Normal Sudoku Rules are Broken!

[@emilywilliams3237]

I love your use of parity in so many places in puzzles when it would not immediately occur to me. I think I am getting better at thinking about it sooner. Thanks for this video, Mark!

[@OlafDoschke]

"Normal Sudoku Rules are Broken!" - "Yes, that happens to me, too, all the time."

[@RecreationallyCynical]

This felt kind of like a 1-up puzzle, but instead of 1-N in every run of white cells, it's renbans with non-repeat rows and columns

[@Stratelier]

Took me several tries to realize that you CAN NOT fill in the empty gray squares on this puzzle, even if a given row or column implies only one possibility for a digit there.

[@praematura]

Felt I missed a few things for too long on this one, but managed to finish in 17:21! Definitely an interesting puzzle, and as people have mentioned, similar to 1-Up. Many thanks to Nicolas for the great puzzle!

[@HeadMed]

Never have I thought that anyone would use the word "funky" to describe a septuple.

[@annikaQED]

Unusual, but approachable. (Not as scary as it first seemed!) Parity plays a nice role here.

[@longwaytotipperary]

Mark’s excitement at finding a septuple made my day! 😊

[@chocolateboy300]

I finished in 24:55 minutes. This was such a cool puzzle. It flowed so well and it actually reminded me of the one up puzzles. It felt similar in logic. I was so close to beating Mark's time, off by just a few seconds. Oh well, I'll get him next time. Great Puzzle!

[@srwapo]

42:07 with help from the video. I was broken in the lower right corner, seems like I missed a pencil mark in r5c7 and I screwed up dealing with the digits around the given 4. I found the break in easy, then felt like it kept getting harder, took me a while to start thinking about the columns as complete sets when the unshaded cells were so far apart.

[@Coyotek4]

18:24 ... a most interesting offset from the standard fare Nice puzzle!

[@markp7262]

15:24 finish. An interesting sudoku-esque puzzle, fun fun fun!

[@MarushiaDark316]

That single cell in column one was by favorite part.

[@a9b9c9d9]

solved in 9:37 - fairly sure this is similar to (if not the same as) str8ts, but good nonetheless

[@scarletmanuka6170]

Watching the video, patiently waiting for Mark to see that the given 8 in r9c1 rules out 8 from r9c7, which then has to be a 56 pair with r8c7, forcing an 8 in r2c7...

[@OverkillSD]

Solve took me 15:56, was quite a fun ruleset to work with!

[@461weavile]

Can you use a 0 in this or is it only the digits 1-9? The rules don't say. Perhaps while I'm working on it there won't be an opportunity for a 0?

[@isidornimages]

Took me just over an hour to solve, or so I thought. Turned out it was wrong. I went back a bit and found another solution, that also was wrong, so I gave up. But I enjoyed the puzzle even though I couldn't find the correct solution.

[@ljdutoit6097]

@14:10, why couldn't r2c3 not also be a 6? What am I missing? OCD kicking in over here... ;-)

[@ljdutoit6097]

OK, got it - it is further down in the column that a problem will arise. Me just being stupid, sorry.

[@stupidas9466]

@@ljdutoit6097lol never apologize for "just being stupid". That's what makes us human. Cheers!

[@MikeMinneapolis-kk2xr]

He did just glossed over. I struggled to see it and had to rewind. for those wondering, he establishes a 56 cell under the 7, so a 6 would make a 56 pair and invalidate that cell, he just explains in the context of the column and not at all when excluding 6 from possibilities.

[@putendoener]

​@@MikeMinneapolis-kk2xr If that was the case he would've excluded the 5 as well. Either he missed the 5 or missed that at that point r2c3 could've indeed included a 6...

[@RichSmith77]

​@@putendoener5 could have been paired with 4 and not broken the "56" cell below. It does break the combined "56" and "456" pencilmarks in the column, but it is one step more and it's just possible Mark didn't see that, but did see the former. I too was a little surprised Mark just glossed over the explanation. Possibly it was a slip, but not conclusively so, in my view.

[@samgillmusic]

I really enjoyed this rule set and layout, took me 25:33

[@sskar9390]

Beautiful puzzle

[@ericpraline1302]

That was jolly, thanks.

[@agoristtaxadvice]

This is a really cool rule set.

[@IgorPellinen]

I think that r3c1 could be a three at 28:15…

[@keegansimyh]

At 28:18, why can't r3c1 be 3 and r3c2 be 4?

[@crwall05]

I thought the same initially, but realized that Since R3C2 was a 5 (and that row block was length 2), it needed to be consecutive with 5 for the row, so although it could have been 3 for the column logic, it could not be 3 from the row logic.

[@michaelhudlow9901]

Hello. Question - I bought you original app. Solved everything and loved it. How do i get more puzzles. ??

[@itsmeagain1745]

Look in the grey description box under the video (click on 'more' to expand the box).

[@Gonzalo_Garcia_]

12:21 for me. Fun puzzle!

[@Kirbyfan87827]

Finished in 29:27. This was tough!

[@leickrobinson5186]

This one was fun! 19:20 for me. 😄

[@markschaal6050]

Looks like (a) a lot of people are ignoring the digit zero and (b) this puzzle does not have a unique solution since at the very least r6c1 could be a 0.

[@Paolo_De_Leva]

Simple but well done and it feels innovative, although I remember something very similar in the distant past.

[@Kirkaje]

Hello Paolo, maybe you heard the Name Str8ts before, a puzzle type that was created by Jeff Widderich around 2009.

[@Paolo_De_Leva]

@@Kirkaje I cannot remember that name unfortunately 🤔 I started solving sudoku after watching a CTC video about five years ago. Since then, I have been mainly solving puzzles featured on CTC. I refer to a puzzle (or maybe a couple of puzzles) with empty grey squares and without 3x3 boxes that was featured on CTC a long ago. I cannot remember its ruleset or title, but I remember it was a similar kind of logic. Very *unusual* and hence memorable.

[@TimWalton0]

Did you know that if you make 1 small mistake early on in the puzzle, it then takes ages and doesn't even solve! Doh!

[@EkuuleusNorth]

42m. Started fast but seemed distracted shelling pistachios.

[@compiling]

12:06. Not particularly hard by the standards of this channel - if you've done enough renban line puzzles then the logic seems fairly natural. I also agree that it's similar to the 1-up puzzles.

[@biaberg3448]

Number scramble

[@Weaseltube]

I suppose we are to assume that the puzzle uses only digits 1 to 9, otherwise surely there would be more than one solution?

[@stupidas9466]

The word digit is key, as it eliminates all numbers greater than "9” and all fractions. The only question which can give any ambiguity is whether “0” is considered a "digit". It is definitely so when it follows another digit (ie "20” is a "two digit" number) or inside other digits (ie “202” is a "three digit" number) BUT when it is by either by itself (ie "0") or in front of all other digits (ie 00345) it isn't exactly clear. It often depends on context. It can be considered simply a "place holder" and therefore not a digit, or if one is reading out "the digits" on a counter showing “00345” the third digit is a "3”, implying the zeroes are digits. Be interesting if others would have a better and more concise answer.😊

[@stephenmarseille5425]

Hey... there's nothing in the rules about using only the digits 1-9. Is that the case or can 0 or 10 or what have you be in there?

[@oliknight2223]

I thought the same, but it does say that any block of white cells contains consecutive "digits", so no 10+. Doesn't actually rule out 0, but it seems to be assumed.

[@girlgaming1993]

Doesnt say base-10 either...

[@ferrum7625]

took me an hour

[@piarittersporn]

Funny puzzle.

[@TurquoizeGoldscraper]

29:53 for me.

[@LednacekZ]

15:33 for me. horrible solve. very messy.

[@whelmking6497]

Very intersting. 32:40.

[@Nexit1337]

it finally happened, normal sudoku rules DO NOT apply 💀

[@RoderickEtheria]

Well, that's because this is a totally separate type of puzzle.

[@riluna3695]

There have been videos on this channel that are closer to that concept, including one where the title simply WAS the phrase "Normal Sudoku Rules CANNOT Apply." Rather than being a non-sudoku type of puzzle, it still was one, but the rule was that you had to specifically avoid making any row, column, or box a valid set of 1-9.

[@bruceh8043]

22:13 for me and solver #1260.

[@willfaber633]

I wish it would have clarified that only the digits 1-9 were to be used. Seemed like hey purposely left that rule out.

[@MarkBennet10001]

Not putting the obvious digits in grey ... even when you say the words ... still a classy solve.

[@MarkBennet10001]

I know it says they are not filled. but pencil-marking "known digits" would hep, I think

[@riluna3695]

There are no correct digits for the unmarked gray cells. Even partway through the puzzle, I have a gray cell that has all of 1-9 ruled out on it. Some of them can be filled, but if you try to use them for logic to shortcut the solution, you'll brick the puzzle by ruling out a correct answer.

[@stupidas9466]

@@riluna3695Correctamundo!

[@RichSmith77]

​@@riluna3695Exactly. As an example, r3c6 can only be a 2 in the column from as early as 9:30. But if you put a 2 in there, you're not going to be able to compete the row without repeating 2 later.

[@MarkBennet10001]

@@riluna3695 Appreciate that - but one could use centre marks for rows and corner marks for columns, just to keep track