New York Times, Tuesday, July 10, 2018

This puzzle took close to two years from conception to publication. I started brainstorming in August of 2016, submitted it to the Times in October 2016, and got an acceptance in February of 2017.

Even though this was my third accepted NYT puzzle, it's my tenth to be published. The disparity is primarily due to shorter queue times for Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday puzzles. For the past few years, Tuesday has had the longest non-themeless publication queue. I wonder whether the disparities in publication queue length among different days of the week correlate to disparities in the number of puzzles submitted that are appropriate for that day. Or is there something inherent to puzzles of particular difficulty levels that makes acceptance more or less likely?

My original theme constraint was just phrases with a three-of-a-kind and a pair. This more permissive interpretation of a FULL HOUSE allowed for lively phrases like BUSINESS SCHOOL, FOR GOODNESS SAKE, and CLASS STRUGGLE. Ultimately, however, I decided that the theme would be better served if the five letters were always in a row with the same 3-2 ordering. Although that reformulation significantly reduced my options for theme entries, it created a much tighter theme and (I hope) a stronger aha moment for the solver.

Along the way, I also changed the revealer from FULL HOUSES to the more natural-sounding FULL HOUSE, which opened up better cluing options, and aligned the three circled areas vertically to create a more ordered feeling for the grid.

Back in 2016, the TV show FULL HOUSE re-entered the national conversation when Netflix released a sequel called "Fuller House" with most of the original cast reprising their roles. That show is now filming its fourth season. We'll see if it lasts as long as the original.

A FULL HOUSE in poker is three cards of one value + two cards of a different one. Amusing extension of this concept to crosswords today. Something so aesthetically pleasing about having the three FULL HOUSEs right atop each other, too.

Anyone else put in WELL LOOKIE HERE? I was all set to rave about it; what a brilliant and colorful themer! Such a shame. WELL, LOOKY THERE ... maybe it's neither here nor there, but IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE HERE, NOT THERE, goldarnit!

Alex tackles some of the most challenging themes and gridwork, providing some delightfully tricksy solves. I think he has some work to do, though, in his early-week gridwork. I get the allure of creating a themed, 72-word puzzle — it's such a fun challenge. But it's also so incredibly difficult to execute on while still presenting a newb-friendly grid.

Expecting newer solvers to get IBEX / SERAPHIC correct seems tenuous at best. Toss in some NATAL EFFS FRIA, and I think you've given too many solvers too many reasons to go do something else.

Put a black square at the D of OPEN DEBATE, and you can smooth things out a ton, and still have room for something great at 9-D.

Another option: HAM SALAD didn't do much for me, so placing a black square at the first A of ATTAIN could smooth out the south region to a whole new level.

Many other ways to improve this grid — most of them involving punting on the 72-word gridding challenge.

Novel enough concept that I would have put it into POW! consideration for creativity alone. But the solving experience for newer solvers has to be given first and foremost priority.