SudoCue Users

Well, SudoCue told me I was looking for a Sue-de-Coq. I remembered seeing the term on the technique step list on Scanraid's Sudoku Solver.
When I went to look it up on your site, I found nothing. I went to scanraid and clicked on the term, but instead of a definition, I was referred to forum threads whose posters spoke in some hyper-argot and used a diagram format from which I gleaned very little. I guess your clear definitions and copious examples with clear illustrations have spoiled a simpleton like me. Subset counting and formulas like ALS is a little too much like math/algebra to me. Sue-de-Coq seems like a mix of Almost Locked Sets and Aligned Pair Exclusions on steroids. I'm still soaking in how to spot and use the XYZ-wing, so hopefully all of this 'arsenal' will eventually help when I'm doing a printed sudoku without vague hints to guide me when I'm stuck. Here's hoping.

The most complete set of solving technique explanations is in Sudopedia. You will also find an explanation of [[Sue_de_Coq|Sue De Coq]]. Just follow the link. It has a nice example.

Ruud.

I appreciate the fast reply.. I know you're busy. I went to that page. Maybe it's your writing style or that you use several examples with the pics and the arrows when demonstrating a technique, but when you do it, I (eventually) grasp it. I'm still not getting what line/box interactions would invite that solving method. I went to the forum, loaded their examples into sudocue and tried to follow along (since the ASCII codes don't help me either). I'm still not clear why that combination of line candidates and box candidates qualified for that technique so that if I happened upon such a pattern while working on a puzzle, I could apply it successfully. Doesn't help that it's said that there aren't a lot of times the method is useful. But then I'm getting a lot more use out of unique rectangles than I thought I would initially. Maybe when my ALS fog lifts, I'll grasp the Sue de Coq, or visa versa. Hopefully at some point you'll have the time and inclination to cover it in greater depth in the solvers guide.

Morgan, you're right about Ruud. He has the ability to cut thru the academic drivel and cut to the chase in a manner that's easy to understand. Perhaps he is too humble to have given you this reference (or maybe the poor guy just forgot ), but the fact is that Ruud resurrected Sue-de-Coq recently. Just stick to the first part of the thread, Ruud's posts specifically, the rest of it goes off into terroritory that just confuses the issue. Do note however, farther into the thread, where Ruud did an evaluation of the relative number of times various solving methods appeared out of a total of 10,000. Sue-de-Coq appeared enough to make it a solving method to add to one's solving grab-bag:

http://www.sudoku.org.uk/discus/message ... 1166200280

Thanks Dave, for bringing that series of posts to my attention. 'Cue has really brought me far along in recognizing (through much repetition and the 'long descriptions' feature) many of the tools in my arsenal. I guess as I learn to spot disjoint subsets, as with hidden trips, quads etc., I'll more easily recognize when the Sue du Coq (SDC) can effectively be applied. The ALS is still beyond me and the fins still have yet to be internalized. I'm sure the next 'Cue version will not only incorporate additional SDC support but will include greater details in long descriptions to enable me, eventually, to spot them. Usually once I hit an impasse, when pointing pair, naked set, kite/skyscraper reductions are no longer possible, I'm far enough along that coloring helps me find that one elusive placement that cracks the puzzle.
My only concern is that once more and more of the sudoku community advance, puzzles will start to appear that go way beyond merely unfair, diabolical, evil etc.
Yeah, I know I talk a lot.
Warmest regards and happy solving,
Morgan

SirDave wrote:Morgan, you're right about Ruud. He has the ability to cut thru the academic drivel and cut to the chase in a manner that's easy to understand. Perhaps he is too humble to have given you this reference (or maybe the poor guy just forgot ), but the fact is that Ruud resurrected Sue-de-Coq recently. Just stick to the first part of the thread, Ruud's posts specifically, the rest of it goes off into terroritory that just confuses the issue. Do note however, farther into the thread, where Ruud did an evaluation of the relative number of times various solving methods appeared out of a total of 10,000. Sue-de-Coq appeared enough to make it a solving method to add to one's solving grab-bag:

http://www.sudoku.org.uk/discus/message ... 1166200280

That link didn't work for me, try this one?

http://www.sudoku.org.uk/SudokuThread.a ... 1#post1844