View notes

Transcription

Monday 28 November 1966 332nd day - 33 days to come

Called Jules Cooper to tell him of the idea of playing OPERATION SEARCH with three hidden cards. Also sug- gested using for three players using passing of or- dinary requests, but only giving the number of bonus requests.

He says some of his men have played it but find it is inferior to CLUE in chances for deduction. I read over the rules of the latter and feel that the game is played simply be keeping the positive and negative inform- ation on the detective sheets. It seems almost auto- matic.

Claude called. He was at Arthur's. Nothing new.

Solution of puzzle on 11/29 1) A has 2-SU and C has 1-SU, so all SU are accounted for. 2) B has 2-UL which must be NUL & WUL since EUL & SUL are already accounted for. 3) B has 1-UM but 0-EM. Since NUM and SUM are already ac- counted for, B must have WUM. 4) B has 1-WR. B also has 3-W. Since B has already been shown to have WUL and WUM and the 3rd W is in the Rural area, B cannot have WIL or WIM. 5) A has 1-NM. C has 3-N but 0-NF. Since NUL and NUM have already been accounted for, C's 3-N must be NIL, NRL, and either NUM or NRM. (It can be proven that C has NIM rather than NRM, but this not necessary for the solution.) 6) C has 1-SI. This must be SIL since SIF and SIM are accounted for. 7) C has 2-IL. Since C has already been shown to have NIL and SIL, C cannot have WIL or EIL. 8) A, as stated before, has 2-SU. A also has 2-EI and 4-R. This limits the location of all 8 of A's cards to the SU, EI, and R areas. Among the cards that A cannot have is WIL, which has already been proven not to be in the possession of B or C. WIL is the solution. The statement, A had 2-W was thrown in as a small red herring. They must both be in the Rural area.

Metadata

transcription
English Monday 28 November 1966
332nd day - 33 days to come


Called Jules Cooper to tell him of the idea of playing
OPERATION SEARCH with three hidden cards. Also suggested
using for three players using passing of ordinary
requests, but only giving the number of
bonus requests.
He says some of his men have played it but find it is
inferior to CLUE in chances for deduction. I read over
the rules of the latter and feel that the game is
played simply be keeping the positive and negative information
on the detective sheets. It seems almost automatic.
Claude called. He was at Arthur's. Nothing new.


Solution of puzzle on 11/29
1) A has 2-SU and C has 1-SU, so all SU are accounted for.
2) B has 2-UL which must be NUL & WUL since EUL & SUL are
already accounted for.
3) B has 1-UM but 0-EM. Since NUM and SUM are already accounted
for, B must have WUM.
4) B has 1-WR. B also has 3-W. Since B has already been shown
to have WUL and WUM and the 3rd W is in the Rural area,
B cannot have WIL or WIM.
5) A has 1-NM. C has 3-N but 0-NF. Since NUL and NUM have
already been accounted for, C's 3-N must be NIL, NRL, and
either NUM or NRM. (It can be proven that C has NIM
rather than NRM, but this not necessary for the solution.)
6) C has 1-SI. This must be SIL since SIF and SIM are
accounted for.
7) C has 2-IL. Since C has already been shown to have NIL
and SIL, C cannot have WIL or EIL.
8) A, as stated before, has 2-SU. A also has 2-EI and 4-R.
This limits the location of all 8 of A's cards to the SU, EI,
and R areas. Among the cards that A cannot have is WIL,
which has already been proven not to be in the possession
of B or C. WIL is the solution.
The statement, A had 2-W was thrown in as a small red
herring. They must both be in the Rural area.