About me
Bookshop

Get new posts by email.

About me

Daily Mail claims Su Doku

Hold up!

See that little date above?

This post was published years ago.

My opinions have changed over time: I think it's quite fun to keep old posts online so that you can see how that has happened. The downside is that there are posts on this site that express views that I now find offensive, or use language in ways I'd never dream of using it today.

I don't believe in airbrushing history, but I do believe that it's important to acknowledge the obvious: some of what I've written in the past has been crap. Some of it was offensive. Some of it was offensively bad. And there's may be some brass among the muck (you can make up your own mind on that).

Some of what I've presented as my own views has been me—wittingly or unwittingly—posturing without having considered all the facts. In a few years, I'll probably think the same about what I'm writing today, and I'm fine with that. Things change. People grow. Society moves forward.

The internet moves on too, which means there might be broken links or embedded content that fails to load. If you're unlucky, that might mean that this post makes no sense at all.

So please consider yourself duly warned: this post is an historical artefact. It's not an exposition of my current views nor a piece of 'content' than necessarily 'works'.

You may now read on... and in most cases, the post you're about to read is considerably shorter than this warning box, so brace for disappointment.

There’s not much in life that’s more entertaining than reading the Mail’s sometimes ridiculous claims. Look, for example, here:

The Daily Mail was the first national newspaper to bring Sudoku to this country

Well, no it wasn’t. It’s not true. It’s plainly false. The Times first published Su Doku. Then the Mail picked it up, decided it’s readers couldn’t cope with a ‘foreign’ name, and called it Numbercrunch. The Times was first.

while the Mail on Sunday went one further with the introduction of Super Sudoku

The first Super Su Doku was published in the Indy. Not the Mail.

You might think that this is a minor correction… but the Mail splashed over half its front page that it was first. And it wasn’t. Besides which, as entertaining as Su Doku is as a puzzle, there really isn’t all that much to say about it, and its becoming quite frustrating to not be able to open a paper without some special feature or other about a number puzzle.

And just as I was about to hit ‘Publish’, it appears that Janine Gibson from The Grauniad has written along similar lines. Choice quotes:

Kudos, by the way, to Sun Doku which launched on Tuesday and distinguished itself immediately by being a puzzle that someone else has already half completed. The Guardian launched its own version on Monday, sprinting for the high ground with “the original Japanese puzzles hand-crafted by its inventors” and gently putting the boot in to the computer versions run by other papers. The others responded with suitable outrage. “We were first,” said the Times. “We’ve got four!” shouted the Independent. Sighs from baffled readers everywhere.

[T]he first Sudoku puzzle hit the UK press in the Times six months ago. The Daily Mail launched one shortly thereafter, though it was called Codebreaker and everyone else ignored it. In fact the Mail was in danger of being written out of the collective history of the Sudoku Phenomenon as it emerged day by day last week, until it devoted half of its front page to a bold “we was first” claim. It’s possible the Mail may now be regretting eschewing the Japanese name, which we can only assume it did in case its readers got upset by the idea of it being foreign.

And, I think, a perfect one to finish on:

I propose a truce. We’ve all got one now, let’s just leave it alone. Do the puzzle, don’t do the puzzle, just don’t talk about it.

This post was filed under: Miscellaneous.

Recently published posts

Weeknotes 2022.03 / 23 January 2022

Weeknotes 2022.02 / 16 January 2022

Weeknotes 2022.01 / 09 January 2022

Five links worth clicking / 07 January 2022

31 things I learned in December 2020 / 31 December 2021

What I’ve been reading this month / 27 December 2021




Random posts from the archive

Swing Update / 12 April 2005

Photo-a-day 310: Marks and Spencer’s tired estate / 06 November 2012

Writing speeches for Andrew Lansley / 11 February 2012

Su Doku / 30 April 2005

Spring / 21 March 2019

Why do people read rubbish? / 19 March 2004




Comments and responses

Comment from The Sudoku Experience


    20.01, 28/05/2005

This post has been cited by The Sudoku Experience: http://sudoku.infoforliving.com/2005/05/daily-mail-claims-su-doku.html


Comment from Chris


    11.16, 09/06/2005

Well, I love these puzzles and there is the world’s best 16 x 16 and 9 x 9 create/solve/print program on eBay – I’ve got it and love it.

Just search on eBay for “sudoku” and you will find a whole load, but there’s one there that is miles above the rest of them – and it is cheaper!

I’m hooooooked !

Chris.


Comment from Mike


    00.48, 13/06/2005

Is there a program for the solution to the SUPER SUDOKU 12×16

I have the program for 9×9 and the program to solve 16×16

Any help would be appreciated.

Mike


Comment from Christopher


    08.51, 13/06/2005

Hello Mike,

Yes, I also loved them so much that, after solving a couple, I thought it would be even more fun to write a program to solve, create and print them. You can now buy my program on eBay.

Just enter eBay.co.uk or ebay.com and search for “sudoku” without the quotes. There are about four, but by far the best program on there (mine !!!) is the one with the red gallery image saying “Create/Solve/Print/16×16/9×9. It is only £2.99 and you can save and all sorts of things.

To see that it is the best, check out the others too.

Alternatively, you could go straight to eBay item number: 8198566586 but that will only be there for the next 9 days. After that you will have to do a search again.

Good luck – and let me know that it is you if you buy it!!

Christopher (no relation to Chris above – just coincidence)


Comment from Syl and Rab


    11.59, 30/07/2005

We are totally hooked on your Su Doku and now buy the Daily Mail every day. But can anyone solve this problem: July 28th’s Su Doku Mini seems to have TWO Solutions! The one you published and the one I found. Mine is 643152/152643/526314/314526/461235/235461 I noticed that each line is the reverse of another. I can’t see any mistakes but with my eyesight I need a second opinion. PLEASE email me and put me and Rab out of our suspense!


Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


    14.19, 30/07/2005

We are totally hooked on your Su Doku

Well thanks, but I’ve never compiled a Su Doku puzzle in my life. I think you might very well be looking for this page of the Daily Mail website. This site has no connection with the Mail at all (thank goodness).

Certainly, the Mail have printed badly formed Su Dokus before, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this was just another. But good luck with finding out for sure.


Comment from Sudoku Fan


    14.09, 03/08/2005

If you like sudokus, look at PrintSudoku.com. Free online Printing Sudoku’s in pdf. 6 new every day.


Trackback from elsewhere on the site



22:54
20th December 2005.

This post has been referenced by another on this site:
sjhoward.co.uk » The Sudoku craze rumbles on


Comment from BJohnson


    23.27, 05/03/2007

Was the Super Sudoku X puzzle published on Saturday March 3rd 2007 in the Weekend Magazine correct ? Every time we get near a solution something goes wrong – We don’t usually have any trouble like this ! I can only assume that the puzzle as set had some sort of error ?


Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


    08.37, 06/03/2007

I’m sorry, but I have absolutely no idea!




Compose a new comment

I'm not taking comments on my blog any more, so I'm afraid the opportunity to add to this discussion has passed.




The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. Information about cookies and the handling of emails submitted for the 'new posts by email' service can be found in the privacy policy. This site uses affiliate links: if you buy something via a link on this site, I might get a small percentage in commission. Here's hoping.