New York Times, Friday, January 2, 2015

I constructed this puzzle in September 2013, a time when I was experimenting with numerous themeless grids with low word counts. My first task in constructing this puzzle (after designing the grid, of course) was filling the center; I soon realized that filling this section was so challenging that even running my construction software for hours on end would be futile!

Remembering a construction trick I picked up during my quad stack phase, the next tactic I tried was seeding entries with friendly letter patterns into the bottom slot of the center stack before letting the construction software grind away at the rest of the grid. From a constructor's perspective, my intuition was to seed the stack with an S-heavy word, such as LAWLESSNESS; switching to my perspective as a longtime solver, however, I decided that such an entry would be dull and somewhat inelegant. Thus, my job was to come up with an entry that would both be lively and likely to lead to a fill for the center stack.

After many failed attempts, I came up with MINESWEEPER, a term with a more contemporary cluing angle that has appeared in just one other Shortz-era New York Times crossword. Although W and P are not ideal in terms of serving as ends to five-letter entries, S, E, and R are particularly nice; before long, I ended up with a center that was surprisingly junk-free! The clean center inspired me to make the rest of the puzzle as comparably smooth as possible; overall, I was (and still am) very satisfied with the final product, even though the grid is rather closed off.

Will/Joel changed fewer clues than they have in some of my older puzzles — as usual, though, they found ways to inject even more misdirection! My favorite new clue is "There's not much interest in them nowadays" for CDS, and my favorite original clue that made the cut is "It might change color" for RIPENER. I was a little disappointed to see that "Being . . . or not being" for IN EXISTENCE (which can also be read as INEXISTENCE) was rewritten, though I realize this clue was a bit of a stretch. I hope you enjoy solving this puzzle, and Happy 2015!

My wife's favorite themeless experience is when you go through a first pass and turn up nearly empty. A feeling of despondence consumes you, but one of those toeholds suddenly trigger a thought, and you can enter another answer. And another! Chunks break open, and neurons fire. Ten minutes later (20 in my case), a seemingly impossible solve is cracked. Tremendously satisfying.

I had that experience today, daunted at first by those gigantic white spaces. I entered three answers in my first pass and wondered if 1.) I'd be able to finish and 2.) how much glue I was going to encounter — I often find that these wide-open grids require a lot of glue to hold them together. To my relief and amazement, I encountered virtually nothing ugly the whole way through. Yes, there's a HALER and a TEK from Shatner's esoteric "TekWar," but what else? The cleanliness is astounding.

And what nice long entries. Often with this style of crazy-wide-open puzzle, you see neutral words depending on –NESS or –ERS. But to get ADULT MOVIES, HIS EMINENCE, PIN CUSHIONS, MINOR PLANET just to start? Really nice selection. If the worst of your 11 long answers is IN EXISTENCE, I call that quite the success.

As is usual with some of these types of stunt grids, I don't love the feng shui. The puzzle is broken so distinctly into three parts. I know from the constructor's viewpoint how much easier it is to make a low-word count puzzle when you can section areas off and work on them one at a time. But, as a solver, it bugs me to see such fragmentation.

Overall though, a puzzle in the Patrick Berry mold — uber-clean with a smart selection of long entries. I really like David's desire to experiment with themeless grids; it's cool to see the variety in his products. I don't always love the solving experience his more experimental stuff, but I thought this one was a big winner.

P.S. For those of you who don't get the brilliance of the CDS clue, it's referring to ultra-low interest rates. I work in investment management, so it got a big smile from me. Reader Greg Johnson points out that it can also refer to music CDs, which are falling out of favor — doubly cool!