David C. Duncan Dekker author page

• 130 out of a possible 185 letters had to reach the fivefold mark; therefore, leaving me with only 55 extras letters to maneuver with.
• 80 out of those 130 letters have Scrabble values of 2 or more points.
• 50 out of those 130 letters have Scrabble values of 4 or more points.
• 25 out of those 130 letters have Scrabble values of 5 or more points.

The word count (80) and the number of blocks (40) may be a touch greater than the normal requirements; however, one must take into consideration that the ratio of available squares (185) to the number of letters (130) that were required to put together this quintuple pangram — along with working in both the entries QUINTUPLE + FIVEFOLD into the grid — made the overall construction of this particular puzzle even that much more difficult! And, on top of all that, none of the letters with a Scrabble value of 2 or more points went beyond the fivefold mark. [High FIVE!!!!!👏]

For those who didn't care so much for "JIVER" in my puzzle, here's another alternative.

ACCEPTED: July 22nd, 2016

Hi David,

Joel here, writing for Will.

We're happy to say yes on your QUINTUPLE pangram. Wow! What an achievement. Of course, there are some compromises here ... but really not so many. Overall, a stunt that's too amazing not to run.

Tentatively, slated this for a Wednesday given all of the unusual and difficult vocabulary.

Thanks for sending this to us — and congrats!

This puzzle turned out somewhat smooth, IMO, given the constraints of making a 72-word themeless into a triple pangram.

Clues I was glad to see stay:

• "Shop class cutter" for BANDSAW, along with "Class cutter, say" for SLACKER to kick things off
• "Float like a butterfly" for HOVER
• "All shook up" for RATTLED

Clues I was sad to see go:

• "Not going anywhere" for FROZEN
• "Has nothing in common" for UNLIKE
• A set of "Boobs" for SCHMOS & OAFS
• "Festivous" for JOVIAL (because it makes folks think of Seinfeld — oh, Frank!)

Nice additions to the mix:

• "Country Rockers?" for QUAKES
• "Stock Exchange?" for LOWS
• "Results of phoning it in?" for FAXES

Not-so-nice subtractions from the mix:

• "Ground-breaking events" for QUAKES
• "Weather conditions" for LOWS
• "Paper transactions" for FAXES

In the clues that I developed for the latter three, I felt neither one of them needed a question mark, as they would have taken away from the trickery, since the question mark may instantly indicate to solvers that there IS obvious trickery going on.

Anyway ... till next time, Word Nerds!

Greetings, Word Nerds!

Firstly, let me just quickly point out some facts that I extracted from XWord Info:

1. This is the 7777^th crossword published within the "Will Shortz era".
2. I am the 777^th constructor published within this era.
3. This puzzle lands on the 7^th day of this month.

This could very well be the 7^th wonder of the world of crosswords?!

Secondly, since I am making my New York Times debut, I thought I'd comment briefly about how I got into the whole crossword constructing thang, step by step:

1. At around 16, I began solving Monday-like NYT crosswords found in local papers or "easy-to-do" puzzle books.
2. By 18, I clued in on the patterns, broke out the paper & pencils; then, began to piece puzzles together bit by bit.
3. Closing in on 40 now & I'm happy to announce that my crossword constructing skills are still ever-evolving.

Thirdly, the cluing for this crossword was originally designed with an unusual amount of acronyms for the purpose of using A through Z again amongst the acronyms, as to add to the already incorporated pangrammatic mini-theme. That idea did not make the cut, and therefore a significant amount of cluing adjustments were made by Will and his team. I am, however, still pleased with how the puzzle turned out, and hopefully you'll think so as well.