New York Times, Wednesday, May 27, 2020

My last puzzle in the NYT was in 2014. I quit constructing for a long time in order to complete a book on antique silver, Gorham Spoons: Sterling Souvenirs from a Bygone Era, a thirty-year project. (Anyone interested in such things can check it out at eBay or elsewhere.)

Now that I'm back, I find it more difficult than ever to make an acceptable puzzle. I suppose the number of constructors has increased so acceptance is more elusive. This one made its way through but not without a number of revisions. My second 15-letter entry, to correspond with FISH (for) COMPIMENTS, didn't meet with approval so I had to come up with a new one. OH (for) CRYING OUT LOUD seemed to be my only option but it appeared to be unclueable (is that a word?) until at last I thought of Sandra Oh. I'm pretty sure my clue for that entry is what put this puzzle over the top. The grid had been pangrammatic until Will and his crew replaced my ESKIMO with ASSISI at 48-Down and the K was lost. In this case, that doesn't matter at all.

But It reminded me of one puzzle I did for another paper with the theme "Long time no see" which removed the C from theme answers. The fill also included all the letters of the alphabet except C. The editor, possibly oblivious to that extra-nice little bit of construction work, edited a small spot and removed the only V in the grid. That one hurt.

I had been shooting for a Tuesday-ish puzzle with this one. Had I known it would appear on a Wednesday, I might have tried to open things up a tad to make room for some longer non-theme fill. But I still like it as it is and hope it's fun for the solvers.

Several weeks ago, Chris contacted me, wanting advice on getting through a dry spell. I tried to help, combing through some of his rejections, assessing the situation.

The rejections were merited; problems with themes or grid work, or both. However, one concept had an interesting seed, so I suggested a complete overhaul, using a different approach.

Several weeks, dozens of emails, and a lot of revisions later, we stumbled across the finish line with a solid product I'm reasonably sure someone will take. Chris learned some things, and so did I. Hopefully his acceptance rate will go up from here. A few general takeaways that might help other constructors achieve more acceptances, too:

• Don't use a giant word list as your main list. Chris said he's using a vast body of 400K+ entries — that's a red flag. There are only so many entries that you'd ever want to employ, and in the 400K range, you're wading through a ton of junk, which makes it seem like a lot of stuff is comparatively fine. Hey, at least this gloop isn't as bad as this ooze!
• Go way out of your way to avoid a weird entry like plural YOGAS or NTESTS. There's almost always a way to avoid them.
• These days, you can't start a puzzle with OLEO crossing OLIO. Chris told me he thought it was a funny joke, but I don't know how many non-insiders will take it that way. And ILO right next door? Can't do that.
• Constructors care about pangrams more than solvers. They usually come with compromises in overall quality.

Editors have limited time, so make sure they see you as a person whose products won't require much revision, if any at all.

The theme is reasonable — FORGONE meaning "phrases removing FOR for kooky results" — and I got a big laugh out of FISH COMPLIMENTS. I did wish that the other themers had been as strong, and since there are dozens of other FOR phrases out there, other winners felt within reach. If there wasn't a matching 15, FISH COMPLIMENTS could have gone in the middle row, with FORGONE at the end. That also would have delayed the a-ha, which would have been nice.