead of standing around in the galley; they replaced all the instances of "passenger" in the script with "customer", and then they forgot to let us off the flight in NYC (again, just standing around in the galley).

*I keep forgetting that my use of the Q33 (getting from LaGuardia to somewhere else) is not really anybody else's use of the Q33, especially on Saturday morning, so my decision to sit down next to a window made life rather interesting when it came time to get off (fortunately I believe there were no injuries).

*LP3 happened (more later).

*I hurry out of the building as the award ceremony ends. Fortunately this was just paranoia, as I made it to the gate a full 10 (maybe even 15) minutes before boarding started. This also means I did not get to play any contest of then tiebreakers, nor did I remember to pick my prize from the most recent contest of then.

*Another upgrade happens.

*The flight home is uneventful, although about halfway there I decided I was done with crosswords for the day.

*I forget that I have parked in the new lot until I have started walking to the old lot. Fortunately, since the old lot is merely farther away, this is not actually an issue. Also they have added automated pay machines at the parking lots.

puzzles puzzles puzzles puzzles. Puzzles!

Because I can, I have posted a puzzle suite on my puzzle page. Worth what you paid for them! Might even be worth twice what you paid for them!